re: Small caliber deer rifle recommendations?

quote:

---

thedice20

---

You asked for a 13 but they drew a 31!

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.

quote:

---

But it is not a marginal caliber in anyone's eyes but yours.

---

Actually Downshift, I agree w/ you. Our experiences have been similar. I also think that in the hands of most hunters, the 243 is a marginal caliber. For the hunter who chooses to be very selective w/ their shots (e.g. taking only head/neck shots or broadside shots between the ribs) and use controlled expansion bullets, it may not be marginal. But if one's not willing to live w/ such restrictions, there are better guns to use. If those who use the 243 think it's adequate, go ahead and continue to use it if you so choose. As someone else said earlier, I think of the 243 as an expert's deer hunting round.

It all goes back to exit holes for me.

I refuse to deer hunt with a load which does not consistently exit.

That's why everybody who wants to kill deer should really be hunting with a 6.5x55 swede



All BS aside though, my .25-06 with 117gr superformance acted like what you shoot. Killed deer in nasty ways, but the only time I got an exit was when I shot a 3 point in the neck while he was flopping around on the ground after hitting the dreaded shoulder knuckle.

Ended up killing my biggest deer with it at 185 on the best shot I've ever made, but still sold it. My swede is a much better performer IMO. I've yet to keep one of those in a deer.

Only if we convert this to fixed vs mechanical to make sure we've covered two of my favorite three OB topics

quote:

---

Actually Downshift, I agree w/ you. Our experiences have been similar. I also think that in the hands of most hunters, the 243 is a marginal caliber. For the hunter who chooses to be very selective w/ their shots (e.g. taking only head/neck shots or broadside shots between the ribs) and use controlled expansion bullets, it may not be marginal. But if one's not willing to live w/ such restrictions, there are better guns to use. If those who use the 243 think it's adequate, go ahead and continue to use it if you so choose. As someone else said earlier, I think of the 243 as an expert's deer hunting round.

---

This just makes no sense at all. Wreaks of emotion and myth. I really expected better.

It's founded on experience, just like your lack of concern is founded on experience.

And you need to leave the school of alx and refute his point so people can know why you think he's wrong

It's based on experience with people who lack the experience to use a round which should be used by experienced people.

Or people who like having more options on what angles they can confidently shoot a deer from.

However you want to cut it.

It's still well founded.

I agree that reduced-power loads are not the best option. I dont think they aren't necessary. I've never used them nor have I ever seen a deer shot with them. I just don't see the need for them when the full power loads are plenty soft enough IMO.

Otherwise, I don't agree with you. Bad experiences with a .243 doesn't necessarily mean you need to practice more or have more patience when you're hitting where you're aiming. If there wasnt a better option out there, sure. But there are better options that allow you to take those shots confidently.

Revert back to my very first post. You agree with me, you just don't realize it.