40 cal for small game/deer

[Rat Trapper]

Thought this thread might prove a bit interesting and I wasn't proven wrong. I lean towards bigger calibers for big game. However since I just got a 40, thought I'd see what you guys wanted to share in regards to the 40. Never understood why the state of Wisconsin made the 40 legal if the rifle is rifled and 45 for a smooth bore?? I'm hoping I can come up with a light load for the 40 that will work for small game.

 

[roundball]

I'm hoping I can come up with a light load for the 40 that will work for small game.

I bet you'll love it...the .40cal seems to be inherently accurate, and from what I've seen posted over the years, its a favorite among bullseye shooters given its combination of economy, accuracy, low recoil, etc...and those features also make it a great choice for small game.

My GM 32" x .40cal Flint drop-in barrel was a proverbial tack driver, and now I'm looking forward to getting a new GM 38" x .40cal Lancaster into operation...hope to try a squirrel with it this fall myself.

 

[Stumpkiller]

I had a neighbor who just died this Spring at 101 years old. He had great success whitetail hunting with a .32-20; which has been illegal in that part of NY for living memory but "overlooked" by the neighbors. (His family was the original clan in that area and everything else was built up around them and it was his land I hunted and target shot on). I lived there 25 years and never heard him take a second shot. But I know he was a very patient hunter and a selective shooter. He was also grim death on woodchucks with it.

Anyway, a .40 muzzleloader is undersized by regulations in NY . . . but with ideal shot placement and within a smaller range (50 yards?) I would not claim it couldn't do the job. Frankly, I'd feel undergunned for a 200 to 250 lb plus whitetail as there are too many variables with the ignition and intervening cover that may make an ideal shot a less than ideal hit.

 

[roundball]

I see that a few people give the common answers of both sides regarding using a .40 on deer and the one making things very personal is you.

If it is legal in your state, then you should feel some consolation that your law makers share your opinion. (or bent to the will of voters who do)

People spoke about their choices and they dared to disagree with your point of view.

Please do not demand that all of us accept your opinion when we honestly hold differing ones.

For all I care, you can stalk deer with a sharp needle and a soda straw.

But if shot placement is all that is needed, why limit the ball size at all. Prove it with a .32. For that matter, why not a .177 cal pellet? Maybe your legislature will pass that one. Hopefully not though, because, size does matter in killing anything. Temporary cavitation, wound channel, bleed out...
We just disagree about the size of projectile hat one should responsibly use in cleanly taking deer.

Can't this be done without crawling into the gutter?

CS

Very well said !
:hatsoff:
And its not limited to only one poster...there have become far too many who spout only keyboard theories on every subject under the sun that comes up no matter what it is.
Yet they have no deep hands on experience to back it up, and/or can't handle the fact that somebody might disagree with "their" chosen way of doing something.

Again, thanks for saying what needed to be said.

 

[BrownBear]

I see that a few people give the common answers of both sides regarding using a .40 on deer and the one making things very personal is you.

If it is legal in your state, then you should feel some consolation that your law makers share your opinion. (or bent to the will of voters who do)

People spoke about their choices and they dared to disagree with your point of view.

Please do not demand that all of us accept your opinion when we honestly hold differing ones.

For all I care, you can stalk deer with a sharp needle and a soda straw.

But if shot placement is all that is needed, why limit the ball size at all. Prove it with a .32. For that matter, why not a .177 cal pellet? Maybe your legislature will pass that one. Hopefully not though, because, size does matter in killing anything. Temporary cavitation, wound channel, bleed out...
We just disagree about the size of projectile hat one should responsibly use in cleanly taking deer.

Can't this be done without crawling into the gutter?

CS

Very well said !
:hatsoff:
And its not limited to only one poster...there have become far too many who spout only keyboard theories on every subject under the sun that comes up no matter what it is.
Yet they have no deep hands on experience to back it up, and/or can't handle the fact that somebody might disagree with "their" chosen way of doing something.

Again, thanks for saying what needed to be said.

Amen! :hatsoff:

 

[George]

My first ML was a .40, and I still have it after 38 years. I carried it on a few deer hunts back then, but never had a shot. As I learned more about the ballistics and capabilities of muzzleloaders I opted for larger calibers and have killed all my deer with .54 or .62 PRB. The .40 is as accurate as any rifle I own, and I have no doubt I can hit a deer in the right spot with it as well as I can with the larger guns. Over the years I've considered using it for deer, but have always hesitated, just not sure what to make of all the negative opinions I've heard about the effectiveness of the caliber. I've considered some things such as these:

An old friend used a .40 for all his deer hunting over a period of many years, and I never heard him say anything about problems. I never deer hunted with him, but I was with him on a wild boar hunt where he dropped a 200+ pound boar in its tracks, but that was at about 20 yards.

I've never heard a statement from a hunter actually using a .40 that he lost deer. Are all the negative opinions being generated in the overstuffed chair ?

I've given some thought to the comparison of the .40 and .45 ballistically. A ton of deer have been killed with a .45, and you don't hear many doubts expressed about the appropriateness of that caliber for deer. My .395" round balls weigh in at 92+ grains, a .440" ball at just about 128 grains, only 36 grains more. With barrels of 42"-43" and charges of FFFg in the range of 75-90 grains very similar muzzle velocities can be obtained from both. Is it really true that the difference of only 36 grains weight can make one caliber a sterling deer slayer and the other a dud?

A .40 is legal in my state for deer, so the only thing keeping me from shooting one with mine is my personal concern for a clean harvest, and I often wonder if I'm not being overly cautious about that.

Spence

 

[roundball]

I've given some thought to the comparison of the .40 and .45 ballistically. A ton of deer have been killed with a .45, and you don't hear many doubts expressed about the appropriateness of that caliber for deer. My .395" round balls weigh in at 92+ grains, a .440" ball at just about 128 grains, only 36 grains more. With barrels of 42"-43" and charges of FFFg in the range of 75-90 grains very similar muzzle velocities can be obtained from both. Is it really true that the difference of only 36 grains weight can make one caliber a sterling deer slayer and the other a dud?

Just to offer some food for thought on the above assessment:

I believe an examination of posts from .45cal users show a trend that anyone who routinely deer hunts with a .45cal also expresses its limitations...typically setting 75yds as the max go/no-go distance.
And in that same vein, the .45cal is not touted as a sterling deer slayer.

The difference in grain weight is extra weight for better penetration, and maybe as or more importantly its also the larger frontal area of the larger ball.
But even considering those points, a .45cal is no more on a par with a .58cal for example, than a .40cal is...they're both relatively small calibers.

Just offering a slightly different point of view...other may see things differently.

 

[majg1234]

well here I go into the fray,last year took a good sized doe with a 40 cal TVM S MTN rifle.PRB cast from WW lead,60gr Fffg Goex, OP felt wad and .015 ticking patch,range was less than 50 yds.She was DRT with a medium high shoulder shot.I hunted for 3 days before I got the shot I wanted,If I'd had my 45, 50 or 54 cal I would've shot the 1st day.Can a .40 take a deer?...yes.Is it adequite for deer? yes..... under the right circumstances. Will I do it again?? Nope.But That hunt will always be special as it was my first Flintlock deer :wink: This year I'll hunt exclusively with my TVM 58 early VA....if it is done in time (still waiting :idunno: )

 

[S.Kenton]

I've killed Many deer with my 45 cal. BP. I have shot out to a few times to 100 yrds and dropped em in their tracks..it's ALL about shot placement and yur level of comfort, skill and confidence in your abilities...GOOD LUCK and stay safe!

 

[George]

Every gun has its limitations. I think of my .54 Hawken as a max 125 yard gun, but my .62 smoothbore as a max 90 yard gun. My Colerain turkey barrel is a max 40+ yard turkey gun, my cylinder .62 is a max 25 yard turkey gun. As long as I stay within their limitations they all do an excellent job. Aye, there's the rub.

A .40 fits in there in its niche, and I don't see why a man who is willing to stay within its limitations shouldn't be able to take deer, because a .40 will certainly kill them when things are right.

Spence

 

[roundball]

I don't see why a man who is willing to stay within its limitations shouldn't be able to take deer, because a .40 will certainly kill them when things are right.

No disagreement here...the wild card is "the limitations".
What are they...what's the limitation that would make a .40cal as potent as a .50/.54/.58cal for example...

 

[longcruise]

Lot's of opinions here from many people that I respect. Funny thing, they don't all agree!

Here's my theory on caliber selection. Bigger is always better. It's legal to use a .50 for elk in my state. Hunters that I respect differ. Some say it's not enough and others say it's effective.

If I err, I prefer to be on the side of bigger than needed.

Not saying what you should choose to do, just my view on it.

I currently use a .54 for elk but am probably going to a .58. My own experience says I don't need it but it can't hurt! :wink:

 

[George]

...what's the limitation that would make a .40cal as potent as a .50/.54/.58cal for example...

Short range and high velocity will do for the .40 what it does for every caliber, but I wouldn't know how to decide when or if they were equivalent. Small balls lose velocity/energy very quickly, and that's why I've always opted for a large ball and high velocity.
I would never chose a .40 as my primary deer gun, but if I decide I want to kill one with it, I would do it like I do hunting turkey with a cylinder bore, hold the shot until I can almost reach out and touch it. I wouldn't hesitate long if I could get a shot with everything just right in the 35-50 yard range with a charge of 70 gr. FFFg. A .40 caliber ball with a MV of 2200 fps ain't no BB.

That's all speculation, of course, since I've never shot a deer with a .40, probably never will.

Spence

 

[George]

:haha: The replies to this thread surprise me a little. One of the things I've made a nuisance of my self about over the years is my belief that hunters who sight their guns in at, say, 50 yards "because in my country none of my shots are ever longer than that", are handicapping themselves. Using the point blank method and sighting for maximum range is so much more logical, but I must have heard a million guys say "in my country none of my shots are ever longer than 50 yards" or "I can't see over 50 yards" or "I never take shots over 50 yards, anyway". Now, here's a gun which seems custom made for those 50-yards-and-under shots, and yet people are all over it like ugly on an ape. You guys are hard to predict. :haha:

Spence

 

[Stumpkiller]

Well, yeah, but if I like to get under 50 yards with a stout load in a .54 where should I be with a .40? :wink:

I'm sighted on at 100 yards. 1-1/2" high at 50 and can bother woodchucks pretty well out to 130 yards. I'll go out to 80 or 85 yards with a deer; but the angels would have to be singing and bluebirds on my shoulders for much further than that - with a solid rest as well.

 

[rabjr]

Just because I sight in at 50 yards now a days don't mean I can't shoot at 75. I know where I'm hittin at that distance and I don't trust my eyes with open sights beyond that so 75 is my limit. Even so, I am in the "bigger is better" crowd and the .40 just don't do it for me neither does the .45. :idunno:

 

[Rat Trapper]

Great read this morning. Thanks for everyone who took the time to put in their 2 cents worth. While I have always leaned towards if big was good even bigger must be better, I just might have to give the 40 a try. If I do it will be during a doe hunt and you can trust it will be used at bow & arrow ranges. Getting a turkey gauge slam under your belt is like using a 40 for deer. The gauge slam is the taking a turkey with all 6 common shotshell gauges. The 10 ga and 12 ga are easy but when you get down to the 28 and 410 you must wait until they are very close.

I have a buddy who always waits until everything is perfect and then puts a bullet between the eyes. He says that way you have no bullet holes to deal with in a brain tanned hide. I'd guess that a 40 cal round ball between the running lights would work all day long. Seems we all agree it isn't the proper caliber for trophy hunting. Anyone who has shot some deer with the 40 caliber can still feel free to jump in here and add your 2 cents.

 

[majg1234]

The limit the 40cal has relative to larger calibers has to be realized and used.The days I hunted with mine I purposely hunted areas were any shot that presented would be much less than 50yds and more likely what another poster called "bow range".This little rifle will stack shots into less than 1" @ 60yds but I will not take a shot @ that distance for all the reasons already posted.It DID kill the doe DRT and the moment will never be forgotten.....nor will I likely repeat the hunt as I agree that bigger is better and I have bigger to hunt with...now for the EV 58 to come in...please oh please!!!!

 

[roundball]

"...I just might have to give the 40 a try. If I do it will be during a doe hunt and you can trust it will be used at bow & arrow ranges..."

And no disagreement here with that either...you added the qualifier of short yardage and the discipline to stick to that. I think one of the things that plagues all of us, myself included, is that we sometimes don't add in enough description / information to a statement something like "a .40cal is a good deer rifle".
And as we've agreed, yes they can be...under the right circumstances.


With my new .40cal Lancaster itching to be used for something, I could even do the same.
Try and get my buck tags filled first with a .50cal I want to use this year.
Then set up for Does at a trail crossing a drainage ditch I know about, exactly 25yds from a ground blind, with the .40.

The drainage ditch is a huge deep wide ditch you could drop a Volkswagon in. When deer come to the edge of it, they pause for a few seconds to look all around...then go down the bank out of sight, reappearing as they scramble up the other side. That pause presents a perfect broadside heart shot at a known 25yds...could use the little .40cal right there.

 

[Kapow]

It seems that the real value of the .40 is it's suitability for small game with the knowledge that if you stumble across something larger you have an opportunity at taking it, rather than deliberately setting out after big game with it. That's the logic I've employed in selecting it for my next rifle anyway.