Calibre Choice for Deer WARNING - GRAPHIC IMAGES

[Cael Nu Mara]

Hi all,

In a recent post a certain member of this forum said that a .308 was way too much gun for roe deer stalking. So i thought about this for a while and decided to put forward soome pictures that show meat damage, the second most import thing about bullet choice when shooting to fill the freezer. The first set of pictures show a pair of roe does shot with a .22-250 with 55grn bullets, I belive that when he shot this load through a chronograph they travelled at over 3000fps.

The above picture shows the entry hole from a base of neck shot taken at 113m. The damage to the carcass is obvious (the jelly like blood has been boiled)

This is the exit wound from the above shot

The photos below are taken from http://www.snipershide.com as I personnaly couldnt find any. I wouldnt think they would touch 2750fps. The shot was a broad side chest shot at around 100m . The beast is much larger than a roe, but the meat damage would be the same.

The above picture shows the entry wound.

And the exit wound.


I admit that one wouldnt use a .22-250 on anything larger than roe in the UK, but many people do use a .308 for all six species in the UK. I dont think that its a particular argument between 308 and 22-250, more between small and fast bullets and larger slow ones. There is also the very well respected middle ground 6.5x55 SWED and so on


I hope this is interesting to some. And I leave you to draw your own conclusions

Sam

 

[Klenchblaize]

In my youth I craved a time when I could try my 220 Swift on roe. I finally got that chance c/o of FCS and experienced similar results with frontal chest shots at 4000fps care of 55g Norma SP's . I believe during 4 days of stalking I took 18 does for 18 shots. I also suspect you meant to say circa 3800fps for the 22-250 unless they are down-loaded homeloads?

As for the 308 my immediate reaction is there is an issue here of the wrong bullet for the job because if that had been anything other than a perfect heart shot the roe might still be walking around albeit with unwanted piercings!

If I wasn't so avers to recoil I would probably go down the route of a slow moving non destructive heavy bullet as there is something comforting about seeing a deer fall over when shot rather than running on.

Cheers

 

[Cael Nu Mara]

I also suspect you meant to say circa 3800fps for the 22-250 unless they are down-loaded homeloads?

Reloads bud, its the way forward. And im not sure what you mean with the 308? Sorry if im just looking at it wrong



Sam

 

[the mole trapper]

Used to use the 22-250 a lot with factory fodder but it was a real masher, now i use my swede for everything using lapua mega ready rolleds, very little wastage whatever the species, and they deffinetly roll over to the shot, with the exeption of the occasional big fallow buck in the rut, even then they dont go far.

 

[Adze]

That's not graphic... it's just unwrapped food

 

[Doc]

Interesting thread.

Particularly so for me as I am just back from culling a roe doe and two young. I only have one r*fle for deer and it is a .270. Ideal for the reds but perhaps too much for these little ones. It's undeniably very humane though.

I don't really find the recoil of the .270 uncomfortable, but I don't like the way you lose the target when the shot breaks. I tried a .22-250 on DSC1 and it was undeniably easier to shoot. So I'm thinking of a second rifle - which is difficult as I have a very experienced professional stalker advising me to get a .223, and another hugely experienced friend equally in favour of the .22-250.

I read somewhere that the .243 is the most popular choice of BDS members, but of course most of them will live in England.

Incidentally, if anyone wishes to buy a .270, buy it in England. I did, and it had seen very little use in it's 30 years - an annual trip to Scotland with one bullet on the target and one on the stag!

 

[Front Room Woodlander]

I may be going off topic but how is the caliber of the bullet measured / arrived at?
Is it length, circumference or weight?

 

[Adze]

None and all of the above... Nominally it's the diameter. eg a two two = 0.22 inches (5.56mm) in diameter.

Other numbers (e.g. .45-70 Government) combine the calibre of the bullet with the mass of black powder used.

Typically it's the diameter of the barrel it's designed to be fired through. However... there's a degree of variation between difference manufacturers both of barrels and of ammunition - e.g. a .45 calibre round is commonly .458 inches, but still called a .45

Loosely, this isn't a bad description:
http://dictionary.cambridge.org/define.asp?key=10845&dict=CALD&topic=handguns-and-rifles

 

[Matt.S]

Of course there's a significant difference between the calibre/diameter of the bullet and what any specific cartridge is referred to as. For instance the .303 Brit is actually about .311" bullet diameter (the minor bore is .303" and the major starts at around .311" and gradually wears out to .313+" or so over several decades of killing fuzzy-wuzzies and stealing their country across the Empire). Then there's the .38 Special which is actually 0.357" but it was introduced when 'heeled' bullets were commonplace and so the public would have perceived it as a step-down in firepower to have gone from a .38 to a .357. Then there are necked-up and necked-down cases, like the 577/450 and those which include a year of introduction such as the .30-06, which add a whole lot of good old-fashioned confusion to the works.

And all this is before you get started on the whole calibre vs. velocity vs. mass vs. killing power issue. 500 years of killing things with firearms and no-one agrees on that yet.

 

[Chinkapin]

Basically, there are two schools of though on calibre choice: big and slow or its opposite, small and fast.

Originally big and slow ruled the day and over the years small and fast has took over. My opinion is that big and slow bullets are vastly underrated and small and fast are overrated for some jobs.

If you are capable of making kills at very long distances and that is where your quarry is, then you want a smaller and faster bullet -- flatter trajectory.

If you hunt in heavy woods and need lots of knockdown power, big and slow would be you best bet. (remember "slow" is a relative term.)

Both big and slow and small and fast can do a tremendous amount of damage to meat. The 45-70 mentioned by Adze above, is Very slow, but its huge bullet can blow a four inch diameter hole, completely through a moose. (stem to stern). The pictures of the damage done by the 22-250 says it all regarding small and fast.

My advice, if you want to hunt deer with a 22-250 is to get some cast all lead bullets and down load them to around 2000 fps. (maximum velocity for lead bullets). This should give you a good clean kill and virtually no meat damage. Recoil will be almost negligible.

The .303 British mentioned by Matt S. is one of the finest hunting cartridges ever made. You can reload it with everything from 125 gr. bullets up to 190 gr. bullets and adjust the velocity and bullet wt. according to what you want to achieve.

In the U.S. the venerable 30-30 has killed more deer than any other cartridge. It is .308 in diameter, and the hottest loads are only capable of around 2400 feet per sec. It is usually loaded with a 150 or 170 gr bullet. Both the .303 Br. and the 30-30 are "antiques" as far as ballistics and trajectory go but both perform admirably within their design parameters. If you want to get the most out of any gun and particularly the most versatility, handloading is the way to go. Factory rounds are almost always a compromise, aimed at the least common denominator. Bullet choice is critical. read up on what is available and what they are capable of doing, prior to reloading.

 

[Buckshot]

A friend of mine always uses a 30.06 IMO that is a little excessive. Not too much gun because if the shot is safe for a 22-250 or .308 it must be OK for anything else.

My 'posh' one is a .308 and we only only have Roe and Muntjac down here. the shock wave seems to vapourise the chest cavity contents on Muntjac so there's no way a non heart shot chest shot will not drop the deer.

I also have a 30.30 (Marlin underlever) which I'm selling atm. All close shooting so no need for longer range guns although it's not too difficult to get a V bull at 600-1000 yards when target shooting with a .308 - not that I'm suggesting anyone try that on live targets

My normal carry gun is a 44. I wanted a 'small', light weight, deer legal thing I can carry around while doing my gamekeeping duties. That was the reason for the 30.30 but although short it was heavy. Just to clarify I'm talking about the physical gun not the calibre or bullet wieght here

Mark

 

[Front Room Woodlander]

Where is there a comprehensive beginners guide to ballistics?

 

[Buckshot]

Where is there a comprehensive beginners guide to ballistics?

Isn't that a contradiction in terms????

 

[Doc]

Where is there a comprehensive beginners guide to ballistics?

A good question - there is a very readable little book called 'Ballistic Allsorts' by some Australian shooter that explains a lot of it very well. It doesn't go into terminal ballistics much though.

 

[Oblio13]

I don't think .308 is too much for small deer. It's my favorite all-around caliber, and I use 165 grn bullets exclusively just to keep it simple. Projectile technology has come so far in just the past few years that good quality bonded-core bullets are amazingly versatile. I've taken coyotes, antelope, whitetails, caribou, moose and bear with 165 grn .308's. On small animals they punch through without releasing all their energy inside the target, but then there's plenty to spare, so they don't need to. If you've punctured both lungs as you should strive to do, no animal is going more than a few yards, and there'll be a good trail if it's needed.

I received a nasty-gram from a mod and had the thread deleted when I posted this pic (what's up with that, has bushcrafting gone vegan?), it's not nearly as graphic as those above, so here it is again, just because it's cool:

 

[Siberianfury]

.243 will take any game in the uk, even Red stags

 

[Doc]

.243 will take any game in the uk, even Red stags

This is true, but some estates will not allow guests to stalk stags with a .243 and require a larger calibre.

 

[dogwood]

I don't think .308 is too much for small deer.

Agreed on the .308 for deer. I don't think anything in the 30cal family is necessarily too much for deer, it just depends on the load.

Heck, over the years I've taken LOTS of deer with my beloved .357 marlin levergun. I wouldn't want to hunt anything much larger than a whitetail with .357, but it's perfectly adequate for the kind of hunting I do most often (stalks, deer trails, tight brush, shots inside of 50 meters).

When I hunt black powder, I use a .50 cal with a round ball. Meat damage isn't too great because I keep the charge on the low side.

In any event, I find the best rule of thumb is to try to shoot the smallest caliber you can to reasonably and humanely take the game you're after. It makes you a better hunter.

 

[suburban bushwacker]

This is true, but some estates will not allow guests to stalk stags with a .243 and require a larger calibre.

A friend of mine has a stalking setup in the highlands and he's often commented that too many english shooters come with their .243 and then he has to spend the night tracking with his dogs after the .243 hasn't been placed in quite the right place. He shoots 30-06 himself.
SBW

 

[Ahjno]

I don't think .308 is too much for small deer. It's my favorite all-around caliber, and I use 165 grn bullets exclusively just to keep it simple. Projectile technology has come so far in just the past few years that good quality bonded-core bullets are amazingly versatile. I've taken coyotes, antelope, whitetails, caribou, moose and bear with 165 grn .308's. On small animals they punch through without releasing all their energy inside the target, but then there's plenty to spare, so they don't need to. If you've punctured both lungs as you should strive to do, no animal is going more than a few yards, and there'll be a good trail if it's needed.

I received a nasty-gram from a mod and had the thread deleted when I posted this pic (what's up with that, has bushcrafting gone vegan?), it's not nearly as graphic as those above, so here it is again, just because it's cool:

If a pic is removed from a thread - for whatever reason, you're not supposed to put it up again. If you have problem with the modding on this site I suggest you take it up with the mod concerned or with Tony.

Use your common sense, and rephrane from posting it again.

Johan