Firearm Forums - Arms Locker banner

1 - 9 of 9 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
9,117 Posts
Discussion Starter · #1 ·
55 gr ball, repeat with good sp load, and SEE if you "think" ball is so great at transferring energy. Repeat on some animals. The sp is FAR better, in nearly every instance. A good 223 sp virtually blows a chuck in half. It blows about 2" diameter holes in feral dogs' chests, too. 223 sp is one BAD mf.
 
G

·
andy said:
55 gr ball, repeat with good sp load, and SEE if you "think" ball is so great at transferring energy. Repeat on some animals. The sp is FAR better, in nearly every instance. A good 223 sp virtually blows a chuck in half. It blows about 2" diameter holes in feral dogs' chests, too. 223 sp is one BAD mf.
That's a real bad'un if you are attacked by a chuck. Now get a REAL gun,a M1A 7.62 with light sp and it will CUT THAT DOGS' CHEST IN TO!

Stupekid, a 11 CAR isn't worth sh*it past 50 yards. Just to much velocity is lost. It's a pos like that cut up Star of yours. Junk.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
9,117 Posts
Discussion Starter · #4 ·
u r just an ignorant punk. I can easily

get a 60 gr sp up over 2800 fps in 11". It still has 2750 fps and 1000 ft lbs left at 50m, dumbass. U read too much bs on the Net, punk. I have the chrono figures. That load will still GUT you at 150m, and you wont do <font color=red>[**censored**]</font> after it hits you in the chest at 200m, either.

The POINT IS, stupid, that the short 223 has PLENTY of power. more is just a waste. It's a wasted effort to lug around more wt, it's STUPID to not have a concealable rifle, and a can, and a .22 unit. all are WAY too valuable assets to be without. but you go ahead and BE as stupid as the rest of them, dumbass.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,690 Posts
andy said:
55 gr ball, repeat with good sp load, and SEE if you "think" ball is so great at transferring energy. Repeat on some animals. The sp is FAR better, in nearly every instance. A good 223 sp virtually blows a chuck in half. It blows about 2" diameter holes in feral dogs' chests, too. 223 sp is one BAD mf.
2" diameter holes? I don't think so. I've shot deer, beaver and nutria with .22 and .24 inch centerfire bullets at 3000-3100 fps and never saw a 2" hole.

I have never personally seen a 55 grain .223 SP that exited a deer. They usually stop inside.

Other folks here have more experience than I do with .223 on deer. Maybe they can share their thoughts?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
9,117 Posts
Discussion Starter · #6 ·
i didn't SAY on a deer. can u READ?

U DONT NEED EXIT WOUNDS on men. You dont WANT the wasted energy. you dont CARE if there's a blood trail. what you want, up close at least, is an INSTANT incapacitation. The kind you get with varmint type bullets, on coyotes.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,648 Posts
Re: Re: shoot several 2 gal cans of water, 223

GBullet said:
2" diameter holes? I don't think so. I've shot deer, beaver and nutria with .22 and .24 inch centerfire bullets at 3000-3100 fps and never saw a 2" hole.

I have never personally seen a 55 grain .223 SP that exited a deer. They usually stop inside.

Other folks here have more experience than I do with .223 on deer. Maybe they can share their thoughts?
My experience on coyotes is pretty much like your's. And I don't use ball ammo. I like to use either the speer tnt's or the nosler ballistic tips.

I don't think I've seen a single 2" exit wound from a .223 on a coyote.

Now, using my .280 or my .338 and the exit wounds are LARGER than 2"

As far as the depositing of energy, lets just say Fackler did a lot of research on the subject, and his results differ from GK's.

I like a nice big wound channel all the way through a critter, at least for any that I don't care about the hide.

But, you gotta decide for yourself on round and weapon selection.

I personally wouldn't want to hamper myself with a weapon that required handloads to make up for having too short a barrel. But, I don't intend to spend my time abushing people or playing rambo.

:devil:
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
397 Posts
Re: u r just an ignorant punk. I can easily

223 fan said:
get a 60 gr sp up over 2800 fps in 11". It still has 2750 fps and 1000 ft lbs left at 50m, dumbass.
In another thread you babbled about ballistic charts, and were probably actually right (anybody can be right once in a while). Better check some tables for your 60 grain pellet. Hell of a BC. I don't believe it, not 2750fps at 54 yards, 2 feet, 1/2 inch.

DC
 
G

·
Re: u r just an ignorant punk. I can easily

223 fan said:
get a 60 gr sp up over 2800 fps in 11". It still has 2750 fps and 1000 ft lbs left at 50m, dumbass. U read too much bs on the Net, punk. I have the chrono figures. That load will still GUT you at 150m, and you wont do <font color=red>[**censored**]</font> after it hits you in the chest at 200m, either.

The POINT IS, stupid, that the short 223 has PLENTY of power. more is just a waste. It's a wasted effort to lug around more wt, it's STUPID to not have a concealable rifle, and a can, and a .22 unit. all are WAY too valuable assets to be without. but you go ahead and BE as stupid as the rest of them, dumbass.
stupekid you can get a 110 gr .308 way way past 3000 fps from a 18 inch .308 battle rifle and you WILL get 2 inch holes! It will have well over 2000 foot/lb of enery at 50 yards. Makes that CAR look like the <font color=red>[**censored**]</font> it is! And that more power translates to more power at longer ranges (past the 50 yards stupekid can hit). If you need a .22, get a good .22 pistol and stop f*u*c*k*i*n*g up your ONLY rilfe you will have.

And stupekid, if you are going to be hinding out in days and stumbling around at night, why you need a 'concealable' rifle? Stupkid, the CAR isn't concealable and you know it. All one has to do is get a pair of logs about the size of the CARs to main parts and any dumb<font color=red>[**censored**]</font> like you could see that.

Showed you up again, stupekid. Your fos as usual.
 
1 - 9 of 9 Posts
Top