Anti-gunner friend wants to handgun hunt deer with me. Need help

G

Genso

New member
Hello,

I've never been a hunter but many in my extended family are. I live in Michigan and most of the people I know use shotguns.
However, I have a buddy who would like to start hunting white-tail deer. Prior to this he was anti-gun. He wants to use a handgun for deer hunting. A lot of people wouldn't advise a handgun over a long arm, but it is possible and it is legal in MI.
So I was wondering what would be a good choice for him to buy as his deer hunting handgun? This would be his first, and possibly only gun purchase. I'm hoping that if I accompany and have a positive hunting experience with him, then he would possibly see the light and become fully progun.

I have a Delta Elite 10mm that I could use 200 gr @ 1250 fps Texas Ammo Co. ammo with. What suggestions would you have for him?
 
If you are going to buy a handgun especially to hunt with I would recommend something like a TC Contender or Encore. This really depends on the range at which you planning on shooting at. If it is close you could use a 44, 41 or your 10mm. I would suggest a 41 or 44. The TC’s are great for hunting because of the versatility with barrels. A good 44 or 41 would be good to just go shoot also. It really depends if he has other guns also. If this is a first purchase then a 44 or 41 would be the best. If this is just going to be a hunting gun then I would get the TC. Confused????
 
huh?!?

Haha. No, that wasn't too confusing.
Yeah, this would be his first gun and maybe only gun. The Contender type is probably a little too specialized for him. (although it offers great options). I was also thinking .44, but I was hoping you'd say 357 is enough because I think the .44 might intimidate him.
.41 is an intersting option. I don't see that very often. How does the ammo price compare to .44?

Thanks.
 
In a large game class that I recently attended, they suggested that a handgun round should deliver in excess of 900 ft-lbs of energy to be used for big game hunting. Many will argue that hunting with anything less is unethical.

If you look at many of the suggestions made, you will have a tough time reaching the threshold suggested about. I think a .44 magnum often runs about 6-700 ft-lbs.

The only person I know that serious hunts deer with a pistol uses Dan Wesson pistols. One he uses is a .375 (not .357) super magnum.

I hope that helps.
 
AAshooter,

Thanks for the input and the 900 lb guide line. I wasn't too sure where to check the ballistics on a .44 but a quick trip to http://www.cor-bon.com/huntammo.html showed that a .44 coming in at 1,100 lbs / force would do the trick pretty well. Even a .41 at close range comes in over 900 lbs / force. So I guess there are more options out there than I thought.
Although my 10mm may be a bit lacking... :(
 
My problem with this whole idea is that of ethics: A skill level is needed such that a definite kill-shot can be made; no wounded animal to run off and die, wasted.

To me, this means buying a pistol now, and practicing more than once a week, more than just a box of shells each outing, on to deer season. One who cannot reliably hit a tennis-ball sized target at 50 yards shouldn't hunt with a pistol. To me, "reliably" means at worst eight out of ten.

More generally, he should feel and fondle various handguns to see with which he is most comfortable. For hunting, IMO, a revolver is almost mandatory. The 10mm cartridge is pretty much marginal for a reliable, clean kill.

I suggest he be made acquainted with a .44 Maggie, although not with full-power loads at first. I note that a Redhawk is heavy enough that recoil isn't bad with max 300-grain loads (IMO).

Art
 
Art makes a great point to consider.

In reviewing my notes from the class, the instructor said the minimum handgun round for hunting big game should delivery 900-1300 ft-lbs of energy.

I assume that scales based on the size of the game. Although I am not sure how to interpret a range given as a minimum.
 
No matter what weapon is used, you aim at a particular point on a deer, not just the general middle of the largest brown part. You have (roughly) a two-inch circle for a neck shot. You have a vertical strip roughly two inches wide and maybeso ten inches high as a kill zone for heart or heart/lung shot. This is for a fairly fast kill or bleed-out within a reasonable tracking distance.

Thus my comment about asking how far out can you hit something the size of the end of a beer can or stay inside a tennis ball, etc.

A frontal hit with a .22 rimfire directly between the eyes will kill Bambi. However, an inch or so either way and you have a mess. Messes are Bad Things, and unethical.

Art
 
Last edited:
Terminal Ballistics

There is a lot of hooey out there about terminal ballistics. First, there is no such thing as "Hydrostatic Shock", nor have Newton's laws been overturned by modern firearms. You can forget about knocking something off it's feet, or about effective marginal hits. The workings of a projectile are simple, you must induce enough damage (read permanent cavity) to incapacitate the game. In a handgun this calls for a large diameter cartridge with the correct angle on the ogive (curve behind the point). You will do much better with a .44 special loaded with a keith type semi-wadcutter than with a .357 and silvertips.
Using foot-pounds of pressure, temporary cavities, momentum or any other means of comparison is only going to sell magazines, not help a novice. Again, penetration which is deep enough to reach vital organs, permanent cavity which is large enough to damage blood carrying organs, and proper shot placement.
The Tompson contender is good, as is the recommendation for a .41 or .44 cal cartridge. You could even get away with the .45 Colt if you keep the shots close. Remember, a lot of deer fell to the old .44-40 in a Winchester 94 in the 1800's
 
I've successfully taken deer with a .357. Yes, a .44 Mag is better and hits harder, but if you use a heavy bullet and place it properly, a .357 will do the trick with no problem.

Heck, from reading some of the responses about how much energy is needed, you'd think some people are putting deer in the same league as Cape buffalo or something! Think about it - people with bows and arrows have been routinely taking deer for thousands of years. If what amounts to a sharp stick works, why then so will just about any handgun in a serious caliber...as long as you place the shot properly!
 
Well, first let me correct a couple of errors. The Winchester model 94 was never made in 44-40 back in the 1800's. The models 1873 an 1892 were.
Second, a bullet kills by destruction of tissue, while an arrow kills by cutting and creating serroius bleeding. Two different mechanisms that achieve the same result. Liver in the pan. I have killed exactly four of what can be considered big game animals with a handgun over an extended period ranging from about 1958 to the present date. One, a black bear with a 38/44 Outdoorsman, (.38 Spl. loaded up to 1150 FPS to be used in special heavy duty revolvers made by S&W. Round was the for runner to the .357 Mag.) Year was 1958.
One 250 pound wild hog with a .357 mag. around 1965-6. Two deer with the .44 Mag. Bear took two shots at very close range, and did the hog. Both deer were one shot kills, one at 25 yards the other at about 45 yards.
I had a friend that decided he wanted to hunt with a handgun. he did not like long guns at all, and wanted one handgun to do it all. He decided on an S&W model 29 with six inch barrel, which felt the best to him.. We picked up an inexpensive loading kit and he started out with very light loads. When he got good with those, we increased the charge up a notch until he was comfortable with that, and so on up the line. We used brass only and no factory ammo whatsoever until he was able to handle the recoil. I monitored his handloading efforts the whole time. When he could consistantly hit a six inch paper plate nine out of ten times at fifty yards from various hunting positions, I took him out hunting with me. He took a nice three point Mule Deer at roughly 35 yards with one well placed shot. It took him a little over two and a half years to reach the standard I'd set for him, and he was dedicated and patient enough to do it right.
Now he not only handloads all his ammo, but casts his own bullets as well.
He was a fence sitter when it came to hunting and shooting when we started out. Now, you should hear him cuss when he doesn't draw a tag for his game.
Paul B.
 
"A bullet by destruction of tissue and an arrow by cutting and hemmorage"? It is the same thing! What do you think occurs from the destroyed tissue? One just creates sharp incises and the other rough rips. If you really want to get into terminal ballistics then go to:
http://www.mindspring.com/~ulfhere/ballistics/wounding.html
the guy knows what he is talking about (which means he agrees with me.... :) )
And yes, they have even taken Elephant with the .22 rimfire.
Sorry for the incorrect model number, I should have said the "Yellow Boy" which was the first .44-40 chambering. Immaterial, it was a pistol cartridge chambered in a long gun (for the convenience of the carrier) intended for shooting wolf and coyote and finishing off sick or injured cows and horses.........among other things.
 
Hello - I have taken whitetail deer with three different handguns. The first was a 6" .357 using Wichester 180 grain Black Talon bullets. This deer was an average size doe. The bullet hit right in the " kill zone ". The deer ran around 50 yards and dropped dead. I also have shot deer with a Ruger Super Blackhawk using 240 grain Hornady XTP's. This worked at least as well as the .357; the deer ran a short distance and dropped. The best handgun I've used is a TC Contender in 7-30 Waters. I have shot two deer with that, both dropped in thier tracks and both had entarnce and exit wounds. That is now my preferred gun for handgun hunting and the one that I'd recommend.

Fabrat:)
 
357

But, make sure he learns proper handgun control, and doesn't shoot him or her self in the foot.

I am a Buckeye, and live right next door.

If they can't get close enough to put a deer own with a good 357 then they shouldn't be hunting anyway.

A deep isn't a bear or wild pig/boar....a 357 should do fine.

Personally I wouldn't even consider a 1st time hunter like that using a handgun.
 
I have succuessfully (with a witness) taken a deer at 25 yards with a 9MM Smith & Wesson 5904 with a Winchester silvertip...

that said, for daily whitetail hunting, I carry a Dan Wesson .44 in my shoulder holster... (and a Savage 110-E in 30-06 on a sling)

I only used the 9MM because I was SURE of the shot, and the target animal was STANDING TOTALLY STILL, at a KNOWN DISTANCE! (and to prove to a friend that I could)

I got a clean kill (ran less then 20 yards) with the 9MM, but again, I KNEW the gun and the shot...

a .357, with GOOD ammo and GOOD shot placement is "enough" gun... but a .44 with at least a 6" barrel (mine's 8") is FAR better...
 
I realize I am taking a little side trip here, but I need a memory check. SmokeyBaer said the .44-40 first appeared in the 1866 (Yellow Boy). Wasn't the '66 a rimfire rifle with the .44-40 first being produced in the 1873?

Just wondering if the gray matter needs to be refreshed.

Jack
 
Same here Art. Most of my books are in boxes in a storage unit right now and I won't have them for another week. I feel like I've been moving for about 6 months now.

Jack
 
OK Guys

First I am not a subscriber to the idea if you can identify every corvette that was ever made, you are qualified to run in the Indy 500. My point is that pistol bullets (and balls at pistol velocities) were used. They were NOT the choice, rather used because of other considerations.
I really could care less if the .44-40 was first chambered in Geranomo's bow......this was not the question or under discussion.
But, if that is what twiddles your fiddle......more power to you.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top