Best for White Tail Deer


PDA






grey9551
July 3, 2004, 04:03 PM
I need some advice on what is the best length and Caliber to use when Hunting Whitetail with a revolver. I'm not interested in the S&W .500 so something my practical please.

I am leaning toward's the S&W 627 with some sort of red dot sighting system OR a Model 629 Lite Hunter scope undecided.

What are some other opinions?

Gary

If you enjoyed reading about "Best for White Tail Deer" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!
RWK
July 3, 2004, 04:39 PM
IMHO, the best calibers are:
.357 magnum (acceptable)
.41 magnum (good)
10mm (good)
.45 Colt (even better)
.44 magnum (even better) (and other “super calibers” in the .44/.45 category)

And the best revolvers are Smiths, Rugers and old Colts with a minimum 4 inch barrel (>5 would be better) and with which you can accurately and consistently hit a five inch circle at 50+ yards. I would personally never take a 50 yard shot at a white tail with a revolver, although I realize many individuals do so.

ducktapehero
July 3, 2004, 07:34 PM
http://www.buffalobore.com/ammunition/default.htm

With this brand of ammo I would rate the 357 and the 10MM as(borrowing RWK's rating system:D) even better and the 41, 44 or 45 as YOWZA!!!!!

Deuce
July 3, 2004, 11:32 PM
I'm no expert ... but, I did take a doe last November with my Glock 20 (10mm CorBon 180gr BCSP 1320fps ... put in a 20lbs recoil spring just for that load).

For an all-around revo, the 10mm is an excellent choice. Moon clips afford fast reloads for competition or self-defense. And, from what I understand, you can shoot .40sw in the 10mm revo's just like .38spl in the .357's. In fact, I know a few practical shooters prefer the S&W 610 for the N-frame heft over the .40sw 646.

I have a 629 (5" classic) and prefer to shoot the American Eagle stuff as it's a little lighter. Bottom line is, comfortable shooting affords more practice which yields better results in the field. Ya, a .44 will be effective ... but only if you can hit what you're shooting at. A whitetail, of comparable weight, is really no more tough than a human and .357 and .45acp are more than sufficient for that. This is also why soft-points are preferred for whitetail (as opposed to hardcast).

You might also, in case you haven't already, check the DNR laws in your state as to what cartridges are acceptable ... and if there are any restrictions on handguns (like bbl length).

Good luck.

jc2
July 4, 2004, 08:09 AM
I use an old five-inch Model 27 for our local (Central Texas) whitetails. I use open sights and just limit range to about 35-40 yards--never really have felt the need of a scope (and that old Model 27 just has too much class to go and hang a scope on it).

The .357 Magnum in a four-inch barrel can do anything the 10mm in a Glock 20 can do (and even very, very slightly better) so it's really no slouch (and you can't get Winchester Partition Golds in a 10mm). If I were looking at a 10mm in a revolver, I'd go with the .41 Magnum for the edge in performance (and I hate moonclips). I suppose a .44 Magnum would be better in that it might give you a slightly larger "margin of error," but it still boils down to you having to do your part.

Shootcraps
July 4, 2004, 09:10 AM
.357Magnum is good for up to 50 yards. Beyond that you'll need a .41 or .44Magnum. Max on those is about 100 yards. Minimum of 6 inch barrel.

With any of these, you need to keep all your shots on a 12" plate at any distance you're going to be shooting. And you've got to have patience to wait for the right shot. Good luck and have fun. Let us know how it goes.

Marshall
July 4, 2004, 10:29 AM
I would suggest .41Mag and up. I start there only because there is a better chance of killing your deer and downing him both. I realize with shot placement I can kill a deer with a .22. But, when Mossyhorns appears, many times our accuracy is, at the least, suspect.

You can't compare humans and deer. A deer shot with a 40S&W could run far enough to possibly not be found. The odds of that happening go way down with the Magnum large diameter rounds.

Besides that, hunting with a revolver instead of a Glock, is the only way to fly.

Yo Vinny, watch me shoot this f**k**g Bambi. D*mmit, that m..f**ker!Vinny, throw me another mag. :evil:

Deuce
July 4, 2004, 11:08 AM
I really don't care to get into a whole .357 vs. 10mm thing ... and if you've tried moon clips and don't like 'em, I understand and I'd probably go with .357 over .41 just for the cost of practice ammo (presuming you don't handload) and I'm all about practicing to become proficient.

Having said that, I'd like to comment ... just a bit ... on what was said about 10mm vs. .357. I contacted CorBon to determine what gun they used to get the velocities they got with 10mm ... they indicated a box-stock Glock 20. I never asked 'em what gun they used for .357 (as I didn't care about that at the time) but, I'd bet at least $20 it was longer than 4" ... and even then, with their 180gr BCSP load, they got 1265fps (compared to 1320fps for 10mm). Now, personally, while I agree that's a significant difference, I wouldn't discount one or the other for it. But, as I understand it the closer you get to 2" in bbl length, the quicker you lose velocity. As such, and considering that CorBon is unlikely to download the .357 (for a revo) compared to 10mm (for an auto) for just about any reason, I'd be very hestitant to proclaim that .357 is simply outright superior from a 4" bbl compared to 10mm from a Glock 20 or just about any similar length bbl. Of course, I understand that an auto will typically "soak" up a little velocity, but, as I mentioned, CorBon's superior numbers were obtained from an auto, therefore, I'd expect the velocity to improve just a bit from a revo ... thereby further increasing the disparity.

Also, a couple things about .41mag. First, I'm thinkin' factory ammo is few and far between and not likely priced well (compared to Winchester white-box 240gr JSP for $20/50 and American Eagle 240gr JHP for $17/50 ... great practice ammo). Second, again referring to CorBon, their .41 210gr JHP (again, whitetail ain't grizzlies) load only offers 150ft/lbs more energy (same fps, just a heavier bullet) compared to .44mag which offers closer to 500ft/lbs more energy. In other words, I don't see, for the cost, .41mag buying you much more than 10mm or .357 ... and, if you really think you need more (which you don't for whitetail ... unless you plan on using a scope and practicing a LOT), than .44mag gives you a lot more. And, if I were seriously thinking of .44mag for whitetail, I'd seriously consider handloading some 280gr BCSP at closer to 1000fps - 1100fps (presuming most is loaded closer to 1400fps).

Incidentally, I thought I heard somewhere that Ted Nugent used a Glock 20 for whitetail and feral pigs ... then again, how could anyone possibly consider Ted a true sportsman?:neener:

Okiecruffler
July 4, 2004, 01:29 PM
I've always thought a Ruger Blackhawk in 357max would make just a dandy whitetail handgun. 158gr at around 1800fps is nothing to sneeze at. Of course they don't make those anymore, but Dan Wesson makes a dandy DA revolver still chambered for it. If we weren't in the revolver forum I would suggest a contender in something like 30-30 or 35 rem, but since we aren't...

Marshall
July 4, 2004, 03:04 PM
Deuce, I agree, a 10mm would qualify. I'm just not accustom to thinking of that caliber so I forget it. And, a .357 Mag will do an very effective job with the proper ammo, I just like a larger diameter for hunting. I hate loosing game.

As for Ted, he really should have more confidence in his revolver abilities, maybe it's that Cat Scratch Fever thing? :evil: :neener:

jc2
July 4, 2004, 03:07 PM
Deuce -
I never asked 'em what gun they used for .357 (as I didn't care about that at the time) but, I'd bet at least $20 it was longer than 4" ... and even then, with their 180gr BCSP load, they got 1265fps (compared to 1320 fps for 10mm).
You'd lose big time--but keep your money! Buffalo Bore's 180-grain LFN does 1375 fps out of four-inch S&W Model 686. (Bhe 686 is a L-frame similar in size/mission to the Glock 20--basically they're just about as equivalent as a revolver and an autoloader can be).

In fact, Buffalo Bore .357 Magnum is just slightly (very, very slightly) hotter out of a four-inch L-frame across the board than Double Tap's stuff out of a 10mm Glock 20. For all practical purposes, the .357 Magnum and 10mm are ballistic twins out of a S&W 686 and a Glock 20.

Deuce
July 4, 2004, 10:03 PM
As for Ted, he really should have more confidence in his revolver abilities, maybe it's that Cat Scratch Fever thing?

Perhaps too much wango ze tango?;)

JC, while I'd be curious as to why CorBon loads .357 lighter than 10mm (presuming they didn't measure velocity of 180gr BCSP from a snub), I'm not a handloader and, as such, ill-equipped to debate such issues in-depth. I only offered my observations. I must say, I feel a bit enlightened as I was unaware of ANY .357 load over 700ft/lbs. Thanks. BTW, those Buffalo Bore 180gr LFN loads appear to be hardcast ... I just wanted to point that out before someone buys 'em for whitetail. Just out of curiosity, what load do you use in your 27 for whitetails? Thanks.

jc2
July 4, 2004, 10:24 PM
I use the 180-grain Winchester Partition Gold. It's not near as hot as Buffalo Bore's stuff, but so far it has worked like magic on our Central Texas whitetails. Like I said earlier, I really limit range and pick my shots. I hate to have to look for a deer in our brush. I was able to recover the bullet from a doe I shot a doe last January. It exhibited just about perfect textbook expansion with nice sharp petals. I couldn't ask for a better performing bullet.

Majic
July 4, 2004, 10:34 PM
Deuce,
How do you point out the negatives of the .41mag with factory loads, but recommend the .44mag and "seriously consider handloading" that cartridge? If you are going to recommend handloading then both cartridges are excellent choices.

Deuce
July 4, 2004, 11:46 PM
Thanks JC!


How do you point out the negatives of the .41mag with factory loads, but recommend the .44mag and "seriously consider handloading" that cartridge? If you are going to recommend handloading then both cartridges are excellent choices.

Majic, I agree, if you handload, both .44 and .41 are quite effective on whitetail. And, if you handload, .41 ammo doesn't need to be expensive or hard to find. There was a little more to it than that though. First off, I was trying to say that you don't NEED to go bigger than .357/10mm for whitetail. Second, if you REALLY think you do, why would you stop at .41? Third, I'm a big fan of .44/.45 (in cowboy loads) and, as such, I'll advise anyone to get that over .41 ... particularly considering I don't even own a .41. Fourth, if the guy was gonna ignore my advice to stay in the .357/10mm realm, I wanted to quantify my recommendation for .44 for whitetail with the "seriously consider handloading" presuming he'd be far more successful if he would.

JohnKSa
July 5, 2004, 12:23 AM
For all practical purposes, the .357 Magnum and 10mm are ballistic twins out of a S&W 686 and a Glock 20. I use the 180-grain Winchester Partition Gold. It's not near as hot as Buffalo Bore's stuff, but so far it has worked like magic on our Central Texas whitetails. So basically you're saying that 10mm is a great choice for hunting deer with a handgun.

RooK
July 5, 2004, 02:19 AM
Deuce, no point in arguing about the 10mm's effectiveness when compared to anything. I think I've been through it a thousand times already, with the same people, in my search for a semiauto to hunt with. They seem to like revolving cylinders and that's that. Fact: 10mm shoots larger diameter bullets at the same speeds as the .357. That, in my opinion, puts it one notch higher on the totem pole. But the only 10mm revolvers in town are the S&W 610 and the out of production Ruger Blackhawk Buckeye.

grey9551, I would personally recommend a .44Mag or .45 Colt in a modern revolver from Ruger, S&W, or Taurus. If you're somewhat recoil shy, then by all means take a step down to the .41Mag. All three are wonderful options, with easy access to ammo for the most part. If you don't handload, .41Mag ammo might be hard to find depending on your location unless you order it and heavy .45 Colt loads are only available from certain companies.

Majic
July 5, 2004, 05:04 AM
It's fine to put in a plug for your favorite cartridge, but not at the expense of other cartridges that can get the job done. This is especially so when you go to handloading.
The fact is any big bore handgun with suitable bullets driven at speeds over 900 fps will down whitetail deer at handgunning ranges.
If seriously considering handloading is factored in then why stop at the .44mag? Move up to the .454 and be even more successful.

jc2
July 5, 2004, 08:28 AM
JohnKSa -
So basically you're saying that 10mm is a great choice for hunting deer with a handgun.
No, John, I'm not. Both are at the low end of acceptable. I'd say the .41 Magnum or the .44 Magnum (or even the .454, .480, etc) would be "great" choices for hunting deer with a handgun. I just like my old Model 27 a lot and am real comfortable with it.

Rook -
Fact: 10mm shoots larger diameter bullets at the same speeds as the .357. That, in my opinion, puts it one notch higher on the totem pole.
That "larger daimeter" consists of four one hundreths of an inch--you have to measure it with a caliper. I've shot lots of deer and never, ever found one with a caliper on it! :p

There are several good reasons most hunters prefer wheelguns over bottom feeders. The wheelguns (and this would include the 610 and Ruger Buckeyes--I'd give my eyeteeth for one) are generally more accurate than autoloaders (fixed barrels and all that). They also give you option of better bullets--you don't have feeding issues with a revolver. For example, you can't get a Partition Gold (like I use) or LFNs in 10mm. Generally speaking, most revolvers used for hunting have considerable longer barrels (six, seven and a half, eight and even longer) than stock autoloaders. Don't forget the .357 Magnum out of a four-inch barrel is slightly faster than the 10mm out of a stock Glock 20. You don't have to go out and drop $160 for an after-market six-inch "hunting barrel" for a revolver.

Deuce
July 5, 2004, 11:41 AM
It's fine to put in a plug for your favorite cartridge, but not at the expense of other cartridges that can get the job done. This is especially so when you go to handloading.

Majic, I admit I'm not big fan of .41 ... but I'm also no enemy of it. Maybe I accidentally made a good point why no one should ever consider investing in one. But, rather than argue with me about what I should or shouldn't recommend, why not make some good points for the .41 ... if you don't think it's being fairly represented here?:confused: I guess I never gave it much thought ... but, now that you mention it, I have no clue why anyone (who doesn't already own a gun in .41) would want to get a .41.:confused:

dairycreek
July 5, 2004, 01:18 PM
I have hunted almost exclusively in Oregon and have taken both coastal blacktails and mule deer. I have never had the pleasure of hunting for and bagging a white tail.

While I have hunted with a 357 and taken several coastal blacktail deer with that caliber, over the years I have come to feel strongly that the larger, more powerful calibers are better. Largely it is a function of range. If you can stay within 25 to 30 yards and pick the kind of shot you will take then a 357 is IMHO acceptable - just barelyl. Anything further and there is a high risk of wounding without killing. Particularly true for the larger mule deer.

I have tended to gravitate toward the 44 magnum and properly loaded 45 LC rounds. A word about the 45 LC. There is a lot of that round on the market that is loaded with the idea that there are a lot of old, weak 45 LC revolvers on the market. Hence it is IMHO not really the best choice for hunting. Using stuff made by Bufalo Bore, Cor Bon, or Garrett is really fine stuff but you must use a pistol strong enough for that kind of ammo. Check the ammo makers specs and warnings.

Using the larger, heavier, more powerful calibers also increases the range at which an effective shot can be taken. I have not hunted with a 10 mm but if it is like the 357 then I have the same kinds of reservations. FWIW Good shooting;)

JohnKSa
July 5, 2004, 02:30 PM
No, John, I'm not.Works like magic=not a great choice? If all of your own experience says that the .357Mag is very effective on deer then how can you argue that the 10mm (which you say is a ballistic twin to the .357) isn't a great choice?

By your logic, if a person was very familiar and proficient with his 10mm autopistol then it should "work like magic" just like your .357 does.

DFBonnett
July 5, 2004, 03:58 PM
Best for White Tail Deer

In Michigan? I understand you have some big deer there. If that's the case, I'd be thinking about a .44 magnum, 6"+ barrel, with or without scope, depending upon your skills and eyesight. Naturally, a quality load would be mandatory.

jc2
July 5, 2004, 04:30 PM
Works like magic=not a great choice? If all of your own experience says that the .357Mag is very effective on deer then how can you argue that the 10mm (which you say is a ballistic twin to the .357) isn't a great choice?
John, go back and read what I posted--the part about limiting my range and picking my shots. One other thing you probably overlooked, John, is I was talking about our Central Texas whitetails which run rather small. I don't know really know what your problem is. Neither one is a "great" choice. I clearly stated that BOTH the .357 Magnum and 10mm are at the low end of acceptable. The .357 Magnum is NOT a "great choice," and neither is the 10mm. BTW, John, you cannot get Partition Golds in a 10mm--you're pretty much stuck with XTPs which are not near as good a bullet for hunting as the Partition Gold.

If you really want to try to nail it down, John, I'd, in terms of ballistics, there is not enough difference between the .357 Magnum and the 10mm to make a difference. In terms of available bullets for hunting, the .357 Magnum has much better selection than the 10mm (and doesn't have the feeding issues of an autoloader). In terms of weapon, my five-inch box stock Model 27 (well, actually it does have Hogue grips on it), is considerably superior to a box stock Glock 20. But regardless, they are still both at the low end of acceptable.

BTW, John, are you really interested in the subject or just trying to stir something up? I scanned the thread, and you have not made one substantive post--just a couple that look more like "baiting" than anything else and haven't added anything to the discussion.

RooK
July 5, 2004, 05:05 PM
That "larger daimeter" consists of four one hundreths of an inch--you have to measure it with a caliper. I've shot lots of deer and never, ever found one with a caliper on it!

Last I checked, the larger a bullet, the bigger the wound channel/damage to vitals. Bullets don't need calipers to work. If you want to get technical, the .44 Mag is only three one-hundredths larger than a 10mm bullet. Does that mean the .44 Magnum isn't much better than the 10mm, following your logic?

jc2
July 5, 2004, 06:46 PM
Last I checked, the larger a bullet, the bigger the wound channel/damage to vitals. Bullets don't need calipers to work. If you want to get technical, the .44 Mag is only three one-hundredths larger than a 10mm bullet. Does that mean the .44 Magnum isn't much better than the 10mm, following your logic?
A larger bullet does not necessarily mean a "bigger wound channel/damage to vitals"--particularly when we are comparing bullets as close in size as the .357 and 10mm with only four one hundreths of inch difference in starting diameter. It's not exactly like comparing a .22 to a .416, is it? Bullet design also has a lot to do with it. For example, the .357 Partition Gold will make a "bigger wound channel" and do "more damage to vitals" than the XTP because it's a better bullet (and doesn't have to feed in an autoloader). Another example (and perhaps more obvious) a .357 Magnum 180-grain LFN will leave a larger wound channel and do far more damage damage than 10mm 180-grain FMJ. So, your assumption is not just oversimplistic but wrong.

The remark about the calipers and deer recognizes the fact that you, or the deer for that matter, would need calipers to tell the difference in diameter between the .357 Magnum and the 10mm. Four one hundreths of inch unexpanded diameter is just not much to get excited about. In other words, your assumption is faulty.

Rook, I was commenting on your post (remember I quoted it). You posted, "Fact: 10mm shoots larger diameter bullets [/I]at the same speeds[/I] as the .357." You evidently forgot that little phrase "at the same speeds"--I took the liberty of adding some emphsis this time to help your memory--and, of course, when talking about the .44 Magnum, we'd have to add "at the same weight." The .44 Magnum throws a considerably heavier slug faster--it doesn't have anything to do with the diameter (and the same holds true for the .41 Magnum--it's not the fact that the .41 Magnum is a hundreth of inch bigger in diameter, it's the fact the .41 Magnum throws heavier bullet considerably faster that puts it head and shoulders of the 10mm and the .357 Magnum).

Anyway you cut it, the .357 Magnum and the 10mm are throwing just about the same slugs and just about the same speed (even though the .357 Magnum does a have the advantage of better bullets). For all practical purposes, they deliver the same performance. Both are at the low end of acceptable for deer (and maybe even unacceptable for the larger specimens)--and almost everyone who has contributed to the thread has echoed those sentiments. Nobody faulting you or the 10mm--neither it, nor the .357 Magnum, is the best for deer, but they will both the job (equally well) if you limit your range and pick your shots. There's nothing "unfair" or "picking" on the 10mm (or .357 Magnum) in that (unless you're one of those people who just have to "prove" their choice is better than everyone else's).

JohnKSa
July 5, 2004, 07:43 PM
...are you really interested in the subject or just trying to stir something up? ...you have not made one substantive post--just a couple that look more like "baiting" than anything else and haven't added anything to the discussion.I'm not going to quibble with you about whether my posts are "substantive" or "add to the discussion".

But here are some relevant facts:

1. You have no authority to qualify nor disqualify posts. If you feel that someone has posted amiss you are free to click the little button that says "report this post to a moderator."
2. There is nothing in the rules of the forum that says posts must be substantive or add to the discussion--only that they must be on topic and polite. If you feel that the rules should be amended then you are free to contact the administrator and petition for a rule change. I did not make the rules, I can not change the rules nor do I even wish to change them--therefore discussing this issue with me is pointless.
3. There is nothing in the rules of the forum that say that a poster must be interested in a topic before posting on the thread. (Although common sense might tell a thinking person that the fact someone has taken the time to read and post on a thread indicates at least a passing interest.)

I asked you a very simple question about some things that you posted. When you answered, I asked for a clarification of an apparent contradiction. You are not required to answer my questions nor are you even under any obligation to read them. If you feel that I'm trying to "stir something up" then you should report me to the mods. Otherwise you should stick to talking about handgun calibers for whitetail deer on this thread.

Ok, back to the topic.

Here's what I'm getting at. I've noticed that many people will quote a glowing record of hunting with a particular cartridge (or cartridge class--in the case of "ballistic twins") and then turn around and state that they don't recommend it. That seems a bit odd to me. If I could say that a particular cartridge had "worked like magic" for me, I wouldn't have any problem recommending it or its ballistic twin to others. Even if a couple of caveats were prudent.

Marshall
July 5, 2004, 09:19 PM
This is somewhat vague to me regarding New Smith N Frames. I have read many articals where folks are handloading above these specs for.45 Colt N-Frames while recommending not going over 1500fps.

Corbon .45 Colt Hunting Ammo (http://mysite.elixirlabs.com/index.php?uid=12665&page=1625)


45 Colt Magnum +P 265gr Bonded Core Hollow Point:

Range 0 50 100 125 150 175 200 yards
Veloci 1350 1225 1126 1085 1051 1021 993 fps
Energy 1073 883 745 693 649 612 580.4 ft/lb
Path -0.50 2.65 0.00 -3.82 -9.48 -17.0 -26.76 in


They other loads as well



From CorBon:

CorBon has given the 45 COLT cartridge hunting loads worthy of the designation: Magnum. These are true high performance loads with the attached +P as an additional caution. In the appropriate modern hunting pistol, our .45 COLT Magnum lods give near 44 Magnum performance with markedly less recoil.

This is NOT plinking ammo, this load should only be used in those guns that have the steel to handle the power. Guns in .45 COLT that are built on heavy duty frames, such as the Ruger, Freedom Arms, Colt Anaconda, and Thompson-Center Contender will handle this load with authority. This load is NOT intended for handguns such as older Smith & Wesson, Colt Single Action Army, or the Colt clones imported single action revolvers. Common sense needs to prevail! THIS IS NOT COWBOY AMMO!



CorBon,

I have just purchased a New S&W Model 25 Mountain Gun in .45 Colt. Can I use your Hunting Ammo without damaging the gun?

Thanks you.



I'll pass on their reply.

Marshall
July 6, 2004, 12:47 PM
Here's the reply from CorBon. I am very impressed, that was fast response!



Marshall,

We used a S&W 25-5 to develop our hunting loads in 45 Colt. Yes it is safe to use in your 25 Mtn gun.

Mike Shovel
Sales Manager
COR-BON/Glaser

twoblink
July 7, 2004, 01:16 PM
.357Mag from Buffalo Bore out of a 18" rifle like a Marlin.. That's the answer :D

Ballsticially better than a 30-30.. Deer Jerky maker..

If you enjoyed reading about "Best for White Tail Deer" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!