• GUESTS

    If You  want access  to member only forums on FM, You will need to Sign-in or  Sign-Up now .

    This box will disappear once you are signed in as a member.

  • WE CREATE LONG TERM, MEANINGFUL RELATIONSHIPS IN HERE ... PLEASE JOIN US.

    You know what we all love...

    RECEIVE THE GIFTS MEMBERS SHARE WITH YOU HERE...THEN...CREATE SOMETHING TO ENCHANT OTHERS THAT YOU WANT TO SHARE
    When you enchant people, you fill them with delight and yourself in return. Have Fun!!!

Sign in to follow this  
Thomas

bullet

Recommended Posts

Thomas

Whats your favorite round for deer? I have a 30-06, but I'm thinking of getting another rifle? I need the deer to drop quickly as I'm color blind red/green - can't see blood vs leaves.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
kpj5br

When you say round I'm thinking the specific load.

I like Winchester Fail Safe in 140 grain .270 caliber.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Mark Christianson

A different cartridge isn't going to necessarily drop deer quicker.
A 30-06 has plenty of punch to drop em.
Its all about placement.

If you are worried about dropping deer in their tracks, do what sharpshooters do.
Sharpshooters aim right at the base of the skull/neck to dispatch deer quickly.
Its obviously not a long range type of shot, but if you are worried about tracking your deer, that method drops them in their tracks.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
PerchJerker

I hunt with a .30-06 and I think it's as good a caliber as you'll find for Minnesota deer. There's lots of other good choices too, but you're splitting hairs and they should all have one thing in common: 1 shot = 1 dead deer.

For a long time my favorite deer bullet was a 150 grain Winchester Premium Ballistic Tips. They fly great out of my gun, and most of the deer I've shot with this bullet have gone less than 30 yards. Some have gone significantly less than 30 yards.

But a year or two ago I switched away from the ballistic tip bullets, and now I use Federal Boattail Soft Points in 165 grains. They also fly good out of my gun, and personally I like the heavier, more solid bullet with better weight retention. It probably won't give me as many super-quick, super-impressive, drop-them-in-their-tracks kills I've gotten on deer with ballistic tips, but I think it's a more solid, more reliable bullet -- in other words, it gives me more margin for error for when I don't make a perfect heart/lung shot.

If you think you'll only make perfect heart or lungs shots, a ballistic tip bullet is a good bet to limit your tracking. But overall I think soft tip expanding style bullets are better bets in case you hit one in the shoulder or something like that. More tracking, but less chance of a lost/wounded deer.

The most important thing, regardless of caliber or bullet, is to practice your shooting. And not just off the bench at the range, but in a hunting situation where you don't have a perfect rest at the perfect height. The next most important thing is to wait for the perfect heart/lung shot, so you put the deer down quickly.

Good luck, I hope this helps.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Gissert

Once I started hunting elk, I moved from a -06 semi auto to a .338 win mag bolt.

I liked the rifle so much, that I use it on whitetails also.

I shoot handloads, with 210 grain Barnes X-Bullets.

My wife shoots the same bullet, except in a .338/06, which is simply a 30-06 case necked open to .338.

We have recovered two bullets from deer. Both still weighed 210 grains, but are opened with four perfect petals to about 50 caliber. One of these bullets went through both shoulder blades, yet still stayed together. Both of thes bullets looks just like the ones you see in magazine ads.

I know that the .338 is way overkill for deer, but I have great confidence in the rifle to put the bullet where I want, and there in no more damage to meat than with my old -06.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
WaveWacker

Your 06 has more then enough ooommff to drop a deer in it's tracks. I personally shoot a .308 with Federal Premium 165gr bullets and can honestly say that 75% of deer that I shot either drop in their tracks or at least drop within seeing distance. This is given that the majority of my shots are taken in wooded areas (not much field hunting) with 100yds being about the max. shot length.

My uncle shoots a 06 with a 180gr bullet and drops them as well. I guess when I want to put the deer down and don't care about wasting some "shoulder meat" (i.e. nice sized bucks), I'll aim right in the middle of the shoulder. On does where I may not care if I do miss I've taken them in the neck or where the neck meets the shoulder. I've had numerous ones that go down like they instantly had their legs cut off at the knees.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
MikeYager - Suzuki

Shot placement is more important. If you want them to fold go for neck or shoulder. I usually go for lung with my 06 and they run a little ways. Not a big deal on private land. I butcher my own deer so I try to avoid hitting main meat sections.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest

I like the 130gr sierra boat tail in 270win. I have shot 4 deer behind the shoulder and haven't found a heart in one of them. It just turns to jelly and gos out the other side. It's not good for the meat but the deer does't go far. It puts a hole around 6" in diameter 6" deep in the chest cavity. Like I said thou you lose most of the front end of the deer.

I too am R/G color blind.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
weekendjunkie

fedrals nosler partition 165 grain will put them down in a hurry. havent seen one walk, crawl, or run away yet that has been smacked by this round

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Thomas

Thanks for the reply so far, what do people think of:
I'm thinking of getting a WSM.
I wanted to get a smaller gun then 30-06.
I hunt in deep woods (shorter and lighter gun is better), but also occasionally have a 300 yard shot.
I need the deer to drop quickly, because of my color blindness.

I'm thinking of 6.5x55SE, 308 Win, 7mm-08 mag, and 270.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Swamp Scooter

Thomas,

Your 30-06 will continue to do the job for you but if you are going for a new gun I would go witht he .308. The 270 does not have very heavy bullet options and goes so fast you may have a problem with expansion if you do not hit a bone.

The .308 will not kick so much and you can use it for a variety of close and long range shooting. Just my .02

I am now shooting the cannon .7mm mag. I like it but you also need to know how to use the gun to get the results you are looking for.

Shot placement is the key.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Eric Wettschreck

First off, I am no where near a ballistics expert, and I am totally colorblind so I kind of know where you're coming from.

I absolutely love my Mauser 7.62. For me, it's a good all around gun. I can use it for a longer range shot, but it also whacks through brush and the thick stuff well.

I agree totally with the fellas that say shot placement is the key. Also, get to know your gun. This is especially true if you get a new one. I'm not too bad of a shot with my Mauser, when I grab my friends 06 I'm terrible. And vice versa.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Mr Special

I would also go with the 300WSM and the Nosler Partition 165 grain combo. That's one fast moving and hard hitting round. I used a 243Win with a 100 grain Nosler Partition and haven't had any trouble dropping a deer. Again shot placement is the most important.

Good luck this season everyone

[This message has been edited by Mr Special (edited 09-22-2004).]

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Cooter

If ya ain't gonna shoot much past 100yrds go with the slug or sabot 12 ga and whatch em drop. Its all about the initial shock, which no deer rifle can do like a shotgun if you don't hit major bones.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
orchdork

I switched from the "06" to 7MMRM when I went from woods to long range ridgetop shooting. I use the 160grain spbt and it definately does the job. I would switch back to the "06" if I moved back into the woods though. That mag is real heavy.

Practice is the key. Buy a bunch of bullets and set some targets out at your stand in the approximate places where you commonly see deer and then shoot the **** out of them. That way when the real thing comes along you will know exactly how your weapon will act. If you miss its your fault.

Stick with the "06" unless you have a specific reason for changing. Good rifle.

------------------
The symphony is on! Orchdork

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Philo

I agree with Cooter. I hunt in southeastern MN where shotguns are mandatory for deer hunting. Get a rifled slug barrel for your shotgun. They are accurate out to 100+ yards and kill the deer immediately. No tracking needed. Obviously they are not adequate for any type of long range shooting, however.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Cooter

Dandy buck you got there, especially impressive out of the bed with a smoke pole!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest

I just picked up a Browning A-Bolt in 25wssm. I can't wait for Sunday to touch off a few rounds and find zero.

The Rem Model 7 has nothing on this.

If I didn't have to fish Lake Tetonka LETS, I would spend the weekend at the range.

Sweeeet!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
mdeiley

After looking at photo agin you can actually see the scar on it. It appears the deer must have been down hill facing to the left and the slug went through the shoulder and exited in the pit area missing all vitals. Just a reminder slugs do not drop everything they come in contact with.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
mdeiley

I took a deer last year from down south that was shot with a shotgun slug. It was hit in the front shoulder. I hunt in very steep terrain and do not know if the shooter was shooting up or down. but this deer would have made it through the winter. The bone was messed up but healed was all. Nothing more then a scab on his shoulder was the only sign of a wound. Placemnet looked very good. I did not see the deer walk as I shot him bed down with my muzzleloader. Here he is...
47b4d702b3127cceb77c1dc952260000001610

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
bigbucks

Slugs kill a lot of deer & I've shot 30 or so with them, but they definitely do not drop them all even with a perfect hit. I'd say the majority of deer I've shot with a slug have kept going or half anyway. Especially if you shoot them running, unless you hit spine, head, or neck, they often don't break stride.

I've seen a few get gut shot that had to be shot again 2 miles later. They weren't deer I'd shot, but either way, it's not a hammer by any means, but it makes a dang big hole.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
Sign in to follow this  



  • Your Responses - Share & Have Fun :)

    • DonkeyHodey
      I eat bass.  I also release bass and typically only keep them to eat when they are by-catch targeting other eaters and I'm in the filleting mood...  (I personally don’t want to keep a bass >~14inches for eating anymore; they don't taste as good (especially in the summer), they have more toxins and I buy the argument that bass help control/balance the bluegill population...) Catch and Release isn’t perhaps the end-all-be-all  for a healthy lake/fishery… Story #1:  My wife caught a nice ~15 incher in mid-May that was missing an eye...--We couldn't keep him then due to season, but it would've been a bit of a dilemma if he’d been caught a week later after full opener.   Do I eat a bigger fish that might be limited to grow big (?mercy killing) or let the survivor continue to survive?   (It did seem likely his lost eye was a result of having been previously caught (?foul hook with a treble hook or removed roughly/carelessly/mishandled?   I could tell stories, and I suppose that could be an interested thread to start:  fish removal techniques you’ve witnessed that horrify you...  This, perhaps, highlights what Del was getting at in terms of harvest vs. annoying the fish…) Agree with Don.  Wasting of ANY fish is awful.  Story #2:  I was fishing this spring in the river and caught a big ol’ beauty of a white sucker (personal best!); when I released it, I was mocked by fellow shore-fishermen for throwing back a "carp" and they advised me the "right thing to do" is pitch it up on the shore...   (there's still alot of fisherman that believe the DNR actually encourages destruction of "rough fish")  I politely reminded them this big treasure is likely providing (through its baby suckers) future countless meals for their precious walleyes…  This argument was laughed at…  But back to bass…--Rodbender—I think you'll find very few anglers interested in a stranger telling them which fish they can or cannot keep...  It comes across as “stop eating MY future big bass!”  A lake is very much designed to thrive with harvest, and I would point out, releasing everything doesn’t always cleanly equal “more big fish.” There's comments here about the northern pike that perhaps highlight this paradox;  numerous lakes in MN had a ridiculous slot limit (release all norts <40 inches) that effectively made nort fishing catch and release (since the central and southern lakes effectively can’t produce a 40 incher and even if it could, eating one would be, well, interesting…).  The goal was to produce more big fish—the end result was lakes infested with <20 inch snakes that no one seems to want (and end up a nuisance by-catch when targeting anything else.)  Furthermore, those numerous small norts grow very slowly (and die of “old age” at 27 inches…)  (…thus, now the DNR is expending resources to try and encourage harvest and hence the (in my opinion) move in the right direction with the 2018 nort regulation changes…)  Yes, I know bass and norts are 2 VERY different species and react differently to lake/season/climate conditions, but lakes/fish/nature doesn’t always behave as we intuitively “know” it will.  A fellow fisher (that is eating “your bass”) might be reducing competition for remaining bass and potentially increasing their growth velocity in the lake.  (I will again repeat:  A lake is very much designed to thrive with harvest--be it humans, eagles, loons, cormorants, bears, snapping turtles, other fish, etc…  I know, we humans tend to be greediest, and take our harvest to unsustainable damaging extremes, but, that’s why we have rules/DNR/etc…  Just my thoughts…) Rodbender—If you want more big bass, there’s a good argument that you should harvest and eat (do not waste!) more small northern pike; they are outcompeting the bass for forage.    (It’ll likely get you farther than trying to guilt/change/bully what is otherwise legal behavior in others…)
    • ozzie
      To the OP: As you get older and wiser you will notice that you can only change what you can control and you cannot control what others think is right.  They are within the law so the only thing to do is get the law changed.  Bass are fun to catch but too many of them and they become a nuisance just like small pike... Also be happy that you are sitting at a landing, getting paid good $$$, to "protect" a lake that more than likely already has most of the invasive species that you are sitting there trying to protect the lake against!!  Sorry but I am not a fan of the AIS inspectors as they just harass most of the time and have absolutely done nothing to stop the spread of invasive species IMO.  My prime example is North Long Lake in Brainerd...4-5 years ago, show up to the landing and see they have a spray station there.  We pull up and talk with the DNR rep and they said they are pressure washing all boat upon exit to spray them for clean travel to next lake.  At this point North Long was listed as a clean lake with no listed invasive species according to the DNR and the DNR employees at the launch that day.  I asked them why wash boats coming out of a clean lake and not washing them before entering said clean lake?  They said it would be too time consuming to wash pre launch!!!! WTF good does it to spray boats exiting a clean lake and not upon entering?!?!?  This is our tax and license dollars being spent on the worst system around: AIS Inspectors!!!!  Keep up the good fight but to me your attempt to educate people on what to keep is about as pointless as you job sitting at the landing protecting lakes that are already invaded by the same species you are trained to find!!!  People who keep bass, start off with a different thought process, as most don't consider bass (let alone bigger bass) good table fare to begin with... 
    • leech~~
      Lol, had this happen many times on lakes in the Brainerd area and north.   One nice quite morning my buddy and I got up before day light to fish for Eye's in a small channel between lakes he has a cabin on.  No one in sight on the lake. About 8:30 am we hear this loud roar coming around the point and about 15 Bass boats with 150 to 300 hp motors flying WOT around the point and right up this small channel!  Thought we were going to get hit or swamped by their wakes! 🤪   I'm all for boys having fun with their toys but asking others to not keep fish they are making a big game out of, not so much! 😕   That being said I have only kept 3 Bass in my life. One's on the wall and 2 I eat to give it a try and never eat another there after. 
    • LoonASea
      Its been years since I targeted bass ,,,, Ever since I fished a lake during a bass tournament and was told to get out of their way because they were fishing a tournament and paid lot of dollars to be there to fish ,,, My response was "If you want to fish here get up earlier tomorrow" ,,, That kinda soured my opinion of bass fishermen ,,,, Respect for the resource and other fishermen is my train of thought ,,, Back to your OP,,, suggesting that the smaller fish make better table fare might be the better approach and not give the idea that you are standing on a pedestal,,, If you contact the DNR ask when fishing with 2 lines will become a reality    
    • SkunkedAgain
      Congratulations. Don't be a stranger around here
    • rodbender27
      Thank you for your input and information you have acquired through your experience in the field. I also agree with your words on small pike. It was nice to see the DNR taking a stand on the issue and creating a new set of regulations that will hopefully benefit all areas of our state.  With some of the responses I have gotten and some of my own self-reflection I have begun to realize that there may not be a best way to approach this issue and try and enhance the mindful thinking of others. For me, this is very disheartening as a passionate angler who has had the tradition of enjoying the outdoors passed down to me from multiple generations before. Taking the interest that was instilled in me from an early age and putting in diligent hours on the water to improve my understanding of fish behavior to catch the largest and most savvy bass has presented me with a sense of accomplishment that I would love to see in future anglers. I hate to reduce that possitive thinking because there may not be that possibility for anglers who target all species of fish that swim. As much as I see angling enjoyment decreasing if the selective harvest trend does not continue to increase, the most concerning issue to me is one from an economic standpoint as my home state of Minnesota relies heavily on the market of water related activities as one if its major sources of profit generation. If we as anglers (who make up a large percentage of that consumer market) are not able to enjoy the hobby because of depleted fisheries, i fear there will be much greater consequences. 
    • Wanderer
      My, that’s a pretty fish!
    • Surface Tension
      Sorry to hear that.  I hope the scrap yard has their contact information and they're tracked down.
    • Surface Tension
      The water is cold up there right now but you still might want to try casting spoons from shore.   As mentioned going inland for streamers or hit a Designated Trout Lake https://www.dnr.state.mn.us/fishing/trout_lakes/list.html  
    • gimruis
      Rodbender, I'm with ya.  I cannot recall the last time I kept a bass for table fare.  For starters, they just don't taste that good because they generally come from shallower, warmer, more polluted bodies of water.  I prefer coldwater species like walleyes, perch, and trout if they are the right size.  And even so, I practice selective harvest too.  I personally don't know anyone that specifically goes out and targets bass as regular table fare.  I'm not going to comment about what I think of that practice but I definitely disagree with it.  I used to work for the DNR and veteran a biologist told me that it takes a bass about a decade to get to 20 inches/5 pounds in the upper Midwest here.  That is NOT a renewable resource in any way, shape, or form.  If people started keeping those fish regularly, the resource would get depleted in a short period of time.  The guys going out there as meat hunters every trip can go kick rocks.  That's the older generation way of thinking.  The modern scientific approach to fishing is resource management and selective harvest.  Luckily there is a strong catch and release ethic amongst most bass anglers.  They don't have to go home with fish in their livewell on a regular basis.  They go because they enjoy it.  Muskie anglers are the same type. As for how to approach these people depleting the bass population on a small lake, I wouldn't say much to them.  They'll eventually see the big picture when they can't catch any more of them.  The fish I wish more people would keep is small pike to be honest.  There are way too many of those in our lakes and rivers because people kept all the big ones for years and now these lakes are loaded with small, aggressive stunted ones that no one wants.