What's the ethical limit for x39?

People hunt deer, bear, boar, and even Elk with compound bows on a routine basis. Others do it with much more primitive bows.
Click to expand...

comparing apples and oranges, bullets and arrows works in very different ways
 
I have hunted pigs in Estonia and we were handed ratty civilian aks (regular rifle stock without pistolgrip) I did not care for it, when shooting driven game you want a rifle that suits you, that swings well, that shoulders well and you got a good cheekrest, the aks with some fixed 2,5x scope did not:D, and the complete disregard for the driving dogs really got to me ):

I mean it works, everything works if you hit them correctly

but I do think that an intermediate round is for people and smaller game, for big game a battlerifle round

30-30 barely gets by nowadays with the new hornady stuff otherwise i'd say 308win, 270win or 6,5x55

there is a certain faiblesse to get away with hunting with a lesser round and I don't get it
 
comparisons

Blatently declaring that the 30-30 is marginal, and anything less is inappropriate, is a bit much and a bit of trolling. But I'll bite. By doing so, such calibers .44 and .357 mag, .44-40, ( carbines ) are also insufficient, as well as the .45 cal muzzleloaders with roundball or sabot, and .50 cal saboted (.429 slug) muzzleloader loaded light, etc.

Folks are having far to much success on whitetails, hogs and small bears with any of the above combinations, as well as the x39mm round, to support such an arguement. Proper bullet placement (good shooting) and bullet construction are the first keys to success on game, and the 30-30 and the x39 are no exception.

While I do not believe that a .223 is an ideal whitetail cartridge and there are better choices, I also am of the opinion that many folks are severely overgunned when it comes to whitetails. Whether I shoot my deer with a .44mag or x39mm carbine, or .243, .270, 30 '06 or a .308, if I shoot well and use an expanding bullet, I get a deer on the ground anywhere from DRT to 50 yds or so (sometimes more) regardless. Yes, the wounding sometimes seems more severe with the "real" deer cartridges, but the reaction and results with the animals are the same. If I had a tape all the shots and reactions from whitetails that I've taken with the above mix, there is no way whatsoever one could tell what rifle/caliber I used. Some drop at the shot, some do a death sprint, all end up in the freezer.

Ethical limits for the x39? Game up to 250 lbs, maybe 300 lbs, range about 175 yds, given a rifle that will group and with a worthwhile zero.
 
I have hunted deer with a 357 and it is a capable deer cartridge from a 6 inch barrel out to 50 yards. There is no way I would use it at 100 yards, though I am capable of hitting the vitals at that range. It simply doesn't carry enough speed or power at that range.
I have hunted with a 30-30 but it's limit is close to 150 yards. The 7.62x39 has less velocity (with the same weight bullet) than the 30-30 and the 300 BlackOut has even less velocity.
I have hunted deer with a 30-06 and limit my shots to around 200 yards. The gun and bullet is usable against game at twice that distance but with all the variables I limit the shot to 200 yards.

I'm sure we each have limitations on how far we are willing to use any given gun on game. Sometimes that limit is due to personal ability and sometimes it is based on realistic data on the "killing power" of the combination of gun and shooter, and sometimes it is the real limit on the potential of the gun and cartridge.
 
30-30 v. 7.62x39mm

One of the issued to watch out for when comparing velocities with the above two calibers from the catalogs, is to pay attention to barrel length. A common tendency for many years was to list velocities of assorted calibers from test barrels that were not reflective of actual sporting rifle barrel lengths.

As an example, many, if not most, velocities for "rifle" cartridges were taken from 24" test barrels, which yielded speeds higher than what the shorter barrels from sporting rifles could produce. Consider the M94, in its most common guise, has a 20" barrel. Many other bolt sporters in that era were coming off the line with 22" barrels.....though we seem to be back to 24" in some models these days.

Point is, compare actual velocities. These days, a chronograph is available at reasonable prices to anybody that really wants one. Mine makes a liar out of me all the time. Here are some velocities from my x39 rifles with assorted loads:
Ruger 77MkII w/ 20" bbl
135 gr Sierra PSP..........................2130 fps (mild)
110 gr Speer Spire Pt....................2330(mild)
123 gr Hornady SST.......................2225
150 gr Hornady RN (for .30WCF).....1900 (mild)

Ruger Mini 30 w/ 18.5 bbl
135 gr Sierra..........................2080(mild)
135 gr Sierra...........................2182( hotter)
110 Speer................................2100(mild)
123 Zombie Max factory (SST).....2080
150 gr Hornady RN, .30WCF.........1800(mild)

As the 135 gr Sierra bullet is no more, no point in experimenting with the few I have left, but I believe that I could safely get that bullet weight over 2250 fps from the bolt rifle. At its rather relaxed 2130, I killed a whopper 180 lb whitetail with a heart shot that ran about 50 yds, a shoulder shot 2-1/2 year old was DRT, as was another whopper at 175 that broke the spine. I also believe I could get the 150 gr 30-30 type bullets over 2000 fps from the bolt rifle, but have not tried. The SST at 2225 is pretty near a max load, and bamaboy took a doe with it this year with good wounding and through and through performance with a 60 yd double lung broadside shot. That doe ran into a nearby fence but would not have gone far.

I just don't push the Mini, but results with it are pretty much the same, despite its lower velocities.
 
i guess deer have grown kevler skin since my grandfather had shot several ton of them with a winchester 30-30 carbine, starting in 1913 and i think the older ammo was a 150gr bullet at 2000-2100fps. put the bullet where it needs to go and you will be eating venison. eastbank.
 
The 30-30 used to be the most popular hunting cartridge but it has been replaced with the venerable 30-06.
The 30-30 is still a good deer cartridge within the limits it is used under.
This discussion was about the 7.62x39 and the ethical limits that might govern its use as a deer cartridge. Without more than stating the facts that it is a lower capacity case than the 30-30 and it produces velocities under those of the 30-30 one would assume that its ethical use would be somewhat under that of the 30-30. Just take the two cartridges with the same bullets fired from a gun with the same action and you get a reduction of power in the 7.62x39 from the 30-30.
The range limit on the 30-30 is generally regarded as 150 yards. It would seem to me that the 7.62x39 would have a somewhat lower acceptable ethical range. Keeping the pressure for each cartridge within its norms. The limit of powder capacity keeps the 7.62x39 at lower velocities than the 30-30, especially with heavier bullets.
 
Shootist, the range limitation of the thutty-thuttty is due more to the typically-crappy iron sights than to the ballistics.

Pretty much the same for the typical SKS or AK.
 
I think the ethical distance for any gun has more to do with the shooter then the gun/ammo.

I grew up hunting with my grandmother's cousin. He did all his hunting, large and small game (white tails and hogs were the biggest critters) with a 25-20 pump. He was good with it. We weren't what you call rich, but he was worse off then we were. He fed his family on what he hunted and grew.

They always had meat, not sure he paid a lot of attention to hunting seasons, but back then game wardens didn't mess with subsistence hunters and in reality that is what he was.

I have a 25-20 Rem Model 25, its a great little rabbit gun but I don't think it would be my number one choice for a deer rifle.

Yeah a heavier rifle would have been better, but he didn't have one and couldn't afford one. But he could shoot, and that's what counts regardless of what rifle one shoots.
 
The 30-30 is more than adequate within it's limitations. A family in our church showed a video of one of their son's (he was about age 12 or so at the time) take a mature bull moose with his 30-30 trapper. Now they are avid hunters and his dad was right behind his son's shoulder videoing everything, and the moose turned out onto the trail they were stalking on at about 30 yards away and one shot and the moose immediately fell under it's own weight dead. Now if I remember right the moose was facing them so the shot was right dead center chest shot.

It's more about the circumstances (shooter, distance, orientation of game, etc) than energies. As an ethical hunter who can stalk game, I would imagine a 30-30 could take any game in the lower 48 with the right shot. But there are a lot of hunters who aren't willing to stalk game to shoot within the limitations of a lower energy cartridge, so they go and buy a 300 win mag and fire away, which will help but not alleviate problems associated with a poor shot situation.

I don't buy that the 30-30 is a poor choice for a deer cartridge, it's filled more freezers of meat than any other cartridges I bet.
 
I think the 30-30 is an excellent deer gun. Even shooting an elk wouldn't bother me too much but I would stay within a range that the round was up to the task.
Shoot a moose at 30 yards? I might not but it is a decent range for the 30-30. Would you take that shot at 200 yards? I wouldn't and I don't believe it would be ethical for even the best shooter with a 30-30.(unless he could put the round into the brain or spinal cord)
All guns have their limits due to their velocity and ammunition limitations. As long as you work within their limitations every one is good to take game.
 
Well, I think there's been a bit of thread creep and perhaps the OP was not so clear, although some posters got the point I was trying to get at.

I'll reiterate the situation with a hypothetical scenario: Your family is starving, their freezer is empty and you have a single round of x39.

Suddenly at 100m you see a rabbit next to a small deer, next to a larger deer then a wild boar, the a moose etc... You get the point.

You have one shot to kill the biggest animal you can to feed your family, but if you don't bring it down you'll not get anything.

So which animal do you feel confident the x39 would fell with a single shot (ie ethically kill) reliably enough to get the most meat for your freezer?
 
Well if that's the case the rabbit has to small of a vital area depending on how accurate the rifle is.

I would shoot the biggest animal I was comfortable with. I don't know how to kill a boar so moose or deer.

I have a family friend that only head shoots game. I'm not a fan of it but he thinks an eyesocket is like a funnel to the brain. And he kills enough to feed his family. I prefer a heart/lung shot.
 
I would most definitely go for the moose and if it didn't drop there track it until I found it. It's only 100 yards away. Unless it's in thick brush with a clear shot I would be more hesitant as it could get somewhere without me being able to see it without a blood trail.

Also depends on the bullet if FMJ I would be more apprehensive, if SP, I stand by my answer, there have been lots if success with x39 SP ammo on deer sized game.
 
Probably the moose. I shot a good sized deer in the shoulder at about 70 yards that was trotting past me and it broke the shoulder and dropped it right there. I shot a big doe right between the eyes at about 80 yards with the same gun, but I did have a log to rest on. Last year I shot a doe at about 60 yards through the lungs. It went no farther than any I shot with a 30-30 or a .303 Savage. Savage used to do ads for the .303 with moose in mind. It was really nothing more than a 30-30. If you do not have faith in a cartridge, DON'T USE IT.
 
The 7.62 X 39 is a battle cartridge that has been chambered in some sporting rifles. Despite its origins, it kills deer sized animals quite well out to approx 150 yards or so. But it is not the equivalent of a 30-30 carbine loaded with 170 grain ammo. I doubt if the 7.62 X 39 is a great choice for taking wild hogs except at fairly close distances.

But this cartridge still has a lot going for it: moderate recoil, good accuracy in the right rifles, and affordable ammo. It's bullets are designed for rapid expansion at these moderate velocities which greatly adds to killing power through tissue and organ damage.

I'm a big fan of the CZ 527 carbine!

Jack
 
KragWy said.
"I think the ethical distance for any gun has more to do with the shooter then the gun/ammo."

Read that line 5 times and let it sink in.

A man who is very skilled with his ordinary tools will beat an unskilled man with excellent tools 99 times out of 100.

A man with a 7.62X39 who is very skilled in it's use will know from using it that his distance is limited by the shedding of the bullets velocity, so I am not trying to day a 7.62X39 is a good 800 yard deer rifle, even if the accuracy was up to the task.
But any man who has shot his rifle enough to be able to use it, up to the rifle's ballistic limits is gong to be someone that brings home the meat a LOT more than most others do.

Given a proper bullet, I would guess the range to be about 300-350 yards on deer. If men were honest, they would admit a 300 yard ability will cover about 90% of all the shots you will get in your life.

Not every hunter, but most hunters shoot closer, MOST of the time.
 
I have a Bushmaster AR in 7.62x39 and a 16"barrel. I put a holo sight on it and have used it to chase deer in dark timber when I pull a tag for that area. I would be willing to take shots out to 100 yards without thinking, but the usual deer encounter distance is short, brief and 50 yards or so.

I wouldn't use that setup to lob one out 150 yards, and I have a 30-06 and 260 Rem if I were hunting more open ground.
 
It is a respectable question.

I believe we consider minimizing the suffering of our prey,not wasting our prey and,as you pointed out,not wasting the opportunity to feed a hungry family.
All reasonable parameters.

And so I ask,how close can you get to your game?
How precisely can you place your shot?
What is your bullet weight and construction? Or ,in other words,What penetration and wound channel can you expect?
How well do you know your animal's anatomy? Can you see the organs inside?
Are you doing surgery or poking holes in a brown spot?

What were the ethical considerations for a Native Amarican with a precious stone point,a split shaft,and a bow made of natural materials on hand?
Probably not so very different.

The folks who killed grizzlies and bison with a patched round ball,or a 38-40,or 44-40 early Winchester had no ballistic chart. They had a gun.

The often mentioned Karamojo Bell harvested thousands of elephants. Many with a 7x57,with the ammo of the day.
A seat of the pants guess at ballistics would be a 175 gr bullet at 2400 to 2500 fps. Your 7.62 x 39 is approximately a 123 gr bullet at nearly 2400 fps.

I have the luxury of choosing firearms from my safe like golf clubs."I think this calls for my 5 iron" I have a grocery store and a pickup truck.I have the option to not shoot.

Suppose the rifle is an old...what? Marlin or Remington or Winchester,in 25-20 or 32-20.Arguably,small game cartridges.
It might be Grandpa got his deer with the rifle every year for 30 years.

It also might be Grandpa used a .22 to drop a steer when he butchered.

Iknow it takes a certain amount of experience to gain confidence...and sometimes experience is bad experience...

But I have a respect for someone who uses one rifle successfully for a lifetime because "That's the one I always use". Its like the Native American's bow.

I'm skeptical of the guy who pursues a stunt with the game animal bearing all the risk.

I might be the one with the problem,but I'm skeptical of the guy who leaves his 30-30,or 308 ,in the safe and chooses the 25-20 just for the yucks and bragging rights of how little of a gun he can use.

In the book "Use Enough Gun", Robert Ruark (its been a long time) had something to say about using a .220 Swift on African game.

Mr Pond,you will find the ethical choice by looking at yourself in the mirror.

Whether it works,or not,and what it means to you,will not be found on these pages.
Or in any of my opinions.

Pulling a trigger is like that.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top