What is Better?

[northmn]

This topic applies to any caliber or any rifle whether modern or ML.  Being a well rounded individual I also enjoy shooting cast bullets in modern guns and just purchased a rare model Marlin lever in 35 Rem. through pure dumb luck.  When I posted my find on another site others stated that is definitely a "better" caliber for deer than a 30-30.  Now here is my question.  What makes one better   I have shot more than a few deer with a variety of calibers and really do not see a lot of difference.  I have come to like a cast bullet (or roundball) because I do not blow up a lot of meat and do not have all taht blood shot tissue you get from HV modern guns.  The deer seem to drop as quick or do not run any further.  I know that I could break shoulders with a round ball and still have a bit of hamburger left in the shoulders as compared to the 270 I used to use.  While I feel a 32 is a bit small for deer or even the 40, after a certain point what is better?  You shoot the darn thing and you eat venison.  Snowy day and I think too much.

DP

[greybeard]

My personal feeling is that a .45 is about the  minimum cal for deer size  animals. Anything above that is fine  for north Americandeer but if going after the larger species  like moose , ellk and bear best go to .58 or better. Just my thoughts .  Bob

[Daryl]

First of all, check your laws on allowable calibres and loads if sepcified. Some animals in some areas/States, Provinces, Countries have particular requirements.

For any North American Deer, ie: Mule Deer, Whiletail and sub species, moose or elk, I prefer the largest calibre I can shoot accurately.  When hunting the buck/doe/cow or bull, be prepared to meet a grizzly.

If I lived in an area (no big bears) where more power wasn't necessary, I'd probably use a .50 or .54.  the greater the 'size' of the ball, the greater the benumbing effect of the blow.

[hanshi]

Minimum of .45 for deer.  But the .45 has 'deer" written all over it.  It seems to be the equivalent of the 30/30 on deer while the .50 is more like a .300 Sav.  The .54 is kinda like a .308 or 30/06.  All IMHO, of course.

[longcruise]

I think a bigger ball is better just as that .35 rem fatter and heavier bullet is better than the .30 cal bullet.  

I don't worry much about damaged meat even on deer with the .54.  It just does not tear it up like a modern gun.  Like Elmer Kerith said about the big bullets, "you can eat right up to the hole".

It's kinda cold and snowy here too!

[Scott Semmel]

Have harvested whitetail with .45, .50, .54 and .58 only difference I find is exit wound is more likely to occur with .54 and .58

[BrownBear]

"Better" for me depends on the details of where I hunt.  Some places around here I'm content to use a 50.  Some places I'm watching over my shoulder with a 62 in my hands.  The difference is brown bear density, from maybe seeing one at a distance to almost certainly seeing one, and close.  It's not the killing power on deer that I'm pondering when I choose one over the other.

[B.Habermehl]

I use a .58 for deer. My short barreled rifle(28") with 80 gr ffg. does not cause big messes of blood shot meat.  The deer usually travel 25yds at the shot and leave a bold trail a blind man could follow. This is not really a stout load for this caliber, but it preforms fine. I started out hunting with a .45. Had a deer that took way too long to find with no blood trail. Moved up to a .50 then .58.

[Pvt. Lon Grifle]

One reason for the high regard of the Remington .35 you mentioned is the .35 remington round nose corelokt bullet. It had long been recognized as an outstanding deer bullet.   

For RB , calibers are a step stone list of increasing energy with similar velocities reasonably useful. Then to me it is an increasing trade off with shooting skill and  hunting conditions. That is where the hunting skill comes in to play with caliber choice.   Lon

[roundball]

What makes one better

As an aside, I have a beautiful 70's vintage Marlin 336/.35Rem and as I've sold off virtually every other C/F rifle I'd accumulated over my lifetime, my .35Rem lays oiled in its case and "ain't going nowhere"  LOL

As far as hunting is concerned there's a lot of variety in the hunting conditions that we encounter...varying distances, poor light, angles that might bring bone into play, a deer starting to turn just as the sear trips which can bring bones into play, etc, etc, etc...always makes me lean towards a larger caliber to carry more energy to longer distances and minimize/eliminate worry about big bones, etc.  So to me, "what makes one better" as a big game caliber is the size & power it brings to the equation that overshadows the variables of hunting conditions. 

Over all the years now I've managed to take whitetails with .45/.50/.54/.58/.62cal PRBs and have noticed the trend first hand at how progressively more authority gets delivered with each larger caliber.  In particular the .58s and .62s just seem to hammer them, and have a higher incident rate of dropping them where they stand or within a body length or two, than compared to sprinting off 25-35 yards from a .45 / 50cal shot.

In that same vein, to me the .35Rem is superior to the .30-30 because it has a significantly larger frontal area and heavier 180 / 200grn slugs compared to the 150 / 170grn .30-30 slugs.

[Dphariss]

This topic applies to any caliber or any rifle whether modern or ML.  Being a well rounded individual I also enjoy shooting cast bullets in modern guns and just purchased a rare model Marlin lever in 35 Rem. through pure dumb luck.  When I posted my find on another site others stated that is definitely a "better" caliber for deer than a 30-30.  Now here is my question.  What makes one better   I have shot more than a few deer with a variety of calibers and really do not see a lot of difference.  I have come to like a cast bullet (or roundball) because I do not blow up a lot of meat and do not have all taht blood shot tissue you get from HV modern guns.  The deer seem to drop as quick or do not run any further.  I know that I could break shoulders with a round ball and still have a bit of hamburger left in the shoulders as compared to the 270 I used to use.  While I feel a 32 is a bit small for deer or even the 40, after a certain point what is better?  You shoot the darn thing and you eat venison.  Snowy day and I think too much.

DP

Bigger bullet, diameter and weight, same velocity. Give all other factors are the same its a better killer.
 Bigger is always better. The 50 cal is near ideal for deer.
I have a 16 bore rifle that is a real killer but for deer the recoil is much heavier and the rifle requires a lot more concentration to shoot well. At least for me. Practice also costs a lot more using about 2.5 times as much lead.
So IMO calibers over 58 for DEER are not warranted. Calibers under 45 are not recommended  though I have no doubt the 40 or even 32 will work if used properly. I.E. Proper shot placement. But an error here, such as hitting a major bone such as the upper leg bone (very easy to do if the lung shot is a little too far foreward) may cause trouble with the light ball.

Dan

[northmn]

The purchase of the modern gun got me thinking when they said it was "better"  Roundball kind of touched on my point when he felt that he saw a progression of efftect with the bigger ball.  Like Dan I think the 50, in the North where deer can weigh in at over 200 pounds is a pretty good deeer rifle.  whether the 58 I need to put the finishing touches on is "better" I question.  Dead is dead.  Lots of folks bought 54"s in case they get a dream elk hunt, and some for bear hunting whcih we can do in MN.  I just htink there is a point where one knows that if you shoot a game animal with what you are carrying you will get it.  Going larger does not always mean its in some mystical way better.  I have shot and seen so many deer shot with so many calibers and have not seen a lot of difference.  If shot on a field and not broke down or brain shot they usually run off the field to the woods edge.  If shot in the woods they seem to run about as far.  If the caliber is adequate and you get complete penetration, etc. 

DP

[bob in the woods]

My preferred hunting rifle is a .54 but have recently completed a .62 Edward Marshall for the purpose of moose hunting.  Having said that,I have shot more deer with a .50 than anything else. The main reason is that the B profile swamped barrels in .50 make up into such nice carrying/shooting guns, I just seem to have one of them in my hand when I see a deer!   

[Kermit]

The island where I live--in Puget Sound--requires a smoothbore. It's a "shotgun only" area, and no ML hunts, but if you've got a frontstuffer it's gotta be a smoothie. The deer are SMALL. A .40 smoothrifle would be about perfect--if you can find a landowner who'll let you shoot Bambi. Small deer, short ranges, small gun.

[eagle24]

I'm a greenhorn when it comes to killing deer with a roundball, but I agree with Dpharris on this one.  I killed my first deer with my .50 cal (90gr FFg) a couple of weeks ago.  It performed perfectly and I have to admit my previous reservations are no more.  So, Dan says .45 to .58 for deer.  I'll buy that.  Couple of scenarios.  Your ball hits a twig you didn't see.  Rather have a .45 or .58?  A 250 lb midwest bruiser runs in to 25 yards and offers a slightly quartering towards you shot.  .45 or .58?  Being an avid bowhunter (mostly traditional) for many years, I know that sometimes bad things happen when you shoot a whitetail.  I also firmly believe they WILL happen more often if your equipment is marginal for the job.  As for damaging meat, I've never really been sick over losing a pound or so of meat, but I've been REALLY sick over losing a deer.  I agree, bigger is better.

[northmn]

We could argue minimum ad nauseum, but most agree that a 50-54 makes a very good deer rifle.  Is a 58 or a 62 then "better"  In cases where shots get longer I feel my 58 is better than a 50 with the reservation that I really should not be pushing much more than 100 yards.  Dan, has shown the open plains where he lives and 100 yards may be a closer shot.  I see deer a lot off of my hay fields but have gotten them in the brush.  My limitations are coming from older eyes and lack of shooting in the off season.  Took me awhile to get back to the flintlock hold through.  Still, if I hit a deer through the lungs or make a fairly decent shot with the 50 I will eat venison.  If I do so with the 58 I will eat venison.  I have hit them in the liver with CF's and they run a ways and lay down.  If you do not pursue right away they will stay there.  I think a bit of the "better" is expectations and what we think is good performance.  I do not feel that any ML load with roundball will destroy meat like a high velocity centerfire where the whole shoulder is destroyed.   One individual pointed out that in the early days shoulder shooting was more common, but that was before we had re fridgeration for preservation.  Still if one needs to anchor the animal on the spot a shoulder shot is not all bad with a slower ball.

DP

[FL-Flintlock]

Whoever told you the .35rem is "better" than the .30-30 is sadly mistaken.  Factory ammo only, the difference in terminal effects between the Core-Lokt 170gr .30-30 and the Core-Lokt 200gr .35rem is indistinguishable inside of 50yds but apples to apples from there on out the .30-30 is superior both on paper and in the field.

PRB's in the front stuffers, having used .45 & .50 for a while, .54 is my first choice as not too-big, not too-small but the ones I knocked over with the .45 seemed to be just as dead as the ones knocked over with the .62 but me personally, when given the choice, I'll always opt for too-much as opposed to too-little.

[Dphariss]

The island where I live--in Puget Sound--requires a smoothbore. It's a "shotgun only" area, and no ML hunts, but if you've got a frontstuffer it's gotta be a smoothie. The deer are SMALL. A .40 smoothrifle would be about perfect--if you can find a landowner who'll let you shoot Bambi. Small deer, short ranges, small gun.

Funny but typical.

A PRB will shoot no farther, if as far, as a shotgun and slug. Especially bore sizes under 58-62

Dan

[Daryl]

Seemed to me those 7/8oz. Foster (shuttlecock) Style shotgun slugs, due to their poor BC, had a maximum range of something like 600 yards.  That was back in the 60's - an article in "Guns and Junk "Ammo" magazine, spouting WHY there were shotgun seasons in builtup areas and why ML's were also allowed - due to the short range of round balls.
Sometimes, 'Better' isn't better.

The first thing mfgr's did, was to increase the weight of the Foster slug, from 7/8oz. to 1oz and 1 1/4oz to make them 'better' , thus increasing their range making them 'less safe' in shotgun-only areas.   Then the ML makers brought out slugs for those, when prior to that, all the old timers still in the game and the new shooters to the sport, were using round balls.  The slugs increased the ranges and special weapons seasons, shotgun and ML's, started being closed - that was the gist of the story's continuance into the late 60's, easrly 70's.

Give him a chance and man will screw it up as he pushes the rules as hard as possible - used to call that cheating and as we know, cheaters never prosper.

 

[northmn]

Modern shooters have screwed up about every aspect of every sport.  I remember when the Ruger Blackhawk 44 mag was about as powerful of big game pistol as one could get.  Now pistol shooters use scoped single shots in rifle calibers and some handguns weighing more than a Walker to "handgun hunt", bow hunters have come up with compound bows, and ML's have standardized the 50 cal with some rather unusual ammunition.  Unfortunately in many cases there has been game commissions seeking to limit seasons due to these "improvements" I have shot game with  normal handguns, traditional ML's and longbows and have taken the challenges intrinsic to their limitations.  Some want the recognition without the challenge.  In most cases to argue that a compound is "better" than a longbow depends.  One has more range, one will get a shot off much quicker.  On another thread I see people trying to get slugs to shoot out of 32's.  One claims the 32 Maxiball will take a deer as cleanly as a 30-30.  Which is mostly BS. What is a 32 for   Why not use a 45 RB, which is better in all respects. Modern slugs in a 50 may be more effective than RB for larger game, but we have members that can shoot take elk and moose with RB.  Somehow we equate extra power with "better" which is not necessarily the case.  The early transitions from BP to smokeless were excellent examples where the military found that higher energy longer range cartridges did not do the job up close in both India and the Phillipines.

DP