Shot Placement or ....

D

Dearhunter61

New member
I just wanted to take a minute to admit after this years hunting I have changed my opinion on the calibers of guns best suited for deer hunting. I am 47 years old and until this year always hunted with a 7mm Rem Mag or a 300 Rem Mag, that is over 23 years of pretty consistent hunting.

During last season I decided to find a quality deer cartridge that did not kick as bad as either of the two rifles mentioned above due to health issues...and simply because I got tired of having the crap kicked out of me when I went to the range to shoot them.

I purchased a couple smaller caliber rifles and finally found one that I really like. A CZ 6.5X55 Swede. The kick was non existent and although I have not tuned it as well as I would like. I am shooting about 1.5 groups at 100 yards. I have gotten groups out of it as small as an inch but they are the exception. I have been able to get it to shoot that one cold shot pretty much right where it is sighted in to shoot. (Someone on this Forum made the comment that that was all that was important...I thought about it and agreed). So I have hunted with it ALMOST exclusively. I have shot at 5 animals with it and 4 of the five have dropped and the other only ran a few yards. Then I took my 22-250 with me when hunting for my cull buck because there are some varmits on my lease and I was actually hoping to get one of them. But you guessed it...out stepped the cull buck I wanted. It was a Buck in Velvet! I have always wanted one and I was told when I got on this lease that there were a lot of bucks that simply do not shed their velvet on this lease and no matter how big they are they do not count as your trophy buck. So when I saw it I grabbed my CZ 22-250 and finally was able to get the cross hairs on it. It was standing in brush and the only thing I saw was the deer heart and lung area. I have a 6.5x20x50 on my 22-250 so with the magnification on the highest level I was able to make sure I was aiming at this bucks heart and lung area. I pulled the trigger and he ran for about 50 yards. He never left my sight.

So what these experiences have taught me is that a well placed shot is more important than the caliber of the rifle. Before I was with those that said you needed to use more than enough gun...just in case the shot is not a good one. What I learned with these rifles this year is that if you hit the target where you aim then you will get your deer. Known of these animals suffered. Both bucks and my doe were shot in the heart and they were done real quick. I shot two hogs in the neck and both went down in a heap. The fox never knew what hit it.

Saying all of this I still think there is a minimum caliber as far as taking a deer. Before this year I really did not think the .243 was a good deer cartridge but I have now changed my mind. With good shot placement it will certainly do the job.
 
I always figured it was shot placement first, enough gun second. Enough gun was for the times where your shot placement wasn't perfect but a wounding shot with a large rifle is still a wounding shot.

Shot placement is king. I've hunted with a 30.06, a .308, a 7mm Rem Mag and a 45-70 gov't and all of my animals died quickly not because of the round, but because of where they hit.
 
I think .243 is the perfect deer cartridge. I bought a 6mm rem just to be different. I have also used 22-250 with 100% success. I just don't see the need to whack a whitetail with a 300 win mag.
 
Shot placement is still king and always will be. Still my favorite cartridge is the 300wm. I am not as recoil sensitive as many so my shots go on target. I have noticed however the rate at which the animial drops when hit with it compared to smaller cartridges. I must admit also that the bullet design is very important.
 
Shot placement is definitely first. If you've ever watched a cow killed with a .22 cal short you'd know that for certain. I've had 4 cows slaughtered for the freezer, the last being a 2000lb Hereford Bull, all with a .22 cal. The last one I had my sons watch as the butcher used a single shot bolt action .22 cal short to dispatch the animal just to show them the potential of such a little bullet. The shot easily penetrated the forehead and the bull fell in it's tracks like a ton of bricks, never even took another breath.
 
Placement

Placement is also relative to the projectile.
I can take any deer with my 25-06 using Positive expansion Point bullets, as long as I place it to enter the body cavity. Usually, I dont get an exit either.
I've seen a deer turned physically up side down with a 300 win mag, and STILL he was running in mid air - not the "Lights out" I like to deliver.

I find, for me, that the gun has to fit me right, I have to know my trajectory by memory, and I have to take a second when I shoot to calculate the wind, position of the animal, and what I want the bullett to do.

THEN I can place it right.
 
Left out one item

Everybody talks about shot placement, and recoil. Yes those are important factors. However you forgot about one additional item, and it relates to shot placement, That would be trajectory, or how flat the bullet shoots. If you like the recoil of the 6.5's then that is great. But why not go to a 264 Winchester Magnum and pick up a few more hundred feet per second. This would give you flatter trajectory(making it easier for exact shot placement), and recoil difference between the two cartridges is negligible. Recoil will be determined more by the actual rifle, rather than the cartridge.

Personally I like the larger 30 calibers. But I also spend a good bit of time and money in range time, and reducing "felt recoil" in my rifle.

I hear a lot of people on the forums that knock a muzzle break. Personally I have one on a 30-06, and along with a thumb hole stock(that fits me perfectly) it makes the recoil almost unnoticable.

All I am saying is there is more than one way to skin a cat. I understand what you are saying, but in all actuality the smaller cartridges are adequate, but definitely not the most effective. Tom.
 
Hogghead

Tom,
I think what you said above is good info but the statement below frankly does not make sense to me.

"All I am saying is there is more than one way to skin a cat. I understand what you are saying, but in all actuality the smaller cartridges are adequate, but definitely not the most effective. Tom."

What is your definition of "most effective"?

If the rifle does the job you use it for and does it well...in this case a 6.5x55 Swede...why would you say it is only adequate? Everything I have shot this year has died fast. I have hunted with bigger calibers and can tell you the rifle I used this year did every bit as good a job as the larger caliber rifles. So why are the bigger calibers the most effective?
 
Deerhunter61,

I agree with you 100%. I still use a 7mm rem mag, but it's not because I think I need all that power to kill a deer.

It's because I hunt some really open country, and somtimes I shoot at some pretty long distances. When the shots get out beyond 400 yards or so, I like to use something that shoots flat and hits hard. The recoil doesn't bother me.

I've never had a problem killing a deer with a .243 though. As long as I did my part, the rifle has always done it's part too.

Daryl
 
Bullet

The simple answer to me is "Bullet Efficiency". And you can also delve into bullet cost if you want to. A simple, non-expensive 165 grain bullet in a 30-06 will do the job every time. Yet all you hear about in the sub-calibers is that you need to use a certain type or more expensive bullet. I have guys tell me that if I am not spending $30-$40 a box for the expensive Barnes Bullets(for deer), then I am not "humanerly" shooting deer. But then I guess it is sexy to pay that much for ammo, and bullets(NOT FOR ME).

I handload and play around with bullets and cartridges for fun. I enjoy that. But I have a bunch of friends who shoot the "non-sexy" Walmart $10 a box 30-06 ammo, and have for 30 or 40 years. And all they do is bring home deer for the freezer. Nothing sexy about that, but highly efficient. They actualy brag on how little they shoot, and how much they save on their ammo. They actually think it is funny when they watch somebody pay $30 or more for a box of ammo to shoot a deer with. Does that make them right-NO. They should practice, but you can not argue with their success.

I shoot a lot of Big Bore rifles. And I honestly believe a bigger slow bullet is extremely more effective than a faster smaller bullet. And I believe diameter of the bullet is key. A 45-70 bullet going in is already over 100% expansion of the 22 caliber bullet, before it even expands. And I can cast a ton of big bore bullets for pennies on the dollar as compared to the "designer bullets".

And by adequate, all I am saying is that hunters will make the occasional bad shot. And when that happens I prefer to have the larger caliber cartridge. It does and will happen to all of us, if we hunt a lot.

Maybe I am just hard headed, and a throw back to older times. But I can tell you that I liked the older times better. Society is in the fast lane today, so I guess people just want "faster"???? Tom.
 
I used to go mule deer hunting with my grandfather when he was in his 70's He used a Remington 740 30-06 without fail every buck one shot in the neck, the buck dropped where it was like it was poleaxed. Farthest shot 150 yards, I know I had to drag it to the road.
 
HOGGHEAD,

I use the same bullets in my .243 that I use in my 7mm Rem Mag. Speer SPBT's. They were about $13 per hundred bullets last time I bought handloading supplies, but that's been a couple of years.

I've shot more than just deer with 'em, too. Bear, antelope, elk, and buffalo go down fast and hard when hit through the chest with the 145 gr 7mm version. I don't shoot the large critters with a .243, but the bullets work equally well on deer.

I don't laugh at the guys who buy expensive bullets. I've used a few Speer Grand Slam bullets myself. If they give the shooter confidence in their firearm's capabilities, then maybe they're worth it.

The big slow bullets work well to, but a dead animal is dead. It really makes little difference if they pass quickly with either bullet. In truth, I've found that the large, slow bullets tend to kill a bit slower, but they damage less meat many times, too.

Daryl
 
Shot placement has priority. An elephant shot in the eye with a .223 will die faster than the same animal shot in the "dirty end" with a .50BMG.


Be accurate and patient FIRST, then have a caliber up to the job.


Of course, a higher penetrating caliber or cartridge can make some shot placements acceptable when it would not otherwise be.
 
When I was a kid my only options were a Mod. 75 Win. Target or a Sears/Stevens 12 ga. SbyS. I always chose the .22 w/CCI MiniMags for deer. Hit them in the eye and they don't go anywhere, good inside of 100 yds.
 
A few years ago, there was a fantastic article on shot placement in the Gun Digest Magazine. The rifle/caliber in question was the .243 Win. I read the article and it got me started shooting and killing much more efficiently. One of the first things with anything you are hunting is knowing the physical make up (anatomy)of your game. I mean exactly where everything is. Neck column, heart etc. A pig ain't the same as a deer for sure and you will **** a lot of hogs if you are shooting for the heart area on a hog if you don't know where it is. That was one of the first things I learned. Second, in my opinion is shooting precise. I rarely take a shot that is not going to go exactly where I want it to go, eg. running deer at 150 yards shooting offhand. I don't do it unless the deer presents its self for the shot. The guy that wrote the article is from somewhere in the NE where the deer are monsters. You might have seen a couple of posts where I mentioned shooting 4-5 inches fwd the shoulder INLINE with the neck. With the .243 he stated that within an inch of the neck column, the .243 has enough energy to snap the column. OK, don't jump on the range vs energy wagon yet. Reasonable range...OK. I hunted with my .243 Sako for Texas white tail in my area and SW Texas as well as for hogs etc. I have an extremely accurate .243 with better than good glass, and have never had a deer take a step using the method I read about.
I am a precise shooter period. I had eye surgery a few years back and the doc said no shooting....Booooo. Hunting season 3 days from that time. I said "doc, you know rifles?" Yes. Can I shoot my Savage 12BVSS 22-250 this season. No recoil. "Yes, but nothing more!!" OK so I shot a huge white tail at 135 yds dead in the neck with it. Bullet, 55 gr, took out the spine and lodged itself in the bone. When I shot he just disappeared from the ridge??? Oh my. Waited a bit while scoping the area then went where last seen. I found him right where he stood before with a tiny hole just barely dripping blood. Shot three more deer that season with that rifle using shot That is my motto...shoot accurately with whatever I have in my hand that day period and I make sure they are before using them.
By the way, I do believe in bullet construction, BC and SD for the range and job at hand. Some of the deadliest bullets I use are the bonded and the Barnes triple shock. Bullet retention for max penetration and energy. Just my .02. I like this thread. Good input....I do listen and try to learn.
 
While perfect shot placement is an ideal goal it does not always happen. We pull the shot some, the beast moves etc.

Thus the bullet that makes the largest deepest wound is more likely to hit a vital spot than a bullet that makes the smaller wound.

Of course we don't want a round where the blast or recoil causes a poor aim. Its a complicated set of facts for each of us to weigh.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top