What's the ethical limit for x39?

[Husqvarna]

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,

So why are you handicapping yourself?

What happens when you only wound that animal and it takes of and the next time you catch up to the animal or see if when you have tracked it for acouple of hours it is standing up in a clearing 250 yards away

can you take the shot your are ethically obligated to and be sure of putting it out of your misery?

 

[ShootistPRS]

When I was pistol hunting I never had to use two shots. I don;t shoot unless I can make a clean kill. I wouldn't take the 250 yard shot even with my rifle. I limit my shots to a range and shot that kills. Only one deer that I shot moved more than 25 yards. He was dead when I found him a few minutes later. That was the first deer I shot in the heart lung area.
I have walked away from more shots than I ever took. Either I wasn't ready to shoot or the deer wasn't ready to be shot. I am not a good hunter but I never take a shot I can't make.

 

[HiBC]

HVA,and Shooter
You two have perfectly illustrated my point.
Shooter HAS exercised restraint,skill,and discipline. He has a series of clean kills. He can look in the mirror . No regret.

HVA,your sentiments are perfectly honorable! You can look in the mirror!

And nothing I say,or you say,makes any real difference in the case of Mr Pond.
He is doing fine,in gathering information.He works to develop skill with his rifle.
I trust he will do just fine.I probably would not encourage taking moose with the 7.62x39.If my family was hungry,my only riflewas a 7.62x39,and a moose was there....??? I might see how close I could get.(I do not poach)
For each of us,we own the outcome,success or failure,every time we shoot.
Internet approval ? The story? Don't matter.
In the face in the mirror,we see the good shot,or the fail.

We do our best.

 

[PlatinumCore16]

I do not have any experience with killing deer with either the 30-30 or the x39mm. However I would submit that I think that the shape of the bullet, not just JHP vs. FMJ matters as well. The 30-30 was a lever rifle that used a non-pointed bullet as opposed to the x39mm which would've been firing a soft point bullet or a hollow point (which actually doesn't act like a scoop if you look at the aerodynamics) which would be closer to a spitzer shape. Now does that make a lot of difference, idk I'd actually have to take it to paper, but I would venture a guess that the 30-30 and the x39mm are closer than a lot of people here are guessing.

Granted this directly affects velocity, so looking on paper (7.62 source 30-30 source), the 30-30 has over 800ft-lbs (energy source) out past 200yds whilst the 7.62 has that just under 200yds. However the flat nosed bullet vs. the less aerodynamic bullet *could* result in better accuracy from the more aerodynamic bullet.

I guess what I'm saying is that there's more to it than just the energy, the rifle, or the shooter. But I think you've got enough information to say that both the 30-30 and 7.62x39mm are humane to kill a deer out to at least 150yds. Beyond that, well it would appear that YMMV.

 

[ShootistPRS]

The shape of a bullet won't determine accuracy at moderate range. Terminal ballistics shows that a larger flatter nose is a more effective bullet than the spitzer shape at lower velocities. With any good hunting bullet designed for the velocities used it shouldn't make much difference.
I'm fairly conservative when it comes to hunting ranges and I have be sure that my first shot will be well placed and the bullet will perform on target to provide for a humane kill. I would limit my shooting with either round to near 100 yards but I recognize the the gun, with an appropriate bullet and a well placed shot, is capable of humanely dispatching a deer at around 150 yards. Beyond that and you are either very good, using a special bullet and target area or too blind to see the limitations of your ammo or skills. If you can accurately place a light, fast expanding, bullet into the head or neck then you could easily expand the range to the limits of your abilities.
The ammunition has limits but those limits vary with shot placement and bullet construction.

 

[Pond James Pond]

OK, so a mixture of responses.

I guess some might ask why I'm asking and I'll explain where I'm coming from.

I have no hunting experience. I'm an adequate shot, mostly but under pressing conditions such as hunting I'm doubtless worse.

I don't want an animal to suffer. Frankly, I don't want to kill but I think it's something I need to learn: you never know what life will bring.

There is endless debate by people more experienced than me about what is or is not enough for a given game animal. Some say .223 is plenty, others say no less than 30-06. Me? I say nothing...

In Estonia the hunting regs only make statements about bullets. Nothing else apart from specifying centrefire for large game. Bullets must be >/=6.5mm, >/=130gr and be SP or HP (no FMJ).

I have a .308 and I have a x39. I could load to those specs with either. Legally, I could shoot anything on my list with either assuming the bullets are as stated.

Ethically I would not. Instead, I'm trying to gauge the "efficacious range" of x39. Not in terms of distance, but in terms of animal. What could it easily take down?

I gave 100m as a set distance because most rifles will shoot accurately out to that range, but in the forest near where my country home is, it would more likely be 20-70m and the main game there is boar, deer and moose.

Hence why I tried to phrase my question as I did...

 

[doofus47]

100m to 150 M max would be a very good outer limit to set with that round.
With deer, you can often get well within 100m as your skill increases.

Pond:

I don't want an animal to suffer. Frankly, I don't want to kill but I think it's something I need to learn: you never know what life will bring.

1. don't want an animal to suffer.
This is understandable. This is right. The point is to put food on the table, not pull the wings off of flies. I've only been a big game hunter for a decade or so and I've killed a couple deer using bow and rifle. All of them were quick. None were pain free for the deer. But let me offer some broader perspective: last year while elk hunting, I heard a mountain lion kill a deer in the middle of the night within 50 yards of my tent. It was not painless and the struggle went on for much longer than it's ever taken for a deer to die by my mechanical means. If people tell you hunting is cruel, I will assure you that the natural world (even without the input of humans) is more cruel.

2. I think it's something I need to learn:
It's an important thing to know for both functional reasons (b/c we don't know what the future will bring) and psychological reasons. If everyone (in my humble and often wrong opinion) learned this lesson, the world would be a better place. It sounds weird, but if people understood the cost of living is paid by something else dying (see above cat/deer story to recognize that this isn't just a human issue), then people would lead much more focused lives.

Good luck with the hunting.

 

[HiBC]

I first suggest you learn about the anatomy of your game animal.
Instead of shooting at the brown hide of the animal,"see inside" the animal,and shoot at an organ.That helps get the angles right.
I don't shoot at moving animals.

I don't know all the animals you may hunt. My opinion is not worth much,but I think,with good shooting and proper bullet,you will have good power on a 50 to 60 kg deer sort of critter.
Having said that,you have a wonderful hunting rifle in your 308.

I can think of few situations where I would choose a 7.62x39 if I had the option of a .308....particularly on any large deer or moose.

I don't know if this will be worth the investment to you,but try Amazon for a book "The Perfect Shot" . It shows pictures of a variety of animals ..their organ locations from angles and suggested target areas.
Its been a long time,I did not buy the book,but you may find it useful.
A pig,for example,is not quite built the way intuition may suggest.

I know a .308 can deliver clean,one shot kills at 300 yards on an elk .And it is not "Too much gun" for a 50 kg deer at 50 yards.

If you take out the heart/lung area with your .308...and a well place shot through the ribs will turn the heart/lungs to soup,you don't lose much meat.

I think on deer at modest ranges,the x39 would be adequate. "Boar" can mean many things,from 60 kg feral pigs to 600 lb tuskers!
I have never shot one. A shot behind the ear is preferred by many. I'm sure it could make dressing easier.A hit behind the ear with a x39 should work fine but I see no draw back in the .308.I would choose the 308 unless thes pigs are the size of a large dog.

Moose? Hands down,.308,and perhaps a 180 gr bullet,or a tougher 165,like a Nosler.

The 130 gr bullets of a x39 are a bit short on sectional density,which plays a part in penetration.

 

[Pond James Pond]

Having said that,you have a wonderful hunting rifle in your 308.

I can think of few situations where I would choose a 7.62x39 if I had the option of a .308....particularly on any large deer or moose.

From a fixed position, yes, my .308 is far better but at 6.5kg and scoped, it is not good for brush and woodland. The VZ is light and manoeuvrable.

 

[ShootistPRS]

I would use the 7,62x39 on hogs out to 75 to 100 yards without a doubt.
Deer, assuming they are not bigger than 250 pounds and you know where to place a shot from any perspective angle I would also go along with, out to the same distance. When you mention Moose you should mention the size of the animal you are targeting. In North America moose get six feet (2 meters) tall at the shoulder and weigh up to 1500 pounds and more (680 kilos). The Moose is not a target I would shoot with the 7,62x39 unless it was the only gun I had and the moose was attacking. These are big majestic animals that deserve respect when harvesting. Even your 308 is on what I would call a minimum cartridge to be used only at close range. I tend to be very conservative so there are likely to be others who might argue. I would recommend the moose needs at least your 308 and leave the 7,62x39 for the smaller animals.

 

[Bartholomew Roberts]

The range limit on the 30-30 is generally regarded as 150 yards.

Generally regarded by who? You've mentioned this in several threads. At 200yds, a .30-30 has between 800-1000 ft/lbs of energy and good penetration. That's a heavier bullet, with more velocity and energy than the .357 you mentioned hunting with has at its muzzle - so how did you arrive at this arbitrary 150yd limit?

 

[ShootistPRS]

Bartholomew Roberts
Quote:
The range limit on the 30-30 is generally regarded as 150 yards.
Generally regarded by who? You've mentioned this in several threads. At 200yds, a .30-30 has between 800-1000 ft/lbs of energy and good penetration. That's a heavier bullet, with more velocity and energy than the .357 you mentioned hunting with has at its muzzle - so how did you arrive at this arbitrary 150yd limit?

I'm old and been at this a long time with others who have hunted for a long time before me. I didn't have to arrive at it. I learned it from my elders who hunted with the cartridge in guns that were older than I.

You keep quoting energy numbers like it is from a religious text. How much energy does it take to kill a deer? It takes darn little energy to break neck bones if you can hit them. How much does trajectory play into your hunting experience? It plays a great deal into my hunting. I'm not interested in the numbers, I just want to be able to hit what I aim at with enough bullet to kill cleanly. Those energy values don't mean spit.

 

[Husqvarna]

it would more likely be 20-70m and the main game there is boar, deer and moose.

But that is the thing

that is planning for the ideal situation (even if it is the most likely scenario) in an ideal situation

I think the what if is more important, hence I have a problem with handgun, bowhunting and so on.

if you believe that 20-70 meters is what you are most likely to encounter and/or set out to do

the rifle and the optic you chose should (in my opinion) be what matters most not calibre

 

[HiBC]

Mr Pond:You might look at the post by Old Stony "Where to shoot a hog" here in the HUNT category.
A fair number of these were taken with a 6.5 Grendel,which is pretty much your 7.62x39 necked down. Some were using a 123 gr bullet. These folks have shot a LOT of hogs.

Actually...with one exception,that being a 44 Magnum handgun,the smallest rifle I have taken big game with is my .257 Ackley.ts only a 115 gr bullet,but at 3000 + fps.
I have not used a 7.62x39 to shoot any game. So,I can express my concerns,but not my experience.
While I might not select a 7.62 x 39 for anything larger or tougher than a deer,myself....Karamojo Bell killed thousands of elephants with a 7x57.
If you are shooting from 20 to 70 yards,if you can hit an apple at that range,and if you know the anatomy of your beast,and if you can keep from pullng the trigger until you KNOW your bullet will hit the right place, suppose its possible to cleanly kill a moose or boar with your rifle.

You will just have a narrow margin to live up to. The 10 ring!

 

[Bartholomew Roberts]

You keep quoting energy numbers like it is from a religious text.

Kinetic energy indicates the potential work a bullet can do. It isn't the only factor to look at; but a bullet is never going to do more work than it has energy.

How much energy does it take to kill a deer?

At 200yds, that is a 150hr hollow point travelling at almost 1700fps with the ballistic coefficient of a flying brick. It isn't going to have any trouble killing deer with adequate shot placement. As you yourself acknowledged when you mentioned hunting deer at 50yds with a 140gr .357 that has 1500fps at the muzzle.

How much does trajectory play into your hunting experience?

The difference in trajectory between the 150yds you claim as the max range and 200yds is about 5" for the Winchester Super-X 150gr hollow point. Using common dirt-clod shooter zeros, you'd be 4" low at 200yds, meaning that even a clod shooter holding dead center on an 8" heart/lung zone will clip the bottom of it at 200yds despite not knowing ballistics or being unable to range a target.

And if your issue is with the trajectory, what relevance is the discussion of .300 BLK or 7.62x39 being weaker rounds? This is the first time I've seen you mention trajectory in three different threads where you have made this comment.

 

[Pond James Pond]

if you believe that 20-70 meters is what you are most likely to encounter and/or set out to do

the rifle and the optic you chose should (in my opinion) be what matters most not calibre

The problem is that neither of my rifles; not the CZ550 not the CZ 858 were bought for hunting. One was for long range shooting (take a guess which!) and the other for Competitions/HD and "Who knows what's next?" in the geopolitical sphere.

However, despite note being ideal, I'd like to know what each could do if the need arose.

I do plan on getting my hunting licence and I would probably use the 550 from a stand. Failing that I have a semi 12g and a single shot 16g which would also do the job in wooded conditions.

But, the fact remains I'd like an idea of what the 858 can do if ever it needed to rise to the challenge.

You will just have a narrow margin to live up to. The 10 ring!

I think this would test my handloading skills as much if not more than my shooting skills!

(I haven't reloaded in ages.... I miss it! )