quote:

Well it's about damn time you woke up!!

Jstevens hit the nail on the head I believe.
The problem in the 22 calibers for deer is when they go too fast and or the bullet is too fragile.
I shot a buck with a 22-250 right behind the front shoulder and I swore I would never shoot a deer with that rifle again.
And I have not.
However when I was in OZ I did have the chance to shoot two red stags, and the only rifle available was a 222.
Two shots, two dead stags and neither moved 50 feet.
I was absolutely amazed at the performance of that bullet at that reduced velocity compared to the blowing up on contact the 22-250 exhibited.
Those little bullets broke ribs going in and aout, completely penetrated to be found just under the hide on the off side, and could have been the poster children for Nosler Accubond.
Both shots were well taken however, the farthest 175 yards and broadside behind the shoulder like putting a dot on a picture.
Would I have been comfortable with an iffy angle? heck no.
But given the right presentation, and not traveling too fast, a 22 cal leaving the barrel at 2500 to no more than 3200 in my books at least is far more gun than given credit for.

Now I know two stags with this combination is not a great deal of experiance, but it ain't chicken soup either.

quote:

Originally posted by bucko:
Jstevens hit the nail on the head I believe.
The problem in the 22 calibers for deer is when they go too fast and or the bullet is too fragile.
I shot a buck with a 22-250 right behind the front shoulder and I swore I would never shoot a deer with that rifle again.
And I have not.
However when I was in OZ I did have the chance to shoot two red stags, and the only rifle available was a 222.
Two shots, two dead stags and neither moved 50 feet.
I was absolutely amazed at the performance of that bullet at that reduced velocity compared to the blowing up on contact the 22-250 exhibited.
Those little bullets broke ribs going in and aout, completely penetrated to be found just under the hide on the off side, and could have been the poster children for Nosler Accubond.
Both shots were well taken however, the farthest 175 yards and broadside behind the shoulder like putting a dot on a picture.
Would I have been comfortable with an iffy angle? heck no.
But given the right presentation, and not traveling too fast, a 22 cal leaving the barrel at 2500 to no more than 3200 in my books at least is far more gun than given credit for.

Now I know two stags with this combination is not a great deal of experiance, but it ain't chicken soup either.

Nice objective presentation.

Even the slow moving well placed 22s can give you problems at times. An old poaching buddy of mine used a 22 hornet with quite a bit of success. In one evening I witnessed him wound two does at less than 50 yds with what had to be well placed shots.No blood trails to speak of and dense oak brush made tracking impossible. A lot of wrongs here but to this day that scenario would have had a better ending with a 30-30. roger

quote:

that scenario would have had a better ending with a 30-30.

Roger,

not to insult your choice here.. but you know for experience on here.. if anyone started a thread about the inadequacy of a 30/30 on deer, we'd have pages and pages of guys with Failure Stories.. claiming it was not a deer caliber....

I was over at the home of one of our parents of one of our new younger scouts.. he is a hunter big time and was showing me his Deer Rifle... Weatherby Mk V, chambered in 338/378... he claimed after he had a failure with his 300 Weatherby, he decided to move up to a better deer cartridge...

I just smiled and kept my mouth shut.... of course if he was reading this thread, I am sure he would throw me out of his house next time...

It just kind of let me know, people base their opinion of 'adequate', on a cartridge that is bigger than the last one they or a friend had a 'failure' with...no one figures operator error ever... that would be impossible...

oh and the same gentleman was indicating he shoots nothing but Barnes X bullets in his Weatherby.. the 300 Roy with 200 grain partitions were just not adequate in his opinion...."Nosler use to be a good bullet, but they are junk now.. especially compared to a Barnes X"...as I was told...

quote:

Originally posted by bartsche:

quote:

Originally posted by bucko:
Jstevens hit the nail on the head I believe.
The problem in the 22 calibers for deer is when they go too fast and or the bullet is too fragile.
I shot a buck with a 22-250 right behind the front shoulder and I swore I would never shoot a deer with that rifle again.
And I have not.
However when I was in OZ I did have the chance to shoot two red stags, and the only rifle available was a 222.
Two shots, two dead stags and neither moved 50 feet.
I was absolutely amazed at the performance of that bullet at that reduced velocity compared to the blowing up on contact the 22-250 exhibited.
Those little bullets broke ribs going in and aout, completely penetrated to be found just under the hide on the off side, and could have been the poster children for Nosler Accubond.
Both shots were well taken however, the farthest 175 yards and broadside behind the shoulder like putting a dot on a picture.
Would I have been comfortable with an iffy angle? heck no.
But given the right presentation, and not traveling too fast, a 22 cal leaving the barrel at 2500 to no more than 3200 in my books at least is far more gun than given credit for.

Now I know two stags with this combination is not a great deal of experiance, but it ain't chicken soup either.

Nice objective presentation.

Even the slow moving well placed 22s can give you problems at times. An old poaching buddy of mine used a 22 hornet with quite a bit of success. In one evening I witnessed him wound two does at less than 50 yds with what had to be well placed shots.No blood trails to speak of and dense oak brush made tracking impossible. A lot of wrongs here but to this day that scenario would have had a better ending with a 30-30. roger

I would have to conclude they weren't "well placed shots" or the deer would have died. Not having recovered them, you can't know. I had never lost a bear with the 270 and decided to shoot one with my 338. You guessed it, never found a drop of blod with what I'd swear was a well placed shot. 40 yards with a rest, stationary bear. No brush or obstructions between us etc. Later paced off the distance and centered the red dot on a lucky strike pack at the exact range. Yet, I have to conclude it was NOT a well placed shot because of the result.

As for the speed & bullet performance, Bucko is exactly right. I've seen 22/250 bullets disintegrate on antelope shoulder blade without ever getting in to the vitals. I shot the antelope, and we could see exactly what happened when my friend hit him with the 22/250. That same bullet travelling 3-400 fps slower probably would have gone right in and done the work.
I won a bet with a friend years ago in Atlanta. I bet him a slower bullet would penetrate further than one going faster. We loaded up 7 mag & 7x57 using the same bullet (154 gr) to factory spec & did the same with 308 & 300 mag (180 gr). Using wet Atlanta phone books in a box, we measured penetration. In both cases, the slower round penetrated @30% farther than the faster round. The rapidly expanding bullet increases frontal area more quickly & decelerates faster (apparently).

quote:

Originally posted by seafire2:
[I was over at the home of one of our parents of one of our new younger scouts.. he is a hunter big time and was showing me his Deer Rifle... Weatherby Mk V, chambered in 338/378... he claimed after he had a failure with his 300 Weatherby, he decided to move up to a better deer cartridge...

I just smiled and kept my mouth shut.... of course if he was reading this thread, I am sure he would throw me out of his house next time...

It just kind of let me know, people base their opinion of 'adequate', on a cartridge that is bigger than the last one they or a friend had a 'failure' with...no one figures operator error ever... that would be impossible...

oh and the same gentleman was indicating he shoots nothing but Barnes X bullets in his Weatherby.. the 300 Roy with 200 grain partitions were just not adequate in his opinion...."Nosler use to be a good bullet, but they are junk now.. especially compared to a Barnes X"...as I was told...

Sounds like another case of "Elmer Keith Syndrome". Remember when old Elmer said the "270 was barely adequate for coyotes". I recall Jack Oconnor saying the "North American hunting community would be no worse off if the only caliber made was the .270 Win & the only bullet avalable for it was the 130 grain"
I always admired old Jack

quote:

Originally posted by seafire2:

Roger,

It just kind of let me know, people base their opinion of 'adequate', on a cartridge that is bigger than the last one they or a friend had a 'failure' with...no one figures operator error ever... that would be impossible......

I'm finding this stand to not be very convincing. As I read over most of the posts, I'm seeing that most guys are figuring in operator error, human error or whatever you call it, because it happens.

Also using extrem examples is not very convincing either. I don't read many examples of guys going up significanty in caliber as a solution to operator error, but I do read examples of guys with experience going to smaller calibers. Each has a different threshold of what is an unqualified minimum, and that's mostly where the difference of opinion is.

A qualified minimum is a cartridge that is adequate, and has qualifying factors such as "if one keeps the shots under 100 yards", or "if you slow the bullet down a bit".

Shot placment is not one that I consider a qualifying factor, because it's always relevant.

An unqualified minimun is a cartridge that is suitable for the game - deer - at any reasonable and normal field conditions. I'm not talking about the unusual - such a 1,000 pound buck, or 500 yard shots, or Texas heart shots.

In my book, operator error is foremost in choosing a minimal cartridge, and then not using the restraint neccessary in the field.

Shooting a deer - rather, wounding a deer - with a 22 hornet - broadside shot - or any well placed shot - is not only cartridge failure, but operator failure. Actually, it's three operator errors -
1) Cartridge failure is inevitable and predictable, thus an error of objectivity. The cartridge is what it is, regardless of whether one can shoot better with it, or whether it kills sometimes very well with perfect shot placment.
2) Cartridge selection is an error of choice.
3) Taking the shot is an error of judgment.

But of course it's all about shot placment.

KB

quote:

Shooting a deer - rather wounding a deer - with a 22 hornet - broadside shot - or well placed shot - is not only cartridge failure, but operator failure.

I find myself better able to place my shots accurately when I know my rifle is accurate and properly sighted in. I also shoot better with my hornet BUT I feel more restricted with it and tend to take more care when placing my shots. I will not use it for deer - I do not have the confidence in its power! I do have the confidence in its power for feral goat, which are not a big animal. But not for Texas heart shots. I am still developing the confidence in my 303-25 with 100gr Sierra bullets for deer. I’m testing it on goats. Looks like it will be fine with careful shot placement and many folk tell of the adequacy of that cartridge (250 Savage/257 Roberts). But to me, it still looks small for deer – just like the hornet did for goat.

I read an article about DG rifles. It struck a chord as the author suggested that there is a difference between killing power and stopping power on DG. This has been hashed and rehashed many times on the Africa and big bore forum.

Isn't this what we are discussing here? The difference between killing power and stopping power on deer.

The stopping power crowd chooses their cartridges for many reasons such as: Extremely thick cover, Close property boundaries, Ego/Machismo of seeing a deer crumple at the shot, lack of tracking skills, lots of money invested on the hunt, etc.

The killing power crowd chooses their cartridge based on: light recoil, economical advantages of small cartridges, ego/hunt challenge issue, less meat damage, maybe more comfortable in the hunt setting, etc.


So are small calibers what I consider the perfect deer cartridges? NO, but they work better than most people give them credit.

My personal opinion of the perfect deer cartridge is the 270 Win. But that is all it is, my opinion. There are a host of other cartridges that will work.

Within reason:
Bigger diameter kills better, higher velocity kills farther.

Shot placement relegates all other discussion to secondary importance.

Place any shot in the CNS and you have stopping power.

Place any shot through the ribs and you have killing power.

In an 18 ft. boat off Point Baker AK this year we were triangulated by 3 Hump Back Whales. They were close enough that We could have thrown a rock and hit any one of them. All I had was a fishing rod with 30# test line. Sure would have felt more secure with a 22 hornet, roger

They wouldn’t have noticed 30# line, and you would have only pissed them off with a 22 Hornet.

Humpbacks on 50# test,,, that would be one hell of a fight,,, does Bass Pro sell a net big enough to land them?

Now this is finally generating down to the ridiculous...

contrary to popular thought here evidently... I don't hunt with a 22 Hornet...

actually I carry a 260 or 7 x 57 most comonly the last two seasons...

but if anyone gets will slow down and go back and pay attention to the thread topic, it asked what the "minimum" cartridge would be effective to kill a deer...

it was an invite to point out what folks thought would be a minimum capable caliber.. and I was referred to with a degree of ridicule by Hot Core about suggesting a 22 Hornet...

I consider H/C a friend so he can rib me all he wants...

but the invite was to give each persons suggestion as to their opinion...

there wasn't a darn thing to say that Hi, give your minimum recommendation and then feel free to ridicule everyone elses if their's is a smaller bore than yours...

as far as I am concerned, use what ever you want.. if you have the ability and know how to make it work, then make it work...

and if you continually lose deer, then that is between you and the Fish & Game Dept.. not between you and a bunch of strangers on an internet forum...

Personally I am glad I was able to provide something for a couple of you guys to have something to complain about.... glad your world is so boring you have to come on line to be able to do so....don't you feel a hell of a lot smarter and better now?

and this isn't aimed at Mick, or Roger or H/C.. as I said, I consider them friends, and they can feel free to rib me...I just got to meet Mick thru a few PMs...

Once upon a time, I thought a 1/2 ton Suburban was minimum, but sufficient for pulling a stock trailer with two horses, and it was sufficient in Eastern Colorado. I just beefed up the springs and drove slow, and had good brakes on the trailer. But there is a distinct difference in adequate flatland brakes, and mountain brakes.

Then I got brave and made an operator error. I took it over Eisenhower Loveland pass. It was difficult enough getting to the top, but just when I thought I had it made - it was down hill from there - I discovered what minimum is really about. Never again. There's pucker factor, then there's pfucker factor. I found the long way around, less steep, going back.

Soon thereafter I traded that suburban for a dodge 3/4 ton diesel with a manual transmission. Braver, and caution aside, add two more horses in the 16' stock trailer, and the Dodge's character is changed from sufficient to minimum, under ideal conditions. The truck didn't change, it is what it is, but the operator choices of expectations and demands upon it change, pushing the edge for more opportunity for operator error, thus reducing the margin for error. That truck was very forgiving and fun with two horses in the trailer. Although the minimum capacity was there, it was significantly less forgiving and a little scary with four horses.



KB

quote:

... contrary to popular thought here evidently... I don't hunt with a 22 Hornet...

I for one, never for one moment thought you did. I have found the opinions and insights posted on this thread (yours included) very interesting and in my opinion very valuable. I am attempting to relate the findings of others to my own experiences - it helps to fill the gaps!


Great Thread!

quote:

Originally posted by Hot Core:

There you go Mick. That should get it on out to your "predicted" 6 pages.

LOL,,,,, and than again, you may have just killed the thread.

quote:

Originally posted by Hot Core:
-----


Then we have Mature people Hunting Big Game using Inadequate Cartridges for some reason that escapes common sense or logic. And they try to defend that position.

I had 22Hornets for 35 years and they were fun shooters. However, no 22Hornet at full power, ever crossed my mind as suitable for Hunting anything over 10#. Way too Inadequate, for a consistent clean Kill. Did use them occasionally on Dogs up to maybe 45# and the 22Hornets just don't have enough power to always get a clean 1-shot Kill.

\

I think the gist of the argument, stating that smaller cartridges can do the job, is that they definitely ARE NOT for beginners or for all ranges & all conditions. You are assuming that anyone who doesn't use a 300 magnum is imature. That is nonsense. I've seen a lot of game lost by people using 300 mags that they were scared to death of and couldn't hit a barn door with. I also don't think anyone recommended using a 22 hornet for deer hunting.
I did post an example of a guy who has killed 20 or so, elk (in their tracks), and never lost one, with a Win 54 hornet (neck shots). Is that rifle "adequate" for his situation?? Always has been. Yet the 300 mag that some of my customers (used to) use is/was inadequate for them & their situation. A smaller, more comfortable caliber has greatly improved their "adequacy" and success; not to mention their enjoyment of the hunt.
It's all relevant. And to label people as "immature" because they don't subscribe to your idea of caliber choice is, in itself, immature.
I think this thread has pretty well run its course: now we're fishing for whales & towing horse trailers up Eisenhower pass

quote:

Originally posted by Kabluewy:
Once upon a time, I thought a 1/2 ton Suburban was minimum, but sufficient for pulling a stock trailer with two horses, and it was sufficient in Eastern Colorado. I just beefed up the springs and drove slow, and had good brakes on the trailer. But there is a distinct difference in adequate flatland brakes, and mountain brakes.

Then I got brave and made an operator error. I took it over Eisenhower pass. It was difficult enough getting to the top, but just when I thought I had it made - it was down hill from there - I discovered what minimum is really about. Never again. There's pucker factor, then there's pfucker factor. I found the long way around, less steep, going back.

Soon thereafter I traded that suburban for a dodge 3/4 ton diesel with a manual transmission. Braver, and caution aside, add two more horses in the 16' stock trailer, and the Dodge's character is changed from sufficient to minimum, under ideal conditions. The truck didn't change, it is what it is, but the operator choices of expectations and demands upon it change, pushing the edge for more opportunity for operator error, thus reducing the margin for error. That truck was very forgiving and fun with two horses in the trailer. Although the minimum capacity was there, it was significantly less forgiving and a little scary with four horses.



KB

I took a Suburban once that was towing a trailer with 4 horses in the back...and actually it was on the downhill side of the Eisenhower Pass! Small world huh?

Took it with a 22 Hornet! Shot it right thru the oil pan! 10,000 lb plus rig.... it didn't go far tho... see I told you it was all about shot placement! Killed it dead'er than a door nail...

Hot Core was right! Now this morning, I am taking me some 20 lb test line and my Hornet and taking Seafire JR over to the coast with me...

We are going Whale Huntin'!!!

merry christmas pilgrims!

.22 Hornets for elk? They are elk killing machines when loaded with a SMK... ...but keep the shots to under 1000 yds.

quote:

Originally posted by ted thorn:
.22 Hornets for elk? They are elk killing machines when loaded with a SMK... ...but keep the shots to under 1000 yds.

You got it Ted!

I like to squeeze one of those 30 caliber 240 Grain Match Kings down in the case....you get a lot flatter trajectory out there at 1000 yds...

3 grains of Blue Dot and a 240 grain Match King and you are set to go!!!

a Nice 45 power Leupold on top of your Hornet, with the 80 mm objective, and you have a complete ultimate Elk Hunting Rig!

..............

Just remember tho guys.. the Elk have Antlers, the Horses don't...pick your shots when shooting at 1000 yds..

Seafire,

I couldn't contain myself sorry to bring the SMK dabolical to the smallbore area.

I personaly think for just me....I would stay with a .243 Win as my low end size deer rifle. Even then I would use a good bullet and not one intended for varmits.

quote:

Originally posted by brayhaven:

I did post an example of a guy who has killed 20 or so, elk (in their tracks), and never lost one, with a Win 54 hornet (neck shots).

And right there is the example of why states have to pass laws to restrict gun caliber size. Why is it that some people can’t see that the practice of hunting elk with a Hornet is no more than a calculated stunt? I’m fascinated by the mindset of the little gun crowd.

Why is it, went discussing reasonable choices for deer or elk cartridges, some people have to make the pendulum swing from lunacy too ridiculous? I’m just always amazed that some people have no middle ground on their plantations.

Hot Core,
I don't believe you have stated your sensible minimum for a deer cartridge?

I will ask you again. How many deer have you killed, or actually witnessed being killed with any 22 caliber cartridge?

I know you disagree with this statement, but:
Shot placement relegates all other discussion to secondary importance.

Deer are not that tough to kill, use any sensible cartridge in the right spot and you have a dead deer. I just happen to feel from personal experience that a 224 caliber 53 gr TSX at 3850 fps is very sensible. I don't know how to state it any clearer than, IT WORKS. If it doesn't, you can blame the nut squeezing the trigger, not the cartridge combination.

quote:

Originally posted by Kabluewy:

Then I got brave and made an operator error. I took it over Eisenhower pass.

Not to be a smart ass but is that Eisenhower tunnel Loveland pass? The rest of the message was well understood. roger

What I find facinating about this whole pile of , is that no one has really made a mention, that I have noticed about what they think is adequate, or the only caliber to use.

Maybe I am just using selective reading, but it looks like everyone is sticking with the subject and expressing their opinions on what they feel is INADEQUATE.

Yes, some folks have made comments about what THEY LIKE TO USE, but I do not recall seeing where they said anything about their favorite being the be all end all caliber for hunting deer.

Did I miss something somewhere along the line?????

As far as the MATURITY issue goes, I think most of the folks using calibers such as the Hornet, that some feel is inadequate, are using such calibers under fairly controlled situations and have years worth of success doing it.

I don't recall any of them saying what they would use on game outside of their little controled environment?

My OWN PERSONAL prefernces are the 375 H&H/35 Whelen/300 Weatherby Mag..

If some one asks me to recommend a caliber for them as their first "Deer" gun, it will be the following.

243/257 Roberts/25-06/270/7mm-08/308/30-06 or for something a little out of the "Ordinary", the 6.5x55.

With the exceptions of the 257 Roberts and 6.5x55, I have no use what some ever for the other rounds, but do feel, for several reasons, that the average hunter can not go wrong with any of those I listed. JMO.

quote:

Originally posted by Crazyhorseconsulting:
What I find facinating about this whole pile of , is that no one has really made a mention, that I have noticed about what they think is adequate, or the only caliber to use.

Maybe I am just using selective reading, but it looks like everyone is sticking with the subject and expressing their opinions on what they feel is INADEQUATE.

Crazyhorseconsulting,

There are literally dozens and dozens of find rounds that are “adequate” for deer that product seasonable to mild recoil. Generally I don’t like to bore everyone with my choice of rounds (243 Win, 25-06 Rem, 270 Win, 7mm X 57mm, 7mm Rem Mag, 308 Win, 45-70) so I’ll just post what the Colorado Division of Wildlife has to say on the matter. I think they came up with a reasonable and far way of weeding out rounds that I think are “inadequate”.

LEGAL HUNTING METHODS

1. CENTERFIRE RIFLES

a. Must be min. .24 caliber (6 mm).

b. Must have min. a 16-inch barrel and be at least 26 inches long.

c. If semiautomatic, they can hold max. of 6 rounds in the magazine and chamber combined.

d. Must use expanding bullets that weigh min. 70 grains for deer, pronghorn and bear, 85 grains for elk and moose, and have an impact energy (at 100 yds.) of 1,000-ft. pounds as rated by manufacturer.

e. It is illegal to hunt game birds, small game mammals or furbearers with a centerfire rifle larger than .23 caliber during the regular rifle deer and elk rifle seasons W of I-25, unless hunters have an unfilled deer or elk license for the season they are hunting. A small game license is required.

2. FULLY AUTOMATIC RIFLES prohibited.

Crazyhorseconsulting,

If I listed every round I thought was adequate in one column and Inadequate in another column, this thread would be 6 pages long before the night was over. And I’m sure the would really start flying then.

Just because a round is deemed adequate doesn’t necessarily mean that it’s a good choice.

quote:

I've never seen a Deer Killed with any 22cal - and won't ever see it happen.

Well with that statement H/C, wouldn't that kinda disqualify your opinion whether it would fail or succeed?

If you've never seen it done, how can you conclude it will ALWAYS fail...or fail at all with the proper velocity, bullet construction and the preverbial "shot placement"....

I shared with Mickey here of a guy in NE Texas that took his 4 grandkids, between ages of 6 to 11 hunting on his property... he had earlier in the year, asked me for BLue Dot loads for the rifle, for his grandkids to learn to shoot...

so I gave him some, and then come fall he asked me if I had any bullet recomendations for the 22 Hornet for hunting deer with at Blue Dot generated velocities... I kinda told him I didn't recommend it, as I also was concerned if that was just too little... but I recommended the Barnes X or the 55 grain Ballistic tips..

the gun being used was an NEF... well, based on my doubt, by around Thanksgiving he sent me 4 pictures on 4 grand kids, 2 boys and two girls... each with the deer they had taken with the load and combo...

so to be fair in my statement above.. I haven't taken deer with a 22 Hornet since I don't own one... but I have taken deer with a 22 caliber more than once.. with a preference for 63 grain SMP Sierras or 70 grain SMPSpeers.. both out of 223s and 22.250s...

I have no reason to question the grandpa's claims... seeing no merit of him sending me the pics of his grandkids with the exception of saying thanks and showing it did work....

so based on that, yeah I'd say ti worked...4 out of 4 is good odds.. he claimed that they were taken between like 75 to 100 yds... and since about 90% plus of all deer taken in the USA is within that distance.. well you can't dispute that....

and I figure if kids under the age of 12 can do it, then an adult ought to be able to shoot as good as an 11 yr old and under...

Not witnessing the shot, but I have seen the end result of 17 Rem's used to drop a few suburban deer also... but my recommendation was 22 cal as minimum.. as I can speak intelligently on that, having done it.. with shots ranging on the short end of 100 yds and the long end of 150 and 200 yds...both with neck shots and lung shots..



this deer here, hung at the butchers at 135lbs after the cape, antlers were off and it was skinned... it is a blacktail.. biggest one I have shot since being here...

This wasn't shot as a stunt.. it was shot with the only gun I could grab quickly, that was loaded.. on the last day of the season when my 30/06 had been put up in the safe...

it was shot on my property, last day of the season.. distance about 75 to 80 yds...with a 22 caliber

So I Can VERIFY they work.. picking my shots, I can say I haven't lost a deer with a 22 caliber.. I have lost several hunting with much bigger calibers.. but I won't call them inadequate due to a failure...and shot placement was good...

the worst failure was a 300 Mag at 100 yds with a 200 grain Sierra... by the 3 ft plus radius of blood and fur in the snow, and him falling on his chin, I knew the shot was good...I was too close for that fast a cartridge and that heavy a bullet, regardless on how big a buck he was...lost him in a swamp...

The failure was mine tho... as I had not matched the bullet to the game. within the distances I was hunting... I just figured like too many folks, that a 300 Mag with the biggest bullet I could find on the shelves ( factory ammo) would drop any Deer I ever ran into any where on the planet in ANY situation on the planet....

the failure of the combo proved me wrong...

now that is why I handload, and tailor my loads, to the game I am hunting within the distances the shots will be in the local I am hunting...

and 22 calibers within 200 yds, with the right bullets will work out fine.. and most folks can place their shots better with them....

now on the other end, if someone is worried about a load combo.. I have NEVER lost a deer shot with a 444 Marlin with Handloaded 300 grain XTPs, with MVs in the 1700 fps range...limiting the shots to 150 yds max..

biggest deer I ever got, was taken with a 444 and Rem 240 grain factory loads...that actually needed a follow up shot also.. distance was about 175 yds...at about 30 below zero..

quote:

Crazyhorseconsulting,

If I listed every round I thought was adequate in one column and Inadequate in another column, this thread would be 6 pages long before the night was over. And I’m sure the would really start flying then.

Just because a round is deemed adequate doesn’t necessarily mean that it’s a good choice.

It is possible that you missed the point I was trying to get at.

The thread has stayed on the course as to what people feel is INADEQUATE, NO ONE has stated that only 30 cal. Magnums were all that should be used, or only 33 calibers and above are the only calibers to even be considered.

By posting the list of calibers I recommend, that means that I do not feel the 224's are ADEQUATE for hunting deer.

Can it be done, yes.

With one exception out of the responders, I believe everyone else has either killed a deer with a 224 of some flavor, or has seen it done.

The concensus however, from the voting, is that the various 224's, are inadequate as deer rounds.

However, unless or until the various game departments around the country set a standard, there are going to be folks using the 224's/20 cals/19's and 17's to kill deer.

Are they going to wound and lose animals, yes.

Are inexperienced hunters going to shoot and lose animals with 7mm RemMags and other larger calibers, yes.

The point however is that out of the responders to the poll, the majority feel that the 243/6mm is the cut off point for hunting deer under normal conditions.

Are people shooting deer with the 224's purposely as a stunt, in some instances possibly.

In other instances it may be all they have access to, and in others, they either have been extremely lucky or good as to not wounding and losing an animal, or have lost animals and were not aware of i, because they thought the animal would drop at the shot. AJMO.

quote:

Originally posted by Crazyhorseconsulting:

quote:

Crazyhorseconsulting,

If I listed every round I thought was adequate in one column and Inadequate in another column, this thread would be 6 pages long before the night was over. And I’m sure the would really start flying then.

Just because a round is deemed adequate doesn’t necessarily mean that it’s a good choice.

It is possible that you missed the point I was trying to get at.

The thread has stayed on the course as to what people feel is INADEQUATE, NO ONE has stated that only 30 cal. Magnums were all that should be used, or only 33 calibers and above are the only calibers to even be considered.

By posting the list of calibers I recommend, that means that I do not feel the 224's are ADEQUATE for hunting deer.

Can it be done, yes.

With one exception out of the responders, I believe everyone else has either killed a deer with a 224 of some flavor, or has seen it done.

The concensus however, from the voting, is that the various 224's, are inadequate as deer rounds.

However, unless or until the various game departments around the country set a standard, there are going to be folks using the 224's/20 cals/19's and 17's to kill deer.

Are they going to wound and lose animals, yes.

Are inexperienced hunters going to shoot and lose animals with 7mm RemMags and other larger calibers, yes.

The point however is that out of the responders to the poll, the majority feel that the 243/6mm is the cut off point for hunting deer under normal conditions.

Are people shooting deer with the 224's purposely as a stunt, in some instances possibly.

In other instances it may be all they have access to, and in others, they either have been extremely lucky or good as to not wounding and losing an animal, or have lost animals and were not aware of i, because they thought the animal would drop at the shot. AJMO.

The first time I quote you was just to address your first 2 paragraphs.
Because you were right, I personally was out spoken about what I was against but I never said what I thought was adequate. I didn’t have any problem with your post, I thought your recommendations were good and your points were noted.

I don’t believe I’m going to change many people’s minds here. People are going to do what they do but that doesn’t mean I have to sit on the sidelines and be quiet about it. Unfortunately your points are correct again.

I had forgotten that this thread started with a poll, I need to look at it.

I have killed a number of does with a .223.

quote:

... looks like everyone is sticking with the subject and expressing their opinions on what they feel is INADEQUATE.
... I do not recall seeing where they said anything about their favorite being the be all end all caliber for hunting deer.

They may be a good reason for that - we just don't really know! OK then, I don't know - hence my interest in this thread.

quote:

... the 257 Roberts and 6.5x55, ... ... but do feel, for several reasons, that the average hunter can not go wrong with any of those I listed

Interesting that you should say that - I am coming to the conclusion that those two calibers are not a bad place to begin.

quote:

I don't recall any of them saying what they would use on game outside of their little controlled environment?

I once lived in a land in which the 'Parks Board' used 22 Hornets for nighttime culling - all head shots from a spot lighted vehicle.

Hey Hotcore, have you noticed how long page 3 is? I think AR is trying to cheat me out of my 6 page prediction.

I know of someone shooting a red deer with a 223. Why? Who knows - he has a safe full of all the appropriate calibers. He actually recommends the 223 on deer. He says just to use FMJ's because they are designed to tumble on impact and when he shot his red the bullet did not exit. He does, however, neglect to mention that the deer he shot in the head with an FMJ from his 223 needed to be brought down by a second shooter with a larger caliber. In short, he recommends a practice that failed for him! Go figure!

I tried putting out a downed Red with a brain shot with my hornet. It didn't work - and that was up close! The second shot did work. (The Red was not going anywhere, I just wanted him to stop being still alive and trying to jab my mate - who had already put three body shots into him with a 308).

Hot Core,
Thanks for replying.

You made a bunch of statements that reaffirmed previous posts about killing power and stopping power.

You prefer stopping power because of the terrain you hunt. As I stated before bigger diameter kills better.

I can normally watch the deer I shoot hit the ground. It is very open country.

That is a huge difference compared to 4' beans, swamps, and impenetrable brush that you have to deal with. So I could could bring my 22-250 to where you hunt and kill a deer, but may have trouble recovering it.

You can bring a 357 pistol cartridge out here to hunt deer, But it would not be an optimum choice.

I honestly don't think either of us would do that, as we both probably own cartridges better suited to the country being hunted.

quote:

As I predicted above, people tend to say the Hunter is a poor shot when they really don't understand what makes an Inadequate Cartridge. Thanks for making the prediction come true.

Maybe it's been a long day, but I don't understand that statement at all.

I am a bad shot because I don't understand what makes an inadequate deer cartridge?
I hope that wasn't a personal shot at me. I have just been sharing my experience and some thoughts.

So thank you for clarifying your position. I understand your point of view.

quote:

As always, my concern is for the misleading information reaching the Beginners and Rookies, which will eventually end up resulting in unnecessarily wounded and lost Game.

If a person is not physically and mentally capable of using an Adequate Cartridge, then they should wait until they can. There are already enough problems with Adequate Cartridges that simply do not need to be compounded with the use of Inadequate Cartridges.

Damn Good Statement On The Issue.

That someone in a specialized situation CAN kill deer regularly with an INADEQUATE caliber, is not the real problem.

It is the Mis-Information that is passed on, and picked up by the beginning hunter/new hunter, that tries to repeat the performance.

Setting in a tower stand or box blind, shooting calm animals at 50 to 100 yards under a feeder or at a mineral lick or in a hay yard, is not the same as shooting at an alert animal from an off hand position.

At least to err on the side of a larger caliber, where there will be a greater chance for more damage to bone/muscle/internal organs, and a greater possibility for an animal to show signs of being hit, and leaving a followable blood trail is infinitely better than shooting an animal with something that may not cause an animal to show any visible sign of having been hit.

I am not any more fond of goverment getting involved in hunting then is necessary, but when it comes down to allowing human choice to be the deciding factor as to the equipment to use, sometimes there has to be mandated limits, to keep some people from going to an extreme, especially when addressing what would/could be considered on the minimal end of the spectrum. JMO.

quote:

Originally posted by Hot Core:
It is difficult in these threads to get the proper message across, without it all going bonkers.

Good Hunting and clean 1-shot Adequate Cartridge Kills.

Good thread HC! Maturly handled.

Now why wasn't the 25 caliber included? roger

quote:

I've never mentioned the total number of Deer Kills I've made because it would relegate me to the blow-hard, impossible-to-believe level for most all the Hunters on the Board.

I feel the exact same way about being a blowhard. I have no where near the experience you have, since you are into the 1000's.

I am fortunate that I get to kill and help kill quite a few deer every year by average standards. This year alone 26 animals. These are all animals I personally killed or directly guided. Factor in 30 years of hunting and you will have a pretty good idea where I am at. I am not done with this season, as I still have 6 antlerless deer tags to fill.

I can only remember losing two deer(243 and 270) during that time frame. It had nothing to do with the cartridge. Better shot placement would have remedied both of those situations.
A bigger diameter bullet may have helped also, but there is no way to prove it, just speculate.

I will still stand by my statement that bigger diameter kills better and higher velocity kills farther. I know it is a blanket statement, but it holds true most of the time.

So Hot Core, What is your personal pick for a do everything, go everywhere deer cartridge. If you could have just one, to hunt all over the US? Coues whitetails to 300lb plus mule deer?

My first pick would be a 270 Win, second would be a 280 Rem, but could get along fine with any number of cartridges from a 6.5-06 to the 300 magnums.

SDhunter
You did not include the 250. I have one and wonder whether it is in fact 'adequate' for deer. I last time I used it I did not get the explosive destruction of the first time - different bullets. Looking at the explosiveness of the first shots, I would not choose those bullets for deer but then the penetration of the second lot seemed like deer medicine. (100gr Sierra spitzer). If I was going out for deer I would still take my 303 Brit but most of the time, deer will be secondary so I want to take my 303-25. I do not want to have to rely on 'shot placement' meaning being able to reach the vitals from any reasonable angle. I would appreciate your comments.

Hot Core
Your comments would be appreciated also! (As would any of the honourable, experienced hunters on this forum).

Many folks are using the 25 successfully but it just seems so small to me.

Something that hasn't been mentioned yet is the fit of the rifle. I find my MkI 303 Brit very comfortable to shoot with but it does 'push' the sight picture off a bit, making it difficult to see my hits. I also have to be careful with getting smacked on the forehead, so I have a long stock and the scope far forward. My No.4 303 Brit has a muzzle device fitted so it does not recoil much and I can set the scope much further back for better shooting comfort. It is also much quieter and lighter than the MkI. I am taking my son out hunting today and he'll be using it.


Great Thread, Hot Core

quote:

Many folks are using the 25 successfully but it just seems so small to me.

In 2007 between my wife and myself, we killed 7 white tails with 7 shots, her 1 and me 6.

All were killed with 117 grain Factory Loaded remington Core-Locts, Round nose soft points, at ranges from 75/80 yards out to 225/230 yards.

JMO, but I believe if you will jump up the grain weight of the bullet you are using, and stop using the 100 grain spitzer, I believe you will notice a difference in your rifles performance.

This will all depend on how accurately your gun shoots the heavier slug.

Also, if you are handloading for your rifle, if you are running at or near top end velocities, you might try backing down just a little. JMO.

quote:

Originally posted by 303Guy:
SDhunter
You did not include the 250. I have one and wonder whether it is in fact 'adequate' for deer. I last time I used it I did not get the explosive destruction of the first time - different bullets. Looking at the explosiveness of the first shots, I would not choose those bullets for deer but then the penetration of the second lot seemed like deer medicine. (100gr Sierra spitzer). If I was going out for deer I would still take my 303 Brit but most of the time, deer will be secondary so I want to take my 303-25. I do not want to have to rely on 'shot placement' meaning being able to reach the vitals from any reasonable angle. I would appreciate your comments.

Hot Core
Your comments would be appreciated also! (As would any of the honourable, experienced hunters on this forum).

Many folks are using the 25 successfully but it just seems so small to me.

Something that hasn't been mentioned yet is the fit of the rifle. I find my MkI 303 Brit very comfortable to shoot with but it does 'push' the sight picture off a bit, making it difficult to see my hits. I also have to be careful with getting smacked on the forehead, so I have a long stock and the scope far forward. My No.4 303 Brit has a muzzle device fitted so it does not recoil much and I can set the scope much further back for better shooting comfort. It is also much quieter and lighter than the MkI. I am taking my son out hunting today and he'll be using it.


Great Thread, Hot Core

Again I’ll refer to the Colorado DOW laws. These laws were not put in place by a 2 or 3 person panel sitting around passing cartridges around between each other saying I don’t like this one, this one is too small, this one is too ugly, or this one is too big. The DOW put a lot of thought into the wording of the laws. Those laws were based on decades and decades of field observations by thousands of people.

Hunters, field officers, biologists, and yes, non-hunters, and anti-hunters all had input into the law making process.

What they finally came up with was not the “standard” or the “ultimate” choice of cartridges for hunting big game in the state of Colorado. They came up with a guideline for what the “minimum” cartridge / rifle combo should be for big game and they set the bar pretty low. It reads as follows;

LEGAL HUNTING METHODS

1. CENTERFIRE RIFLES

a. Must be min. .24 caliber (6 mm).

b. Must have min. a 16-inch barrel and be at least 26 inches long.

c. If semiautomatic, they can hold max. of 6 rounds in the magazine and chamber combined.

d. Must use expanding bullets that weigh min. 70 grains for deer, pronghorn and bear, 85 grains for elk and moose, and have an impact energy (at 100 yds.) of 1,000-ft. pounds as rated by manufacturer.

e. It is illegal to hunt game birds, small game mammals or furbearers with a centerfire rifle larger than .23 caliber during the regular rifle deer and elk rifle seasons W of I-25, unless hunters have an unfilled deer or elk license for the season they are hunting. A small game license is required.

2. FULLY AUTOMATIC RIFLES prohibited.

(This is copied from the 2008 regulations)

I think the law is reasonable. If you like the .257 and want to hunt moose, and your cartridge/rifle comb can products 1000 ft pounds at 100 yards, it’s “adequate” in Colorado.

Just because it’s adequate doesn’t make it a good choice.