• This community needs YOUR help today. We rely 100% on Supporting Memberships to fund our efforts. With the ever increasing fees of everything, we need help. We need more Supporting Members, today. Please invest back into this community. I will ship a few decals too in addition to all the account perks you get.



    Sign up here: https://www.muzzleloadingforum.com/account/upgrades

Hardball for small caliber deer hunting

Muzzleloading Forum

Help Support Muzzleloading Forum:

This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate links, including eBay, Amazon, and others.

dledinger

40 Cal.
Joined
Nov 23, 2012
Messages
173
Reaction score
0
Generally speaking, I would not consider hunting deer or similar sized game with anything less than a 50 cal roundball. The foundation for that stems from my rearing in the northeast.

Lately I've reflected on my observations living in the southeast for for 20 years. I've killed a bunch of deer over the past couple decades with local hunting methods...often times involving unmentionables throwing hardened lead balls at running deer at ranges between 5 - 60 yards. It's been my observation that anywhere within that range, a single hardened .33 caliber ball impacting the vitals puts a deer down rather reliably. Out to about 40 yards I've seen 100% penetration, and 40-60 the ball usually rests under the hide on the far side.

Tossing this around in my head, I can't help but think a 40 cal with a hard projectile would do just the same, if not better.

I'm second guessing my objection to hunting with less than a 50 cal. Maybe I'm crazy.

Don't get me wrong, I'm a huge proponent of doing the best we can to execute a quick and humane kill. But what I've witnessed is just that.

Any thoughts?
 
Years ago....before you were born... back in the old days people hunted deer.....and they used sharpened sticks.

The necessity of using a large caliber is an insurance policy against the inadequacies of the modern day hunter who hunts for recreation rather than sustenance.

I have read accounts of people using .22 shorts to kill large game during the great depression.

Personally, I would have no problem using a .40 cal...or even a .32 for deer hunting.. However my style of hunting would be modified to suit the weapon...just like Bowhunting...
 
What Clyde said. We pretty much all know you can take a deer with a smaller projectile and I would if that's all I had to do the job and it was a survival thing. However many people never shoot except just before hunting season and aren't that good a shot or take the time to know their gun. So many of todays rules are made for the stupid people.
 
Most of my deer kills have been made with a couple of .45s and prb. Never lost a deer with either the .45, .50, .54 or .62. While I wouldn't hesitate shooting deer with a .40, where legal, I so far have not. And I'd probably still use a soft lead ball if I did.
 
20 years ago when my eyes were better my 40 fl killed deer never lost a one. Shots were all taken when perfect as in range, movement and distance when all 3 were there I shot.

Now my eyes are not good and I use my 54. When my shot is off a bit it makes up for my failure that would be had it been my forty.

Beginning to like my 62 SBFL club butt as well. Distance is the key!
 
My only experience with smaller calibers and deer is with cartridge guns and cast bullets at moderate velocities even slower than top end small caliber muzzleloaders are run at- on the order of 1500-1700 fps. I won't go into more detail than that, cuzz after all this is a muzzleloading site.

But here's what I learned about soft versus hard.

The shots were all broadside, and I never recovered a bullet. Hard bullets sipped on through and generally left me with a tracking job. Softer bullets clearly expanded a little and were much quicker at putting down deer.

The "soft" pills were still harder than pure lead, but the results had me experimenting with gas checks and lubes in the hopes of shooting pure lead without leading the bore. Never got there. I got jealous of patches on a round balls for their ability to protect the bore with pure lead. Tried paper patching those small slugs, and the effort was enough to make me put away my experiment.

'Twas me launching small caliber balls at deer, it would be pure lead and broadside shots only. We're limited to 45 caliber, so I just might never be able to test that. But I think I have the info I need for good load design if the day ever comes to pass.
 
Sure, I agree with the above. In my state I can use a .40 caliber rifle with a .380 round ball to take deer. In other states you cannot, and the minimum is a .45.

I know several older men who as boys in the '30's took deer with .22 LR. They were quite close, and one fellow told me the secret was to shoot them in the eye to get to the brain. OK well you do what you have to do in some situations. Most of these fellows were share-croppers in those days and weren't supposed to be hunting deer where they were, as well. However, as soon as they could afford to do so..., they upped what they used to either something like a .30-30/.35 Remington OR a 12 gauge using slugs.

I have obtained .40 caliber conical bullets, which is what I will use if I try the .40 for deer. I normally am out there with a .530 round ball.

LD
 
I've killed and gathered about 30 Blacktail deer with modern rifles firing several cartridges. I have wounded and lost a couple. I felt sick about it each time. I am at a loss as to why any body would up the odds of crippling a nice buck.


Another consideration is that the biggest buck you will ever kill presents a shot. That shot would be ethical with a 50 cal or above, but you are holding a squirrel rifle.

I don't see the point of being under gunned.
 
Where did you come up with 50 cal minimum? Please don't keep your reasoning under your hat.

Our ancestors used small cals for deer with perfect success, and from all accounts most rifles were under 50 cal. I'm not going to call them unethical hunters until you splain what I'm missing.
 
Scota4570 said:
Another consideration is that the biggest buck you will ever kill presents a shot. That shot would be ethical with a 50 cal or above, but you are holding a squirrel rifle.

I don't see the point of being under gunned.

Personally, my deer guns are .54 and up. I want a blood trail Stevie Wonder could follow since I'm color blind and need all the help I can get. I shoot for lungs, so rarely do I drop a deer in it's tracks. Lungs are the biggest "sure thing" target, so that's what I aim for. I don't believe in taking any chance of being under-gunned either as I'm hunting mature Northern Whitetails, and they can take some punishment.

That said, if you search the archives here, you'll find some MASSIVE bucks killed with under 50 caliber with some DRT. It's not unethical if the shooter knows their gun, load, and what it is capable of or not. A couple in particular were an absolute hog of a Whitetail that Skychief shot in Indiana and another was an Iowa boy's (and I mean a youngster) huge buck.

While I personally want more caliber, the choice of what we use is up to each of us. I won't jump on anyone's choice of smaller calibers as long as they don't try to tell me I only use a larger caliber because I can't make good shots on game, which is many times insinuated in these conversations. :v If it's legal, and one can use it with efficiency to make quick kills, it's their choice.
 
Our ancestors used small cals for deer with perfect success, and from all accounts most rifles were under 50 cal. I'm not going to call them unethical hunters until you splain what I'm missing.

No, but I think he would call himself unethical for using what he considers so small a load that he runs too high a chance of wounding the animal. As for what others do, will do, or did......

That's how I understand such opinions. :grin: :wink:

Part of the problem with such discussions is folks don't know the accuracy and skill of another hunter, and folks don't know the range to the animal that is used by another hunter. I remember when Mark Baker revealed that he used 50 grains of powder in his .50 caliber, the manure-tastic reaction to that bit of information. Mr. Baker had never stated that he works in quite close to the deer, probably a lot closer than any of his detractors. His load was fine, for him.

In my state, if you have a muzzleloading rifle, you must use at least 60 grains of powder for deer, but for handguns you must use 40 grains of powder. Either muzzleloader must be at least .40 caliber. (The DNR assumes you're going to be much closer with the pistol than the rifle.) So while Mr. Baker here in Maryland would be illegal with his 50 grain load in his rifle, that same load would be more than legal in a pistol. BUT if he gets the deer in at 30 yards and pistol range, would he be unethical using a load 25% higher than a pistol load, at pistol range, in his rifle?

Ethics is very subjective. :shocked2:

LD
 
Loyalist Dave said:
Ethics is very subjective. :shocked2:

It's also projective. No problem running your own life your own way within the law. But when you project your choices onto other folks, that's no longer ethics. It's opinion.
 
Funny how we label things...
If I buy a deer from a deer farm, I can kill it with whatever.

If I buy one from the State, I have to follow their rules. :shocked2:

One is considered farming. the other is a sport.

Both have the same end result.
 
I had a frustration with a Traditions Crockett years ago that I solved with a TVM .32 rifle . . . but in asking around on the internet, )and I don't think it was here), some guy down south, TX perhaps posted a pic of a deer and his .32 Crockett.

I was stunned. I guess one could argue that as my being one who used to hunt with a .32 Winchester Special, it's not much different, but that's arguable. . the entry hole is similar but that's about the only thing.

I can see that a .32 ML could kill a deer, but I've seen a lot of deer lost with a .243 or shot twice with a .243 compared to just once with the 30-06.

I'd want to be as humane as possible and losing a deer is a sick feeling that will ruin your week, so why take a chance, in my opinion. (Besides, how many states allow a caliber that small?)
 
Warning opinion ahead..

Brown Bear I agree with they used lots smaller calibers than 50 cal..

But..They are not the same deer we have now..

There was no pressure on them..

and lots were shot in the summer months too.

I shot a 187 # big whitetail in 2016


58 cal..ball split on rib entry 60 yards
turned the .570 into 2 30 some cal.projectiles.

both ended up at hairline on out end dbl lung.

Very glad it started out at .570

I will not hunt deer with any smaller caliber after the experience.

We all live by our experience..Just saying

PB280174_zpsyjqlxfzq.jpg
 
I can see that a .32 ML could kill a deer, but I've seen a lot of deer lost with a .243 or shot twice with a .243 compared to just once with the 30-06.

There are so many factors at play here that it is impossible to draw straight line conclusions....

velocity, distance, bullet construction, point of impact, accuracy, anatomy....etc...

As one decreases in caliber, velocity or accuracy ....one should think of their gun more like a bow and arrow...with respect to killing efficiency....And hunt accordingly.
 
Mac1967 said:
I had a frustration with a Traditions Crockett years ago that I solved with a TVM .32 rifle . . . but in asking around on the internet, )and I don't think it was here), some guy down south, TX perhaps posted a pic of a deer and his .32 Crockett.
He was also committing a ticketable and arrestable offense here in Texas. All muzzleloaders below .45 are illegal for deer throughout the state. He's lucky they weren't combing through social media looking for those kind of things like they do now. Some checking of hunting sites are also being undertaken by many states wildlife depts!
 
Shooting an animal in a pen is different than shooting a deer in the wild. As far as comparing archery to MLers, consider the huge cuts made by broadheads as compared to a field point. I think the field point and 32cal PRB similar.

I've cast .395RBs and know how small they are. I wouldn't be comfortable shooting a deer with my .45 flinter beyond 50 yards, so is why I generally larger. Having witnessed the significant velocity drop off and resultant lack of expansion of a .605" PRB shot into a smallish WT at 125 yards+, I KNOW that I wouldn't even consider such with my .45.

Yeah, sure, a deer can be killed quickly with a small caliber provided the distance is short and shot placement is perfect, but isn't the normally expected situation where I hunt deer. Its more of a stunt. :td:
 
Wes,

I'm not trying to start an arguement, but could you point me to that regulation? I am unaware of any TPWD regs that state a minimum caliber for hunting. The only muzzleloading restrictions that I have read say that the projectile must be loaded from the muzzle, effectively making cap and ball revolvers illegal.
 
Back
Top