POLL-- Bare minimum cal. for deer?

[SHOOTALL]

Being in construction and reading bare min. makes me think of building codes as they are the bare min. Then think why would someone want the bare min ? why not want better ?

[BBF]

Being in construction and reading bare min. makes me think of building codes as they are the bare min. Then think why would someone want the bare min ? why not want better ?

The only legit. reason I can see is that all you got is a 22CF or that is all you can handle, and I'm not sure about the second reason.

[Doublebass73]

So if year after year I take my deer rifle out and shoot one shot at a target and hit where I aim then go deer hunting and kill my limit of deer I did it wrong because I did not waste more ammo ?

All the power to you if you're that good that you don't need to practice. You should get into competitive 3 gun or cowboy competitions if you're that good, you could make a career out of it. Unfortunately most people don't have ninja skills like you do and therefore need to practice to put an ethical kill shot on a deer. Many deer are lost every year because people don't practice and make a bad shot. We all know people who have done this, I'm sure you do as well. An acquaintance of mine lost one last season because he made a bad shot and he's the type who takes 1 shot per year from the bench to check his scope. He was using a 30-30 which I think you'll agree is well above the bare minimum.

[SHOOTALL]

No super skills , but I have been shooting over 50 years some guns almost that long . I did shoot competition and enjoyed it. I live in a place I can shoot when I want day or night and I do with handguns and 22 rifles. I don't shoot my deer rifles as much mainly to reduce wear. one is over 60 years old , one over 40 , one over 30. They have all been shot a lot in younger times. Now ammo cost is too high to waste ammo.
 See my post about WM hunters I think it is much like your post.
 My point is there are hunters that honed their skill and with in reason will do just fine. There was a WW2 sniper on TV that was 90 and given a gun that was spot on hit targets at 1000 yards. He had the skills like many seasoned hunters do or skeet shooters , IDPA shooters etc. 800 to 1500 reputations will teach the muscles and memory will not fade as fast. So like I said if the shooter and rifle can hit the target where it is supposed to on the first shot it would indicate gun , ammo and shooter are dialed in .
 I shot IHMSA for several years and got good with a handgun out to 500 yards. My favorite gun was a revolver. After 10 years of not shooting long range with a revolver I was at a 500 yard range and had a 7.5 inch redhawk so I tried it at 500 yards and after a few shots was hitting a 18 " X 24 " plate . So from then on when at the range I took a few shots mostly hitting it. Known range and known hold not a great feat. So one day a I take a guy to the range and after shooting rifles I take out the ruger and he ask what am I doing. I say shooting at the 500 yard plate . He said if you can hit that i'll give you 100 bucks. I said can I have two shots . Later he said he knew I wasn't kidding when I said two shots. I hit it the second shot barely missed the first. I handed him the gun and maybe 6-7 shots later he was mostly hitting. If you know how to shoot then you can shoot. Maybe long range or fast  takes practice but normal shooting is not hard if you have done it for years. And no I did not take his money. I aimed at the base of a tree about six feet over the plate which my front sight blocked out 

[Doublebass73]

That's a good point Shootall and given your age and experience I have no doubt that you can do it. You've had a lot of trigger time over the years which I think is key. I also know people like you that can do it as well. I know a hunter in his 80's that doesn't shoot much these days but did as a youngster and he gets a deer every year. I did see that show you mentioned about the WWII sniper making that 1000 yard shot, it was amazing. I personally don't have that much experience so I have to practice so I try to stick with calibers that are affordable to shoot plus I reload. The only point I was trying to make was that the majority of hunters out there are not accomplished shooters and could definitely stand to practice more. That to me seems more important than the caliber but I do know some guys that get away with using more powerful guns to make up for their lack of shooting ability. Another friend of mine told me he switched from a 30-30 to an '06 because he lost so many deer after shooting them with the 30-30. In his mind he thinks the 30-30 isn't powerful enough when the reality is he doesn't practice enough to make a clean kill shot.

[Swampman]

There are guys on the 24 Hour Campfire that have killed hundreds of deer with the .223.  Bullets are a lot better than they use to be.

[charles p]

The AR craze will change the standards.  Personally, I vote 243.

[spikehorn]

Personally I don't like tracking. I use predominately a 45-70. I personally wouldn't go smaller that 7mm. I like 7mm-08 and 280

[flintlock]

Personally I don't like tracking. I use predominately a 45-70. I personally wouldn't go smaller that 7mm. I like 7mm-08 and 280

Deer can easily be dropped in their tracks with calibers smaller than a 45-70, I've done it dozens of times with my .243...   
 

[Drilling Man]

  My brother who knows little about ballistics, has used a LOT of different guns/cartridges over the years, from a .223 on up.  He shoots up to 8 deer a year and only compares how deer react when rib shot with the different cartridges.  He uses factory loads...

  When he had a .444 Marlin, he liked the performance pretty good, but he kept hearing how the 45/70 was better and as he has plenty of disposal income, he traded for one.  First thing he told me was how disappointed he was with the 45/70, as on average, rib shot deer ran a LOT further than with the .444...

  I think he had that 45/70 only two years when he traded for a .450 Marlin.  HE said the .450, for the most part, fixed the deer running off problem, but had a LOT more recoil.

  My brother is a above average game shot and I believe what he tells me, as he has no agenda to keep on what works for him and what doesn't.  AND his findings fall right in with my experiences too...

  BTW, my brother has been shooting a 7mm Rem. Mag for several years now, and he says he really likes the way he can take longer shots and have good clean kills.  I don't know what brand of ammo or bullet weight he's using in it...

  There's no question the slooow ones kill game, but there's NO question that "speed" kills, and the faster cartridges with good bullets, kill a LOT faster...

  DM

[Cheesehead]

In support of all the AR guys out there, myself included, I strongly believe 223 is adequate.

Cheese

[Spanky]

I've killed lots of 'em with my 22 Hornet. Shot placement is key. If you don't have a perfect shot don't take it. Matter of fact that holds true with any round not just a 22.



Spanky

[spikehorn]

Personally I don't like tracking. I use predominately a 45-70. I personally wouldn't go smaller that 7mm. I like 7mm-08 and 280

Deer can easily be dropped in their tracks with calibers smaller than a 45-70, I've done it dozens of times with my .243...   

it's mostly just me, I like the 45-70. using Remington 405gr green box I've never had one got to far

[SHOOTALL]

This has been an interesting topic. I know a 22 lr or 223 will kill deer when all goes right. But when we enter the field for a hunt not for survival or such would it not be better to carry a rifle that would also work when the chips are down ? As example - I killed deer with a 30 carbine for several years. Most were does and small buck. Then one day in thick cover a nice 6 point buck comes by at about full speed. I made six shots and had six hits on the front shoulder. My son killed the deer with a 30-30 . None of the 30 carbine bullets went deep enough to do the deed. I have not hunted deer with a carbine since even though it had taken deer before.

[BBF]

  ...........
.........................
  When he had a .444 Marlin, he liked the performance pretty good, but he kept hearing how the 45/70 was better and as he has plenty of disposal income, he traded for one.  First thing he told me was how disappointed he was with the 45/70, as on average, rib shot deer ran a LOT further than with the .444...

 

I found the same results. When I had a 444 Marlin I used the Hdy. 265 gr FN and that bullet made short work on moose and bear. Even my lowly 44 Rem Mag drops them(deer) faster than the 45-70 and I can shoot a full house 44 Rem without dislocating my shoulder.