Lowest Caliber for Deer

Status
Not open for further replies.
6mm/.243 again.
Click to expand...
Agreed.

I also wouldn't take the shot at further than 150 yards to be humane & effective. As others have said shot placement is very important.
 
Everyone knows shot placement is important but what happens when you are presented with something unexpected? Say the wind blows at the exact instant you pull trigger? Or a raccoon decides to jump at a deer and all of a sudden scare it as you pull the trigger? I mean ya anyone can take a deer with a .22 but thats just stupid and will maybe work a small percentage of the time. I'd rather be sure than not sure.
 
Rubenz, one of the does was shot in the neck, the other was shot in the spine. Both were shot while I was squirrel hunting. I wouldn't intentionaly take a 22LR on a deer hunt, but if a deer presents itself and that is what I have in my hands... Bottom line is that deer are not tough. They don't wear body armor. I frimly believe that most of the people who blast away at deer with magnum powered rifles and consider small caliber guns inadequate, are people who don't know how to wait for a good shot. That, or they know they are using overkill and do it because this is America and by God they can if they want. I am not saying that the 270, 30-06 and 7 Mag are bad choices, just saying that bashing lighter loads is uncalled for and sooner or later you guys are going to run into a good shooter with a light rifle and they are going to make a fool of you bashers.:neener:
 
Art Sez: "Ain't a lot of worthwhile meat in the neck. And a cross-body heart/lung shot doesn't hurt anything I'd eat."

Meek Sez: Art, I don't know how you get all those deer to pose exactly straight. Seems like a lot of my deer are turned one way or another so that chest shot bullets seem to cross over and hit one or the other shoulder or front leg, usually the offside one. Nearly all my face-on shots seem to be turned just enough so that the rumin gets hit on the way through. :neener:

(The rumin problem may be my habit of aiming for the hollow of the near side in facing deer, above where the collar bone would be if deer had collar bones. Since I read up on CWD I've been avoiding spine shots if at all possible.)
 
Well, that's why I've mostly taken neck shots. :) Otherwise, if I don't mess up hams or backstraps, I don't worry a lot. But, hey: "I'll take luck over skill, any day." :D

As far as bad stuff from the spine, well, I've generally had Ol' Bucky disassembled before much of anything can move from Point A to Point B. So far, nothing's killed any of my coyote buddies, from cleaning off the carcass...

'Cept me.

Art
 
I find this interesting since I am in a similar boat; even though I am close to middle age, I didn't get exposed to hunting until a few years ago; basically I'm as green as a youngin on his first hunting excursion; I tried a .30-06 bolt action that was not setup for me (bought a used springer 03A3 that had a custom sporter stock that was way too long); next I tried a combo of Marlin 336 in .30-30 and Mossberg rifled slug setup in 12 ga with low recoil ammo; even with all this prep, I haven't seen any deer, let alone taken shots at any

earlier this year, I bought a nice Tikka T3 in .223 and was wondering about using it for deer; I talked it over with my hunting buddy (really taken me under his wing and getting me up to speed) and he suggested staying away from such a light caliber unless I was able to consistently place head or neck shots in exactly the right areas; he mentioned .243 as a minimum and an ideal 'low recoil' and effective hunting round for deer; I just got my dad's Remington 760 in .30-06 and I put together another shotgun combo based upon a Remington 870 Express to include a fully rifled slug barrel and a shorter tube for open sights and forster slugs

I am leaning toward .30-06 w/ low recoil ammo (if the regular 150's cause a flinch with the heavier trigger of the 760) and 12 ga low recoil sabot slugs and the other barrel (hi-viz adjustable sights & interchangable chokes) will act as backup with 12 ga low recoil forster style slugs

since I'm no 'expert' and don't want to experiment with my shots, I will run heavier calibers and take proven broadside and angling shots to the torso and the heart/lung vitals
 
It does take a little time to get your feet wet hunting. Then again, the new hunter always seems to see that big 8-pt... it just walked up to me....

I never particularly enjoyed shooting the 30-06 a lot on the bench. Same goes for the 270 win. For the most part, I just shoot my "deer rifle" enough to be proficient. Used to shoot my 243 a bunch. I was young and I believed I could place a kill shot inside a 6" circle at 300 yds at a running animal until the day came when I shot one with the 243 at 20 yds in the front shoulders and it didn't react. After waiting a bit, I tracked it a long way (several 100 yds in dry leaves) until the blood trail stopped. That is when I switched to a Remington Model 700 in 270 win.

The 270 or 30-06 is not the end all of calibers, as I shot one buck with it that ran about 75 yds before bleeding out. Frankly, after you learn a bit about how deer react to a shot, you discover that if you don't hit the front shoulder or spine and you put one through the heart-lung area, the deer will probably run a ways before bleeding out.

That is why using the 223 with say a 60 gr bullet or a 6mm/243 in a 100gr is a reasonable choice as the round will expand rapidly (but not too rapidly) when it hits a deer where another round may just wizz through the heart-lung area and exit without apparent immediate massive damage to the animal. I'm still not convinced that I would choose a 223 rifle as my first choice. I certainly would not choose an AR-15 style rifle in 223 for deer hunting. But if that is all I have, I'd use it.

My father used the Remington Model 760 in 30-06 as his deer rifle. He shot many deer with it. They are good rifles for a whitetail hunter. I always leaned toward bolt action rifles. Probably as a kid I read that they were usually so much more accurate... funny. You really don't need 1 MOA accuracy for a deer rifle, but I'll take it.
 
270

I don't like tracking a wounded deer. They seem to go for water. I like a 270 in a 150 gr. for my deer round. A good neck shot, down they go. It is a great flat shooting predictable round. I have had good results.
 
One problem with this sort of discussion is the difference in skill levels among shooters. Please keep that in mind when making "grand, sweeping generalizations."

, Art

Above is the only statement I have seen that makes the most sense on this post. Some can do much with little. Some can do nothing with much. A .243 that hits its target is far better than a .300 win mag that misses.
 
elkhuntingfool, I have a 7mm WSM, but I don't take it out very often. I just feel like it is more gun than I need unless I am hunting a power line or hay field where long shots are more likely. As a matter of fact, I don't think the 7mm WSM has been out since I got my .243.
 
Marksman.... I actually shoot a 7mm mag :) I was waiting for a few guys from the 'best caliber for elk' to show up and start talking about needing a magnum.

It is too much - but it works just fine and I don't feel the need to get a rifle for deer and a rifle for elk - one size fits all.

Plus - my shots are around 300 yards or more - and I feel just fine shooting it.

If I did buy a rifle for deer only it'd be a .243 - perfect, perfect round for mule deer.
 
State laws aside, it is perfectly ethical and sensible to shoot a deer with a .223. It's a function of shot placement (as is anything, really), but with proper bullets and proper placement, your deer will leave this mortal coil just as quickly as it would with anything else.

That being said, my smallest hunting caliber is a .270, a caliber that I think is perfectly effective on any deer, elk, antelope, or jackalope that I would ever take a shot at. My largest (and main hunting rifle) is a 7mmRemMag, and between those two, I can plant anything I will ever shoot at.
 
All this shot placement crap is good, but its not the final say so. I mean, ya its important, but thats just one variable against many more unpredicted ones. Like I said earlier, you don't know what can happen between the second you decide to pull trigger and bullet hits target.

I am a good shot, in that I get no buck fever, I can always hit where I aim. But I'm not going to go bare minimum and use a .223 because I can. What if something went wrong and deer moved etc. I don't want to spend minutes or even an hour tracking a Buck. Especially down here in South Texas where the brush is so thick you need to hack away with a Machete an Axe just to go find your buck.
 
All this shot placement crap is good, but its not the final say so. I mean, ya its important, but thats just one variable against many more unpredicted ones. Like I said earlier, you don't know what can happen between the second you decide to pull trigger and bullet hits target.
Click to expand...

Your argument holds just as true for a .416 Rigby as it does a .223. I am going to directly disagree with you and say that shot placement is the final say so. Look, if you want to hunt with a .223, you are going to have to tailor your hunt around it, which means stalking in closer and taking certain shots. I am not saying that it's the best choice, and I made it clear it's not even my choice. It will work though, and thats just the truth of the matter.
 
Wow.....popular topic.

Here's what the old deer hunter thinks (hopefully wise but not yet old enough to be senile).

Deer come in all shapes and sizes ...... 100 to 350 and more pounds.

Think about it.

They are also shot at all ranges........ 10 feet to 400 and more yards.

They are also shot from all angles.....including the Texas Heart Shot (that one has to go through the deer from stern to stem to get to the heart).

So......considering all this......what is the least powerful gun that can cover all these possibilities?

I would set THAT minimum at .270 class or more.

Meaning, for this comprehensive set of shooting circumstances......the .243, the 30-30, the 45-70, and a lot of other traditional rounds just don't qualify.

Of course you CAN kill deer with them......but not in every one of the circumstances that we may encounter in deer hunting--say, big deer, bad angle, long range.

That's why the old deer hunter sticks with his choice of .270 power class and above......because he has taken that long, tough shot at a big deer's behind--and had success.

If you want to stay at the shorter distances and be very picky about the shots you take.......go ahead and use the less powerful rounds.

It can be done, but you won't be ready for all the contingencies.
 
I think the bottom line is that we will never have a general consensus on what the lowest caliber for deer is. Apparently there are an awful lot of up armored deer running around that are immune to anything that doesn't start with a "3". There alse seems to be alot of people who don't realize that bullet construction has evolved as much as hunters have over the past twenty years or so. My personal opinion is that a 223 should be the lowest caliber used as a dedicated deer hunting round even though many deer have been killed with the 22LR. I have several firearms to choose from when I head to the stand, but more often than not it is my Remington 700 in 243 that is slung over my shoulder. I would not feel undergunned with a 223 as long as shots were kept under 200 yards. Apparently there are some of here that feel under gunned with a 270. To each his own I guess.

Bottom line is, find a gun that you are comfortable with, that you shoot well, and is in your price range. Chances are better than not that the cartridge you choose will be more than adequate for killing a deer.
 
Of course you CAN kill deer with them......but not in every one of the circumstances that we may encounter in deer hunting--say, big deer, bad angle, long range. _ Logos


I say the old deer hunter needs to learn how to get close enough to his prey to make a clean kill. He also needs to learn when to take a shot, and when to pass. Big deer + bad angle + long range = deer walks and I go home with a good story for my buddies.
 
Last years deer

Last year I shot eight deer with seven different rifles. Only one rifle had a scope and I used it offhand at about 60 yards. The rest were military rifles from Swede 6.5, Garand 30 cal, M1 Carbine 30 cal, Jap 6.5 carbine, K31 Swiss 7.5, and an Argentine 7.65. Longest shot was 150 yards. All deer died from the first shot. Some dropped in place. One ran about 100 yards on a lung shot. I'm thinking about shooting a deer with an AR15 carbine this year. Maybe.

Most folks shoot ONE or TWO deer a season and that's it. I'm not sure you build expertise that way, or if you do it takes a long time. Add that to the fact that most folks don't shoot their deer rifles much on the range- in factu usually they come out for zero check at deer season, hunt a little and then go back in the guncase. If you don't shoot a LOT, just shoot your deer rifle during season or have killed enough deer to have a background in shooting live game dead on the spot, then I would opt for a 243 or larger.

As long as the shot is placed, you are going to be OK. If you don't have 20 or more deer already on your resume though....I'd be hesitant to drop down to 223 caliber.

This is all said with the background of shooting a little 223 throughout the year. I load and shoot about 4K rounds through my AR15s and usually rebarrel one of the rifles each year.

Maybe I will shoot three or four does with an AR15 this year and post my results. We shoot doe tags from Oct through Feb.
 
The question is, why?

You can say, "My 8-year old son (or daughter) can't tolerate the recoil of a more powerful rifle." That's a good reason.

You can say, "All I have is a .223, and I can't afford another rifle." That's a good reason.

But if you have a safe full of rifles, or you are going out to buy a deer rifle, why buy less than a .243/6mm?
 
I say the old deer hunter needs to learn how to get close enough to his prey to make a clean kill. He also needs to learn when to take a shot, and when to pass. Big deer + bad angle + long range = deer walks and I go home with a good story for my buddies.
Click to expand...

In a perfect world, of course, you'd be right.

But....this world is not perfect, so you're wrong.

Why? Reality. Fact is, a lot of people DO (some rightly, some wrongly) feel they have the skill to take the long shot at a bad angle.

Especially if the deer is a really big one, since it could be a once in a lifetime opportunity.

So they need to be encouraged to "Use Enough Gun," as Bob Ruark used to put it.

Was good advice......Is good advice.

Disciplined practice with increasing power will enable almost anyone to master a rifle of considerable power.

But I'll make a deal with you.....you hunt the way you like--and I'll hunt the way I like.

This topic is, after all, and like most, about opinions.

I also know for SURE that I'd rather have a big set of antlers on the wall than a story for my buddies.

;)
 
Logos, I too would rather have another head on the wall, but not if it means taking a bad shot. Fortunately, we live in America where we can hunt the way we choose (in most places). I think the two of us will have to agree to disagree about this. I may shoot deer with what some call inferior calibers, but I refuse to take a poor shot at big a deer because I want him on my wall. I don't want to risk wounding him and causing him a slow and painful death.
 
I refuse to take a poor shot at big a deer because I want him on my wall.
Click to expand...

Yes, you are now totally correct.

I respect that because now you're not telling me that I'M taking a poor shot or I am lacking in skill.

It's a good shot for me because I have the skill and use enough gun for it.

It would be a poor shot for someone with a rifle that was too weak or was an unpracticed rifle shot, or both.

I think I mentioned before that rifles of less power are perfectly acceptable to me.

I have no problem with someone using a 25-35 or a .218 Bee or a handgun, if they have the skill and the judgment to use it with success.

They just won't be equipped to take that long range/bad angle/big deer shot that sometimes presents itself.
 
Logos, I don't care how good of a shot you are, how powerful of a rifle you are using, or even how loud your big brass balls clank together when you walk through the woods. A bad angle is a bad angle. There no reason to shoot at a deer that not giving you a good shot.

With a big buck at a long distance that is giving you a poor angle for a shot, the deck is stacked against you making a clean kill. Why risk wounding the deer? Why not give him a quick grunt so he will face you and give you a neck shot? Dumb decisions are dumb decisions no matter what skill level you have. Experienced hunters know how to pass on a deer that is not offering a good shot.

Like I said before, proper shot placement opens up the door for alot of calibers, and closes the door for many others. You can talk about how great magnum calibers are, and for the most part I will agree, but they do not make up for a poor shot. You have no idea what that bullet is going to do once it enters a deer's body. Why risk wounding a truly huge buck and have him run off in the woods and die?
 
I don't care how good of a shot you are, how powerful of a rifle you are using, or even how loud your big brass balls clank together when you walk through the woods. A bad angle is a bad angle. There no reason to shoot at a deer that not giving you a good shot.
Click to expand...
In theory, you're right. In practice, you can't count on perfect performance. Go to a range and look at the 100 yard target frames and count the bullet holes -- many a shot has gone astray under ideal conditions.

All sorts of things can happen under field conditions -- a perfect presentation can change as the hammer falls. A poor shot due to adrinaline or exertion is always a possibiltiy. You can find yourself with a fast-departing view of a wounded animal, and have to take that shot. You just can't count on 100% perfect performance 100% of the time.

Which is why we have seatbelts and airbags in our cars, jacks and spare tires in the trunk, and why we buy insurance and have smoke detectors in our homes -- and why we like to have a rifle that will punch a bullet through to the vitals no matter what the angle of the shot.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

A
  • Locked
Lowest caliber for:
Replies
13
Views
853
marksman13
marksman13
J
  • Locked
Keep in mind
Replies
3
Views
369
jbkebert
J
P
  • Locked
A smaller caliber for cougar than for deer?
Replies
11
Views
2K
sm
S
J
  • Locked
Thought experiment: The clash of the marginal deer rounds
2 3
Replies
68
Views
4K
WestKentucky
WestKentucky
B
  • Locked
Auto handgun caliber for deer?
2
Replies
33
Views
11K
Legionnaire
Legionnaire
Back
Top