I guess so, it is 10 pages and counting.Do we really need another thread on the subject? I think people have aired their feelings on the subject pretty well the last couple of days.
if you are spot on with your shot placement and distance it does work.Trying to determine what percentage of opinions on .22 centerfires on medium and large game are based on actual experience doing so vs conjecture or intuition.
Definitions:
Good shot placement: putting a bullet through heart and/or both lungs.
Good bullet: said bullet will penetrate to reach heart and/or lungs with adequate expansion to disrupt function of said organs.
Like I said earlier I had a big Nebraska whitetail doe just like the ones pictured with the 22 creedmoor, that I shot with a 338 lapua.if you are spot on with your shot placement and distance it does work.
if something does not go to plan the animal can suffer a slow and bad death assuming you hit it.
imo it is a very irresponsible to hunt larger animals with a 22 when so many appropriate calibers are readily available.
I'm guessing you had erratic, poor bullet performance.Like I said earlier I had a big Nebraska whitetail doe just like the ones pictured with the 22 creedmoor, that I shot with a 338 lapua.
That 338 lapua 285 eldm deer ran over 300 yards.
That is farther than all four of the 22 creedmoor deer combined.
So does that mean that the 338 lapua is too small and unethical for deer size game
A little too far forward in the chest.I'm guessing you had erratic, poor bullet performance.
Did it expand?
Yep, this is why my hunting rifles are trending smaller and smaller.Just being curious I ran some numbers against my 6.5 SS which has killed more than a few elk in the 800-900 yard range rather effectively. The 22 Creed with the 80+ gr bullets look like their nearly identical except the 6.5 having more energy but still landing with more than enough velocity to open the bullet well, wind drift within a 10th moa, altogether actually the 22 Creed seems interesting especially in the form factor you could build one in, ultralite, low recoil for better performance from various improved positions. It's definitely more interesting with these big 22 cal bullets!
I'd add Willfrye that while some are beginning to get it that the heavy for cal .224 bullets will indeed cause a lot of devastation so will the standard 55's to 63 cnc bullets that most people in the Rocky Mtn states use when filling their tags for the fall.Yep, this is why my hunting rifles are trending smaller and smaller.
Turns out an optimized .224 will run neck and neck ballistic wise with most anything, out to a reasonable long range hunting distance.
It also turns out that a big magnum does not truly provide that "margin for error" that guys believe it will. Without belaboring it, encourage guys to take a close look at ballistic gel data. You do not "need" to make a perfect head or neck shot with an 88eldm…they will turn lungs to soup and bust through a cardboard thin shoulder blade just fine.
After you look at the devastation caused by some of these heavy for caliber .224 bullets on game, you realize you've been doing it all wrong for years! At least that's my conclusion..
Very true. For me, when I started into .224, it helped me "feel" better actually looking at the numbers for the heavies and how close it is to our more…socially acceptable choices (.243, 6.5 creed, etc).I'd add Willfrye that while some are beginning to get it that the heavy for cal .224 bullets will indeed cause a lot of devastation so will the standard 55's to 63 cnc bullets that most people in the Rocky Mtn states use when filling their tags for the fall.
For the kinds of ranges that most people take game at year in and year out (sub 400 yds) the heavies just aren't needed. Sure as heck doesn't hurt to use them, it's just that they're not needed as some people seem to think.
Those with experience in taking big game with the 22/250, Swift etc have sorted out just how effective they are.