Deer, Head shots, 22 250

Bang ! Flop!

22-250 115 yards

Fastest I've Ever seen an animal drop, never even flinched

IMG_1072.jpg
 
Last edited:
I would rather a tsx or Nosler Partition to the lungs than head shot. I just got in a big argument with a native friend of mine who always uses head shots. This week he shot a bull moose " right behind the ear" when he got to where the bull was he found a bit of blood and trailed it for a while then lost the bull:mad::mad: Then the next day same thing shoots a cow "hit er right in the eye, and she went down, but when I was about twenty feet from her she took off again." He never found this cow either. :mad::mad: I have never been so disgusted in my life as listening to these stories and they may jepordize a good friendship, so no I don't support headshots.
 
With that head shot I took there I had more than enough time to shoot it anywhere else, endless opportunities, I also knew where my rifle was shooting and felt confident I could split the horns, unfortunately one of them flew off instead, I dont support head shots
 
Head shots are a poor choice in my opinion. Too easy to miss the brain and end up with trouble, like a lost animal, or one that suffers for a while before being put out of it's misery. Take the heart/lung shot....much more reliable. Regards, Eagleye.
 
If you want to use a .22 centerfire, you are using a "marginal" cartridge to hunt with. DOnt' use "marginal" shot placement.

Use a TSX or Nosler Partition, and shoot them in the lungs....
 
There are many variables which must be considered in regards to headshots.

Calibre, and range are quite obvious things to consider, along with ammunition and the shooters skill level.

I wouldn't use a caliber as small as the one in question to take headshots at deer. Even if I had a larger calibre with premium bullets, there are very few situations which I would try a headshot.

If you have enough confidence to go out and try it then I know your a better shot than I am!
 
leveractionjunkie said:
I would rather a tsx or Nosler Partition to the lungs than head shot. I just got in a big argument with a native friend of mine who always uses head shots. This week he shot a bull moose " right behind the ear" when he got to where the bull was he found a bit of blood and trailed it for a while then lost the bull:mad::mad: Then the next day same thing shoots a cow "hit er right in the eye, and she went down, but when I was about twenty feet from her she took off again." He never found this cow either. :mad::mad: I have never been so disgusted in my life as listening to these stories and they may jepordize a good friendship, so no I don't support headshots.
Click to expand...

Jeez... Was HE using a .22???? If he actually shot them where he said he shot them, any cartidge that could normally drop a moose should have killed them. I suspect that he's not the dead-eye he may think he is. That basically sums up my opinion on this.

A head shot with a 22-250 on a deer would be fatal, unless you're farther away than 200 yards. If you're that far away, you deserve a smack for thinking about a head shot. I think what it comes down to is it's completely ethical to make a head-shot on a deer, as long as you KNOW you can make the shot. Obviously, your gun needs to be up to the task, but if your gun can't kill a deer with a head shot, then it would have trouble with a shot at the vitals, and again, you deserve a smack. :p

If leveractionjunkie's native friend was under-gunned, that would explain the lost moose. A moose's skull is pretty thick, and I wouldn't trust many lighter bullets to do the job.
 
A bad head shot(too far/bad, unsteady support/beyond the shooter"s capabilities) is no worse than a bad heart shot. You take the shot as it presents itself, depending on the conditions.
I have shot dozens of deer in the head(both wild and farmed deer), but only when I am as sure as I can possibly be of the shot. Yes, there is still a possibility of a terrible wound, but I have seen terrible wounds to the body and legs from "heart" shots gone wrong.
As for the calibre, it"s fast, flat and accurate, and I"ve seen big red and sika stags killed with it out past 150yds.
I would have no qualms about a head shot out to 100 yds with a 22.250 and an appropriate bullet , GIVEN IDEAL CONDITIONS. The rest you decide on the day!
 
1899 said:
Almost misses the point, doesn't it?

Our goal is to kill as quickly and humanely as possible. Considering the possibility of making a slight mistake while aiming or a last second twitch by the target, a behind the shoulder double lung shot is, IMO, the most ethical way to harvest game.
Click to expand...

The MOST ETHICAL way is the way that kills the animal the fastest. I've seen more bad heart lung attempts that went ugly than bad head shot attempts that went ugly.

So. Did he get the deer?
 
First deer I harvested was a doe that was head shot with a .300 Win Mag. I have not repeated that feat again. I agree with the motto of "aim small miss small" but when used for head shots on deer the margin for error is still to great....especially when using a marginal round to begin with.
 
There are a handful of guys here that could consistently pull off a "headshot" at distance. Chances are, if you've got questions about it - you aren't one of those guys.
 
A Troll thread of the 2nd degree:

- 22 centrefire for deer
- headshots

All we need is:

- at 600+ yds
- from a truck on a road in Bear country
- with a Commie Norinco SKS using corrosive FMJ ammo
- without checking headspace between shots

and we'd have a Grand Prize winner.
 
Last edited:
sjemac said:
The MOST ETHICAL way is the way that kills the animal the fastest. I've seen more bad heart lung attempts that went ugly than bad head shot attempts that went ugly.

So. Did he get the deer?
Click to expand...

Ok, so the heart/lung is an 8" diameter target, while the brain shot is probably a 3" diameter target and the heart/lung area is near the center of mass therefore doesn't move quickly whereas the head is at the end of an extremity and moves very quickly/suddenly. And you think that it is not more risky to attempt the head shot?

Don't forget to add this to your MOST ETHICAL - kills the fastest AND the least chance of wounding
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom