How much horsepower does it take to reliably put a deer down?

[WestKentucky]

My sources say 55, but more is certainly optimal.

 

[Armored farmer]

We could all post our favorite whitetail caliber and the then get an average of the ballistics or energy at say 200yds....then choose a caliber that falls in that range.....
But that would be thread jacking.

 

[Choctaw]

EVERYONE STEP AWAY FROM YOUR COMPUTERS AND GO HUNTING RIGHT NOW. I mean it, too.

We could all post our favorite whitetail caliber and the then get an average of the ballistics or energy at say 200yds....then choose a caliber that falls in that range.....
But that would be thread jacking.

Which would lead to a veritable forum bloodbath because these kinds of threads tend to go bad.

 

[Don Dayacetah]

A 180gr 30/06 would be the MINIMUM for putting a deer down?

Them some big ole deer!

I use the rifle for different game. I don't see any reason to prolong an animal's suffering. Knocks them out quick.
On the occasions when I hunt deer.

 

[TN Outlaw]

I use the rifle for different game. I don't see any reason to prolong an animal's suffering. Knocks them out quick.
On the occasions when I hunt deer.

I agree with you, the '06 works great for lots of North American game, whitetail included. I also don't like the suffering of animals and hope for an instant KO shot. I just feel there's dozens of smaller and/or less powerful cartridges that will achieve bang flops just as reliably and have done so for lots of deer seasons so I don't quite see the 30/06 as being near the minimum for whitetail. It is a good one though.

Cartridges like 25/06, 257 Roberts +p, 260 Rem, 6.5 Creedmoor, 6.5x55, 270 Win, 7mm-08, 280 Rem, 308 Win are just some that have made names for themselves as deer killers. Also, 30-30 or 44 mag in a carbine for inside 150yds. None of these are the "trying to do more with less" cartridges, they are just really good whitetail rounds.

All just my personal opinion based off of my experience and general consensus so YMMV, I just see the '06 as being closer to the upper end of deer cartridges than the bare minimum.

 

[ACES&8S]

Enough numbers:
I have shot deer with a bow thru the heart & they run 100 yards.
I have shot a doe's heart out with a 12 gauge slug gun as it sneaked by, it ran 100 yards because it was scared & nervous
as it came by from all the doe day shooting.
I have shot deer with my bow & they jumped a little not knowing they were shot, went to standing & looking around
for where the sound came from then fall over dead, but I have never shot a deer with a firearm & it not know
it was hit or grabbed by something.
I have killed deer with everything from 375 HH Magnum to 243, from 2 feet away to 450 yards & they all seem
to work well, no complaints.

 

[tarosean]

So I'd say 330 hp is adequate.

oh give me a break..Ive done it with only 135hp

 

[WestKentucky]

I suggest not using too small of a tool. Can leave you in a position where there is an angry injured animal that wants revenge. People around here keep saying 32 is too small...maybe.

 

[Don Dayacetah]

All just my personal opinion based off of my experience and general consensus so YMMV, I just see the '06 as being closer to the upper end of deer cartridges than the bare minimum.

I have to admit to being a little lost on the merit of bare minimum. We're not painting an apartment, here. We're talking about humanely and ethically
taking game.
.

 

[MCgunner]

My car has 330 horsepower and dropped a large buck in it's tracks DRT. It did however result in $3,700 in damage.

So I'd say 330 hp is adequate.

Yeah, well, I took one out with a Dodge Van, 55 mph with the horn blowin'....... If you wanna kill a deer, slow that bullet down to 55 mph, put some lights and a horn on it, and the deer will literally jump in front of it....../Ron White

 

[.308 Norma]

Yeah, well, I took one out with a Dodge Van, 55 mph with the horn blowin'....... If you wanna kill a deer, slow that bullet down to 55 mph, put some lights and a horn on it, and the deer will literally jump in front of it....../Ron White

I think most of the deer killed around here are killed on the interstate by trucks (18 or more wheels) at speeds just slightly higher than the legal limit of 70mph for trucks. I've always felt truck drivers were "over compensating" for something.

 

[TN Outlaw]

I have to admit to being a little lost on the merit of bare minimum. We're not painting an apartment, here. We're talking about humanely and ethically
taking game.
.

I'm assuming the merit is just conversation. Just common sense anecdotal conversation about the low end of power to reliably take a deer judging by the OP. Wether there's a kinetic energy number or a caliber size or what have you.

Yes, it's not a good idea to skate by on the bare minimum when trying to ethically take a game animals life. It's also not like it takes a bazooka just to make sure we are killing them ethically either.

I'm not painting a room, and I am very well aware of the seriousness of being ethical when taking game but im smart enough to know I don't need to hunt them with a tank to dispatch a whitetail either. With all of the deer that have been put down instantly with a little 30-30 or 25-06, I know they are not the bare minimum. They just work well. So, all the more powerful and/or bigger cartridges above them have more than enough horsepower to do the job. The discussion of bare minimum is just that, a discussion. Idk what that bare minimum is but I do know it's a less powerful cartridge than a 30-30, 7.62x39mm, or 35 Rem as long as the proper range is considered.

 

[mcb]

Another point of view on minimum/marginal energy cartridges. As a hunter that has played with the bottom side of ballistics as a deer hunter (hunted several years with a 410 slug gun and also with a iron-sighted revolver) sometime it is more about the hunt than the trophy or meat in the freezer. We hunt with a minimal cartridge/firearm because we are looking for an additional or particular challenge as part of our hunt. If you pick a minimal cartridge, practice with it enough to be proficient, and then have the ethics to hunt within its limited capabilities I see nothing unethical about that. It is simply a self imposed additional difficulty. If you are the type of hunter that cannot live within the more restrictive limitations of a marginal cartridge then by all means select a cartridge that you can operate within its ethical capabilities.

I hunted with a 410 slug gun for more than a decade and only took two deer with it. I had to pass on many deer that I could have taken with a more capable firearm. Same with my attempts with a revolver, I passed on many deer that were outside what I was comfortable shooting at with my revolver before I finally took a deer with my revolver.

 

[Varminterror]

This is really just a permutation of @mcb's thread on "minimum cartridge for deer."

I can say, a specified limit of kinetic energy isn't the best metric for the minimum cartridge limit. It might not be the WORST metric, but I can think of few metrics worse than KE. None of the available calculated metrics are without bias (I'm pretty sure I have a post on here somewhere which outlines the biases of each of a dozen or so common metrics for stopping power). Any time you have a dependency upon speed AND mass, you're opening the door for imbalances where singular metrics don't tell the whole story. This is how we end up with the absurdist arguments such the Taylor KO Factor is bunk because a baseball pitch has 4x higher number than a 45-70 (TKO values diameter as much as speed or mass), or such the 243win has as much KE as a 45-70 (because KE values speed over mass)...

And of course, any of these metrics are typically based around exactly those two parameters - speed and mass, the product of which is momentum... momentum likely has more merit than most metrics, since we're dealing with real world, inelastic collisions, where momentum, but NOT kinetic energy is conserved. But the transfer impulse, shot placement, inefficient losses due to fragmentation, and dumb F'ing luck (or lack thereof) are all extremely influential variables...

I laugh whenever I see 1,000ft.lbs. touted as the minimum KE requirement for deer. 1,300ft.lbs. is even moreso laughable. .357mags will drop deer very well at 50yrds, leaving the muzzle with only around 550ft.lbs. As noted above, arrows kill deer every year with less than 60ft.lbs. at the bow, let alone upon impact. Alternatively, I can push a 40grn 20cal pill in 204Ruger to about 1,300ft.lbs. but only hit about 900-1000fps with a 240grn bullet in 44mag. - would anyone suggest a 204Ruger is a better choice for whitetails at 100yrds than a 44mag?

It's all physics - comparisons of the CORRECT metrics can aptly describe disparate samples along the spectrum of cartridges, but using KE alone, or really any of the common metrics used in the sporting arms industry alone, is a fool's errand.

 

[Don Dayacetah]

On the one hand, I can't justify using a 375 H&H on a White Tail. OTOH, I once used a 223, just happened to be the rifle I used at the time.
Having to walk up to that poor animal, panicked, frantic, in pain, and finish it with a follow up shot is a regret I could live without. A
30.06 in the same spot, on the first shot, would have put him away fast.

 

[TN Outlaw]

On the one hand, I can't justify using a 375 H&H on a White Tail. OTOH, I once used a 223, just happened to be the rifle I used at the time.
Having to walk up to that poor animal, panicked, frantic, in pain, and finish it with a follow up shot is a regret I could live without. A
30.06 in the same spot, on the first shot, would have put him away fast.

I can respect that and totally agree. The '06 would have done it in sooner. Do you feel a 270 Win or say a 7mm-08 would have ended it just as fast as the 30.06? They quickly end loads and loads of whitetail instantaneous every season and have for years so I feel that either one would have along with some more rounds in that power range.

I don't hunt with a 223 Rem although many people do and swear by them. I'd say alot more detail on bullet wt/type, range, and shot placement would have to be accounted for using something that small and weak but accounting for these things, it's doable.

I agree with a good vital shot, your '06 would have ended that scene alot sooner but I guess my point is so would several other cartridges between the 223 and the 30.06. I don't believe in skating that line of not enough and just enough, I just believe whole heartedly that the line of more than enough is a pretty good tick below 30.06. That's all

Been a good conversation though Don Dayacetah.

 

[32-20]

How much "energy" the bullet hits with is almost meaningless, bullet performance and shot placement are what matters. If you use a 30-06 with a 150gr. FMJ bullet it will be less effective than a 30-30 with a soft point 150 gr. with much less energy.

 

[mcb]

How much "energy" the bullet hits with is almost meaningless, bullet performance and shot placement are what matters. If you use a 30-06 with a 150gr. FMJ bullet it will be less effective than a 30-30 with a soft point 150 gr. with much less energy.

On one hand I agree with the general idea but the engineer in me also disagrees strongly that kinetic energy is meaningless. Kinetic energy is the only energy source the bullet has to do work when it reach the target (assuming your not lobbing HE rounds or other projectiles with their own energetics on board) The ability to perforate tissue is a result of exchanging kinetic energy for tissue damage. The ability to cause the bullet to expand or fragment is the result of exchanging kinetic energy for deformation to the bullet. Whatever the bullet does at the target is powered by the only energy source the bullet has and that is kinetic energy.

If we where talking about perforating a monolithic target with a non expanding bullet penetration depth is directly proportional to the kinetic energy the bullet has when it hits the target.

The problem comes from the fact that poking a hold in a critter is simply not enough to kill. You need to damage the right things in the right way to kills and there are simply too many variables in shot place, anatomy, bullet performance and other adverse conditions to simply say X amount of energy will always work. That said kinetic energy is the only physical energy source a bullet has when it gets there to do what its going to do.

 

[jmr40]

Does the terminal ballistics idea make the .243 a 500 yard deer round?

Yes!



The most accurate measure of a cartridges effectiveness is enough weight and tough enough construction to reach vital organs. Plus enough impact velocity to expand. People forget how important sectional density is. A bullets LENGTH is far more important than it's weight or diameter.

Years ago bullets were fragile to hold up at high impact speeds and heavier bullets were needed to hold together and penetrate. Today's better bullets mean that fairly lightweight bullets will still penetrate and expand close or far. Years ago there was a need for bigger, heavier bullets, and they can still work. But certainly aren't needed.

I still consider a nearly 700 yard shot on an elk pushing things farther than I would. But it certainly proves a 243 is a 500 yard deer cartridge.

 

[LoonWulf]

^ Shooting a 105Vld, not a bonded or monometal, at that.

 

[Art Eatman]

I gotta admit that I've never paid all that much attention to "power". My first deer was a close-range doe that I shot in the white spot with a .222. More like mouse-power than horse-power. Which of course gets us back to shot placement.

 

[horsemen61]

Gotta agree with everybody who said shot placement trumps everything else

 

[CraigC]

On one hand I agree with the general idea but the engineer in me also disagrees strongly that kinetic energy is meaningless. Kinetic energy is the only energy source the bullet has to do work when it reach the target (assuming your not lobbing HE rounds or other projectiles with their own energetics on board) The ability to perforate tissue is a result of exchanging kinetic energy for tissue damage. The ability to cause the bullet to expand or fragment is the result of exchanging kinetic energy for deformation to the bullet. Whatever the bullet does at the target is powered by the only energy source the bullet has and that is kinetic energy.

If we where talking about perforating a monolithic target with a non expanding bullet penetration depth is directly proportional to the kinetic energy the bullet has when it hits the target.

The problem comes from the fact that poking a hold in a critter is simply not enough to kill. You need to damage the right things in the right way to kills and there are simply too many variables in shot place, anatomy, bullet performance and other adverse conditions to simply say X amount of energy will always work. That said kinetic energy is the only physical energy source a bullet has when it gets there to do what its going to do.

Kinetic energy is a useless number and is more useful for marketing than anything else. It's a vain attempt to produce a simple answer to a very complicated question. It places far too much importance on velocity and too little on weight, while completely ignoring critical factors. When a load producing 1200ft-lbs of energy is fully capable of taking Cape buffalo but others producing three times as much are at their limit with deer, we need another metric.

It all begins and ends with the bullet. How big it is, how much it expands, how deeply it penetrates, how much tissue it destroys, etc.. How much energy it expends while doing so is irrelevant.

 

[CraigC]

Gotta agree with everybody who said shot placement trumps everything else

Shot placement is important but it's not everything. Unfortunately, it's become a crutch answer for those who have little understanding of terminal ballistics. You have to use enough gun with the right bullet or your shot placement is meaningless.

 

[Wisco]

I was just going to say...

Shot placement. Penetration. Expansion.

There are some (varying degrees of) effective bullets for deer in just about every caliber from 223 to 375.