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.
