Minimum cartridge trend?

The nature of gun owners has changed dramatically. When shopping for my 1st deer rifle in 1974 a 243 was seen as very marginal, a 270 acceptable, and a 30-06 about perfect. Naturally I took the advice of older hunters and bought a 30-06. Back in those days most gun owners were hunters. Many, maybe most would buy a box of ammo each year, use up last years box to confirm zero, get in a little practice, and use the new box for that hunting season. The 30-06 was probably always too big for deer. But with depression era parents and mentors the concept of buying one rifle for everything from deer to moose made sense instead of multiple rifles.

Today most gun owners are shooters 1st, hunters 2nd, and they shoot a lot more. They also own more than 1 rifle. I don't care how big or tough you think you are shooting hundreds of rounds of less powerful rounds is more comfortable. When you shoot a rifle a lot you gain confidence in it. Eventually we decided to try the less powerful rounds in rifles we were were confident in and found the deer died just the same. The advent of better bullets removed any doubts.

Today I consider a 223 perfectly acceptable for deer with limitations. With most cartridges you can kill a deer as far away as the shooter has the skills to make the shot. A 223 is best limited to deer size game and ranges under 200 yards. I feel closer to 100 is better. I think a 243 is near perfect for deer at any range while being borderline on elk, and a 308 is a BIG gun capable of taking any game in North America. Any of the 6.5's are a great compromise round for elk, moose, bear, or deer.

Part of the rise of 308 over 30-06 is better loads. One of my grandfathers fought in WW-1, my father WW-2. My 308 shoots 150 gr bullets almost 200 fps FASTER than my grandfathers 1903 Springfield and almost 100 fps faster than my fathers Garand. With modern 30-06 loads I can still get the 30-06 about 50 fps faster than my 308, but it simply isn't worth the extra recoil and a heavier rifle.
 
"The 30-06 was probably always too big for deer."

Run and get in a basement before lightning strikes you.
 
At a hundred yards, I wouldn't really argue against the old '06 being "too much" for Bambi; certainly it's more than is needed. But it really shines when Bambi is out there around 400 or 500 yards. Works really good, then.

The larger bullets are able to penetrate more deeply and work better when an angling shot is needed--as in hitting behind the rear rib and still getting to the heart/lung area.

There's no "One size fits all."
 
Nobody is saying that the 06 is a gross overkill at 400-500yds but in the woods that kind of damage is completely unnecessary, at leased with the bullets that I have used.
 
I don't have a dog in this fight, except that I just took my first buck ever this weekend, and used Hornady's steel cased 7.62x39 SST, which worked great.

Anyways, keep the comments coming, I could read this thread all day.
 
I'm in the boat to where I only want a cartridge adequate for the job at hand. What I need is an accurate rifle that can cleanly and ethically take deer and smaller at 200 yards or less.

I'm not a fan of the extra recoil and muzzle blast unless it's necessary. Shoulder surgery will do that to you. In my limited experience a 120-150 grain bullet in .264-.308 diameter at 2500-2900 fps is all I'll ever need. My AR-15's in 6.5 Grendel, 30 Rem AR, and 7mm Valkyrie accomplish just that. And they don't have excess recoil or muzzle blast.
 
Well sometimes all they will give you is a nervous walking shot, I don't like trying for a neck shot when they won't hold still for two seconds, never missed a shot or lost an animal in 30 years and I don't plan on starting now.
 
Kachok as a hunter it's your responsibility to make the best and most lethal shot possible on your intended game. If you are nervous about taking a shot on a nervous walking deer, don't take a shot.
Caliber choice shouldn't change that.

You've stated you've never lost a deer so it seems that you are making your shots count.
 
I'm sure it's been said, I've never had a problem killing anything. If the shot is not right, it's not right no matter what caliber used. If the shot is not right, you let them walk.

I personally don't care for archery, that's more dicey than any center fire rifle caliber.
 
For most of the last 50 years a 30-06 has been my main hunting rifle, for the past 40 or so it's been the same one altho it has undergone some changes. I don't feel it's overkill and will work anywhere from 25 yards out to 400 and more. I almost always make heart/lung shots and almost all of them are dead right there. I haven't lost a deer since my younger days hunting across bean fields with iron sights. I have seen a good many lost after being shot with .243's etc.
 
I help out with a managed hunt each year, where there will be 25-30 deer taken, with just about any caliber imaginable. I have seen a lot of them killed stone cold dead with .223's, and deer lost with .270s, .30-06 etc. the ones that are lost, well you simply don't usually know how well they are hit, with the occasional telling blood trails and descriptions. the end result is always the same, the ones who shoot well and put a decent bullet through the lungs, we will recover their deer, those who gut shoot them, or shoot a front leg etc. usually they are gone, although sometimes we can recover one. And have found deer that were shot by a second hunter, the deer had wounds that would make a trauma surgeon weak in the knees, but still going. Deer can take a non vital hit and leave, but no deer is going far without its lungs. Destroy them and you are in business. larger calibers with good bullets do give you a little more leeway in choosing shots, i.e. if you only can see a shoulder on an angling shot, you are sure to get the bullet deep enough to disrupt the vitals. From what I have witnessed good bullets (not necessarily the premiums) are more important than the head stamp of the cartridge it is fired with. Keep the shots within your and the particular cartridge's range, use good bullets and place them well. The rest requires a camera and good knife.
 
CarJunkieLS1 I am not talking caliber that was making reference to shot placement, just saying that I am not going to try to hit a deer behind the ear if he won't hold still or slow down caliber has nothing to do with that. If my 06 keeps blowing the shoulders to bits it limits me to neck shots so I might have to pass up on some deer that I would otherwise take with my 7mm-08 or 6.5x55. I can easily take a double lung shot within normal hunting ranges. Again that excessive damage might just be due to bullet choice and the fact that the rifling in my 06 might be cutting through the bullet jacket, been brushing lead flakes out of barrel when I clean it, none of my other rifles do that, but obviously the 06 is capable of making considerably more energy then I need within the ranges I hunt, someone else up north or out west might find the 06 is ideal for their deer as I understand that they get considerably larger there then here in Texas.
 
I'm an old guy who forever thought that 30-06 was the ideal deer load.

About 30 years ago, a friend got a 243 for deer. I thought he made a mistake because the 243 was just a varmint cartridge.

Boy did he prove me wrong. He got both white tails and mulies with it. Then he also took a Wyoming antelope.

I was impressed enough to get a Winchester Model 70 in 243 and even though I'm not a hunter, I really like the rifle and the cartridge.
 
I shot a doe Thursday with a 7.62x39. Used a Remington .308 150 grain SPCL. There was nobody back there and I had plenty of time, so I put one through the lungs. She ran about 80 yard. Plenty of lung damage. One broken rib, no meat spoiled. Works for me. One guy at camp always uses a medium to heavy cartridge and tries for a drop it on the spot shot and usually ruins some meat. He is color blind and I don't blame him.
 
My issue is recoil

Two spine surgeries later, I've gone to a 260, 6.5 Grendel, and 450 Bushmaster. I was amazed by the 450, as it kicks like a 20guage shotgun.
 
It would be more economical and about the same ballistics wise to use a shotgun slug instead of the .450 Bushmaster.
 
Au Contrere

It would be more economical and about the same ballistics wise to use a shotgun slug instead of the .450 Bushmaster.
Click to expand...
A 12ga, 7/8oz slug loses half of it's velocity at 100 yards (1800 to 978). Remington does make a saboted round with the 260gr Bullet designed for the BM ($3.30/Round), but I don't want to lug an 8.5# shotgun. Also, I haven't seen a shotgun put 3 slugs into one hole at 75 yards.
 
A 12ga, 7/8oz slug loses half of it's velocity at 100 yards (1800 to 978). Remington does make a saboted round with the 260gr Bullet designed for the BM ($3.30/Round), but I don't want to lug an 8.5# shotgun. Also, I haven't seen a shotgun put 3 slugs into one hole at 75 yards.
Click to expand...

I wish I had the skill to shoot a single hole group at 75 yards. :(
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top