7.62x39 deer loads?
- Thread starter QueensHorseman
- Start date
- Location
- West Central Alberta
Shot a little fork horn whitetail about 5-6 years ago with my SKS and I used 123gr softpoint by Prvi Partizan.
It was a one shot kill, mind you it was a broadside shot at only 70 yards.
Deer was dead and didn't know what hit him.
It was a one shot kill, mind you it was a broadside shot at only 70 yards.
Deer was dead and didn't know what hit him.
But... A 69 grain .223 had a higher sectional density than a 125 grain .310... A 75 grain has a significantly higher SD. A 75 grain .223 also had more energy at 100 yards, and 25% more energy at 200 yards than a standard 125 grain x39.
nowarningshot
CGN Ultra frequent flyer
X39 on deer isn't the issue. The platform is the issue. SKS that I have used are minute of barn door, at short range, as in from inside the barn.
X39 has roughly the energy of 30/30. Perhaps a bit more range, but 170gr from 30/30 has more close range smack.
I have a CZ527 in X39, with a good supply of the Hornady steel cased SST. Also laid in supplies, and dies, but it might be a while before I load for it. Where I live, Coastal Blacktail the size of domestic goats, typically at bayonet distance.
X39 has roughly the energy of 30/30. Perhaps a bit more range, but 170gr from 30/30 has more close range smack.
I have a CZ527 in X39, with a good supply of the Hornady steel cased SST. Also laid in supplies, and dies, but it might be a while before I load for it. Where I live, Coastal Blacktail the size of domestic goats, typically at bayonet distance.
I still don't buy it but not here to debate with you guys, I think we are all past that. Specifically speaking to my purposes I could care less what either bullet does at 100 yards. I care about under 50 yards and I "don't" want a caliber bullet that is likely to pass thru easily, I want it to dump it's energy..... and that animal so I don't have to use climbing gear and injure myself trying to retrieve the animals I shoot there. Applying this to my situation in other terms I would liken the debate between the .223 and the x39 for deer to the debate between 9mm and 45acp for man. If it's all about stopping power.... who wouldn't choose the 45acp.
Now to leave that discussion behind and turn back to bullet choices and barrel lengths..... I'm not going to use a semi auto. Haven't fired my yugo or my sks-d rifles for years and they have been packed away in grease since i moved up here 8 years ago LOL
I kinda had a crazy thought that i might build up a 7.62x39 on a lee enfield no1 mkIII receiver I have sitting around.
Our blacktails range in size but the big ones run an easy 200pounds on the hoof. Average hook weight though for most shooter bucks is about 90 pounds at the butcher. Our big one this year was 160 ish pounds on the butchers hook..... but he is a hybrid.
Factory load ballistics compared shows otherwise.
.223 / 75gr GDSP/ 2652 fps MV / b.c.~0.4: https://www.ar15.com/forums/ar-15/-/16-694384/&page=1
7.62x39 / 123gr SP / 2365 fps MV / b.c. 0.265: https://www.midwayusa.com/product/2900244739/winchester-super-x-ammunition-762x39mm-123-grain-power-point
Not Hornady. And 2625fps is close to start load velocity for all the loads on Hodgdon. That's really slow. If I was picking a load for the purpose it'd be the 75 BTHP Hornady Superformance at 2930. Actually closer to 3000 in real life, out of a 24" bbl.
X39:
.223:
Last edited:
I'm not advocating anything, just saying that if SD is your concern, 75 gr .223 bullets beat 125 gr .310 hands down. Your post seemed to suggest the x39 was higher. Just pointing it out.
My 50 yard brush gun IS a x39 as it happens. I wouldn't pick a .223 for the application, but it does have the advantage at any distance and in terms of SD.
Last edited:
Comparing factory loads the 7.62x39 has more energy than the .223. Handloaded also.
My Ruger No.1 7.62x39 123gr SST handload retains just under a 1/2 ton of energy at 300 yards.
Comparing factory loads the 7.62x39 has more energy than the .223. Handloaded also.
My Ruger No.1 7.62x39 123gr SST handload retains just under a 1/2 ton of energy at 300 yards.
Yes. But that's not what I said. I said .223 had more energy at 100 yards and significantly more at 200 yards, as the Hornady loads above show. I didn't say it had more energy at the muzzle.
Please stop banging on about those loads of yours. I found myself thinking that getting that performance out of x39 was just the excuse I needed to load for It, and there's a x39 #1 available at Prophet River I'm praying someone buys before my will to resist gives out. You're going to cost me money buying a rifle I don't need... yet.
Last edited:
Right, the fastest .223 Hodgdon handload has more downrange energy than the 7.62x39 factory load. But if we compare handloads, it's a different story.
The 7.62x39 Ruger No.1-A is a very fine rifle. Very strong action. Short and lightweight. A real joy to handle. Plus it's rare and not getting any cheaper...
$1899.00. http://store.prophetriver.com/ruger-1-a-7-62x39-walnut-blued-light-sporter-22/
Glad I got mine when these were $1299.00.
7.62x39 Ruger No.1-A with Leupold VX-2 2-7x28mm
The 7.62x39 Ruger No.1-A is a very fine rifle. Very strong action. Short and lightweight. A real joy to handle. Plus it's rare and not getting any cheaper...
$1899.00.
http://store.prophetriver.com/ruger-1-a-7-62x39-walnut-blued-light-sporter-22/Glad I got mine when these were $1299.00.
7.62x39 Ruger No.1-A with Leupold VX-2 2-7x28mm
Last edited:
- Location
- Lloydminster, Alberta
Right, the fastest .223 Hodgdon handload has more downrange energy than the 7.62x39 factory load. But if we compare handloads, it's a different story.
The 7.62x39 Ruger No.1-A is a very fine rifle. Very strong action. Short and lightweight. A real joy to handle. Plus it's rare and not getting any cheaper...
[/img]
only a handful made, not long ago, by Ruger. They were using up the last of the barrels made for the run of 303 British rifles from several years ago. Some say only 27 were made into 7.62x36.
OK right the Hornady Superformance Match ammo...
https://www.hornady.com/ammunition/rifle/223-rem-75-gr-bthp-superformance-match#!/
75gr BTHP @ 2930 fps from a 24" barrel. I should try these in my Hog Hunter which has a 20" barrel so probably 100 fps less (~2830 fps MV), or in my Mini 14 which has a 18-1/2" barrel so probably 150 fps less (~2780 fps MV). Except it's a match bullet and may not be suitable for game?
https://www.hornady.com/ammunition/rifle/223-rem-75-gr-bthp-superformance-match#!/
75gr BTHP @ 2930 fps from a 24" barrel. I should try these in my Hog Hunter which has a 20" barrel so probably 100 fps less (~2830 fps MV), or in my Mini 14 which has a 18-1/2" barrel so probably 150 fps less (~2780 fps MV). Except it's a match bullet and may not be suitable for game?
- Location
- Lloydminster, Alberta
these are .3105"
Hornady 75gr Superformance Match advertised ballistics are inflated. This article states their ammo chronographed at 2778 fps from a 24" barrel vs. 2930 fps claimed.
What were we saying about .223 downrange energy being higher than the 7.62x39?
https://www.ar15.com/forums/ar-15/-/16-694384/&page=1
https://www.hornady.com/ammunition/rifle/223-rem-75-gr-bthp-superformance-match#!/
What were we saying about .223 downrange energy being higher than the 7.62x39?
https://www.ar15.com/forums/ar-15/-/16-694384/&page=1
https://www.hornady.com/ammunition/rifle/223-rem-75-gr-bthp-superformance-match#!/
