re: Small caliber deer rifle recommendations?

quote:

---

Where we part ways is on the reduced velocity rounds. In general, if you want to maintain lethality while reducing velocity, you must increase weight of the projectile.

---

Using a heavier weight in a reduced load is another way of "skinning a cat." In fact, the first reduced load I worked up for deer hunting used a 150 gr Hornady round nose bullet at approx 2400 fps. My son killed a small deer w/ this load. It actually left the biggest blood trail I've ever seen. Most reduced loads use a lighter bullet to reduce recoil. Some factory reduced loads are marketed as "Managed Recoil" or "Reduce Recoil."

quote:

---

But energy is energy. And if the lower weight bullet achieves more energy than the heavier bullet as a result of higher velocity, it WILL penetrate further as it expends what's left. Possibly a lot further because it's a smaller SD.

---

Bullet penetration is counter intuitive because we're dealing w/ expanding hunting bullets. As mentioned earlier, I did a series of science fair projects w/ my son over a span of 3 years. We compared bullet penetration vs velocity and bullet weight. All bullets were Nosler BT's (125, 150, 165 and 180 grain). The bullets were shot into water soaked newspaper. I realize that's not the same as a live deer, but it is a consistent and easily available medium. The constants we found were: 1. W/ bullets of the same weight, penetration decreases as velocity increases. At higher velocity, expansion of the bullet increases the bullet's frontal area, causing the bullet penetrate less. 2. W/ bullets shot at the same velocity, penetration increases as bullet weight increases. It gets complicated when one compares penetration of bullets of different weight AND velocity.

quote:

---

As for the angled shot... The thing that makes that bullet travel further is energy. If the heavy bullet retains more, it travels further. If the light bullet does so would it.

---

I know it sounds crazy, but when comparing the same hunting/expanding bullet of the same, one w/ less velocity will penetrate DEEPER than the high velocity. Do the experiment yourself sometime. Soak a 15" thick bundle of newspaper in water for 6 hours and shoot some bullets into.

quote:

---

But there's a lot to be said about the lethality of turning those bones into projectiles as far as killing is concerned.

---

I agree entirely. Bone/shrapnel in the lungs is especially deadly. Of course, all bets are off when a bullet hits bone.

quote:

---

I shoot a 125 gr Nosler Ballistic Tip doing 3200 FPS in 30-06. It is MUCH, MUCH more lethal than the reduced rounds sold across the counter.

---

I very well remember your glowing accounts of the high speed 125 gr NBT. Because of that, I'm still considering loading some up for my Savage Striker 308 handgun for next deer season. I don't mean to make people think I believe reduced loads are as lethal as regular velocity loads of the same gun. My advocacy for reduced loads is for the OP's scenario: a newbie deer hunter who'll be shooting deer inside 200 yards. if she can handle regular velocity loads, that's great; go ahead and us them. But if not, the reduced recoil load is a deadly load to start w/.

In part, I don't personally get all worked up over a load's muzzle energy because of how I hunt, using long barreled handguns w/ mid-velocity loads instead of high velocity rifles. Most of my loads have a muzzle velocity between 2300 fps-2700 fps. That's also why I can attest to the lethality of managed recoil loads shot in a rifle. My handguns just can't develop the velocities that rifles do. I rely on adequate bullet velocity, bullet diameter, a properly constructed bullet, bullet placement and (to a very minor degree) sectional density.