The arms race for deer

[Harry Stone]

Let me preface this by saying I'm no accomplished deer hunter. I've gone out for about 6 or 7 seasons and had no success so far. I go with my dad and uncle so it's as much about spending time with family for me as anything else. They have much better results than me, but they've been hunting for 50 years.

Anyway, here it is. I live in southeast Missouri. Deer hunting around where I live is limited by terrain to shots well within 100 to 150 yards, as far as I've found. For where my family hunts, in the woods 50 yards is a long shot down a deer trail. We use muzzleloaders, .50 caliber and they work just fine for us. I see a lot of guys around here at the range before deer season sighting in guns in calibers I just don't understand. There seems to be quite a lot of them using .300 Winchester magnums. For the ranges people shoot around here it seems like that's way more than what they need.

Now I'm not trying to say they shouldn't be allowed to use a gun like that, or that's there's something wrong with using more than enough power to get the job done. What I'm wondering is what I'm missing, like these guys know something I don't. I've asked my dad what he thinks, and he doesn't have any clue either. Does anyone here have any ideas, or is it just a case of bigger is better?

 

[palerider1]

well,
some people dont like using muzzle loaders. they would rather use a cartidge that is ready to go, and be able to have multiple shots at their fingertips. also they may think that their rifles are more accurate, which is true but at longer distances mayby. i personally would use a 30-30 or a 30-06 if i had a choice, but here in upstate NY we can only use shotguns with slugs or pistols.
keep your family traditions and enjoy each other on the hunts, you will get one.

good luck

 

[Grumulkin]

Muzzle Loaders

I bought a muzzel loader barrel for my Encore several years ago and just decided to use it this year since there is a muzzel loader season in Ohio. It had better accuracy than I was expecting (a deer within 100 yards would be in real danger) with open sites but I still prefer a cartridge I can put in and take out; no muss no fuss.

As for the 300 Winchester magnum, it certainly is enough gun for deer. After all, you want to kill them. If a guy can shoot it well, then more power to him. It would also work for Moose, Elk and the great bears. There are cartridges much easier on the shoulder with better inherent accuracy for deer though.

 

[Sergeant Sabre]

For whitetail exclusively , the .300 wouldn't be one of the top choices. However, I think that more than a few people out there (myself included) purchase thier first rifle with the idea of travelling to other states to hunt larger animals than whitetail or to environments where longer shots are more common. Taken in context, some of the choices of the people you mention may begin to make more sense.

(That is, unless the high recoil is making them flinch and shoot poorly)

 

[El Tejon]

People do not shoot. They see the .333 UberMagnum in a gun rag and believe they can purchase competence.

Just look at THR, how many "what gun?" threads do you see. Now compare that to the number of software threads you see. It is as 50 is to 1.

Software trumps hardware, however software comes with blood, sweat and effort, nobody wants that.

 

[dakotasin]

i never did understand the minimalist attitude for deer. i am planted firmly in the camp of 'use as much gun as you can shoot well'.

yeah, a 300 win mag isn't optimal for brush hunting, but i'd rather see a hunter carrying a 300 win rather than a 223.

 

[longrifleman]

Does anyone here have any ideas, or is it just a case of bigger is better?

I think it's a combination of factors, some of which have already been stated. I think most of the time the macho factor along with a sneakin feeling that they aren't capable of proper shot placement makes some pick way bigger calibers than needed. I use .30-06 most of the time and am probably over-gunned. That is the biggest caliber I can shoot a lot without recoil and flinch becoming a problem. Some people only shoot one or two rounds to check the scope before season but I haven't ever been comfortable with that level of practice.

One thing that always bothers me about large calibers in the brush is the inability to see beyond the target. I think the assumption is the trees will stop the bullet before it goes very far. Well, maybe. I'd rather use something that I know will drop and hit the ground relatively quickly. When I hunt the heavier timber around here I usually go back to my .30-30. I've also used my longrifle during regular season after I put one in the freezer.

 

[fisherman66]

i never did understand the minimalist attitude for deer. i am planted firmly in the camp of 'use as much gun as you can shoot well'.

yeah, a 300 win mag isn't optimal for brush hunting, but i'd rather see a hunter carrying a 300 win rather than a 223.

That's neither fair nor legal in many areas (the 223 that is). If you plan on a mixed bag of medium to large game with one rifle over your life time than I have absolutly no grounds to disagree....but if you only plan on only shooting whitetail deer under 150 yards then a 300 win mag is WAY more gun than needed for 95% of all hunters (and deer). Contemplating distances and game size over the expected role of the rifle should yield a sweet spot. Anything from the 270 to the 30'06/308 should be more than adequate without resorting to a mag. First time buyers should not read, "a 300win mag isn't optimal; but it beats X caliber." No flame intended.

 

[mtnbkr]

I know a guy who hunts Va whitetail (small to med sized deer, a 30-06 is overgunning) with a 338WinMag. Not because he thinks he needs that much gun or because he's compensating for poor shooting, but because he LIKES that gun. He got it for a steal and has put effort into load development and target practice.

He has at least 5 or 6 suitable rifles (all smaller than the 338), but almost always uses the 338 because it's his favorite.

Chris

 

[fisherman66]

mtnbiker;

I have no beef with people shooting whatever they want (that is legal and provided an ethical quick kill.) However; I hesitate to steer new shooters into too much gun.

 

[Harry Stone]

Thanks for the replies, guys. It makes a lot more sense to me when I consider that someone would buy one gun to do it all. For me the concept of only one gun is completely foreign so that's why it didn't click for me.

I hesitated to ask this question anywhere else for fear of starting arguments. The High Road isn't just a name, and it's nice to see it in action.

 

[dakotasin]

First time buyers should not read, "a 300win mag isn't optimal; but it beats X caliber."

no, first time buyers should borrow a few guns and develop their own tolerance to recoil, and then buy just below or at that threshold. or, heaven forbid, they take the time to learn some shooting skills and develop a tolerance to recoil even buy 1 step higher.

again, i do not understand the minimalist attitude. surely anyone who wants to try hunting out can handle the terrific recoil forces of a 25-06, or 25 souper, or 270, or whatever.

i wasn't around back in the 50's and 60's (or prior), but i have seen the guns used, and a 30-06 or 300 h&h w/ a steel buttplate was common. if they could shoot a 30-06 w/ a steel buttplate and a ton of stock drop back then, why can't we shoot a 25-06 w/ a sims limbsaver, merc-tube, and a stock that actually fits now? why do we feel compelled to use the smallest cartridge possible?

i wasn't advocating everybody use a 300 win mag - i was just questioning why so many people want to go smaller and smaller (ironic, given the bigger is better society we live in).

 

[fisherman66]

Dakotasin;

We come from different schools of thought. A rifle is a tool. I choose the most appropriate tool for the job. I've shot deer with 30/30, 280, 300 win mag and they all were anchored where shot (neck shots are great for keeping meat blood shot free.) I'd imagine I could do the same with much less in the cartride department, but I won't always have the perfect shot. You do whatever floats your boat, but I don't have any need for anything bigger or badder than a .308 class rifle for my little West Texas Whitetails. I don't know of anyone who does, and I'm certainly not pushing new hunters into a pissing contest of who has the biggest "gun".

Respectfully,
fish

 

[azredhawk44]

I go out varminting with a .30-30.

Does that mean I am pushing a 170gr bullet at 2200fps all the time? Heck no!

I have a pet load for varminting that is by no means a full powered .30-30 load. It is a 100gr RN bullet under a few (if you wanna know, PM me) grains of Unique. it's a little pop-gun that pushes that bullet around 1600fps. I can choose to push it faster, but why? My targets are usually under 100 yards, are small critters like coyotes, birds and rabbits, and I want the bullet to stop quickly.

Maybe your .300winmag guys are doing the same thing.

The .45-70 is another cartridge that can take alaskan bear or moose, but it takes a lot of deer every year too. The loads available vary from Garrett loads to hobbyist loads similar to my .30-30 recipe.

That .300winmag shooter may be doing a lot of homework. I think we should all take the high road here and look at his game bag rather than his gun.

 

[dakotasin]

i'm not advocating a biggest gun contest. i am advocating moving away from a littlest gun contest.

 

[bowfin]

I don't "need" a .300 Winchester Magnum with 180 grain bullets here in Nebraska for the deer.

I need it for the 45 mph winds like the one blowing right now.

 

[HankB]

I've gone out for about 6 or 7 seasons and had no success so far . . . We use muzzleloaders, .50 caliber and they work just fine for us.

Bit of a contradiction there, eh?

Seriously, if it's a case of your not getting a shot, I suggest you try another location. I'm not into muzzleloaders myself, but if you're not seeing shootable deer, year after year, you're in the wrong place.

As to power . . . I don't necessarily see anything wrong with being overgunned, but deer aren't armor plated. As long as one can shoot it well, pays attention to shot placement, and uses an appropriate bullet, anything from a .357 mag in a revolver on up is OK in my book.

 

[MCgunner]

i never did understand the minimalist attitude for deer. i am planted firmly in the camp of 'use as much gun as you can shoot well'.

yeah, a 300 win mag isn't optimal for brush hunting, but i'd rather see a hunter carrying a 300 win rather than a 223.

Why not carry a .308, near perfect for the quarry IMHO? I've killed most of my deer with one of the finest long range or short range white tail guns I know of, IMHO, the .257 Roberts. You don't need no belted cannon to hunt white tail, believe it or not...

I draw the line at smaller than the .243. Guys down here are always getting .22-250s for kids because of the lack of recoil. Well, the kid has to be a heck of a shot for his age to score a good hit with such a small pill. Yeah, it'll work on a perfect broadside shot or a neck shot or head shot, but hey, if the kid can't handle a .243, he's not old enough or mature enough as a shooter to be hunting deer IMHO. Keep him shooting his .22 until he can handle a .243.

 

[Vern Humphrey]

In my opinion, the right gun for deer is one that has adquate power (I say .243 Winchester or above) and which you can shoot well.

Personally, I like the .30-06 and the 6.5X55 Mauser, with the .30-30 as my saddle gun (and I've ridden upon and killed a lot of deer with it.)

The .30-06 may be "overkill" but I like my .30-06. It's a pleasure to hunt with. I don't have any quarrel with the .300 Win Mag, or the .458 Win Mag for that matter -- if you can shoot them well.

 

[dakotasin]

You don't need no belted cannon to hunt white tail, believe it or not...

since you quoted me, i assume you are referencing me... once again: i am not advocating everybody shoot a 300 win mag (or any chambering, for that matter). i am advocating a move away from the 'see how small of a gun you can get to kill a deer' thinking.

now... on to the belted magnums... what exactly does that mean? if it has a belt, then it is bad? where does that leave the wsm's, stw's (especially the 257 stw), and rum's? and, if it has a belt, is it really a magnum? ie, a 338 win mag has a belt, but it really isn't all that powerful. and what of the 7 mag? everybody spouts about how perfect the 30-06 is, and those same people are quick to point out the ballistic similarities of the 7 rem mag to the 30-06... and, if magnum means 'overbore', would not cartridges like a 25-06, 257 roberts, and especially the 243 be way overbore?

just because it has a belt and 'magnum' in its name doesn't make it more or less effective at a given task. (222 mag, anybody?)

 

[MCgunner]

No, but you should get my point. I know lots of folks that think they need even a .30-06 when the lowly .30-30 has killed more deer. .30-30 is a very effective deer caliber, in fact, and I've taken a few with it myself. To me, any deer beyond 400 yards can walk don't care if I'm shooting a STW. Too many variables at that range to risk crippling a deer IMHO. I ain't that good at dopin' wind or judging range without a range finder. I have a range finder, a Bushnell, good for 400 yards. If it's over that, I let it walk. If I'm spot and stalking, I'll try to get closer anyway, as close as I feel I can.

The .25-06 is a fine deer rifle 400 yards. I'd limit the .243 to 300 yards, but might give it an extra 50 with a good boat tail bullet. It's plenty enough rifle for white tail. I agree with you about .22s. On paper, sure the .22-250 has the energy, but there is some question whether typical .22-250 bullets can retain enough penetration through deer size game given they're designed to explode on prairie dogs. A 70 grain bullet would seem the answer except that most .22-250s aren't fast enough in rifling to handle a bullet that heavy.

The .243 with 100 grain bullets, especially a controlled expansion bullet, is plenty, though. I don't call that "small" for white tail.

 

[MCgunner]

Thanks for the replies, guys. It makes a lot more sense to me when I consider that someone would buy one gun to do it all. For me the concept of only one gun is completely foreign so that's why it didn't click for me.

I hesitated to ask this question anywhere else for fear of starting arguments. The High Road isn't just a name, and it's nice to see it in action.

Yeah, somebody said "beware of the man with only one gun". I say why, is he so bored with his plight in life he'd bore me to death???? I don't wanna OWN one gun to do all. I have a big 7 just in case I ever get to go elk hunting, which probably will never happen. I refuse to buy an elk tag even if I draw one for public lands and I can't afford a private land hunt. I have the .308 and the .257 and even have hunted with my SKS and I hunt with my contender a lot and I've got this black powder .50 I've sat in the stand with a few times, though I've not shot anything, but paper with it, yet.

 

[~z]

"On paper, sure the .22-250 has the energy, but there is some question whether typical .22-250 bullets can retain enough penetration through deer size game given they're designed to explode on prairie dogs."

MCgunner, I must politely dissagree. Your assumption is that if using a .22-250 you must use "typical" bullets. That is not the case. Match the bullet to the quarry take shots with 100% certainty and collect your game. I agree, there is no need to place varmiter bullets in the hands of an inexperienced hunter and send them out after deer. But I feel compeled to say if used properly, a .22-250 is plenty. A .222 is plenty...Sorry if I'm stepping on any toes. I'm not advocating inexperienced hunters, poor shots, those who dont take the time to practice and learn their equipment, know their limitations, the limitations of their gear, appriciate environmental conditions to go hunt with a .22 Hornet. But under certain conditions, a .22 is plenty. Push your limitations at the range, practice your limitations in the field.

Go ahead flame away, Ive said my piece.
~z

 

[MCgunner]

"On paper, sure the .22-250 has the energy, but there is some question whether typical .22-250 bullets can retain enough penetration through deer size game given they're designed to explode on prairie dogs."

MCgunner, I must politely dissagree. Your assumption is that if using a .22-250 you must use "typical" bullets. That is not the case. Match the bullet to the quarry take shots with 100% certainty and collect your game. I agree, there is no need to place varmiter bullets in the hands of an inexperienced hunter and send them out after deer. But I feel compeled to say if used properly, a .22-250 is plenty. A .222 is plenty...Sorry if I'm stepping on any toes. I'm not advocating inexperienced hunters, poor shots, those who dont take the time to practice and learn their equipment, know their limitations, the limitations of their gear, appriciate environmental conditions to go hunt with a .22 Hornet. But under certain conditions, a .22 is plenty. Push your limitations at the range, practice your limitations in the field.

Go ahead flame away, Ive said my piece.
~z

No toes stepped upon, I just don't see WHY you should use such a diminutive round when there are better out there. Step up to the .243, no doubt about it, a good deer rifle caliber and not much recoil either.

Most of the guys I know using the .22-250 around here are shooting varmint loads and don't even know anything about what they're shooting. I hear "make neck shots" a lot from guys that can't hit a deer's neck past fifty yards. Fortunately, not many deer are shot in the woods past 50 yards.

I just don't see why, when a .243 or .30-30 or .25-06 or .270 can be had for the same money, someone would want to use a .22 on deer?

Hope that don't sound like a flame, just a query and maybe a disagreement. Nearly every caliber from .243 up make a good white tail rifle, .22 is pushing it for me. There's so many good choices in deer rifles, heck, it could get real confusing, but none is a bad choice depending on terrain I reckon. I don't see the point in a huge magnum, but had a friend that used a .375 H&H on deer just because he got a deal on the gun. You CAN do that, not necessary. He didn't handload either.

 

[longrifleman]

The .30-06 may be "overkill" but I like my .30-06.

Me too.

I've read in several so-called expert places that 1000 ft/lbs is the lower limit for reliable kills on white tail size game. When I first read this I started thinking about all the deer I've seen killed and the calibers and distances involved. I did a little work with a ballistics calculator and I think this is a reasonable cut-off point. Imagine that; the experts being right! There is some safety factor in that and that may be where some of the kills at the edge of the power comes from.

My feeling of being overgunned at times comes from using a .30-06 with a 180 gr bullet to kill deer at 50 yds. I'm quoting the energy from memory, but I think my usual load would be at 2200 ft/lbs. Should be adequate.

Any time I think about using a different caliber I usually use this as a guide for max range or appropriate bullet wt.

My ex-son-in-law always used a .22-250 for deer and I got real tired helping him track the deer that didn't drop from his "perfect" shots. He did kill deer, but he also proved that shot placement is the most critical element. Some of his lost deer might have dropped with a caliber at the other end of the scale, but I've seen too many deer go too far with their guts completely shot out to have much confidence. I think that if you are going to use lighter calibers you really need to know the capabilities at different ranges. Any shot beyond the acceptable energy and the deer walks.