jerkface11
Member
No I don't. However in your original post you said .22 cal not .22lr. And I WOULD hunt with a .223.
Deer Calibers
- Thread starter Duckingit88
- Start date
- Status
No I don't. However in your original post you said .22 cal not .22lr. And I WOULD hunt with a .223.
oldpapps
Member
I'll add to the list.
Smallest:
.222 Rem many years ago, ranges were 100 to maybe 125 yards and all head shots, this was for food, don't remember what bullets.
Largest:
.375H&H, 75 to 80 yards, slight angle from just behind the left shoulder, dropped like a rock, 285 grain cast lead at about 1850 FPS went threw like a broom handle.
OSOK
Smallest:
.222 Rem many years ago, ranges were 100 to maybe 125 yards and all head shots, this was for food, don't remember what bullets.
Largest:
.375H&H, 75 to 80 yards, slight angle from just behind the left shoulder, dropped like a rock, 285 grain cast lead at about 1850 FPS went threw like a broom handle.
OSOK
wlewisiii
Member
Smallest used: 7mm
Smallest willing to use: .243
Currently: .30-30
Smallest willing to use: .243
Currently: .30-30
1stmarine
Member
.223REM if legal. For some inexplicable reason in some places is not. the 6x45 is just perfect out to 300 yards.
largest? hummm. if you have three or four deers in a row and have tags for them then use a 338 lapua? lol.
Seriously I don't think that anyone will need anything more than a popular 308win or 30.06.
largest? hummm. if you have three or four deers in a row and have tags for them then use a 338 lapua? lol.
Seriously I don't think that anyone will need anything more than a popular 308win or 30.06.
mortablunt
Member
Not a hunter, but deer are in the same game/weight class as humans, so the same round choices ought to apply.
Smallest: 5.56x45
Largest: 30-06
Smallest: 5.56x45
Largest: 30-06
Last edited:
PowerG
Member
The problem for me with the smaller calibers is that eventually a buck you really want is going to show his face, the trophy of a lifetime, and you're going to be presented with a shot that is more than your gun can make. The deer will die, and you won't find him. For me, the .243 is marginal, unless you're an excellent shot (on game, not paper), and stick with good angles. I don't like taking chances on wounding any game animal, it's just irresponsible IMO, and I don't really enjoy crawling through swampy briar patches after deer that run 300 yards after the shot. I'll stick with 7mm's and up, and some variation of PSP bullet; thanks anyway, but no plastic for me.
1stmarine
Member
try the TSX bullet in .243 or in any caliber for that matter. Even a 55gr .223 is devastating. The terminal effectiveness it has more to do with bullet design than simply caliber and raw power.
And being a good shot both in paper and in the field helps A LOT no matter what caliber.
Try them, or other solids. It might change your perspective. Years ago I used to think like you too.
And being a good shot both in paper and in the field helps A LOT no matter what caliber.
Try them, or other solids. It might change your perspective. Years ago I used to think like you too.
allaroundhunter
Member
Smallest I have used: .243 Win
Smallest I would use: .223 Rem (more than capable deer round with the right bullet)
Largest I would use: .300 Win Mag (overkill.....maybe)
Smallest I would use: .223 Rem (more than capable deer round with the right bullet)
Largest I would use: .300 Win Mag (overkill.....maybe)
black_powder_Rob
Member
well at this point the only legal deer rifle I own is a 30-30 I guess I would go with-------------- well the 30-30. So far it has worked well for me and I have had no reason to change. (the other rifles I have are all rimfires).
Great advice from 1stmarine. Shot placement + bullet construction trumps head stamp every time. The biggest problem that I've seen with "magnum" hunters in 25 years of hunting, is many have the notion that the "extra power" will compensate for poor shot placement. Big game will run just as far with a marginal hit from a magnum as any other caliber. I've seen it numerous times. If you shoot magnums well in the field, then great. But, I think many hunters who are marginal marksmen with magnums would be better served in the field by stepping down in caliber, and so would the game.
PowerG
Member
"Great advice from 1stmarine. Shot placement + bullet construction trumps head stamp every time. The biggest problem that I've seen with "magnum" hunters in 25 years of hunting, is many have the notion that the "extra power" will compensate for poor shot placement. Big game will run just as far with a marginal hit from a magnum as any other caliber. I've seen it numerous times. If you shoot magnums well in the field, then great. But, I think many hunters who are marginal marksmen with magnums would be better served in the field by stepping down in caliber, and so would the game."
Oh I totally agree, but the extra power will allow shots at angles and ranges that smaller calibers won't do, or at least do as well. There are many people who can get by fine with the .243. There are many people who can't always make shots with .300's. But if I've spent a couple of thousand dollars on a hunt, and the buck weighs 275 lbs., and is 250 yards out and quartering away, a .223 is most definitely not the gun I want in my hand. If you're shooting over small food plots or something, yes, they'll work...but other calibers will work better in more varied conditions.
Oh I totally agree, but the extra power will allow shots at angles and ranges that smaller calibers won't do, or at least do as well. There are many people who can get by fine with the .243. There are many people who can't always make shots with .300's. But if I've spent a couple of thousand dollars on a hunt, and the buck weighs 275 lbs., and is 250 yards out and quartering away, a .223 is most definitely not the gun I want in my hand. If you're shooting over small food plots or something, yes, they'll work...but other calibers will work better in more varied conditions.
1stmarine
Member
The reason a .223 was banned in many places is because folks were using the wrong surplus 223rem bullets and not the caliber, the 223 rem round or the rifle or anything else.
A 70gr solid copper in .223 might have in fact more penetration and a wound effect than many classic 308. Try them out in any caliber, really. Ask around. you will be surprised.
I never had a buck or a pig taking more than two steps when hit with any TSX in any caliber. I do heart or spine shot all the time. They are brutal NO MATTER THE CALIBER.
A 70gr solid copper in .223 might have in fact more penetration and a wound effect than many classic 308. Try them out in any caliber, really. Ask around. you will be surprised.
I never had a buck or a pig taking more than two steps when hit with any TSX in any caliber. I do heart or spine shot all the time. They are brutal NO MATTER THE CALIBER.
Montenegrin
Member
- Joined
- Jul 4, 2011
- Messages
- 85
Smallest: .22 short-friend took one with old S&W No .1 with 3 shots in head
Largest: .950 JDJ (just see picture of it and you'll be SHOCKED)
Largest: .950 JDJ (just see picture of it and you'll be SHOCKED)
FLNT4EVR
Member
Because you say it may become law ,......smallest = 22 mag.....largest= what ever you have larger than 22 mag , ie; 22 HORNET- 700 NITRO EXPRESS...., dead is dead, the deer won't know how it got that way.
Smallest would be a .223 Remington, largest would be a 12 gauge. I'm more likely to go with 7mm Wby, .30-06, .30-30, or .45-70 depending on the conditions. .30-30 is just about perfect for around here (NE TN).
edit: You should probably take into consideration the bullet used, as well. There's a good bit of difference between a bonded 140 grain expanding 7mm bullet at 3400 fps and a soft cast-lead 440 grain .458" bullet at 1300 fps. I've got a couple other go-to loads, but those cover the broadest range of the spectrum, IMO.
edit: You should probably take into consideration the bullet used, as well. There's a good bit of difference between a bonded 140 grain expanding 7mm bullet at 3400 fps and a soft cast-lead 440 grain .458" bullet at 1300 fps. I've got a couple other go-to loads, but those cover the broadest range of the spectrum, IMO.
Another A+ for the 6.5x55 Swedish Mauser. Very accurate, plus the sectional density allows it to kill beyond what you would think The Europeans hunt Moose and Elk with it. Everything I have ever shot with it dropped dead.
To answer your question the .223/5.56x45 is the smallest I recommend, and as far as heavy calibers go I prefer the 9.3x62 Mauser. It has killed Elephants and other dangerous game all over Africa, and is liked in Europe too. A 286gr barnes, norma or nosler will take most anything down. I use the CZ 550FS with Leopold VX-R 2-7 ballistic firedot recticle.
To answer your question the .223/5.56x45 is the smallest I recommend, and as far as heavy calibers go I prefer the 9.3x62 Mauser. It has killed Elephants and other dangerous game all over Africa, and is liked in Europe too. A 286gr barnes, norma or nosler will take most anything down. I use the CZ 550FS with Leopold VX-R 2-7 ballistic firedot recticle.
I went deer hunting this year for the first time in 16 years, because my son wanted to try hunting. I had sold off all of my old deer rifles in that time, and a friend offered to let me borrow his 243. I hadn't ever used a 243before, and I have to say after looking at the little bullet I didn't feel overly confident. Nevertheless, I was happy that he offered it, and gladly used it over the last two weeks hunting. Well, in that time I've fired two shots, and now have two nice deer in the freezer to show for it. Neither deer went very far after being shot. I don't know if I would go out atnd buy a 243, but I wouldn't hesitate to use one for deer in the future. Doubt that I'd want to go smaller though as some here have indicated.
ScrapMetalSlug
Member
Smallest used so far is a 7.5mmx55 Swiss. Largest is a 12 guage, also know as .73 cal
Maple_City_Woodsman
Member
- Joined
- Jun 15, 2011
- Messages
- 430
Ask your Grandparents what 'deer calibers' were during the great depression! The answer may surprise you.
IF they actually used a rifle (instead of a 30" choked shotgun), the cartridges would probably have been things like 22 Hornet, 25-20, and 32-20. Few would have ever used anything bigger than 30-30 or perhaps 30-40 Krag.
IF they actually used a rifle (instead of a 30" choked shotgun), the cartridges would probably have been things like 22 Hornet, 25-20, and 32-20. Few would have ever used anything bigger than 30-30 or perhaps 30-40 Krag.
- Status
