Author Topic: smallest caliber  (Read 1695 times)

0 Members and 4 Guests are viewing this topic.

Offline 25/06

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Member
  • *
  • Posts: 55
smallest caliber
« on: December 16, 2008, 03:03:04 PM »
here in ky we are allowed to deerhunt with any caliber muzzleloader. was wondering what you all thought would be the smallest caliber to shoot deer with im thinking my lil 32 is to small. am i wrong? im sure back in the day no meat craving mountain man would pass on a easy whitetail if all he had was a squirrel rifle. so what your opinions.?

Offline torpedoman

  • GBO Supporter
  • Trade Count: (7)
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2574
  • Gender: Male
Re: smallest caliber
« Reply #1 on: December 16, 2008, 04:54:04 PM »
they killed a lot of deer with 32's way back when , 32-20 does fine so why not, if you can hit in the vitals.
the nation that forgets it defenders will itself be forgotten

Offline Ladobe

  • Trade Count: (91)
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3193
Re: smallest caliber
« Reply #2 on: December 16, 2008, 05:14:20 PM »
Why not?   IMO it's not enough gun for deer.   Sure anything is possible, lots of deer have been killed by a 22 rimfire too, but do you really want to chance just wounding an animal to run off and die a slow death?    The 32 PRB is approximately somewhere between a 22LR and 22MAG at best.

Why do I feel this way?   Because I have shot a lot of varmints and predators with 32 AND 36 PRB's and at reasonable ranges making good hits.   The 32 is just not enough for the larger predators, the 36 does up to coyotes OK but can still be marginal without a good hit at fairly close range.

Why not instead use more gun, at least a 40, and a 45 would be even better.
Evolution at work. Over two million years ago the genus Homo had small cranial capacity and thick skin to protect them from their environment. One species has evolved into obese cranial fatheads with thin skin in comparison that whines about anything and everything as their shield against their environment. Meus

Offline 25/06

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Member
  • *
  • Posts: 55
Re: smallest caliber
« Reply #3 on: December 17, 2008, 03:00:44 AM »
always wanted to try the little 32 on deer. i was thinking no further than 30yrds and making a good head shot would do it. but i figured i would need something bigger. on our place we have does walk 5yrds away all the time offering easy kills. and i no that thousands of deer have been killed by 22 and i know thousands have been wounded as well

Offline 25/06

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Member
  • *
  • Posts: 55
Re: smallest caliber
« Reply #4 on: December 17, 2008, 03:23:47 PM »
would a 40 be a happy medium for squirrel to deer?

Offline filmokentucky

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • A Real Regular
  • ****
  • Posts: 535
  • Gender: Male
Re: smallest caliber
« Reply #5 on: December 17, 2008, 09:27:09 PM »
would a 40 be a happy medium for squirrel to deer?

The parameters are really vastly different  when choosing a gun for these animals, but I would go heavier rather than lighter--.44 or .45 caliber would be as light as I would go for deer. The .32 is a pipsqueak--nowhere near the .32-20 in power and the .32-20 is weak for a deer gun. My .32 is a great rabbit and squirrel gun, but I would be completely unethical if I tried to take a deer with it.
N.M.L.R.A. Member
T.M.A. Member
N.R.A. Endowment Life Member

Offline jgalar

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1231
  • Gender: Male
Re: smallest caliber
« Reply #6 on: December 18, 2008, 03:51:10 AM »
Shooting round balls I think the .32 and .36 are to small. Maxi balls were available for .32 and .36 calibers, but I haven't seen any in years.

Offline Swampman

  • GBO Supporter
  • Trade Count: (44)
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 16518
  • Gender: Male
Re: smallest caliber
« Reply #7 on: December 18, 2008, 04:17:05 AM »
here in ky we are allowed to deerhunt with any caliber muzzleloader. was wondering what you all thought would be the smallest caliber to shoot deer with im thinking my lil 32 is to small. am i wrong? im sure back in the day no meat craving mountain man would pass on a easy whitetail if all he had was a squirrel rifle. so what your opinions.?

.490
"Brother, you say there is but one way to worship and serve the Great Spirit. If there is but one religion, why do you white people differ so much about it? Why not all agreed, as you can all read the Book?" Sogoyewapha, "Red Jacket" - Senaca

1st Special Operations Wing 1975-1983
919th Special Operations Wing  1983-1985 1993-1994

"Manus haec inimica tyrannis / Ense petit placidam sub libertate quietem" ~Algernon Sidney~

Offline glshop20

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Avid Poster
  • **
  • Posts: 168
Re: smallest caliber
« Reply #8 on: December 18, 2008, 05:11:23 AM »
.45 minimum.  I don't know what the fascination with using the smallest ca./lightest bullet is.  It's not golf where you try for a low score.  I firmly believe that you should use the most potent loading that will shoot accurately and that you can shoot accurately.  A quick kill is what it is all about.   The saying "too much gun"  is a bunch of crap.  Dead is dead and if you put the shot where it belongs you will ruin very little meat.

Offline flintlock

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1405
  • Gender: Male
Re: smallest caliber
« Reply #9 on: December 18, 2008, 05:27:04 AM »
While a .32 will kill deer with a proper head shot, I wouldn't try it...I have killed several with a scoped .22, but I started squirrel hunting in the 60s and have killed hundreds with a head shot...The difference is that a scope makes shot placement much easier and most of the deer I shot were when I was much younger and they would come through eating acorns when I was sitting there squirrel hunting...This is not something that most hunters should do...I grew up in the country and we killed 20 pigs a year, dad would dispatch them with a .22 pistol, hit in the head, they would drop...

Now when it comes to black powder, I started in the mid 70s with a custom made .45 that I used about 15 years...I used a 75gr charge of FFF Goex and killed 25 or so deer with this rifle...A .45 ball will go through the lungs and stop on the off side, under the hide...Deer usually fall within 75-100 yards when hit this way...The problem isn't in the killing, it's in the tracking...With no exit, this is more difficult...Remember...The early settlers were hunting for food, so if a deer walked up, they would take the shot...We don't have much feedback on how many they lost and I can guarantee you that they were better trackers after the shot than we are...So it is totally different...

Yes, you can kill a deer with a .32-.40 caliber muzzleloader, but after losing a few deer with the .45, I built a .54...Now, I am getting an exit hole to assist me in tracking...The .45 has been converted to a .40 and it is used for squirrels, with 25grs of Goex, it is a tack driver and does the job with head shots on squirrels...


Offline Ladobe

  • Trade Count: (91)
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3193
Re: smallest caliber
« Reply #10 on: December 18, 2008, 05:47:42 AM »
Shooting round balls I think the .32 and .36 are to small. Maxi balls were available for .32 and .36 calibers, but I haven't seen any in years.

I have a full set of TC molds for RB and Maxiball, including for the 32 and 36.  Have hundreds of 32 maxi's cast I never did use in my 32 Cherokee, although my early CVA Squirrel 32 did shoot them pretty well.  

Yes they add some whomp, but mnaxi's in either caliboth would still be very marginal for deer.  

Any caliber ML can be used for squirrels if you load down and "bark" them, even a 54, 58, etc.   So I would pick the rifle to be enough for deer, and let the chips (bark) fall where they may on the squirrels.  
Evolution at work. Over two million years ago the genus Homo had small cranial capacity and thick skin to protect them from their environment. One species has evolved into obese cranial fatheads with thin skin in comparison that whines about anything and everything as their shield against their environment. Meus

Offline AtlLaw

  • Moderators
  • Trade Count: (58)
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 6405
  • Gender: Male
  • A good woman, nice bike and fine guns!
Re: smallest caliber
« Reply #11 on: December 18, 2008, 06:23:18 AM »
Richard
Former Captain of Horse, keeper of the peace and interpreter of statute.  Currently a Gentleman of leisure.
Nemo me impune lacessit

                      
Support your local US Military Vets Motorcycle Club

Offline 25/06

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Member
  • *
  • Posts: 55
Re: smallest caliber
« Reply #12 on: December 18, 2008, 04:51:16 PM »
im not into the whole smallest lightest calliber i can get. im just wanting to know the limits of my .32 i do have a couple of boxes of the maxi hunters. but like glshop20 says dead is dead.----
.45 minimum.  I don't know what the fascination with using the smallest ca./lightest bullet is.  It's not golf where you try for a low score.  I firmly believe that you should use the most potent loading that will shoot accurately and that you can shoot accurately.  A quick kill is what it is all about.   The saying "too much gun"  is a bunch of crap.  Dead is dead and if you put the shot where it belongs you will ruin very little meat.
   -----   so if i you can say "too much gun" is crap than why cant i say "too little gun" is crap if we go by the dead is dead rule. if i can get a a deer to meander into say 10yrds and i put a rb into its eye and it drops dead as elvis am i unethical? i know im going to hear about this but i cant help it i like to argue i guess.

Offline 25/06

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Member
  • *
  • Posts: 55
Re: smallest caliber
« Reply #13 on: December 18, 2008, 05:08:37 PM »
and another note. killing experts and the like say that the ultimate killing caliber is one that uses all its energy within the said target. so like the israelis favorite caliber the venerable .22 ,which expounds all its energy inside the skull when it is fired into the base of the brain and rattles around causing the maximum damage it can thus ending life. so if i was to kill a deer with a 32 at close range it could be said that i am being a more efficent killer. but it dosen't have an exit hole, which would help in tracking due to more blood loss, it will be harder to track. here at home it dont matter if you shoot one and it bang flops or it runs they all end up laying 200yrds down in the holler.

Offline glshop20

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Avid Poster
  • **
  • Posts: 168
Re: smallest caliber
« Reply #14 on: December 20, 2008, 07:33:05 AM »
Use whatever you feel comfortable with!!  It is kind of funny that many soldiers in Iraq and Afganastan would love to have a larger caliber weapon.  The reason being, it gets the job done better.  Even if you are a little off your mark.  Keep lots of batteries handy for those that are not hit well!!

Offline 25/06

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Member
  • *
  • Posts: 55
Re: smallest caliber
« Reply #15 on: December 20, 2008, 08:01:54 AM »
im not saying that a bigger caliber wouldn't work better just saying that if you want to go by dead is dead anything that kills is ok. mine not even saying that i would attempt to shoot a deer with a 32 i simple asked what my limitations were. i was looking for information.

Offline Foggy

  • Trade Count: (40)
  • A Real Regular
  • ****
  • Posts: 749
  • Gender: Male
  • If you die first we're going to split up your gear
Re: smallest caliber
« Reply #16 on: December 20, 2008, 12:30:35 PM »
when I lived in MD I kiled several deer with my 40 call flinter. in Va it's not enough gun  picking my shoot I would use a 36
Walk softly carry a big stick and never walk away  T.R.

Offline DennyRoark

  • Trade Count: (6)
  • A Real Regular
  • ****
  • Posts: 501
  • Gender: Male
    • The Ohio Outdoorsman
Re: smallest caliber
« Reply #17 on: December 20, 2008, 12:41:07 PM »
Looking in my TC book, I'd say the velocity/energy is there for the 36 with a maxi.  I'd keep it short range tho.  Probably more energy than a .410 slug.....
Denny Roark
Member of PETA (People Eating Tasty Animals)
The Second Amendment...the one that makes all the others possible
I have no problems with vegetarians...I eat them regularly-Ted Nugent
"The beauty of the second amendment is that it will not be needed until they try to take it." -Thomas Jefferson

Offline 25/06

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Member
  • *
  • Posts: 55
Re: smallest caliber
« Reply #18 on: December 20, 2008, 01:41:02 PM »
well no worries know i just traded for a brand new seneca 45. the fella traded it in. he bought it just to hand over his fire place bore is slick and stock is pristence. traded in a cz 17hmr for the seneca and 300 bullets of 45, 300 of 32 and some other necesities.

Offline S.S.

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2840
Re: smallest caliber
« Reply #19 on: December 28, 2008, 10:23:04 AM »
For .32 caliber maxi-balls go to the link below. Well cast, nice sharp edges on the ones we ordered.


http://www.trackofthewolf.com/(S(zphdko45vweuqq2mbni1xc55))/categories/tableList.aspx?catId=2&subId=25&styleId=65&partNum=BALL-58-525
Vir prudens non contra ventum mingit
"A wise man does not pee against the wind".

Offline torpedoman

  • GBO Supporter
  • Trade Count: (7)
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2574
  • Gender: Male
Re: smallest caliber
« Reply #20 on: December 28, 2008, 05:40:54 PM »
would a 40 be a happy medium for squirrel to deer?

The parameters are really vastly different  when choosing a gun for these animals, but I would go heavier rather than lighter--.44 or .45 caliber would be as light as I would go for deer. The .32 is a pipsqueak--nowhere near the .32-20 in power and the .32-20 is weak for a deer gun. My .32 is a great rabbit and squirrel gun, but I would be completely unethical if I tried to take a deer with it.
I'v only taken 25-30 deer with the old 32-20 rolling block and havent had one go more than 50 yds.same gun my grandpa and uncle used for deer.
the nation that forgets it defenders will itself be forgotten