Food for thought on smaller calibers for hunting big game.

[Dale Allen Raby]

But since the forum rules forbid discussion of plastic wrapped bullets, I'm sure your choice would be a .45 REAL or similar bullet with no plastic.

WHAT?! No, if I could not use a sabot with a .45, then I would go to a .54 PRB.

WHY can we not talk about sabots? They have been in use since before the Civil War... though not made of plastic.

I guess da rools is da rools....

 

[Erwan]

Historically it been proven that these smaller calibers harvest deer, bear, and hogs cleanly with a single shot. Yet so many push for the larger .50, .54 calibers

IMHO, the problem is not only the caliber, but with a large caliber the hydrostatic shock is much greater since it is proportional to the caliber and velocity...
So I think it's better to use a large caliber because if the bullet is not well-placed, the hydrostatic shock will do the job without risking minimal injury and long suffering...
That way of thinking engages only me...

 

[Spikebuck]

WHAT?!

WHY can we not talk about sabots?

Forum Rules

9: We do not discuss copper and/or jacketed, plastic/polymer tipped bullets, sabots, power belts, or other 'plastic-wrapped' bullets. Smoothbores using plastic wads and steel shot are an exception to this rule.

I assume if we were in a discussion of the metal, and even wood, attachments used during the acceptable time period of this forum, that would be OK. But the modern plastic versions are out of bounds.

 

[Art Caputo]

i have hunted with 45-58 cal using PLRB’s all running 60-80grs of FFF. All are fully capable of killing whitetail at typical ML distances(<75yards). IMO, the larger calibers provide a greater margin of error if placement is unintentionally off, and, there is usually a better blood trail. I don’t see a material difference in trajectories or accuracy, and the recoil of the larger calibers using LRB’s with my powder load range in my 7.5-8.5 pound rifles, not all that noticeable. With larger game or longer distance shots, I’d choose the larger caliber when using LRB’s.

 

[longcruise]

I have no doubts of the effectiveness of a 45 PRB on a deer however, I go with mostly a 54. Killing game with a ml is more analogous to killing with an arrow. A wound channel that results in rapid loss of blood pressure is essential for both. Members here regularly effectively kill everything from coyotes to moose with balls carrying 500 FPE or even less. Suppository hunters are mostly anchored to the velocity/energy concepts that rule their world. In the process they throw away a lot of destroyed meat!

 

[Snydly]

I have taken elk here in WY with a .45,,50 and a 54. Huge difference between the .45 and the 54. With a .45, a double lung at 40 yards, the elk took off running. No reaction that he had been hit. Tracked for over 400 yards,,, spotted him on the next hillside. Trying to go uphill but was unable to. Just stood there with his dead down. By the time we got close enough for another shot, it was obvious he was going nowhere. At 30 yards another shot finished him off. No blood trail, just his hoof prints digging into the ground as he ran. If we had not spotted him, it would have been at least another day before we could have found him. 54 on the other hand it was obvious he had been hit. THUMP!! That is the sound of the round ball hitting him. 60 yards and he went about 30 yards and staggered over backwards and was dead before we got to him. If my life depended on shooting an elk with a .45 cal, I would do it but I use nothing but my .54 now. Although two years ago I packed my 62 cal fowler but never even seen an elk that was approachable,,,, I don't shoot at elk over 100 yards with my .54 and not over 50 yards with the fowler.

 

[hanshi]

My go-to rifle for deer, a .45 and I shoot only prb, gave me some of the most interesting kills I've had. The most awesome-gruesome shot on a deer was with that .45. I fired at the buck and he "took off" staggering badly. He went about 50 yards and I heard him crash. No exit wound but that entrance hole left the ground and brush/trees covered in red. I had many DRTs with that .45 and used it a bit on squirrels.
I don't consider the .45 to be a small caliber, to me it's a medium caliber. The .32 & .36 are small calibers and the .40 bridges the gap from small to large. I have killed deer with the .45, .50, .54 and .62. The last two hit noticeably harder than either the .45 or .50 but the two smaller ones did much more than just hold their own.

 

[Nuthatch]

Out here, .40 is the minimum legal caliber for deer & .50 for elk. However, we can't use lead. So .50s just make sense from the perspective that there will be no expansion on roundball of any size since cast Bi is too hard. Plus, it's just easier to find stuff for it.

I'd not feel limited by a .45 -- especially on the coast where the deer seldom top about 130 lb. But even in the Sierras, I doubt the deer or bears would be able to tell the difference.

A .40 would make me hesitate though. Not from experience, though. It's just that things are starting to stack up against me at that point. Just makes more sense to stay with a .50. The .50 is effective & proven itself to me. The .40 is an unknown but it isn't likely to be any better. If I had to use a .40, I'd be looking for a copper conical & drive it fast so that I could get some expansion again.

I would consider a .40 for turkey or pig, though.

 

[FishDFly]

WHAT?! No, if I could not use a sabot with a .45, then I would go to a .54 PRB.

WHY can we not talk about sabots? They have been in use since before the Civil War... though not made of plastic.

I guess da rools is da rools....

Yep, that is the rules.

 

[ETipp]

Interesting enough, Kentucky does not have a minimum caliber restriction for ML rifles. I just got a new .32 Crocket Squirrel Rifle but I don't think I would ever use it on deer. And if I did it would have to be a close up shot and most likely in the neck or head. I simply have my doubts on such a small ball being very effective on putting a deer down, at least without having to join the Upper Cumberland Hiking Club to find it.

 

[pamtnman]

A 45 could kill a deer, I suppose… if a swallow grasped it by the husk and dropped it from a height. Then again, certain killer rabbits are vicious enough to kill a deer, too. And are immune to all but a Holy Hand Grenade.
We will have to interview the next deer poked in the ribs with a 127 grain 45 caliber round ball, and ask him just how dead he feels. Really really dead, or just pretty much dead.
And to all a good night

 

[FishDFly]

In reading many posts on deer and bear hunting, I am very surprised at the number of contributors that down play the use of smaller caliber rifles like the .40 or .45 ( if legal in your state). Historically it been proven that these smaller calibers harvest deer, bear, and hogs cleanly with a single shot. Yet so many push for the larger .50, .54 calibers. Now don't get me wrong, the larger bores work Great!! and I love hunting with my .54 caliber, but have harvested deer and hogs easily with my .45 rifles with patch and round balls. After all hunters killed Bison with 45/70s ( .45 cal conical bullet with 70 grains black powder). History has showed us this can and does work on LARGE game yet so many are nervous about hunting deer with them. Now I'm talking about solid lung shots at reasonable distances (80 yards and under). I guess I'm curious why folks feel they have to go to bigger calibers for Med size game? At most of the Museums I've been to that had displays of muzzleloading rifle most of the guns from the mid west and south were .35 to .45 calibers. So anyways just my two cents worth, and would love to hear success stories with small caliber rifles and or why you prefer a larger caliber. Not trying to start anything as I don't believe there is a wrong answer. I look forward to hearing from you all.

" So anyways just my two cents worth, and would love to hear success stories with small caliber rifles and or why you prefer a larger caliber."

To go along, how about failure stories.

 

[ETipp]

I had many DRTs with that .45 and used it a bit on squirrels.
I don't consider the .45 to be a small caliber, to me it's a medium caliber. The .32 & .36 are small calibers and the .40 bridges the gap from small to large. I have killed deer with the .45, .50, .54 and .62. The last two hit noticeably harder than either the .45 or .50 but the two smaller ones did much more than just hold their own.

Can't argue with that part. If it works for someone and their happy hunting grounds, then it works.

For this ole boy, terrain is a major factor in caliber of choice.

 

[William O.]

My go-to rifle for deer, a .45 and I shoot only prb, gave me some of the most interesting kills I've had. The most awesome-gruesome shot on a deer was with that .45. I fired at the buck and he "took off" staggering badly. He went about 50 yards and I heard him crash. No exit wound but that entrance hole left the ground and brush/trees covered in red. I had many DRTs with that .45 and used it a bit on squirrels.
I don't consider the .45 to be a small caliber, to me it's a medium caliber. The .32 & .36 are small calibers and the .40 bridges the gap from small to large. I have killed deer with the .45, .50, .54 and .62. The last two hit noticeably harder than either the .45 or .50 but the two smaller ones did much more than just hold their own.

I believe you took a hog using a "small" caliber round ball. Shot placement is e everything.

 

[pamtnman]

" So anyways just my two cents worth, and would love to hear success stories with small caliber rifles and or why you prefer a larger caliber."

To go along, how about failure stories.

I have about two decades of mostly failures stories with the 45 patched ball. Most of the failures were due to me leaving the scene after not finding blood, and assuming that where there was no blood there was life. After years of “Guess I didn’t miss that deer after all” I started to piece together how the 45 works, how the prb works, in the place I hunt most. One of the challenges we’ve had here for a long time is a lack of late season snow.
In 2012 I switched to a 54 prb and immediately saw the benefits of greatly increased horsepower. When I hunt, I’m after a critter, and the “extra cost” of an extra fifteen grains of powder and a hundred grains of lead per shot are not factors I think about. Probably most hunters don’t think about it. We want our critters dead as quick as possible. Bigger calibers do that better. And again, a lot of how people hunt is shaped by their hunting terrain, topography, plants etc. So a 45 might work best in one area and not as well as bigger bores elsewhere. I did kill a huge deer last week, with a 45 prb, but only because he was about 30-35 yards broadside. Absolutely perfect conditions for that caliber.

 

[hanshi]

Many of the deer I killed with .45 prb dropped in their tracks. None ran far and there was most always at least a few drops of red here and there. Sometimes a short trail looked almost painted. Most were close enough to hear when they crashed. I don't recall losing any I shot with a .45 prb. I killed several with a .357 and 125 grain bullets using only one shot each. Compare: .357 MV 1400 fps vs a .45 prb of 129 grns at a MV of 1700 to 1800 fps.

 

[user 48702]

Boone's Ol' Ticklicker was a .44, Crockett's was a .40, and Lewis & Clark's air rifle was a .46 caliber. Crockett having only a .40 caliber rifle must have been why when hunting bear, he preferred to grin them to death.

 

[SOLANCO]

I have about two decades of mostly failures stories with the 45 patched ball. Most of the failures were due to me leaving the scene after not finding blood, and assuming that where there was no blood there was life. After years of “Guess I didn’t miss that deer after all” I started to piece together how the 45 works, how the prb works, in the place I hunt most. One of the challenges we’ve had here for a long time is a lack of late season snow.
In 2012 I switched to a 54 prb and immediately saw the benefits of greatly increased horsepower. When I hunt, I’m after a critter, and the “extra cost” of an extra fifteen grains of powder and a hundred grains of lead per shot are not factors I think about. Probably most hunters don’t think about it. We want our critters dead as quick as possible. Bigger calibers do that better. And again, a lot of how people hunt is shaped by their hunting terrain, topography, plants etc. So a 45 might work best in one area and not as well as bigger bores elsewhere. I did kill a huge deer last week, with a 45 prb, but only because he was about 30-35 yards broadside. Absolutely perfect conditions for that caliber.

Therein lies the key to the conundrums. I will reference an unmentionable which I am familiar with. The 6mm Swedish Mauser. This caliber has taken every species of large and dangerous game on several continents. In conditions which were good for the 6 MM Swedish Mauser.
But you need to know some things to know if the conditions are good for the shot. You need to understand the ballistics of that bullet in your rifle. You need to know the anatomy of the game you propose to shoot. You need to be able to make a decent assessment of the range. You need the ability, born of practice, to put the bullet where you want it. So you also need to be able to evaluate wind, uphill or downhill poa, and your ability to have a steady shooting position where you intend to shoot from.
There have been a lot of comments which mentioned wounded game. If you wounded an animal, likely the shot taken was a result of poor judgment.

 

[ETipp]

Guys, I know this is not a great example of what a difference in bullet size can do, but I would like to share something that happened to me last week at the range.

On this trip I took my .50 New Englander and wanted to do some testing with different rounds. For a backstop I took a metal real estate sign. I put a target on the front of that and placed it out at 100 yards. I shot a few Maxi Balls, then some lighter 240 grain unmentionables that holds the bullets that were actually .44 caliber. When I was finished shooting I went to check out the target and pull the sign. I was amazed at the difference in the hole sizes in the metal was. The 365 Grain Maxi Balls blew a large hole through the metal with large tearing and jagged metal facing rearward. The 240 grain unmentionable holes were much smaller and cleaner. I also had some other unmentionable rounds that were bore size but a little lighter than the Maxi Balls. For whatever reason, even though the Maxis and the bore size unmentionable were the same dia, the Maxis left a much more wicked hole. Both the other rounds were no doubt traveling faster as they are lighter than the Maxis.

Conclusion............the heavier bullet proved to be much more damaging. Even though it was traveling slower than the other two and was the same dia as one of them. I have no doubts what so ever that the same would apply to game.

Not an apples to apples comparison to the discussion, but nonetheless noteworthy.

 

[smoothshooter]

A double lung shot from a comfortable shooting .45 is better than a rump shot from a flinch induced by a .58.

But is it better than a double lung shot from a .58?
Or as good as a rump shot fired from the rear with a .58?

BTW, I am a big fan of the .45.
I have found it to be far more generally useful than the larger calibers.
Am in the process of trying to come up with a .40 also that is not a southern mountain style-the butt stock architecture does not fit me very well.