minimum caliber? why?

[MCgunner]

Well, since I know nothing, is the .22 Magnum too much for deer? I don't wanna tear up meat using a magnum caliber, but I really shoot this 597 magnum well, 1/2 moa at 100 yards. Good shoulder shots aren't a problem. But, I don't wanna ruin the meat.

For a good bullet in 7mm (and destructive) try the 150 Sierra game king. I guarantee you, it WILL expand. Blew the whole shoulder off a doe with it once, but she died right there. Everything I've hit with it died right there. But, it's too much gun. I'm thinking a .22LR doesn't quite reach far enough, just hope the .22 Mag, being a magnum, ain't too much. It don't have a belt, ya know. It's sorta powerful, though. I knocked my swinging target over with it at 100 yards. My .22LRs won't do that at 25. That's why I'm sorta worried it's too much now that I know the .22 is the best big game caliber. I don't have a .223, so I guess I'll over gun 'em with the magnum until I can get one. I'll just have to put up with the meat loss. I'm not sure I can handle the recoil enough to make a head shot with it. It is a magnum, ya know.

At $25 a lb .223 uses about half the fuel a .308 does LOL

Yeah, but I don't drive a .308 to work.

Oh, but the .22 mag will sure save on gunpowder. I'll probably use maximag solids. They're accurate and maybe they'll keep the meat loss down.

 

[Clark]

If the Elk will stand broadside at 200 yards, shoot it with a .243 through the heart.
If the Elk is outside the kitchen window, shoot it with a 22LR through the brain.
If the elk is 200 yards and running away shoot it through it's length with a .338WM partition.

 

[MCgunner]

Anyone deer hunt with a .17 Remington? How about .17HMR?

If the Elk will stand broadside at 200 yards, shoot it with a .243 through the heart.
If the Elk is outside the kitchen window, shoot it with a 22LR through the brain.
If the elk is 200 yards and running away shoot it through it's length with a .338WM partition.

So, you carry your rifles around in a golf bag? "Whadda ya think, caddy, .338 iron?" "Nah, that's a chip shot, here, take this .22."

You can putt with a driver, but ya can't drive with a putter.

Pretty good since I never swung a golf club in my life, eh?

 

[R.W.Dale]

You can putt with a driver, but ya can't drive with a putter.

But if your golfing is taking place on the putt-putt course why bring a driver at all? Much like hunting deer in the woods with a 308 where you can't see any farther than 50yds

 

[R.W.Dale]

 

[Cypress]

I guess there are some people out there who truely are perfect. They never blow a shot even though it's laid out good. I wish I was one of those guys!!!

 

[MCgunner]

But if your golfing is taking place on the putt-putt course why bring a driver at all? Much like hunting deer in the woods with a 308 where you can't see any farther than 50yds

Fine. Just stand hunt over a feeder, don't even think about taking a running shot at a deer while still hunting. Arse to neck penetration ain't the .22's game. I've killed a few deer DRT that way, including with the .308.

"Wait, caddy, take this .22 back. That there shot calls for a .308 iron....."

 

[Colorado Bob]

First and foremost, most states have a minimum caliber requirement for each type of game to be harvested. In this state the smallest caliber allowed for deer is .243. I think the logic that if you were a good marksman you could take a deer with a .22 is pure "macho B.S.".

 

[MCgunner]

How about, "If you're a good rifleman, you can handle the recoil of a .243?" People have called me a testosterone laden big balled macho chauvinist for that one, but I think it's true..... that you could handle .243 recoil if you were a good enough rifleman to actually hunt, not that I'm big balled or anything.

 

[R.W.Dale]

I think the logic that if you were a good marksman you could take a deer with a .22 is pure "macho B.S.".

and I think the logic that you need 3000ft lbs of energy from a 400yd cartridge to kill a 180lb bambi 70 yds away is pure over compensation.

don't even think about taking a running shot at a deer while still hunting.

I wouldn't even with my 35 whelen......because I have enough self discipline not to take shots I haven't practiced for. How many deer have you wounded shooting them on the run? How do you practice for shooting running game at the range?

News flash! Just cause a deer is there doesn't mean you HAVE to shoot it.

Fine. Just stand hunt over a feeder,

McGunner have you ever been in an actual forrest? With real trees, Not those sparsley scattered misquete bushes that a ya'll call trees a grown man can pee over.

 

[MCgunner]

How many deer have you wounded shooting them on the run?

None, missed a couple, though. I do use an adequate caliber. I won't take a shot like that either with a cap gun. I don't take shots over 50 yards on a running deer. I got a LOT of practice poppin' running rabbits with a .22 when I was a kid. I can handle the marksmanship of it out to 50 yards. Don't take much lead out to that range regardless of speed.

First deer I ever killed was on a dead run at 75 yards, but over a tree for a rest. I was 11 years old. Me and ol' Davy Crockett used to run together, but he got kilt down here in Texas, ya know.

McGunner have you ever been in an actual forrest? With real trees, Not those sparsley scattered misquete bushes that a ya'll call trees a grown man can pee over.

They call it the "piney woods" or "big thicket" down here. I prefer hunting out in the desert or down in the brush on the senderos, though. Yankees can have their trees. My FAVORITE deer hunting is the Guadalupe Mountains in New Mexico. I'll go back there some day. All spot and stalk, 200 yard plus shots are common. I like my 7 mag out there, but the .308 is lighter and is enough. I could use a .223 for jack rabbits out there, I guess. They're almost as big as the deer in Arkansas. I guess I could practice on moonshine jugs if I lived up there.

BTW, I'm still just kiddin'. You are the home state of Bill Clinton, though. I wouldn't get too cocky.

 

[R.W.Dale]

You are the home state of Bill Clinton, though. I wouldn't get too cocky

The past couple of presidents have left a lot to be desired. One from Arkansas the other...........

 

[MCgunner]

Well, they did call it the Clinton gun ban, ya know. Bush brought CCW to Texas after Ma Richards told us we'd turn into Dodge City, Kansas if we passed it and vetoed said bill. For that, I will always think of GW fondly. He's the man that made me legal. Before that, I was just another armed outlaw, committing a class A misdemeanor every day.

OKAY, back on topic now. .22s are for rabbits and squirrels.

 

[Art Eatman]

This thread is gettin' over-loaded with irrelevancies, seems to me.

Look: Some guys, particularly those with more experience, like to use what they consider to be a minimum caliber as a test of their own skills. They're forcing themselves to be pickier about their shots, more precise in their aim, more in control against "buck fever". This includes being closer to the animal than they might otherwise try.

Then there are those who believe, "If he can, I can." Sometimes they're just really wrong.

Generally, from a bunch of deer-camp years and a lot of hunting on my own land, I've found that something like an '06 is gonna give more tissue damage and bone breaking than something like the .243. And that's why I go along with the notion that being off-target by a small amount with that class of cartridge gives the shooter a better chance at not losing the animal. IMO, it has to do with such as the amount of blood trail, as one for-instance. And when I say "small amount", I'm not talking about way off the mark as in a gut shot.

I've never understood all this about "wasting meat" from using high-power cartridges. Me, I don't shoot deer in the hams or backstrap. Or in the meaty part of the shoulders, either. The reason a deer has that long old neck is to give me a target. Heck, I don't eat the heart or lungs, either. And on little ol' bucks, I've been known to stick it in his ear. Sorta cuts you out of brains and eggs for breakfast, though.

 

[moooose102]

i agree art, this is not intended as a pi$$ing match. please, no one take any offense of anyones postings, and try to refrain from posting in argumentory language. i just dont get why people want a minimum caliber. arts explanation is pretty good, but i feel a lot of folks are not posting for that reason. since those folks have enough experience to know what is the minimum caliber for their skills. i believe that the majority of these style posts are from inexperienced hunter/shooters. and they really should not be asking minimum, but best.

 

[Shawnee]

There is NO one "best" caliber for this or that quarry.

None. Nada. Zip. Zero. Zilch. NOT ! No Days. Ain't gonna happen.
NoWayJose. Game Over. Period.

There may be a couple (or several) "really suitable" calibers for a given quarry - but linking caliber to quarry is always less important than linking caliber to the shooter. It is the shooter who uses the caliber.

The Gospel Truth is the average American shooter, and certainly the beginner, will shoot more effectively with calibers in the .22 - .25 category than they will with anything larger/more powerful.

Yes, they could increase their hunting and shooting skills to the point that they are proficient with a much larger caliber. But for deer hunters and varmint hunters especially (and that's what 99% of Americas's centerfire shooters are)... there is no need, or point, in going above .25 caliber. None. Nada. Zip. Zero. Zilch. NOT ! No Days. Ain't gonna happen. NoWayJose. Game Over. Period.

As for bigger caliber providing some "insurance". Hogwash. I literally learned to follow blood trails by looking for deer that other people wounded with their .308s and 30-ought-BS rifles. I know of a small Texas buck that recovered from a .308 shot through his back. A week later he had two ghastly wounds (entry/exit) scabbed over but was grazing calmly and fully mobile.
Right now there is an 8-pt. buck that dines in the beanfield behind my house every morning and nght. He was shot in the shoulder early this Spring by a .270. He laid down for a couple days and now his right foreleg is permanently bent - sorta like the lifted leg of a pointer - and the top of the broken ulna bone is visible. His body weight looks better than normal and his rack is looking good. I can't shoot him now because crop damage permits are "does only".
He stays during the day in the top of a downed Ash tree along the fenceline. He can only hobble so all the bean plants near that Ash show the effect of his feeding - exactly like the areas around a woodchuck burrow.
I could wait until opening day and collect that good-looking rack but I have watched him struggling along like a wounded trooper nearly every morning and evening and I doubt I'll be able to shoot him. Since the other side of the fence is my friends' posted property, it's more likely I'll use the weeks before the season opens to convince him to abandon the Ash and relocate farther onto the property where he won't be bothered.
The guy who shot that buck has claimed to have shot 6 deer so far with his .270. He has recovered one and, he doesn't know it yet, but the farmer he has gotten his permit from will be removing him from his list of authorized hunters this week - not because he uses a .270, but because he uses it poorly. The .270 is a fine caliber - but not in that guy's hands.

But I digress. The crap about "bigger gives you more chance" is absolute Hooey. It's just a popular, but highly unethical, rationale some people use to excuse themselves for blazing away with shots that they know are 99% wishful thinking.

I surely don't advocate everyone use a .223 for deer. But I know there are trainloads of varmint hunters who can hit poker chips at 200yds. with their .22 centerfires so I would rather see that than everyone using a 30/06. I would be very much in favor of seeing a legal maximum caliber for deer.

An old time San Antonio beat cop told me once that he would much rather face a bad guy who was armed with a .44 magnum pistol than one armed with a .22 pistol - and his reasoning was very straightforward. He said it is because there is a good chance the guy with the .44 will miss him but a great chance the guy with the .22 would hit him, and he felt that difference significant.

One last comment - NO hunter ever sees all his deer dropping in their tracks until one thing happens and that one thing is when he makes the decision that DRT is the absolute minimum he will accept. No exceptions. No matter what caliber you use or scope you buy or bullet you have or amount you spent or how much camo you own, you canNOT achieve that standard until you set it for yourself. Period. And then the caliber you use can be any of several calibers.

 

[MCgunner]

The reason I think the .308 is neigh on perfect for Texas hunting is that it's relatively light on the shoulder, accurate to the max, carries good power and penetration, yet does not destroy much meat. It will take small deer to large hogs effectively with shoulder/lung shots, not limited to neck or head shots. It is easy to shoot for the beginner if one picks a heavyish gun in the caliber and there are light, fast guns available for it for those who don't mind a little more recoil. Like the OP, I really can't understand someone wanting a minimal caliber. Sure, you can take a 400 lb boar with a head shot at 50 yards, but if all you have is a .223, you won't be properly armed for mulies in west Texas or the mountains or whitetail down a long south Texas sendero. Probably not even legal to hunt with in New Mexico. You do want to hunt more than just whitetails over a feeder in the brush at 50 yards, don't you? Would you not enjoy a trip to Colorado for mulies? If you're going to have one caliber for everything, the minimal caliber ain't it. Now, if you have a good caliber and want something for the challenge and are willing to pass a lot of shots because of angle and don't want to handgun, black powder, or bow hunt, you think the .223 is the challenge for you, hell, go for it. But, it's not an ideal deer or hog hunting caliber by any means. To me, it borders in inadequate. I've trailed and finished an angry hog shot behind the shoulder before. I prefer to put 'em down right now. You have to take those things out through to shoulder and to do that, you have to have penetration. Hogs have thick gristle shields. Oh, yes, there's the head for all you Annie Oakleys out there. But, I like horsepower, enough to do the job with a not so good shot, if I'm hunting with a rifle.

If all I did was woods hunting, I can think of nothing finer than a Marlin M336 in .30-30 Winchester or .35 Remington, but my .308 will do that, too. It really isn't too much gun, it's just about right IMHO.

 

[Art Eatman]

Shawnee, you're sorta getting circular in your argument. Those deer you had to trail weren't trailed on account of the cartridge. They were trailed on account of the shooter not hitting the right place.

Now, I don't go to rifle ranges, so I don't have a clue about how many would-be hunters flinch or worry about recoil and all that. The last forty years, I've had a benchrest and 100-yard range at home. I've known a few bad shots, but from what I saw, they couldn't hit a bull in the butt with a bass fiddle, a .22 rimfire or a .30-'06. But that was a mere few out of dozens of guys who could pop beer cans at significant distances with all manner of your "too big" centerfires. Maybe I'm spoiled...

Now, if you want to say that "some shooters" oughta stay with lesser-recoil cartridges, I'm not about to disagree with you. Nor about some folks needing to work at being better shots, no matter what they use.

I dunno. From around 1964 to 2000, I autopsied somewhere around 50 or 60 deer that I shot, and was around for other guys' likely-equal amount. My observation, in general, is that there is more tissue damage and bone damage from such as the .270s and .30s than for any of the centerfire .22s or the .243.

But if you shoot Bambi in the white spot, it doesn't really matter.

 

[Shawnee]

LOL !


Nothing "circular" about it. The reason they didn't "hit in the right place" is because they were using a caliber that was too much for them to shoot well.

"But if you shoot Bambi in the white spot, it doesn't really matter."

Absolutely - that "white spot" is about the best place to land the shot there is.



As for damage - slip a .243 87-gr. Honady BTHP behind the shoulder and angled forward from about 250yds. and you'll see damage with a capital "D".

 

[Meeteetse]

Sorry to disagree Shawnee, but for some it doesn't make any difference if it is a Red Ryder BB gun or a 375 HH, they are poor shots. They have bad technique, poor trigger control and no knowledge of their gun. But that is another story. .

I never knew anything smaller than a 30/06 existed, steel butt plate and all, until I entered the service in the 60's and learned about the .308. . . .

The .223 is not legal for game animals in Wyo so it was not even considered. The 243 was the smallest legal gun. On the ranch, the 22 lr harvested a lot of deer when the meat locker was empty. Our family ran a guide service for 12 years in the 1960's in Wyo and found that most people couldn't shoot regardless of the caliber they carried. Those who hunted in "shotgun only" states couldn't judge distance and really didn't understand what it takes to anchor a big elk, mule deer or moose. It isn't about minimum caliber, as someone said earlier, it is about what caliber is best for the job.

Sure, small, low recoil calibers can take game, if the shot is perfectly placed. But, IMO, there is less room for error, and a greater chance of wounding and loosing game.

 

[cjanak]

Maybe the ideal commenter would ask for minimum, best and maximum caliber? And more importantly perhaps, they should probably be very detailed in explaining the size deer they are likely to encounter, the style of hunting, the likely distance of the shot, their sensitivity to felt recoil, and their skill and experience.

This gives the respondents an opportunity to best define the bookends and the optimal cartridge for the given situation and shooter.

 

[MCgunner]

I really don't think there is a "maximum" caliber. I mean, for one, I can load a .375 H&H DOWN. The full power loads will kill deer, after all. You can take a squirrel cleanly with a .458! I don't hunt squirrel with a .458, just sayin'. But, would you wanna use a .22 LR on cape buffalo, up close and personal? Would ya? Not me. I'm talking rimfire, now, not .223. We all know the .223 is way enough gun for elephant, let alone buffalo. All it takes is a well placed shot. You just have to be able to hit the right spot. In fact, I'm thinking of investing in .223 futures. Once Africa finds out what a great caliber it is, i'l make a fortune.

 

[cjanak]

"I really don't think there is a "maximum" caliber"

Point taken MCgunner. No question .505 Gibbs will take rabbit just fine... assuming you're capable of handling such a weapon. Frankly I doubt that I could, which means that at some point there is a maximum caliber that I can reasonably use to humanely and effectively dispatch game. But a guy like you that seems comfortable and experienced in dealing with larger calibers might not have any problem at all, and therefore the maximum bookend might not be particularly relevant to you.

Also, some people claim that using large calibers on small game can waste meat, though I have no personal experience with this as I only hunt small game with light shotgun loads or .22LR.

 

[MCgunner]

Our forefathers used to "bark" squirrels with their kentucky rifles to avoid meat loss.

 

[Art Eatman]

MCg, guys used to try to "crease" wild mustangs, to cold-cock them for an easy catch. Fed a lot of coyotes and buzzards, doing that.

Back wehen I was selling bibles door to door, I was set upon by a vicious dog. A pit bull, to be exact. All I had with me was a sample, a leather-bound, brass hinged and locked copy of the Holy Word. Some seven ecclesiastical pounds' worth. I smote that evil hound in mid-leap, sending the evil bow-wow to that Great Fire Hydrant in the Sky.

I was sore down-heartened by that awful event, and sought advice from my preacher. He asked, "Were you engaged in lawful pursuits?" "Yes, sir, I was." "And you were attacked without warning?" "Yes, sir I was." "And you say you smote this creature with the Word of the Lord?" "Yes, sir, I did."

"In that case, then, I suggest you let your work speak for itself."

It is in that spirit, then, that I suggest that if somebody is successful in his endeavors with respect to Bambi, we let his work speak for itself. Regardless of the ecclesiastical caliber...

Art