Evan T Report post Posted December 21, 2015 Brought in this fox in saturday evening with a cottontail distress call and a homemade feather decoy. First animal I've taken with this rifle. 4 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Will K Report post Posted December 22, 2015 Nice pic. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
429mike Report post Posted December 22, 2015 What bullets are you shooting out of your AR not to blow the foxes apart! I shot one last week with mine at about 80 yrds and it looked like a bomb went off on him! Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Evan T Report post Posted December 22, 2015 What bullets are you shooting out of your AR not to blow the foxes apart! I shot one last week with mine at about 80 yrds and it looked like a bomb went off on him! I was shooting 55gr bullets. They left some big exit wounds and did a lot of fur damage so I would say they are too heavy for fox. The picture only shows the good side of the fox. I think the damage was the result of the bullets fragmenting. I think the best answer for taking fox with a 223 might be to use something that will pass straight trough with out breaking apart and just leave a small hole on each side. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Presmyk Report post Posted December 22, 2015 Witch 55 grain bullet? Balistic tip sp? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
firstcoueswas80 Report post Posted December 22, 2015 The answer is a 22, or shotgun. 2 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Evan T Report post Posted December 22, 2015 Witch 55 grain bullet? Balistic tip sp? FMJ. I think they tend to fragment and that might be why they did so much damage. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
trphyhntr Report post Posted December 22, 2015 Witch 55 grain bullet? Balistic tip sp? FMJ. I think they tend to fragment and that might be why they did so much damage. R12-4-303 Unlawful Devices, Methods, and Ammunition A. In addition to the prohibitions prescribed under A.R.S. §§ 17-301 and 17-309, the following devices, methods, and ammunition are unlawful for taking any wildlife in this state: 1. An individual shall not use any of the following to take wildlife: a. Fully automatic firearms, including firearms capable of selective automatic fire; or b. Tracer, armor-piercing, or full-jacketed ammunition designed for military use not that i care, but if you didnt know now you know 1 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Evan T Report post Posted December 23, 2015 Witch 55 grain bullet? Balistic tip sp? FMJ. I think they tend to fragment and that might be why they did so much damage. R12-4-303 Unlawful Devices, Methods, and Ammunition A. In addition to the prohibitions prescribed under A.R.S. §§ 17-301 and 17-309, the following devices, methods, and ammunition are unlawful for taking any wildlife in this state: 1. An individual shall not use any of the following to take wildlife: a. Fully automatic firearms, including firearms capable of selective automatic fire; or b. Tracer, armor-piercing, or full-jacketed ammunition designed for military use not that i care, but if you didnt know now you know The FMJ ammo used was not designed for military use so I assume its legal, but the reg dosen't define "designed for military use" so its hard to say for sure. 1 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
trphyhntr Report post Posted December 23, 2015 Yeah I was thinking the same thing. Probably left it like that by design, I don't think when you're on the other side of a ticket you're getting the benefit of the doubt. 1 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Presmyk Report post Posted December 23, 2015 What fmj fragment? You mean a jacketed hollow point? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Evan T Report post Posted December 23, 2015 What fmj fragment? You mean a jacketed hollow point? Ive seen some ballistic tests that show FMJ 223 rounds fragmenting after they enter a target. I thought that might explain the large exit wounds. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
firstcoueswas80 Report post Posted December 23, 2015 The way I see that rule, is the FMJ itself was meant for military, and that's what they go off of. Not whether or not the box says intended for military use. 1 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Evan T Report post Posted December 23, 2015 The way I see that rule, is the FMJ itself was meant for military, and that's what they go off of. Not whether or not the box says intended for military use. They should rewrite the reg so what they are actually prohibiting is more clear. If the intent is to prohibit all FMJ ammo they could just state that without the "designed for military use" and eliminate all confusion. It would also require less words. 1 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
firstcoueswas80 Report post Posted December 23, 2015 I agree. But as stated, I BELIEVE the fmj bullet itself is/was designed for military use. 1 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
