40 cal. on deer?

[nhmoose]

Here in NH a 40 is legal for deer. I have taken deer with my 40. 20 years ago I competed with the gun every weekend. I had 20/15 vision and could see blood drops from 15 feet.

Now I cannot so I use my 54 with the same powder charge I used in my 40. I do not have to trail them past 10 yards anymore.

I do not buy into the foot pound theory at all, but my 54 makes a bigger hole for sure. Never recovered a ball shot into a deer.

 

[BrownBear]

20 years ago...I had 20/15 vision and could see blood drops from 15 feet.

That's an important insight. Last time I tracked a wounded deer (from a poorly place 62 caliber no less) it was darned tough to spot blood back in the shadows. Once upon a time when I was younger.... :wink:

I'm having a 40 cal made, and though not legal for deer during our special muzzleloader season, it's legal during the regular season. To be honest I'm not sure what I'll do once I have it in my hands. I've taken deer with lots less "capable" modern rounds in my younger years, but I'm older and hopefully smarter now. Or at least a little more risk averse. But I'm still as curious as I've ever been. My wife sezz that is now a character flaw and scarier than anything else she can think of. :rotf:

 

[Vaino]

The fact that you even posted a topic of a .40 cal. on deer displayed a lack of confidence as to using a .40 on deer but in the end, your choice of a .45 is a wise decision.

Don't know why some use "minimal cals" on big game....possibly a "sniper complex" or such.

Many years ago, when I was 11 {1943} and living on my Gparents survival farm in northern Minnesota, I shot a deer w/ a .22 LR and the fresh meat was quite welcome.....but, is the .22 LR a deer caliber?....Fred

 

[wattlebuster]

We are all getting older guys :idunno: so thats why I stick to the "What can go wrong will go wrong" theory. So I need every advantage I can get an thats why MY 40 is not considered my deer rifle :nono: Now notice I said MY 40. Maybe someone elses it is their only gun an if so then I say get er done

 

[Lonegun1894]

Don't know why some use "minimal cals" on big game....possibly a "sniper complex" or such.

In my case, it was a matter of hunting squirrel and rabbit during deer season, and just having deer walk up very close, as in inside of 30 yards. Well, since we don't have a caliber limit, and it was calm deer that were unaware I was there, and I had deer tags and a load that I knew was capable after having taken hogs with the same gun and load, I took the shots. I did NOT however pick up a .32 and INTEND to go hunt deer with it. I have a .50 and a couple .54s for when I go looking for bigger game. But I also know the smaller calibers are capable if you work within their limitations, as in placement, range, and account for everything else that can go wrong. I figure anything my small .32 can do to a deer, the OPs .40 can do better.

 

[S.Kenton]

I've killed several deer with my 40 cal flinter, I try and keep them close as I can, but will go out to 50 to 70 yards if needed. shot placement is everything...

 

[hanshi]

Same here; .40 is not legal during the special muzzleloading season but is during the general season. I hunt on private land and the owner, and my hunting partner, says shoot 'em all. His family eats a lot of venison...when we are able to kill something, that is.

 

[Onojutta]

We are all getting older guys :idunno: so thats why I stick to the "What can go wrong will go wrong" theory.

Since when did that have anything to do with age? Been struggling with that my whole life! :rotf:

 

[Loyalist Dave]

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.

Ah but this too is arbitrary sophistry. The idea that massive energy from a poorly placed shot due to hunter lack of skill or inaccuracy from the rifle, or both, has been debunked time and time again. Thus the idea that a minimum energy level will do much to ensure such damage is also debunked.

ALL that energy does is do the work at impact when the bullet hits the proper, vital area, so if it doesn't hit said vital area, one cannot expect it to make up for miss with damage (measured by the DNR with energy). What energy does do as well, is it extends the effective range where such shots may be reasonably accomplished.

Thus a .54 delivering a mere 605 foot pounds to the lungs of a deer at 50 yards is quite lethal, but at 200 yards (if one could hit the deer in that spot) the bullet might not penetrate below the ribs or might even bounce off...while a .35 Whelen with the same weight bullet may be accurate and lethal at 500 yards (when hitting the vital area). If either hit the deer in the abdomen..., even if the shot for the Whelen was at 50 yards, while both delivering a mortal wound it would take a while to take effect, even though the .35 Whelen arrived with 4X the energy of the .530 round ball.

LD

 

[BrownBear]

Ah but this too is arbitrary sophistry. The idea that massive energy from a poorly placed shot due to hunter lack of skill or inaccuracy from the rifle, or both, has been debunked time and time again. Thus the idea that a minimum energy level will do much to ensure such damage is also debunked.

I think sophistry is not the right choice of words, because sophistry includes an intent to deceive.

The problem is that the folks making regs know poop about round balls. They're trying to apply centerfire spitzer rules because it's what they know.

We run into that same fallacy all the time here on the site where folks supposedly know muzzleloaders. Are proponents attempting to deceive here too, or just misinformed?

Fallacy yes, sophistry no.

 

[hanshi]

Thus a .54 delivering a mere 605 foot pounds to the lungs of a deer at 50 yards is quite lethal, but at 200 yards (if one could hit the deer in that spot) the bullet might not penetrate below the ribs or might even bounce off...while a .35 Whelen with the same weight bullet may be accurate and lethal at 500 yards (when hitting the vital area). If either hit the deer in the abdomen..., even if the shot for the Whelen was at 50 yards, while both delivering a mortal wound it would take a while to take effect, even though the .35 Whelen arrived with 4X the energy of the .530 round ball.

LD

I would seriously doubt a .54 ball would "bounce" off a deer at 200 yards assuming a decent powder charge. It has been done before. I know, of course, that you were using hyperbole to make a point; I thought I would add this for those less experienced. 200 yards is certainly far beyond the distance a prb should be fired at game.

 

[Loyalist Dave]

I would seriously doubt a .54 ball would "bounce" off a deer at 200 yards assuming a decent powder charge

Ah yes, but in my example the .54 was fired with 200 pounds less energy than the 800 pound minimum discussed...., in fact I based it on a load that was under 1100 fps at the muzzle (thus not a decent powder charge)... so basically a bullet the same weight and MV as a "hot" .45 ACP....not what one would want to hunt deer at 200 yards, and yes hyperbole was there too... :wink:

LD

 

[Skychief]

I've recently rediscovered a 40 caliber caplock that I have had for some years.

If my state would allow it, I'd bring home some venison with it. No doubt in my mind. :thumbsup:

Best regards, Skychief

 

[Mr.Bedford]

Yes the .40 is fine on deer. I feel just as confident shooting a deer with a .40 as I do with a .54.

So far I've killed 3 bucks with my "lil .40". 1 was a double lung pass thru @ a step over 40yds, the 2nd was a double lung but not pass thru @35yds, and the 3rd was a head shot at 10 yds.

All my loads are the same, 60gr 3F, prb.