What is the smallest cartridge YOU would hunt whitetail deer with?
- Thread starter Target-Hunter-Reloader
- Start date
my grandpa sure shot a ton of deer with his win 92 in 2520 .he kept his family fed all winter with it ,,even a black bear or two came home with him dew to that little rifle and there was a story told of a young moose that meet his end because of this little gun ,,,I wish I had that gun today ,,Dutch
pete dobinson
CGN frequent flyer
- Location
- Courtenay BC.
For me the 223 is a pure varmint round. For hunting deer size game, 243 and up would be a better choice. I don't hunt whitetail, I hunt blacktails on Vancouver Island, and go on a annual BC Interior mule deer hunt. I wouldn't rely on a 223 for a expensive mule deer trip. I would opt for a 270 win and the like. Just my opinion.
I don't know anything about the mule deer in BC but in my area of sask you could hunt them with a rock on foot. There isn't a stupider animal around my area. I am however curious about these black tail deer you guys have out there. How do they compare size wise to your mule deer?
On the cabilre thing a old neighbor around here swears the best deer gun he ever had was a 22 hornet. He is still mad about our restrictions in this province. He sold his gun when they came in. He also hates the 243/244 rounds as he claims those two cambering have wounded more deer than anything else. I like the 243 and I see no reason why these laws exist. I also personally think if you are going hunting you should go hunting with a rifle you are comfortable and familiar using. If its legal and you meet those last two conditions use it. If you aren't comfortable using one caliber use another.
Hotwheels81
CGN Ultra frequent flyer
- Location
- South of GP
Yup an my uncle brought many BC interior WT's home on his back in his early teens with his single shot .22 in his hand... Used to sit over a game trail and put one behind the ears when they walked under him... Of course the deer in question are also the size of a medium goat.
Think the smallest gun I'd use would be dictated by my level of hunger and what's in my hand... But my regular boom stick is a 7-08 and not much I ain't scared to take a shot at... I could step down to a .243 with the same results I'm sure... Probably a 300 BLK would do me just fine most days as well... But I'd sure hate to pass up something at 300M because I didn't bring enough gun.
The argument that most people make against the .243 win is interesting. "I've seen more animals injured by a .243 than anything else."
OK. So, who was shooting the .243? What type of hunter is apt to choose (or be given) a .243 to shoot with?
Answer those questions and I think you might be closer to the truth about why the .243 (supposedly) injures so many animals.
My wife and both my teenage daughters will be aiming at their first mule deer this fall. They'll be using a .243. I plan to spend hundreds on ammo this summer (or start reloading) and ensure that they can hit a 9 inch steel plate (off shooting sticks) every time at 100 yards. If they can't, they won't be shooting at any animal. Then, I'll make sure that the animal they shoot is within 50 yards, and standing broadside.
They may not get a shot at any deer, but if they do they won't be injuring them.
OK. So, who was shooting the .243? What type of hunter is apt to choose (or be given) a .243 to shoot with?
Answer those questions and I think you might be closer to the truth about why the .243 (supposedly) injures so many animals.
My wife and both my teenage daughters will be aiming at their first mule deer this fall. They'll be using a .243. I plan to spend hundreds on ammo this summer (or start reloading) and ensure that they can hit a 9 inch steel plate (off shooting sticks) every time at 100 yards. If they can't, they won't be shooting at any animal. Then, I'll make sure that the animal they shoot is within 50 yards, and standing broadside.
They may not get a shot at any deer, but if they do they won't be injuring them.
How true! The new hunters who are provided with a .243 by their mentors are well-equipped...IF the rest of your formula is followed, i.e. lots of practice combined with careful shot selection.
The hunters who choose the .243 for themselves seem to belong to one of two groups. The first (and smaller) group consists of experienced hunters who know how to shoot because they do a lot of it, and know how to choose their shots on game. The much-larger second group consists of guys who "know" that the .243 is a giant-killer, and use its easy-shooting quality as a substitute for practice and experience. They attempt shots with it that should be either reserved for heavier guns, or passed entirely. Sorry, but it's true: there are many instances in which, due to either range or shot presentation or both, a heavier rifle is called for if the shot is to be taken.
I would use a .243 if circumstances forced me to, but I'm not a fan, and any time I raised the gun to my shoulder I would be thinking "Remember...this is a .243".
pete dobinson
CGN frequent flyer
- Location
- Courtenay BC.
What is the retained energy of a 223 out at 300 yds?
In my opinion, the easy-shooting quality of the .243 is not a substitute for practice; rather, it enables lots and lots of practice and encourages proper technique. Anyone who thinks they don't need to practice, regardless of what caliber/cartridge they choose, is an idiot.
260 is the "lightest" I have personally used for deer, but wouldn't hesitate to use a 243. Would like to take one with my 6XC in the future, that's about a light as I would go. (Practically identical to a 243 Win anyways)
When I posted smallest cartridge I meant bullet diameter, speed, weight, powder capacity, etc are all on the table.
So as far as that goes my minimum is a 223rem, but it could also be a 45 auto, and also 30 carbine as far as that is concerned, everyone is free to post from whichever direction they would like.
So as far as that goes my minimum is a 223rem, but it could also be a 45 auto, and also 30 carbine as far as that is concerned, everyone is free to post from whichever direction they would like.
The responses will keep going for quite some time yet. A lot is perception.
In most circumstances a 22 Hornet has more listed energy than a 44-40. Who here would dare speak of going deer hunting with a 22 Hornet?
Possible? You bet. I've got my grandfather's deer rifle, a Savage 219 in 22 Hornet.
A lot of unscripted replies on the 44-40's suitability would be affirmative. Likely the same learned folks would " Never use a 22 Hornet! "
As far as a 243's suitability? Sure, why not?
Other than the fact that "It's for women and children"
Of course such a statement sort of shows one as being a tad narrowminded, as women are typically not recoil sensitive. But if it makes you feel manly...fill your boots.
In most circumstances a 22 Hornet has more listed energy than a 44-40. Who here would dare speak of going deer hunting with a 22 Hornet?
Possible? You bet. I've got my grandfather's deer rifle, a Savage 219 in 22 Hornet.
A lot of unscripted replies on the 44-40's suitability would be affirmative. Likely the same learned folks would " Never use a 22 Hornet! "
As far as a 243's suitability? Sure, why not?
Other than the fact that "It's for women and children"
Of course such a statement sort of shows one as being a tad narrowminded, as women are typically not recoil sensitive. But if it makes you feel manly...fill your boots.
For the record, my discussion of my wife and daughters using a .243 was specific to them, not a generalization. They are all recoil sensitive and I want to give them the best chance at developing good technique/skills. It is so light and fun to shoot, I might even end up using it as my goto deer rifle. Who knows.
Oh, I wasn't focusing on you Ironsighter...lots of folk repeat that mantra.
My eldest daughter can shoot any of my Milsurps; and well I might add.
My youngest can shoot my 375 Weatherby ( she's a bale-chucker mind you ), in fact she prefers it to the milsurps.
Maybe if I had a featherweight short magnum they'd shy from it...but regular rifles? GTG
