84 deer travelled an average of 31 yards after being shot with a .270
SCDNR - Wildlife Information
Printable View
84 deer travelled an average of 31 yards after being shot with a .270
SCDNR - Wildlife Information
Interesting read.
Shot placement..#1.
that is a good read. so using a dog expect to improve your chance of bringing home a deer by 20 % , shoot them square in the shoulder, and stop using ttsx's .
Looks like well worth a good read.
That's about as good a summary as I've read. And very gratifying, me being a .243 Win soft point shoulder shooter who's been harangued and scolded and generally belittled by .30-06 Partition heart shooters since the mid 80s!
Deer traveled an average of 14 yards after being shot with a 25/06........ just sayin :)Quote:
Originally Posted by Tahr
With one exception the only time any of the deer that I have shot have "traveled" are rolling down the hill to my feet. It's always the shoulder for me.
said it before and guaranteed to say it again......they dont go far when you take the front wheels out.
Seems about rightQuote:
Originally Posted by Tahr
They only gave caliber not cartridge so maybe 257 roberts, 250 savage or maybe even 257 weatherby :yaeh am not durnk:Quote:
Originally Posted by 257weatherby
And one over on the monolithics too... god knows I hope the enviro-hippycrites don’t bring the anti-lead cobblers to fruition... soft and frangible will always be the way to go for a fast and ethical kill for deer.
I shoot in the front shoulders most of the time no messing about, but its not often a deer will drop on the spot unless the shoulder joint is smashed, usually go 20 yards. Dead on their feet all the time though. Dead is dead.
rather dumb to lump partitions in with monos....the partition is both soft and hard.....more towards the soft in preformance with bonus of penertration more towards hard.....
Flyblown,the .243 is SUPPOSED to be fired into shoulders to make it work.....we cant all be dead eye dicks and head/neck shoot everything.
The hard bullet category seems a little skewed.
"Also, bullets that are generally accepted as being too heavy for southeastern sized deer were placed in this group."
Mentions the barns X bullet so it's a little out of date wne it comes to all copper alloy bullets.
I have shot deer with cartridges from a .30-06 down to a pure lead bullet in a black powder .44-40 and they all died where they were standing or within a few yards depending on where I hit them.
Deer are pretty easy to kill with some form of rifle I have decided.
And I think that’s one of the main two points eh Carlsen, what you shoot them with rifle wise isn’t that important.
What a study like this can never capture I suppose is the manner in which the deer was shot, seeing as how these were all shot out of a stand. For the typical kiwi shooting, off hand, kneeling, off sticks, prone on a bipod... I know my placement snap shooting off hand in the woods at a close-ish range deer that knows I’m there is nowhere near as flash as me shooting them prone from five or seven times further away.
It's where you hit them and with a good expanding bullet that counts.
funnily enough you see what Winchester and browning have done with their matrix projectiles.Quote:
Originally Posted by Mooseman
Supposed to rapidly dump all the energy where you put it. aim for shoulder and big damage.
@csmiffy well there’s a bullet I’d never heard of before. Just watched the promo video and will now search for reviews. Looks very interesting, thanks for posting.
This south Carolina paper got some real good discussion going last night, winter pot roast and a few mates. Interesting to see the range of opinion, almost all it seems founded in what their dad told them to do.
Got us owning up to fails that hadn’t been discussed before, the how and the why... happens to us all at some point or other, but there was defo a common thread... shooting for the “crease” and going in too high and slightly too far back, over the top of the heart, into the rear lungs and maybe just empty cavity if the lungs are deflated.
Really interesting to hear how little the two younger fellas knew about different bullet types. So we nipped out to the shed and cut a few in half to have a look, that was a good little exercise.
@Flyblown Well I suppose its a take on conventional soft points.
Instead of trying to make a bullet that tries to do everything-mushroom, deliver energy and all but if not completely go right through they have gone the other way and made it so in a relatively controlled manner wants to dump all of the energy in there with maybe a little penetration. A bit of the opposite of the copper projectiles which are meant to need a bit of speed to work but will still generally go right through but not always mushroom if its a bit far away.
Basically they want it to go in and wreck things and they will go down.
Edit:it seems from the hype they are also meant to penetrate properly also.
Henry made his living shooting deer for skins up the back of Tokomaru - I met him in about 1965 - he had been doing it since around 1945 when he decided to withdraw from society and live in the bush - he probably shot a thousand or more deer during that period with his 303 - all his ammo were solid nose and came from NZFS and like many hunters of the day - he put a file over the tip - likely most of the deer fell over close by. Me and my Mates that started hunting in 1965 used 303 or 30.06 - we built a jig for each and drilled them with a 1/16th drill - most of the deer fell over fairly close. Most of us started without scopes or dogs. Most deer die fairly rapidly if they get hit in the shoulder with any caliber 243 or larger - 270 is a great rifle!Attachment 91155
interesting about the drilling thing. I was going to have a play with the fmj 303 ammo I have but that's was all I was going to do. Softpoints now are readily available but back in the day not so much.Quote:
Originally Posted by time out
Careful about praising the 270. Being a patched up member of the #270 gang will definitely draw some attention lol.
2FF2
Great photo of a man in his element. It was that era, late 40s early 50s that my Grandpa was here working on the Waikato hydro builds. He fell in with a good bunch and spent many many weeks in the bush with blokes like Henry. Got an education in deer hunting alright and me and my cuzzies got the benefit of that experience for sure. The stories of just how many bloody deer there were though makes for a helluva yarn, I reckon they were just about tripping over them. The work to get them out though, crikey. Not for the faint hearted.
My father worked for the Forest Service at Karioi Forest during the 1950s and 60s. He used a .303 and was selling venison to the local chiller at Waiouru In those days you didn't need the ears on the carcass so he could get the Government bounty of 3 rounds of .303 ex Army solids per pair of deer ears. He made a jig and drilled the tips to give a slight hollow point and shot heaps of deer with them. From memory he used to get 10 pence per pound.
To be fair, Henry wasn't the best looking of blokes - unless that photo just caught him on a bad day - which might have had something to do with him withdrawing from society perhaps ??
Regarding numbers shot I remember Mick Rosinowski told me he shot 13,000 on foot before they bought their first helicopter.....
Yes - we drilled all oursQuote:
Originally Posted by csmiffy
The jig would get worn but - needed to hard face it - but that was beyond our country hick technology
Used to buy in a round packet/box - 75 rounds
Were shooting Goats by the 100’s in King Country – pulled off some great shots – or prob flukes in my case
Wish I could remember the price
some of us remember the old school silvertips with fondness while others curse them........huge lead tip covered with light aluminum cap....rapid expansion and big hole to let the daylight in...... the term reinventing the wheel comes to mind....Quote:
Originally Posted by csmiffy
Was that the Rosinowski from Ikamatua ?Quote:
Regarding numbers shot I remember Mick Rosinowski told me he shot 13,000 on foot before they bought their first helicopter.....
https://www.ballisticstudies.com/Kno...e+Killing.html
There it is, everything you ever wanted to know about game killing and shot placement but were too afraid to ask.
I am a bit confused by what is described in the article as a 'shoulder shot' (was it high, low, mid, forward ,rear shoulder). Because animals ran after being 'shoulder shot' I am guessing the shot was high behind the shoulder.
Yes that was Mick a champion of a man. Allan (Micks son) is still operating machines from Reefton. If anyone wants to get at the very best Cham hunting and biggest bucks in NZ look Allan up.Quote:
Originally Posted by nor-west
its all about placement, you could shoot a deer in the bum with a 338LM and never find it yet a 223 into the heart is instant deathQuote:
Originally Posted by Carlsen Highway
Yes. But not really, and that's what the survey confirmed and something that we already knew. A heart shot results in a runner and often a lost deer.Quote:
Originally Posted by gonetropo
Shoot a bit higher into the centre of the shoulder and recovery percent will be higher.
I agree with Sneeze, in that the Roberts and Savage may very well make up the bulk of chamberings used to take the 36 deer reported in the .25-cal category.
The average-distance-travelled figures by calibre presented in the report deserve more discussion, as the figure for .25-cal is close on being only half of the next calibre - in other word this bore size performed best, and by some margin.
I hold the opinion that the .25-cal is the sweet-spot for medium-sized deer (this probably should be extended to the metric equiv 6.5mm as this was not a separate category in the report). Other factors being equal, larger diameter, heavier, faster bullets of a comparable construction will be more effective at killing, but on the effectiveness-vs-recoil curve, something like the 257 Roberts with 117-120gr is optimum for the distances reported. I think in the data we are seeing that it is the lower recoil that allows for consistently better shot placement by hunters who don't do a lot of shooting, and I suspect given the ticket system in the US that plenty of the hunters who turn up at the Cedar Knoll Club are fairly infrequent 1-packet-of-ammo-prior-to-the-season-to-check-the-old-girl shooters.
It is also clear from what I read that hunters who shoot quite regularly - like many here on the forum - can underestimate the ability in hunters who shoot less frequently (the majority) to handle moderate recoil and achieve the preferred shot placements mentioned above. We have these discussions from time to time about the best cartridge for newbies. This report should influence our recommendations.
I didn’t read all the report but when I shoot a deer with my 308 they drop - placement
I’m sure if I spent more time in the bush then the law of averages will take over and I will eventually lose one
My shooting is all bush and little experience at longer ranges
when you look at the average range of the sample......you couldve shot the lot with your mod 94 .30/30 with buckhorn sights...if you had kept your aim forwards of the line of leg the deer wouldve all dropped on the spot .Ive been hunting for morethan 30 years...Ive helped unsucessfully to track wounded deer twice that others had hit but cant recall ever doing so myself....either they are hit and go down pretty darn quick or been clean missed.Ive had some right balls ups and piss poor shooting has resulted in lots of noise but no results. age and experience has taught me to AIM THE PLURRY RIFLE and place projectile where it will do the most good,now days Im happy to take deer at sub hundred yards with any of my centrefires,the 7.62x39mm has killed a few now as has the .223 just because I felt like taking it for a walk. I have complete faith in the .270 as we have taken lots of animals over the years and Ive finnally sorted my shit out to where I can happily shoot deer to 300ish yards and KNOW they are going down... the .308 is now kid on the block still in honeymoon stage and getting to know her properly,good reloads help me to have complete faith she will do the bizo too.
Ive played with subsonics ,still do...one of these days I will shoot something other than goats or sheep with them...for the same reason my dog licks its bits....because I can.
Like mentioned above by Mickey d the front line of the forleg shot, the high shoulder shot, the lower neck shot, all are much better options than the “in the crease” heart shot. I’ve not really ever understood why the heart shot is still so popular cos as Tahr says it will result in long runners a lot of the time, most of the time. Especially here in NZ were 50-60 yds and no dog can be good bye deer. In the UK they’ll tell you its because the game dealers won’t accept shoulder shot carcasses because of meat damage.Quote:
Originally Posted by Tahr
Yet still most outfitters and lots of different books and websites and so on still want the heart shot. Doesn’t make much sense to me.
Yes, they all could have been shot successfully with a .30-30. They could equally have all been shot successfully with DRT kills with Sako75's .308, or the previously mentioned 338LM, .223 etc, but in this study they weren't. No calibre was completely effective in the hands of these hunters, far from it, and from the data of distance travelled recorded against calibre size it appears that the .257 was the most effective calibre, with performance falling off significantly for bore sizes both above and below. Why ?
257 less available and perhaps more of a reloaders bore resulting in those useing said bore shooting more and being better shots?Quote:
Originally Posted by Puffin
Sent from my SM-A320Y using Tapatalk
^^^ This, or something similar. The quarterbore has always been something of an aficionado’s cartridge, and I mean that in a positive way.Quote:
Originally Posted by veitnamcam
The sample size (very small) could very easily be skewed heavily in favour of one particular calibre simply by having a more experienced shooter with that particular rifle. It comes down to the shot placement variable, if the .257 shooter(s) is putting it reliably into the neck, spine and shoulder, then there’s your answer. Could have been the one single bloke on several trips.
@Puffin I hear what you’re saying and I certainly don’t disagree with the assertion that the .257 / .264 bore is well suited for deer, clearly that’s been the case for decades.
But I shoot a range of calibres like many blokes here, .223, .243, 6.5mm, 7mm and .308 and I back myself every shot to put that deer down on the spot and I’m always a little cross with myself when I don’t. Most of the time that’s what happens, the carry rifle I am most effective with is and always has been the .243 Winchester, shooting prone. High percentage shots where time, wind, line of sight, everything is on my side. Deer shouldn’t really be running anywhere, when everything is in the shooter’s favour, but shit does happen from time to time.
And on the rare occasion when I sit in a blind and wait for the fallow to come to me, my .223 T3 Super Varmint will drop ‘em on the spot everytime, have never failed to kill them outright with a neck shot with that rifle. If that was the only type of shooting I ever did, my stats would look pretty bloody good I reckon. And the Wife’s would be even better, she’s a machine.
But it isn’t the only type of shooting I do and when I don’t manage to put the deer down on the spot, its because I didn’t put the bullet where I intended, which 90% of the time means it hit behind the shoulder in the rear of the lungs / heart area. And 50% of that 90% its a longer range shot with either the Creedmoor or the 7mm-08, and the other 50% of the time its a close range snap shot in the scrub and timber with the .308.
I can 100% say that my heavier bullet shots account for more runners that my lighter bullet shots, simply because the heavier bullets are used in less precise circumstances. But because I use the right heavier bullets for the medium game animal, I know that if I’m a bit off, they won’t go far. And that’s the soft frangible bullets coming into play and why the stats reflect that in the study.
If anything I’m looking at the number of runners in the stats, shot at what I would regard as quite short range from a good rest with good visibility, and I’m wondering how many newbies they had in their study. Cos shooting out of a high seat should be pretty bloody bankable for an experienced shooter. Branches and so on can play a part in the woods in the US, I’ve done a fair bit in the winter season there and it can be helluva frustrating to get a clear shot through the branches. Its also friggin’ cold. Like frozen bones cold.
I don’t think calibre has got much to do with dropping deer on the spot. It’s down to how the shooter sets up the shot, the point of aim and all the circumstantial variables that can affect the trajectory from the moment he pulls the trigger to when the bullet strikes. Buck fever being one of them. And if the shooter is using a soft bullet on soft little deer like he should be, then the odds of a bang flop are even more in his favour.
Yes a heart shot is death, but even with Pai Mei's five point exploding heart technique Bill didn't drop instantly. In fact he still made five steps which for a Human is close to five metres. Five steps for a spooked deer well that is at least fifteen metres. That could take even Uma Thurman parting scrub with a Samurai sword a while to find me thinks.Quote:
Originally Posted by gonetropo
