Good Article on Deer Hunting and calibres, shot placement, etc...

Northman999

CGN Ultra frequent flyer
Rating - 100%
225   0   0
Location
Southern Yukon
Sorry if it has been posted before, but I found this and thought you fellows might like to read it.

Good, scientific information, as far as I can see.

http://www.dnr.sc.gov/wildlife/deer/articlegad.html
 
I have read it before, good read and nice to see scientific data and not hunt camp or internet data. There shots are a lot further on deer than ours, we are lucky to see past 50 yards.
 
Good article, thx for posting. Interesting results... seems the only significant factor was in bullet types. Something to be said for the old school tried and true bullets on whitetail
 
I remember looking at a lot of deer skeletons in university, I would always reflect on how even though I was taught to aim for the heart/lungs the scapula makes a large target and ,as with almost all quadrupeds, they can't go far if you smash it plus the added bonus of it covering some vital internals in most postures.
 
I almost brushed this off and didn't read it, now I'm glad I did. That was a very interesting article. I liked the bit on chamberings, though I wish they'd tested a slow chambering (.45-70, .44 Magnum, etc) beside the standard chamberings. The .25 cal of all things exhibited by far the shortest distance deer travelled on average when hit. One has to wonder if there's just enough bullet, weight, and just little enough recoil it's hitting a sweet spot for most shooters. Now I'm doing what we always do online and wrangling the data...

No surprise on shoulder shots, I just avoid them due to meat damage, unless we're talking mountain game / hard recoveries, then anchor them with the shoulder.
 
I think the .25 cal thing may be a statistical anomaly caused by the .257 weatherby.

Similarily the 30-30 is in the same class as the '06 and 300 win mag, thats a pretty broad spectrum of power to draw conclusions about 30 cals from

Also they put "solids" and possibly fmj bullets in the same category as barnes tsx etc.

Sample size is not exactly huge either...
 
Last edited:
Great article! It got me wondering if the "explosive" bullets vs the slower to expand bullets were producing hydrostatic shock that was knocking the deer unconscious as they expand, causing them to collapse and die while unconscious as opposed to running.

If I get the chance to take a shot on a deer this year, I'll be aiming at the shoulder.

I wonder if the AMAX would be considered "explosive" or "ballistic tip".
 
Great article! It got me wondering if the "explosive" bullets vs the slower to expand bullets were producing hydrostatic shock that was knocking the deer unconscious as they expand, causing them to collapse and die while unconscious as opposed to running.

If I get the chance to take a shot on a deer this year, I'll be aiming at the shoulder.

I wonder if the AMAX would be considered "explosive" or "ballistic tip".

Do not use a target bullet on game. :cheers: Ballistic tip if you want something frangible, as you suggested. It does come with meat damage however, depends what you're after.
 
I note that the sample size for the 25 is small.

I'll also note that it was known a long time ago that most shoot 25's better than 30's,
 
I've read lots of information on .25 cal hunters who feel like .25's are about the perfect blend of power, speed and muzzle blast for deer, so I was not really surprised on the .25's scoring well on that size of game.

'It may be that the .257 'Bee skewed numbers a bit, but even the vanilla 25-06 is no slouch at all, compared to velocities in the 30 cal class rifles.

I too would have liked to see the bigger cals included, but I guess the info was just no there.

No one study or article has all the answers, but one piece of the puzzle does help here and there...
 
I think the .25 cal thing may be a statistical anomaly caused by the .257 weatherby.

Similarily the 30-30 is in the same class as the '06 and 300 win mag, thats a pretty broad spectrum of power to draw conclusions about 30 cals from

Also they put "solids" and possibly fmj bullets in the same category as barnes tsx etc.

Sample size is not exactly huge either...

36 deer with the .25, and 495 total is pretty huge in my eyes... I'm not taking a position on the .25 either way aside from it being interesting, but I would have a hard time saying trends can't become strongly evident after 36 occurrences. Hell, we shoot three, or five rounds to make a judgement of trend in rifle accuracy. ;)
 
Perhaps I did not articulate my point. Deer are small animals and one should not be surprised at faster results from a conventional or "soft" bullet as compared to a premium or "hard" bullet.
 
Perhaps I did not articulate my point. Deer are small animals and one should not be surprised at faster results from a conventional or "soft" bullet as compared to a premium or "hard" bullet.


Use small, light, fast and soft bullets on small, light, soft and fast animals. Save the big, heavy, slower and hard bullets for the big, heavy, slow and hard animals. If you can't match all the characteristics, match as many as you can.
 
The most experienced game shooter I know (edit, ha! He heard the call and showed up above me), and a well known member of this site (even the vast majority of hunting celebrities will not have dropped as much large game, I hadn't realized the extent of it till we talked) has long argued the point overly hard bullets are less effective. He has a very strong point. TSXs have their place, when you want to shoot right through something big, but by and large will be less effective than a softer, lead core bullet. That doesn't mean TSXs and the like aren't lethal, they absolute are, but more game is bound to drop where it is or travel less with a softer bullet, this is true even for larger animals up to the threshold of the big bovines it would appear on vitals hits (bone is different). I started seeing this as I moved to cheap interlocs from TSXs for everything in .375, there is a difference. Now, I still load and use TSXs, I like no lead for meat my kids eat, and they work swell, but I'd opine they're behind softer bullets on everything we have in Canada with the possible exception of bison.
 
I still load and use TSXs... and they work swell, but I'd opine they're behind softer bullets on everything we have in Canada with the possible exception of bison.

I agree...

The caveat, would be; given an appropriate energy level is used for the target species.

I am moving more and more to sturdy C&C bullets.
 
Back
Top Bottom