The power contradiction

[Jason_W]

Something I've been wondering about lately on the topic of deer rifles is this:

Even if they do not bow hunt themselves, most deer hunters have no problem with the idea of bow hunting. Very few (though perhaps not all) would argue that bow hunting is unethical.

Many of those same hunters when the discussion of deer rifles comes up will assert that any firearm that is not in the .308 or .30-06 class is inadequate for whitetails.

Even though a so called marginal round like the .357 mag or .44 WCF will cause as much or more tissue damage than a broad head when ranges are similar, the .357 and .44-40 are inadequate for deer.

Granted, the above is a generalization, but it is a fairly common attitude I've encountered both in real life and on gun forums.

 

[jpwilly]

Distance, terrain, etc has a lot to do with it.

 

[Mr_Pale_Horse]

That's why I practice shoot and release deer hunting

 

[Jason_W]

Distance, terrain, etc has a lot to do with it.

agreed. A .357 carbine isn't a 200 yard gun (or really even a 100 yard gun) but there are a lot of areas in the country where the brush is pretty thick and even a 50 yard shot is rare.

 

[kaferhaus]

At "bow" ranges a .221 fireball is plenty.

You're right it's a stupid argument.

Just like to me, a guy who goes after whitetail with anything more powerful than a 30-06 has little wiener issues... especially considering the vast majority of deer are taken inside of 100yds. Vast majority of Elk are taken inside 200yds, Moose inside 100yds etc.

Many guys read too many magazines and watch too much TV...

Remember the buffalo were nearly wiped out by the very anemic (by today's standards) 45-70 rainbow trajectory, black powder single shot rifle.

 

[Jason_W]

I'll clarify that I see nothing wrong with using an '06 class or bigger round for hunting deer at 100 yards or less. If those are the sorts of rifles you like and shoot best with, great. However, when rages are close and the terrain is thick, there is something to be said for a fast, quick handling, and light kicking carbine.

 

[John Wayne]

Just because an arrow isn't traveling at 3,000 fps and won't shoot 2 miles doesn't mean it's any less lethal on game.

Also, when hunting, "tissue damage" is not the objective. Arrows also don't need to cause an exit wound the size of a basketball in order to bring down a deer (or pig, or bear, etc.).

 

[CraigC]

Perception is everything. Shooters and hunters have been obsessed with velocity and muzzle energy for a hundred years. It's still difficult to make 'some' folks understand that pistol cartridge carbines will even work for game as small as deer, because their paper ballistics are not too impressive when compared to their vaunted `06. Much less a belted manglum.

 

[A Historian]

I think it's a matter of precedence; kind of hard to question the killing power of something that has been bring food to the table for over 10,000 years.

Facetiousness aside, a lot of people will agree that there is a level of skill involved with hunting with a bow is generally greater than of with a gun. In the same vein you'll hear it's more "fair," and some will have you believe it's also more "manly." In addition, not many people have the steadfastness, let alone the patience, to try to advocate that bows are "more cruel" to hunt with... So they just leave well enough alone.

That said, I guess it's hard for people to accept using anything "less powerful" than their rifle when they've seen deer get up and run away after a shot from their boomstick. Probably doesn't help that a lot of people don't think about all the mechanics of what happens when you shoot something; just because tons of hydrostatic shock doesn't happen, doesn't mean shooting a hole through your target won't drop it dead.

 

[R.W.Dale]

You won't get any dissent from me as I'm sitting in a makeshift blind right now with a 357 mag baby rolling block across my lap hunting a new gas well in the woods with my farthest line of sight lazering at 115yds.

I'm getting cold though and I'm about to turn in.

 

[kaferhaus]

I have nothing against bow hunting, bow hunted myself for over 20yrs.

But, you nearly never see a deer hit with a arrow "fall dead".... almost never.

The animal usually has to bleed out before it dies which often entails long searches for it as they usually run a minimum of 50yds and I've seen them run 200yds and more even though they were well hit.

 

[Jason_W]

Perhaps a good way to look at hunting deer with a lower powered firearm would be to largely apply the same principals as a bow or handgun hunter. Get close and wait for a good shot.

 

[d2wing]

It only bothers me when bowhunters are not good at and about tracking wounded deer.

 

[BrocLuno]

There was a time when the 30-30 was thought of a god awful fast. Now it's not so much thought of at all by the go-faster crowd. But it has accounted for more deer than almost any other round (I suspect poached deer with a .22 outnumber the official count/estimate?). So it seems that the 30-30 is plenty once you step away from the bow.

If you were good enough to get in close with a bow, you'll have no trouble with a little 30-30 lever or a reasonably powerful handgun cartridge

 

[bejay]

I killed my very first deer with a 30-30 sorry to say that on an unusually warm day of deer season that the meat wasnt any good by the time I found it about 1/2 mile away.
ive killed deer with a bow with a double lung shot that didnt even run 100 yards so sorry to say that im not recomending a low power rifle when my very first deer wich apperntly deflected off a rib and failed to do much internal damage there is alot better choices out there,does the 30-30 work sure it does more often than not,but im not going to recomend a rifle that let me down period. I switched to the 270 and havent looked back why take a rifle that is questionable on penetrating even a rib when you can take one that will easily penetrate a shoulder and still hit vitals.

 

[Clifford]

bejay, I'm not calling you a liar or anything so don't take offense to this but... I'm having a hard time understanding how a 150-180 bluntnose (probably softpoint) bullet from a thudy-thudy "bounced" off of a whitetail rib.

Was this a really long shot that may have caused the bullet to lose most of it's speed? Was this a giant whitetail with 1.5" ribs? Or was it possibly a marginal hit on the animal? If it was a marginal hit, it wouldn't matter if you hit it with a .22, .338 or a bow. It still don't die right away.

Again I'm not trying to be a jerk I'm just kinda curious.

 

[John Wayne]

.30-30 is generally considered an intermediate cartridge. The reason hunters switch to more powerful rifles is often because of the flatter trajectory, not because the .30-30 doesn't penetrate well.

 

[Coal Dragger]

^ This.

I currently am working up a Cooper 52 in .280AI due to the flatter trajectory, high ballistic coefficient, and relatively high sectional density offered by 7mm bullets of reasonable weight. The extra powder capacity of the improved .280 is also useful in getting me to near 7mm Remington Magnum power levels (at least according to my new Nosler manual) while using less powder.

For my realistic hunting use in the Black Hills and western South Dakota prairie I may be presented with hunting in coniferous trees one day for Black Hills deer season with only a 100-200yd shot likely, then hunting west river prairie mule deer the next day where very long shots are possible. Plus there are long shooting opportunities (or necessity) for antelope as well. Elk are usually taken in the Black Hills at not very long ranges though, not that I'll ever find out since it seems to take a bit over 16 years on average to draw a tag.

While a .30-30 would work quite well for some of my hunting opportunities, it would be pretty limited for many others. At least for antelope and prairie deer the option of hiding in a tree and harpooning one with a bow is pretty much nonexistent in most areas. Ground blinds can work fairly well though.

 

[Clifford]

I noticed that bejay didn't actually say his 30-30 round actually bounced off of the deer rib. I assumed that's what happened due to his comment about switching to a .270 later in his post.

It don't matter if you hit them with a Bow, bullet or Buick. Sometimes the damn deer just don't want to die till they run a little

 

[Jason_W]

For my realistic hunting use in the Black Hills and western South Dakota prairie I may be presented with hunting in coniferous trees one day for Black Hills deer season with only a 100-200yd shot likely, then hunting west river prairie mule deer the next day where very long shots are possible.

Your choice in arm matches the terrain. I don't know if you've ever visited northern New England, but it's largely a whole different ball game as far as terrain is concerned. Most places I've hunted offer 40 yard shots at the most. I can't even count how many deer (or possibly other large animals) have walked within 100 yards of my stand, never to be seen.

There are some farm fields and clearcuts that can offer 200+ yard shots, but my experience has been that bucks that live past their first year learn to avoid these areas in daylight hours. That leaves me usually picking out 20 to 40 yard shooting lanes in the thick woods that intersect a game trail. At those ranges, I'm not sure that cartridge selection is much of an issue.

 

[Captcurt]

You can't beat Personal Experience!

Guys,

When I started deer hunting I read everything that I could get my hands on and came up with the opinion that you "HAD" to have at least a 270 to kill a whitetail. Now after 47 years and over a hundred deer later I can honestly say that I was wrong. I've take deer with 357, 44 mag, 243, 260, 270, 300 Sav, 30-06, 300WSM, 45 and 50 cal muzzelloader, 12ga with buckshot, and over 25 with a bow. One deer will fall where it stands. The next may run 100 yards with the same bullet placement.

I always wondered why you needed over 1000 lbs of energy to kill a whitetail with a rifle, but a 44 mag in a handgun was perfectly suited for an elk. Then I came to realize that 2/3 of the so-called experts in the shooting magazines do most of their hunting from behind a desk instead of outside in the open air.

This debate has and will go on forever, but for me, I will take whatever method, be it handgun, rifle , shotgun, bow or muzzeloader that is legal at the time with whatever weapon that I have at my grasp and go hunting with the complete knowledge that if I do my part, that method will work.

 

[kaferhaus]

Then I came to realize that 2/3 of the so-called experts in the shooting magazines do most of their hunting from behind a desk instead of outside in the open air.

No, they're trying to sell product.

Magazines, TV shows and many web sites these days exist for one reason only. To sell product.

It's capitalism at it's best and I have no problem with anyone making a buck.

But because of that you have to take everything you see and read with a huge grain of salt.

New cartridges sell more rifles, scopes and ammo.

If all the gun makers were offering were .223s, 308s, 270s, 30-30s and 30-06s no one would have "needed" to buy anything else.

Once you had one of each (and you wouldn't need 3 of those listed to take anything on this continent) you'd have no reason to buy a new rifle....

A 125gr broadhead at 300fps is delivering how many FT LBS of energy???

You only NEED enough energy to put a hole in the vitals of whatever game animal you shoot. It's dead.

A bigger or faster hole doesn't kill it any more dead.

Many moons ago we were hunting with spears..... certainly don't want to go back there though...LOL

It's all about the money.

 

[Art Eatman]

To tie kaferhaus' post to the OP:

When folks grew up with hunting as a common part of life, there was a lot more "family knowledge" about cartridges and effectiveness. Nowadays, a lot of what "everybody knows" comes from those involved in selling guns'n'gear.

The variables get lost. Variables such as size of game, or common shooting distances. Other variables such as personal skill at estimating range, or personal skill in knowing the trajectory of a cartridge.

I'd guess that maybe half of the deer I've killed would have dropped dead to a .32-20. White spot or other hit in the neck, inside of 75 yards, maybe.

But the others varied a good bit, on out to 450 yards on one buck, and "only" 350 on another. My long-time favorite "Old Pet" rifle was the venerable '06.

So I just figure that any common-usage cartridges are about as good as any others, subject to the variables. Not something to get all exercised about...

 

[Coal Dragger]

Jason W, yeah I've hunted northern Minnesota along Lake Superior and it is the same story up there. Alder thickets so dense you can barely see through them much less attempt a shot. I was wishing for a .45-70 lever gun or a good .44Mag revolver.

 

[Old Shooter]

Part of the issue may be that most bow hunters don't take shots at 100-200 yards or more with their bows but some hunters may try those shots with their .357 lever action and either miss or cause a wounded (mayby not badly) deer to run off and be lost. Just my two cents, I hunt with a Winchester 94 in 32 Winchester Special, never did get too tied up with bow hunting.