A Case of Use Enough Gun?

[DIRTYHARRYBALLISTICS]

I do believe i'm up for testing this theory. It wont happen soon as i dont own either cartridges at the moment, but i may be able to sort that out down the road. I could do a shoot, side by side on ballistics gel and with slow-mo, we could easily see which leaves the larger temporary and permanent wound cavities.

I could get multiple varieties for proper matching as well to test regular factory ammunition. I know that Federal has their Fusion line that has 95gr .243's at 2980fps and 180gr .300's at 2960fps. I believe that factory offering would be highly telling as well as others.

 

[MS 9x56]

@MS 9x56 Let it go brother, not worth the time…

Your right, the man doesn’t even understand the meaning of the word ballistics.

 

[CZDiesel]

Congrats! Beautiful deer!! What grain and type bullets did you use on both? How far were they and were they broadside shots? thx....

They were 85gr Nosler Partitions loaded by Superior Ammunition at close to 200 yards for both bucks. Not sure at the exact angle but I’d think both were broadside or quartering

 

[Daisy]

Superior ammo does great work. They have loaded a lot of ammo for me

 

[DIRTYHARRYBALLISTICS]

So it seems MS 9x56 demands i keep it civil, but thinks its peachy to insult me instead of showing evidence supporting their claims. That isnt using intellectual discourse. Resorting to insults, indicates a lack of any meaningful material to add to the argument. Everyone else has kept it civil as you requested, please do the same. As i said in a previous response, i meant no hostility in my initial comment and intended no aggression. It was worded very poorly and i apologize for that. I will be better in my replies and be respectful of others.

 

[Bob Nelson 35Whelen]

Everyone has their opinions and that’s great! Variety is the spice of life and keeps things interesting…
But the 243Win with the right bullet will hammer large Whitetails!
Both of these large bodied bucks were just taken this season using a 243Win and it knocked the heck out of them!

View attachment 657144View attachment 657145

@CZDiesel
And that's where the problem lies.
95% of 243 owners choose the wrong bullet.
Bob

 

[Ontario Hunter]

@CZDiesel
And that's where the problem lies.
95% of 243 owners choose the wrong bullet.
Bob

Comparatively much less potential for a "problem" with a more manly caliber. 30-06 will flat kill a deer no matter if it's shooting 150 gr or 220 gr bullet. Difference being the 150 gr bullet may make a wasteful mess while 220 gr only accurate out to 150 yards. But the deer is still dead.

 

[WyoBull]

@CZDiesel
And that's where the problem lies.
95% of 243 owners choose the wrong bullet.
Bob

I would agree with you, Bob. I think the majority of hunters that do not reload will buy the least expensive bullet on the shelf, like Remington Core-lokt and call it good.
As an avid reloader for 45+ years, I have loaded and shot a lot of bullets over the years in a lot of different calibers. I will definitely say the bullet used makes all the difference and bullet technology has come a long way.

I also shoot light for caliber bullets and run them fast. I have always had this mindset and probably comes from my first varmint rifle being a 220 Swift (which is my favorite varmint caliber which I still favor and shoot today). An example is my 7mm RUM where my favorite bullet if the Barnes 145 gr LRX running pretty fast. For my first Africa hunt for PG I loaded 160 gr Barnes TSX and it absolutely hammered everything I shot. I know the 145 gr TSX would have performed just as well and that is on the lighter side for caliber.
And as I have said in other posts, the 80 gr Barnes TTSX I have loaded for my 243 Win is a fantastic load for deer and antelope size game but I would never use it for anything larger. I have it loaded faster than the factory load from Barnes using the same bullet and it is a lot of fun to shoot.
So for me, picking a high quality bullet is key. If you reload, it opens up a lot more option for you in bullets, bullet weights and velocity.

 

[DIRTYHARRYBALLISTICS]

@CZDiesel
And that's where the problem lies.
95% of 243 owners choose the wrong bullet.
Bob

I think thats really a large portion of the issue when animals get wounded, no matter the caliber, that and shot placement, which i believe shot placement trumps bullet selection in any case.

 

[DIRTYHARRYBALLISTICS]

Comparatively much less potential for a "problem" with a more manly caliber. 30-06 will flat kill a deer no matter if it's shooting 150 gr or 220 gr bullet. Difference being the 150 gr bullet may make a wasteful mess while 220 gr only accurate out to 150 yards. But the deer is still dead.

I'm not sure about "much less" but less for sure. A .243 can expand, but a .308 isnt getting any smaller. A .50bmg only leaves a 3cm larger permanent wound channel than a .30-06 (both with fmj ball ammo) 3cm is barely over an inch, and while it can certainly make the difference between dead and not, its not a massive difference like people would have ya think. If you can dump all of the energy on target, and thats a big if, then more is always better up to the point of destroying the meat you intend on harvesting.

 

[DIRTYHARRYBALLISTICS]

Everyone has their opinions and that’s great! Variety is the spice of life and keeps things interesting…
But the 243Win with the right bullet will hammer large Whitetails!
Both of these large bodied bucks were just taken this season using a 243Win and it knocked the heck out of them!

View attachment 657144View attachment 657145

Howd these two score? The wide one is awesome for sure.

 

[Bob Nelson 35Whelen]

I think thats really a large portion of the issue when animals get wounded, no matter the caliber, that and shot placement, which i believe shot placement trumps bullet selection in any case.

@DIRTYHARRYBALLISTICS
Sorry mate have to respectfully disagree.
You can have the perfect shot placement but if'n the projectile ain't up to the task all you will get is wounded game or a lingering death. Not a good scenario.
This is from personal experience, not book readin or from couch ballistics.
Ive seen animals shot with 243s that just ran off. Yes they may have died later on but that ain't ethical to me.
Changing to a better construction bullet increased the percentage of drt or short run kills.
The projectile needs to get into the vitals and do massive destruction and to me hopefully exit as well. Hole in and hole out makes for more blood loss in my book.
I have seen animals shot that showed no signs of being hit only to be found later very dead. The entrance wound had sealed and there was no exit. It wasn't until it was skun that the entrance wound was found. Hence hole in bigger hole out to me. They can't usually run far if they are leaking blood from two holes.
They can't go far when leaking copious amounts of blood and the lungs don't work well if'n there's no negative pressure and big holes in the lungs.

Then again what would I know I ain't a vet or a doctor and only been hunting 50 odd years
Bob

 

[WAB]

Everyone has their opinions and that’s great! Variety is the spice of life and keeps things interesting…
But the 243Win with the right bullet will hammer large Whitetails!
Both of these large bodied bucks were just taken this season using a 243Win and it knocked the heck out of them!

View attachment 657144View attachment 657145

Fantastic deer! I have shot a number of deer with a .243. It works just fine with the right bullet and decent shot placement.

 

[DIRTYHARRYBALLISTICS]

@DIRTYHARRYBALLISTICS
Sorry mate have to respectfully disagree.
You can have the perfect shot placement but if'n the projectile ain't up to the task all you will get is wounded game or a lingering death. Not a good scenario.
This is from personal experience, not book readin or from couch ballistics.
Ive seen animals shot with 243s that just ran off. Yes they may have died later on but that ain't ethical to me.
Changing to a better construction bullet increased the percentage of drt or short run kills.
The projectile needs to get into the vitals and do massive destruction and to me hopefully exit as well. Hole in and hole out makes for more blood loss in my book.
I have seen animals shot that showed no signs of being hit only to be found later very dead. The entrance wound had sealed and there was no exit. It wasn't until it was skun that the entrance wound was found. Hence hole in bigger hole out to me. They can't usually run far if they are leaking blood from two holes.
They can't go far when leaking copious amounts of blood and the lungs don't work well if'n there's no negative pressure and big holes in the lungs.

Then again what would I know I ain't a vet or a doctor and only been hunting 50 odd years
Bob

Well i cant say i personally know of a .243 bullet design that when shot just behind the shoulder, wouldnt just decimate both lungs or take out the heart. Any .243 shots on deer that didnt die, in my opinion, is due to poor placement. I'm a butcher, i've seen more animals come across my table than i care to count, and the damage from a .243 on deer is more than sufficient. The few elk i've seen taken with it had 2 lodged in the opposite shoulder and 1 pass through double lung that the exit hole was nearly an inch and a quarter in diameter. Thats sufficient in my opinion. I will note, that for elk, i strongly prefer larger cartridges as they are more prooven on em. Elk have heavy bone structure in the shoulder and while a .243 might get through it, i'd bet they would probably need a follow up shot. Just my experience in 15 years as a butcher.

 

[dlmac]

I would agree with you, Bob. I think the majority of hunters that do not reload will buy the least expensive bullet on the shelf, like Remington Core-lokt and call it good.
As an avid reloader for 45+ years, I have loaded and shot a lot of bullets over the years in a lot of different calibers. I will definitely say the bullet used makes all the difference and bullet technology has come a long way.

I also shoot light for caliber bullets and run them fast. I have always had this mindset and probably comes from my first varmint rifle being a 220 Swift (which is my favorite varmint caliber which I still favor and shoot today). An example is my 7mm RUM where my favorite bullet if the Barnes 145 gr LRX running pretty fast. For my first Africa hunt for PG I loaded 160 gr Barnes TSX and it absolutely hammered everything I shot. I know the 145 gr TSX would have performed just as well and that is on the lighter side for caliber.
And as I have said in other posts, the 80 gr Barnes TTSX I have loaded for my 243 Win is a fantastic load for deer and antelope size game but I would never use it for anything larger. I have it loaded faster than the factory load from Barnes using the same bullet and it is a lot of fun to shoot.
So for me, picking a high quality bullet is key. If you reload, it opens up a lot more option for you in bullets, bullet weights and velocity.

Actually the Cor-lok is a better than average bullet, But probably not new enough for many.

 

[MS 9x56]

Remington cor-loc, the most dangerous mushroom in the woods. Key part of that advertisement is “ in the woods”.

 

[Velo Dog]

Well said.
To be clear, I don't advocate using small bullets for big game, quite the opposite actually. I am in favor of allowing people their choice of legal cartridge, and hopefully they choose wisely. Still, choosing an arbitrary diameter as a legal minimum really doesn't make sense as it is really energy that matters. Among all my firearms is the lowly .25 auto, I think we can all agree it's use to kill should not be attempted on anything except field mice. A friend of mine was once shooting it and the bullet ricocheted and hit him on the forehead with so little energy that it didn't even cause pain. Anyway, if .25 caliber centerfire were the minimum, this cartridge could be legal and grossly inadequate. If they want to make laws about minimums, energy needs to be in the equation, and perhaps the .243 wouldn't make the cut (at least the lighter projectiles)
I still argue that the issue raised by the OP in this thread was less about cartridge selection and more about sloppy aim and lack of follow up. A high back/shoulder shot would have had the same results with a 30.06 with possible increased likelihood of the animal not recovering from it's injuries due to the larger hole blasted. The .243 may have helped this deer live.
Side note, my two teenage daughters both shot mule bucks this year with 6.5 creedmoors. One was 200 yds, the other a little under 100. Ballistic comparison between the 127 gr CM they used vs 100 gr .243 is 300ish lb/ft at 100 yds. It's not a ton of difference, both deer fell like a sack of potatoes, dead, one shot each. Both were broadside through the lungs, one clipped the heart, the other was high enough to be in the fabled "void" below the spine. Both had entry and exit holes. I can't remember if either hit ribs on the way in or out. Both seemed substantially more than adequate for a reasonably well placed shot.

Hi again Pilgrim and all Fellow Hunters,

Right up front here, I apologize to the OP for earlier presuming the huge buck lost to a poor hit with a tiny bullet was a mule deer.
Turns out it was a white tail deer however, an exceptionally large white tail deer.

Anywhooo,

I agree with you on the shot placement and energy thing (provided that one’s bullet weight is also adequate to break the bones in whatever species is being hunted).
On that note, I’m under the impression that no members here, (definitely not myself anyway) when recommending .25 caliber rifles as minimum, are suggesting anything other than the above notion, (especially not anything approaching the tiny, pip squeak pocket pistol cartridge, .25 ACP ).

Also on this cartridge topic, I am a little corn-fused by your following reference to the OP’s telling a wounded and lost buck story, while his friend was using a .243 Rifle when it happened.
You wrote,
“A high back/shoulder shot would’ve had the same results with a .30-06” etc., etc.
A few lines later, you wrote that your daughter dropped a mule deer stone dead with one shot from her 6.5 Creedmoor.
The bullet struck “high enough to be in the fabled “void” below the spine”.

Some folks seem to suspect this is exactly where the original wounded and lost buck in the OP’s original scenario was hit with the .243 bullet.
So anyway, I don’t understand how, with a similar hit, your example of a .30-06 would not have worked on the wounded buck but the 6.5 is adequate with a similar hit.

I definitely agree with you on things, as described in my paragraph beginning just under the word “Anywhooo,” and I definitely mean no disrespect, just puzzled by what seems like a contradiction.

Best Regards,
Velo Dog.

 

[Pilgrim]

Hi again Pilgrim and all Fellow Hunters,

Right up front here, I apologize to the OP for earlier presuming the huge buck lost to a poor hit with a tiny bullet was a mule deer.
Turns out it was a white tail deer however, an exceptionally large white tail deer.

Anywhooo,

I agree with you on the shot placement and energy thing (provided that one’s bullet weight is also adequate to break the bones in whatever species is being hunted).
On that note, I’m under the impression that no members here, (definitely not myself anyway) when recommending .25 caliber rifles as minimum, are suggesting anything other than the above notion, (especially not anything approaching the tiny, pip squeak pocket pistol cartridge, .25 ACP ).

Also on this cartridge topic, I am a little corn-fused by your following reference to the OP’s telling a wounded and lost buck story, while his friend was using a .243 Rifle when it happened.
You wrote,
“A high back/shoulder shot would’ve had the same results with a .30-06” etc., etc.
A few lines later, you wrote that your daughter dropped a mule deer stone dead with one shot from her 6.5 Creedmoor.
The bullet struck “high enough to be in the fabled “void” below the spine”.

Some folks seem to suspect this is exactly where the original wounded and lost buck in the OP’s original scenario was hit with the .243 bullet.
So anyway, I don’t understand how, with a similar hit, your example of a .30-06 would not have worked on the wounded buck but the 6.5 is adequate with a similar hit.

I definitely agree with you on things, as described in my paragraph beginning just under the word “Anywhooo,” and I definitely mean no disrespect, just puzzled by what seems like a contradiction.

Best Regards,
Velo Dog.

No offense taken.
I just reread the OP, I guess I had assumed that it was an over the spine shot since it was not fatal. Below the spine would most certainly pierce the lungs and result in death if it were in the chest area. After rereading, the OP thought it was below the spine but it doesn't seem as if anybody knew for sure, and if the deer were still alive days later, I would assume the lungs were not hit, so probably an above the spine hit.
I guess my point was if it was an above the spine shot that missed bone, most common rifles (6.5, 243, 30.06 etc) would likely have a somewhat equal effect as it would be piercing non vital tissue. Likewise, if it were a lower leg shot, there is likely no cartridge that would kill better than another. Some would just succeed at blowing off more leg.
If the shot were below the spine, bullet/caliber choice would most certainly affect the speed of death as more damage would be done to the lungs with better cartridges. In my opinion, a small amount more damage to the lungs would go a long way toward expediting death. I feel it has much less to do with bullet diameter and much more to do with energy and expansion. A good expanding .243 would probably be far deadlier than a non expanding 30.06 solid on a whitetail. Likewise a 100 gr .243 would do much more than a 50 gr (inertial energy).
Back to my daughters success with 6.5, it worked good not because it is a fantastic cartridge but because the shot hit the lungs. If it would have been high back, we might still be looking for the deer. In this scenario, the 6.5 was plenty adequate. A 30.06 would have blasted a larger hole but not killed any faster. Likewise, the lowly .243 could have killed just as fast. It was the good aim that killed, not necessarily the cartridge selection.

 

[Daisy]

If the authorities were setting caliber limit for Cape buffalo at the barest minimum capable of killing one, it might be something like 338 or 300 magnum. They set the bar much higher than that because buffalo are dangerous game. Unfortunately for our deer they are not considered dangerous game so the authorities will set minimum caliber restrictions at the bare minimum capable of stopping one. The probability of stopping it properly and humanely or even it seems mortally does not figure into the decision.

According to your logic 243 is a great caliber for deer. Millions of deer have been killed with 223 and 22-250. So 243 is not the “barest of minimums.”

 

[Velo Dog]

I find this all entertaining , especially with all the deer I've seen killed with 5.56.
Shot placement is king, bullet design after that.

P.S. Understand we are talking deer in the lower 48 state and not dangerous game in Alaska or other continents.

Greetings Colt191145lover,

I agree that the 5.56 - .223 Remington has taken countless deer in N. America.
And, with today’s extra tough bullets, the little cartridge more than likely is working better than ever.
That said, it remains my opinion that because there are so many appropriate cartridges available these days, there really is no reason to use varmint cartridges for hoofed game.

Again, I agree with you that, just like the little .243, also the 5.56 does work most of the time, provided like anything else, that the all-important vital hit is delivered and one’s bullet doesn’t come unraveled before piercing some vital organ or central nerve of the animal.
Earlier in this thread I described witnessing a literally brain shot wildebeest, that ran away, after being shot through the skull with a 50 grain .222 Remington bullet.
(Part of a culling effort, during drought).

Eventually we found it again and I finished it off with a 220 gr round nose soft through her shoulders (.30-06 Rifle).
I expect that a flat nosed revolver bullet striking the same spot would’ve been more effective.
Certainly an appropriate caliber rifle bullet striking the exact same spot would have instantly dropped that animal, in the first place.

Yours Truly is an above average rifle shot but occasionally, just like every hunter now and then does, I muff one.
This of course results in having to find and finish the wounded and suffering animal.
This is a major reason why I recommend cartridges with bullet weights capable of breaking bones of whatever species is being hunted.

I don’t begrudge you or any others for using too light of cartridges on hoofed critters.
It is your life and you should live it according to your own moral compass.
But my friendly suggestion remains, in all fairness to the animals, “Use enough gun”.

That’s it, old geezer rant over.

Kind Regards,
Velo Dog.