40 cal. on deer?

[Lonegun1894]

The diameter of a 40 caliber ball is plenty big enough to cause a mortal wound to a deer. Just ask anyone who hunts with a modern 30 caliber rifle, or 270, or 243....

...But there is a lot more to a lethal hunting round than simply the diameter of the projectile, though. The energy delivered by the ball is what does the damage, and that is what many states use to establish minimum loads for game. Somewhere I have seen, and I can't for the life of me remember where, that the minimum energy recommended to kill whitetails is 800 ft-lbs. That's at point of impact, not at the muzzle. So if you have access to a ballistics calculator, check and see at what range a .40 can deliver 800 ft-lbs of energy and keep your range less than that.

Also, as someone else said, make sure you check local game laws. Likewise in PA, the minimum caliber allowed for deer is 45.

Per my calculator...
The minimum velocity for a .395" 89gr RB to attain your stated 800 ft/lbs is 1940 fps where it attains 802 ft/lbs, and it drops below your limit before it gets 10 yards. At 2500 fps, it drops below your imposed limit before it reaches 35 yards. And it has to start at 3,000 fps and 1918 ft/lbs at the muzzle to still have 878 ft/lbs left at 50 yards, where it is travelling at 2029 fps.

Please don't take this the wrong way, but you have been told by several here that you can't trust "paper ballistics" when using a ML because it just doesn't translate to hunting effectiveness. I hope the above numbers help you understand what you have been told by others, but still can't seem to grasp that modern and ML are not the same and you have to start seeing a ML as a whole different animal.

 

[hanshi]

I've always considered the "800" ft lb rule to be pure poppycock. I've killed too many deer with various revolvers, mostly .357 but also .41mag & .44mag, that didn't produce 800ft lbs; the .41 and .44 did, however. I've also killed them with modern rifles that don't produce that even at the muzzle. The .45 is my favorite but I wouldn't let 'em walk even if I had a .40.

 

[Lonegun1894]

Exactly my thoughts. I have done the same with moderns, with my lowest powered tool being a .22LR pistol for up close and personal hog hunting. Yes, I know a lot of people believe the ft/lbs theory, but going by that, a .490" RB that starts at 1650 fps is a 20 yard deer rifle, and we all know that isn't correct.

 

[Onojutta]

Per my calculator...
The minimum velocity for a .395" 89gr RB to attain your stated 800 ft/lbs is 1940 fps where it attains 802 ft/lbs, and it drops below your limit before it gets 10 yards. At 2500 fps, it drops below your imposed limit before it reaches 35 yards. And it has to start at 3,000 fps and 1918 ft/lbs at the muzzle to still have 878 ft/lbs left at 50 yards, where it is travelling at 2029 fps

And there we have it, probably explains why the Pennsylvania Game Commission, for one, has outlawed .40 caliber muzzleloaders for hunting deer. That makes sense, thanks for the follow up.

Please don't take this the wrong way, but you have been told by several here that you can't trust "paper ballistics" when using a ML because it just doesn't translate to hunting effectiveness. I hope the above numbers help you understand what you have been told by others, but still can't seem to grasp that modern and ML are not the same and you have to start seeing a ML as a whole different animal.

As for that comment, quite frankly I'm growing tired of debating that topic on here with people who for some reason believe that the laws of physics change depending on your firearm or projectile. If your knowledge of basic science and physics is that limited, perhaps you are the one who is having trouble with grasping the concepts, and I politely decline any further debate.

 

[Onojutta]

I've always considered the "800" ft lb rule to be pure poppycock. I've killed too many deer with various revolvers, mostly .357 but also .41mag & .44mag, that didn't produce 800ft lbs; the .41 and .44 did, however. I've also killed them with modern rifles that don't produce that even at the muzzle. The .45 is my favorite but I wouldn't let 'em walk even if I had a .40.

I don't believe it is a "rule". I'm speculating here a bit because I don't know where I first heard it, but my guess is that is is a guideline that has been established by state wildlife agencies as a practical limit. They need to draw the line somewhere.

Assuming the states have used some minimum energy in determining their permissible game loads (again, I don't know that for sure), I don't believe its ever been postulated that shots delivering 801 ft-lbs of energy will be lethal everytime, but shots delivering 799 ft-lbs will never be.

Same concept as the DOT establishing a safe speed limit. Doesn't mean you can't drive faster or slower than that without crashing, it's simply a threshold based on science and statistics for the average person under the most general conditions.

Personally I would tend to agree with you. Imagine the common knucklehead they have in mind when they establish minimum criteria. I take well placed shots and game that isn't running, in areas where I know the distance, and so I believe that I can be more lethal with a smaller load. If 800 ft-lbs is the minimum for the average knucklehead, most of us could probably be effective with much lighter loads, as in your examples. But again, gotta draw the line somewhere.

 

[satx78247]

Fwiw, my 1st cousin, who is a VERY good marksman, has taken a HERD of our small but very numerous deer in NETEX with his .40 cal. FL mountain rifle. - He killed one at SIX steps from the base of the hickory tree that he was sitting in. - GYD right there, too.

That said, I'll keep right on hunting WT & other game with my .58 caliber "Remington" contract rifle/musketoon or whatever one chooses to call my "replica of nothing" historic.= I trust it to "bring home the venison".

yours, satx

 

[smoothshooter]

Progressive bifocals will fix that.

 

[Lonegun1894]

The diameter of a 40 caliber ball is plenty big enough to cause a mortal wound to a deer. Just ask anyone who hunts with a modern 30 caliber rifle, or 270, or 243.

You conveniently enough left out this part where you said that a .40 is plenty. So which is it? Is it "plenty big enough", or am I too thick-headed to understand the basic laws of physics as you said in your above post? You can't have it both ways. And I happen to know for a fact that a .32 RB is plenty to cleanly take a deer when used by a good shooter with self-discipline (because I HAVE DONE IT several times), so a .40 is more than enough when used by a good hunter. And please don't give me the line about the "average knucklehead", because that guy is going to go buy a modern rifle from Walmart, and hunt with ammo out of the same 20 round box for the next 10-15 years, probably with one or two recovered deer to his credit in that time. I was talking about a good hunter.

And as to your comment about my grasp of basic science and physics, maybe we should discuss your grasp of basic anatomy and trauma medicine, cause my training in that is extensive. Couple the medical and anatomy training, study of the anatomy of my game, field-craft training to allow me to get close, and add training in precision shooting, and you would be amazed what can be accomplished, even if you still think it is impossible. As I said before, if you want to tell us what your limitations are, I for one will gladly listen and try to help you improve. But please don't annoy those of us who are capable by telling us that what we suggest doing is impossible, especially while we have done it and know it is very doable.

 

[Spikebuck]

As for that comment, quite frankly I'm growing tired of debating that topic on here with people who for some reason believe that the laws of physics change depending on your firearm or projectile.

I would agree that the laws of physics do not change and I also agree that a centerfire rifle shooting a pure lead round ball at X speed and a muzzleloader shooting the same pure lead roundball at X speed makes no difference.

So I think the key is THE PROJECTILE in combination with the forces behind it. If the PROJECTILE itself didn't matter I would never shoot thru deer with arrows like I consistently do. It's not the physics laws, per se, that should be debated, it's the misunderstanding of how different projectiles act/react/perform on game under those physical laws. :v

 

[Katahdin]

Everyone breath deep,relax get a Snickers,,,,go outside and get some sun,,This has evolved from a posting to a line in the dirt,,,shake hands,step away,relax......
Go back and read the original posting !!!!!

 

[The Baron]

Good choice. I think the .45 will serve you very well for deer. :thumbsup:

The topic has certainly been chewed over a lot, but seems the general consensus for a PRB on deer is that a .40 will work within its limitations, a .45 is a much better choice and .50 is quite sufficient. Anything larger is extra insurance and, across all calibers, there's no substitute for hunting skill and shot placement.

 

[Loyalist Dave]

The flaw with the "gotta draw the line somewhere" idea when dealing with wildlife officials and hunting loads is, first, often that line was drawn by ignorant people at a period in the past, with very little actual information, so it's arbitrary, and second it often today ignores better, more recent information, and actual experience, and thus if it wasn't arbitrary when set, it has become so with better information.

To use the speed limit example, the interstate highways were designed for vehicles to drive at 70+ mph, with 1960's technology. The Carter administration mandated 55 mph to "save gas", which didn't work, and yet we find with 21st century handling and stability systems in modern cars..., some urban areas still have 55 mph zones on interstates, which in reality only add to congestion..., not safety..an arbitrary idea.

Regarding DNR minimum foot pounds, for example in Maryland you have to use ammunition when hunting deer with a handgun that gives at least 700 foot-pounds at the muzzle. YET they permit people to use handloaded handgun ammunition so have no idea what energy is being delivered with handloads. There is no ammunition foot-pound level when using a rifle. Why, if it is to avoid a knucklehead mistake, would they not set the same level for a rifle, and require factory ammunition? Because it's arbitrary.

Maryland DNR also requires 60 grains of powder and a minimum caliber of .40 for hunting deer with a muzzle loading rifle. With that load, a patched round ball from a .40 has 729 foot-pounds, and a .54 has 716 foot-pounds. Both drop below that threshold within feet of exiting the muzzle, so the impact energy is much lower than their minimum. BUT if you use a muzzle loading handgun, your minimum load is 40 grains of BP.... which even for the .54 is well below the 700 foot-pounds at-the-muzzle threshold.

Yet, the empirical data shows that there isn't a need to ban muzzle loading deer hunting with a muzzle loading handgun that holds the required 40 grains of powder..., because those handguns are successful at harvesting deer. True, they aren't used at the same distances on deer that the rifles are used, but then the muzzle loading rifles aren't effectively used at identical ranges from .40 caliber through .54 caliber either, AND the muzzle loading rifles have range limits shorter than modern, cartridge rifles.

LD

 

[BrownBear]

...there's no substitute for hunting skill and shot placement.

I think you've implied it, but it bears extracting and emphasizing:

A huge part of shot replacement is the wherewithal NOT TO TAKE some shots.

That takes more guts and brains than foot pounds and trajectory.

 

[Lonegun1894]

Everyone breath deep,relax get a Snickers,,,,go outside and get some sun,,This has evolved from a posting to a line in the dirt,,,shake hands,step away,relax......
Go back and read the original posting !!!!!

You're right, but I get really fed up when someone talks down to me, and it gets worse when the only reasoning they have isn't based on experience hunting with a gun, or bow, or whatever other weapon you want to choose, but is based on:

well, I read somewhere, or someone told me, or my favorite being the ft/lbs smoke-blowing that makes it seem like they have never hunted with anything but a calculator

If someone wants to tell me about their experience, I will do my best to learn from it because we have all done some things right and others wrong and there is a lesson in all of it that we can benefit from. But I will NOT be lectured by someone who can't back up anything they say and apparently hunts with a keyboard--as impressive as that is IF he is successful.

As an aside, as has been mentioned, we all have different game laws we have to follow. For example, here in Texas, I can use ANY caliber of ML I want to hunt with, with the only limitation being they want it smaller than a 10ga, but there is no minimum caliber. If I was using a modern gun, I can legally use any CF for hunt deer, including a .25 ACP. Now I won't do that because I don't trust a .25 ACP, but I am legally allowed to. So as long as you and I and everyone else follows our State's game laws, who is anyone else to criticize us? I mean, I hunt in Texas, so being concerned what California, Pennsylvania, or Illinois game laws and caliber restrictions are makes as much sense as worrying about Australia's game laws. Interesting to know, but just doesn't apply in any way. Know what I mean?

 

[satx78247]

It is MY OPINION that "shot placement" & good marksmanship is vital in ANY hunting. - Anything sort of a light cannon (and certainly no firearm that can be fired by one person) is NOT suitable for hunting, IF the hunter cannot shoot accurately.

As I said earlier, my cousin Randy has killed many WT deer (since 1970 when he got it as a Christmas present from his dad) with his .40 caliber flinter & as far as we can see to shoot in our swampy/brushy farm's confines.
(In most places on our farm, other than down the power-line right of ways, you cannot SEE a deer more than 40-50M away & in lots of GOOD hunting places not even 20M.)

yours, satx

 

[hanshi]

The "800" lb figure has been touted by gun writers from as far back as Jack O'Connor. They, of course, were talking about suppository guns. Our G&F does specify 500ft lbs for a pistol.

 

[Katahdin]

My father always said," Never argue with an Idiot,,cause it won't be long and those watching can't tell the difference"
I do Show and Tell,,you told me ,,now show me,
I know what does and does not work for me,I try something others tell me about and if it works I use it if not go back to plan 'A'.
Life is easier, when you plow around the stumps!!!
Bottom line:shot placement will over come fire power,Every time. :wink:

 

[Onojutta]

The diameter of a 40 caliber ball is plenty big enough to cause a mortal wound to a deer. Just ask anyone who hunts with a modern 30 caliber rifle, or 270, or 243.

You conveniently enough left out this part where you said that a .40 is plenty. So which is it? Is it "plenty big enough", or am I too thick-headed to understand the basic laws of physics as you said in your above post?

You took my quote out of context. Was pointing out that just considering diameter, a .40 round ball is bigger than most modern hunting rounds. But then I went on to discuss how there is more to it than simply diameter. If you didn't comprehend that part, maybe that's where you being "thick-headed"? :wink:

 

[Onojutta]

Did someone suggest that the 800 ft-lb "rule" is precise or universally applicable? I sure didn't. As I said many times, I don't even know if that's what is behind some states position on establishing minimum game loads, purely speculating. Simply offered that as a suggestion to the OP as a guideline in assessing his choice of caliber.

As for speed limits, here in the Commonwealth of PA they are actually upping the limit to 70 mph on many highways to accommodate modern improvements in transportation technology. Unfortunately, that argument falls apart in the context of traditional blackpowder rifles.

One thing that hasn't changed over time is basic human nature. So from the regulator's perspective, yes they need to draw the line somewhere to accommodate that fact that many hunters, probably most, hit the field each year with guns that aren't properly sighted in, that they haven't gained familiarity with, and that they will use to shoot at anything that moves or runs at a distance that they poorly judge. So yes, the line needs to be drawn somewhere. If the line was drawn at 800 ft-lbs in some states, was that the correct value? Who knows. Could it be revisited or updated? Sure. Could someone using a round that is less than that still make a kill? Absolutely.

Energy is one of the primary factors that makes any round lethal. A round ball, or a modern hollow point, sitting on the table in front of me that doesn't have any kinetic energy isn't very lethal. There are a myriad of variables that affect every kill shot fired in a hunting situation beyond diameter and energy that can't possibly all be accounted for. I agree with everyone who said that there is nothing more lethal than a well placed shot. A 22 LR will kill a deer under the right conditions. Does that mean the game commission should allow that as a legal hunting round for the masses? You be the judge. Since I'm one of the guys who disciplines myself to wait for well placed shots and not shoot at anything that moves, I'm in the camp that would probably be effective with a .40 PRB or something even smaller. But for all the reasons I stated above, I don't object to the fact that the line has been drawn somewhere.

 

[mike garner]

thanks to everyone for the replies that has real exp. with the 40, although not many with exp. with a 40 chimed in, mostly opinion. i do have a lot of exp. deer hunting here in SC. about 50 years worth. but it is mostly with modern guns, and recurve bows. i am 59 and have been handloading for 49 of those years, and have killed deer with a lot of small calibers. and like others have said shot placement is key. but i was wondering about how deadly a 40 would be. i think i will be happy with the 45. i had a 45 hopkins & allen in a cap lock but i let it go. it shot very good and it was a pleasure to shoot. i no i will love a 45 in a flint.