Jon Sundra declares 1K ft lbs "necessary" to kill deer!

[AtlLaw]

In the May/June issue of RifleShooter magazine.  In discussing various 6mm cartridges he refers to the 95 gr. factory load from a 243 WSSM and states:  "The latter leaves the muzzle at 3150 fps and is still generating the 1,000 ft.-lbs. of energy necessary to kill a deer (and certainly a pronghorn) out to 400 yards."  <emphisis added>

 

I can't believe he would make such a statement!     So much for experts... or proof readers...   

[PA-Joe]

1000 ft-lbs has been around since the 50's. It's a good general rule.

[Wyo. Coyote Hunter]

AtLaw, I must agree with Pa-Joe, this is a figure that has been quoted for the 50 plus years I have been hunting..and I started reading about guns and hunting before I could legally buy a license...I looked over that article..Sundra is not one of my favorites, so I didn't read it closely...but when this figure was mentioned in the past, I think "reliable" was a word associated with this figure...If I am not wrong, Francis Sell used this figure when he was building his long range deer rifle...one thing that has been on my thoughts lately is the quirk we have for considering calibers for deer that were not intended to kill deer..we all do it, but honestly, there is no reason I can see for using a marginal caliber today...Handi's come in all calibers...as one of the other members suggested if someone is too small or young to shoot an adequate caliber, then maybe they are too young to hunt deer...when one of the substandard calibers fails in the hands of a hunter, it is the animal that suffers....sorry I got carried away here, but this has been on my mind for several days now...no ill will intended....I enjoy your thoughts and posts...

[AtlLaw]

Ah boys, I too have heard that "1K for deer/1.5K for elk" figure for as long as I can remember.  It may be, as PA-Joe says, a good general rule... if not arbitrary.   Or at least as good as any... Right up there with "because we've always done it that way!"   

I say arbitrary because, in the 50 or 60 years I've heard the statement repeated, I've never seen a source for it cited so I could satisfy myself as to it's validity.   

For a few decades I accepted it as a general rule, mostly because it was so often stated by people more knowledgeable then I.  I no longer do that.  Didn't someone say "If you repeat a lie often enough people will believe it."

And Sundra didn't qualify the statement at all.  He didn't say that level of energy is necessary to reliably kill deer, he made the flat statement that a 1000 Ft. lbs of energy is NECESSARY!  Meaning you must have it; the deer cannot be killed if the projectile doesn't have it!  And you know that is just not so.  Unfortunately, less informed people who may be reading the article normally don't question what is stated.     The power of the printed word and all that...   

Well, what do you expect from someone who thinks a .243 is a jim dandy deer caliber...   

[mechanic]

Alright Richard!  Pour some water on that overheated keyboard before you have a stroke!   You know the deer are getting tougher by the minute, and by next year we will all need a big 50 to drop one.....of course folks like you with all them 45-3000's probably kinda' look down on us little folk anyway, with our 45-70's and such.

Wha'cha' gots to do when you read an expert analysis like this, is remember....this guys the pro.....he must be right.........after all you probably ain't shot over a billion rounds in your life...right?

Sorry...just had to take a jab..

Ben

[AtlLaw]

Sorry Ben...     Still in the fight mode from court... 

But speakin of experts...    I'll need to give you a call when I get around to beating files into knife blades!   

[mrussel]

Ah boys, I too have heard that "1K for deer/1.5K for elk" figure for as long as I can remember.  It may be, as PA-Joe says, a good general rule... if not arbitrary.   Or at least as good as any... Right up there with "because we've always done it that way!"   

I say arbitrary because, in the 50 or 60 years I've heard the statement repeated, I've never seen a source for it cited so I could satisfy myself as to it's validity.   

For a few decades I accepted it as a general rule, mostly because it was so often stated by people more knowledgeable then I.  I no longer do that.  Didn't someone say "If you repeat a lie often enough people will believe it."

And Sundra didn't qualify the statement at all.  He didn't say that level of energy is necessary to reliably kill deer, he made the flat statement that a 1000 Ft. lbs of energy is NECESSARY!  Meaning you must have it; the deer cannot be killed if the projectile doesn't have it!  And you know that is just not so.  Unfortunately, less informed people who may be reading the article normally don't question what is stated.     The power of the printed word and all that...   

Well, what do you expect from someone who thinks a .243 is a jim dandy deer caliber...   

 In Utah,the minimum legal requirement for handgun hunting is 500ft lbs at the muzzle for deer and 500 at 100 yards for elk. That seems kinda low to me,as some rounds in a 45 auto (a great gun,but I wouldnt think it would be good for hunting) are legal for deer.

[mechanic]

Head on down one day Richard...preferably when it cools down a little bit, and we will throw some coal on the forge and make sumpin'!  You probably need a nice tomahawk to wear to court.  It would boost your image as a fighting man, and gain you new respect with the judge!

Of course, I can't carry such a thing into a court house myself.  I almost got drawn and quartered by the 80 year old guarding our house of legal proceedings a while back, when I forgot I had my big old fingernail knife!  He was not too amused, when I told him that some of the deputies were known by me to be a little teched in the head, and  they got to carry a gun.

Ain't nobody got a sense of humor these days....

[mrussel]

In the May/June issue of RifleShooter magazine.  In discussing various 6mm cartridges he refers to the 95 gr. factory load from a 243 WSSM and states:  "The latter leaves the muzzle at 3150 fps and is still generating the 1,000 ft.-lbs. of energy necessary to kill a deer (and certainly a pronghorn) out to 400 yards."  <emphisis added>

 

I can't believe he would make such a statement!    So much for experts... or proof readers...  

 I WOULD like to see the word "reliably" inserted between "to" and "kill" Maybe there are PITA people out there equipping the deer with level IV body armor. LOL

[R.W.Dale]

pah! energy never killed anything except in of instances electrocution.  Someone needs to tell Jon it's all about the bullet stupid!


all that matters is putting a bullet of proper construction for the velocity in the proper place. Deer suck at math, they don't know they're not supposed to die when shot through the vitals with a paltry lil 30carbine, 357 or .223rem

[moxgrove]

Well now I am really scared. Those deer in my freezer I killed with my 41 mag are gonna wake up and get me. I didn't have anywhere near a thousand foot pounds. I guess I thought those heavy hardcast bullets hitting vertabrae did the job. Guess I'm a moron.

[Drilling Man]

  I haven't read anything that goof ball wrote in many years...  I remember him writeing an article about single shots.  He was "in his own way" putting down users of semi auto's for big game, and all about how much better you were to use a single shot...  Anyway, then he went on in the article showing what he came up with to make getting more shots off faster!  He had picts to show ways to hold the ammo, so you could get off that second and third shot fast!

  He!!, i figured HE should have just bought a semi auto to begin with...

  DM

[AtlLaw]

In Utah,the minimum legal requirement for handgun hunting is 500ft lbs at the muzzle for deer ...

Jawja used to have the same rule.  It also excluded certain cartridges like the 30 Carbine and 44-40.  Seems to me we have done away with that now...    let me check real quick... yup, i was right, as usual.     Our current law for "Modern Rifles and Handguns" is: "Centerfire only, .22 cal or larger with expanding bullets."  This section only excludes shotguns and muzzleloaders which are covered further on.

I also just checked to see what kind of energy my M73 in .45 Colt was churning up last year.  I don't remember the exact velocity I loaded it to but let's say it was around 1200 fps with the 250 gr. Hornady XTP's I used.  That's right at 800 ft. lbs. at the muzzle.  Heck, at 1K fps the energy is down to 555 ft.lbs!     A little velocity sure makes a big difference in energy!  I wonder if it (velocity that is) makes that big a difference to the deer?  Anyway, my considerable less then 1K ft. lbs. load sure flattened, DRT, bang-flopped a nice 6 pt. last year... 

[AtlLaw]

Ain't nobody got a sense of humor these days....

Ain't it the truth...    I am very happy not taking much of anything seriously, least of all myself.  Got to much fun to have and to little life left to have it in to waste any time being to serious!   

all that matters is putting a bullet of proper construction for the velocity in the proper place.

A succinct statement of what I have come to believe.   

Guess I'm a moron.

Naw, just blissfully ignorant according to Sundra...    But one look at your avitar tells me that's not true!     I look at it and see my ol' pal Gunner, my last bird dog, dead these 20 odd years now.   

[billy_56081]

Richard to bad one of these "experts" can't be used in court dor a murder defence. Do ya think the jury would buy "Mr Smith could not be the murderer as his 32 auto does not have the energy to kill a human".

I'm thinkin that would get laughed out of court.

[AtlLaw]

I haven't read anything that goof ball wrote in many years...

He said something else in the last paragraph or so of that article that made me flinch.  To bad I can't remember what it was...    I hate being senile... 

[AtlLaw]

Do ya think the jury would buy "Mr Smith could not be the murderer as his 32 auto does not have the energy to kill a human".

What a heck of an idea!     Lessee here...    Intent is a necessary element of any crime and must be proved beyond a reasonable doubt... ergo, the defendant must have intended to kill the victim... a parade of "experts" would swear that 1000 ft. lbs. of energy is "necessary" to kill poor little 100 lb Bambi.  The defendant used an itti bitti little pistol that only generates 150 ft. lbs of energy to shoot the 250 lb victim.  The defendant, an avid hunter of the aforesaid "poor little" Bambies knows this fact so it is obvious he had no intent to kill the victim, he just wanted to wound him a little bit!   

This has possibilities!  You should have been a lawyer Billy!   

[billy_56081]

Could make the difference between 1rst degree and a lesser murder or manslaughter charge.

[Spanky]

I made a bang flop shot on a buck at about 80yds. with my 22 Hornet... I'm pretty sure there wasn't 1000 lbs. of energy there.
Alot of what these guys write should be in the funny papers instead of a gun magazine.



Spanky

[Justin10mm]

I guess this means you can't kill a deer with a 44mag handgun.

[Dee]

Good ole John Sundra. I wonder where he got his "experts license"? Those gun rag writers are so full of horse leavins. But they do sell a lot of magazines and guns and ammo to the rookies of life.

[john keyes]

yeah but just wait, pretty soon he will have an article about getting back to the basics featuring well known old cartridges, lever actions, etc all the while proclaiming that you don't need the latest and greatest whizbangs to kill a deer....

[R.W.Dale]

Good ole John Sundra. I wonder where he got his "experts license"? Those gun rag writers are so full of horse leavins. But they do sell a lot of magazines and guns and ammo to the rookies of life.

Just remember these guys went to school to be writers and journalists, NOT outdoors experts

[Sweetwater]

Jon Sundra? Is he still spreading rumors? Shows how much I don't read anymore!! I started reading somewhere in the mid-50's and was cautioned then about putting too much stuck in the written word - it was to sell magazines. I'd read stuff by Elmer and Jack since I could hold a book. Bill Jordan's "No Second Place Winner" is still a great read. I probably appreciated Bob Milek's escapades with revolvers and Contenders as much as anyone's, though we sharply disagreed in some areas. Milek almost talked me into a 357Herret, though at that point in life I couldn't see me elk hunting any time soon. Just a few years, I relocated to Wyoming and the rest is history!

Though most of the time I think I can write as good as anything I read, my hat is off to those who have put it on paper and sold it. Guess I've never been brave enough to find out if mine would sell. I don't handle rejection real well, even after two divorces!

I'm recalling that 1000lbs of energy necessary to kill a whitetail being around at least as long as I have. To that I have always asked the question, what arrowhead carries that kind of energy? Still comes down to placement.  Place it wrong and they keep running.

[Dee]

Good ole John Sundra. I wonder where he got his "experts license"? Those gun rag writers are so full of horse leavins. But they do sell a lot of magazines and guns and ammo to the rookies of life.

Just remember these guys went to school to be writers and journalists, NOT outdoors experts

I have been guilty of making that exact point many times. 

[mrussel]

Well now I am really scared. Those deer in my freezer I killed with my 41 mag are gonna wake up and get me. I didn't have anywhere near a thousand foot pounds. I guess I thought those heavy hardcast bullets hitting vertabrae did the job. Guess I'm a moron.

 They are gonna be MAD too. I would suggest getting something with enough energy and putting a few shots into the freezer before it turns ugly.

[charles p]

Having killed many deer in the 60's and 70's with buckshot, often by just one pellet to a vital area, I realize there are exceptions to the 1000 ft/lb rule.  I have also hit deer with my truck and seen them rebound onto the shoulder of the road, then get up and run away. 

I think the 1000 ft/lb rule is a good guide for high velocity rifles.  When I was much younger and read reloading manuals cover to cover and studied velocity tables until I could almost recite them from memory, I would not select any bullet-cartridge combo that had a muzzle velocity under 3000 ft/sec.  I thought boat tail bullets with high BC were necessary as well.  With and increase in age and knowledge, coupled by a decrease in physical stamina and a dislike for all magnum and heavy recoiling cartridges, I know deer can be taken with hunter friendly combinations.  So what if a bullet drops 3+ inches more than another at 500 yds.  I hope I never shoot that far again in my life.  I don't even plan to drag a deer that far again.

Gun writes are just like other columnist.  They have to voice their opinion every month.  If their career last as long as Sundra's, that's a lot of opinions, and he probably doesn't stricky abide by all of his.  Next time you read about a particular rifle, notice the full page adds on either side of the story. 

[AtlLaw]

Next time you read about a particular rifle, notice the full page adds on either side of the story.

   So you've noticed that too!  You'ld think they would be a little less obvious!   

[mauser98us]

Good ole Jon Sundra..... a legend is his own mind!

[TommyD]

I guess this means you can't kill a deer with a 44mag handgun.

Or a 45 Colt for that matter.

Darn! I suspected that the deer was playing 'possum when I took him to get the venison processed.