PDA

View Full Version : Sorry brush buster does exist IMHO



charger 1
10-20-2007, 03:21 AM
When the term brush buster has been mentioned here, I've heard "NO SUCH THING" I've been told to test the theory by intentionaly setting up a maze of brush for two different projectiles to travel through. Yesterday I got out the twelve with bluforce slugs and the 30/06. Firing them both at a white outline I had set up through the alders 40 yds away each 3 times. One 06 hit it semi keyholed. The other 2 couldnt be found. All bluforce slugs hit as well as I could aim through the crap. I wont be convinced that some projectiles dont bust brush better than others. A heavier mass will retain its path and resist side forces better than lighter

Lloyd Smale
10-20-2007, 05:23 AM
I agree and dissagree. Ive shot through enough pine trees with the 475 and 500 to knoiw that a buck standing on the far side of a 8 inch pine tree would be in dire staights if i had one on me and the same goes for hardcast out of big bore rifles. A centerfire rifle like an o6 just wouldnt cut it doing the same. But the thing you have to keep in mind is shooting directly through somthing is the same as just glancing off of it. A small stick or tree with deflect even a big bore bullet. So in my opinion the therory of a brush buster works to a certain respect but if it is used in context to the way it was original though up. Say compareing a 30-30 to a 270 i dont buy into it.

Bass Ackward
10-20-2007, 07:27 AM
I wont be convinced that some projectiles dont bust brush better than others. A heavier mass will retain its path and resist side forces better than lighter


Charger,

Well, duh. Of coarse. Ever hear of momentum? But .... every bullet is going to be altered in some way. Either immediately in flight path or stability, or bullet deformation that WILL cause either one, or both, of those .... AT SOME DISTANCE. Eventually nothing will be reliable.

You just have to define, with certainty through testing, how every situation will unfold. Testing is time consuming. You have to take velocity loss into account as range increases. What you are doing is determining how far you can count on momentum before external ballistics alter the flight path of the combination you are using. For some, it is just better to avoid the situation entirely. Especially, where that option exists.

charger 1
10-20-2007, 07:41 AM
Charger,

Well, duh. Of coarse. Ever hear of momentum? But .... every bullet is going to be altered in some way. Either immediately in flight path or stability, or bullet deformation that WILL cause either one, or both, of those .... AT SOME DISTANCE. Eventually nothing will be reliable.

You just have to define, with certainty through testing, how every situation will unfold. Testing is time consuming. You have to take velocity loss into account as range increases. What you are doing is determining how far you can count on momentum before external ballistics alter the flight path of the combination you are using. For some, it is just better to avoid the situation entirely. Especially, where that option exists.



Bass

Well duh, exactly. So what you are saying in short is that if a fella is at all familiar with arm and surroundings he can put himself in a more"brush busting" set of circumstances with one gun than another. I've been told on here and other places that is not possible. I'm saying it is. If it werent the gash in titanic's hull would not have been as long as it was...


Even in a side glance Lloyd the heavy projectile will undergo some destabilizing, but not to the degree as the peashooter

Bass Ackward
10-20-2007, 08:03 AM
I've been told on here and other places that is not possible.

Hey, my mom told me I was good looking too. If you can't trust your mom, who can you trust?

Don't hold me responsible for lies you have been told. Only the lies I tell ya. :grin:

charger 1
10-20-2007, 08:14 AM
Hey, my mom told me I was good looking too. If you can't trust your mom, who can you trust?

Don't hold me responsible for lies you have been told. Only the lies I tell ya. :grin:


Seriously
I just forget now what it was I posted on here not long ago (I think designing a new mold)and I mentioned I'd like some capability in the brush. Some responses to that and that I've heard other places is that all tests were in and no slug did better than another in brush.....Well I say Horse hockey. Some do better, by far, by far enough to take the game a foot. Should a fella try to avoid that situ and be out in the clear? Yes, but if he cant, he can atleast find himself there with better arm and projectile

44man
10-20-2007, 08:15 AM
It depends on how far the target is from the branch even with a heavy slug too. I would rather shoot through a small tree then hit a branch. (I shot the .475 through 16" of seasoned oak firewood.) Deflection might be enough to cause a bad hit from even the smallest branch. Other times the slug can get through OK. I missed a deer clean at 20 yd's with my .54 muzzle loader. I found a twig cut on the edge and the branch was only a foot from where the deer was.
In my opinion, nothing should be shot through deliberately, there is enough trouble with those unseen branches.
If you want a visible picture of deflection, shoot a heavy arrow through some branches.
There is no way I would ever tell myself that I can shoot through anything between me and a deer. If he doesn't walk into the open, he goes free.

charger 1
10-20-2007, 08:32 AM
If you want a visible picture of deflection, shoot a heavy arrow through some branches.


This is very true, but if your out there with all the shooting lanes as wide open as you can get em, but of course you cant napomb the bush. Would you rather be there with the heavy arrow or light blow gun dart?

Bob B
10-20-2007, 08:54 AM
Years ago Larry Moore had an article in the AR Magazine where he stated the 150 gr. jacketed pointed bullet busted brush as well as any projectile. Bob B

Bass Ackward
10-20-2007, 09:03 AM
There is no way I would ever tell myself that I can shoot through anything between me and a deer. If he doesn't walk into the open, he goes free.


Jim,

And you know what? Your probably right. That's what any reasonable and responsible person would do if that option is available to him. Confidence comes in many ways when hunting. And so it has many limitations too.

But then the same can be said for moving deer. Why would you shoot a moving deer and risk shot placement when the next one that comes along will stop? Or the one after that?

Some guys won't use cast either. Period. No matter how many good ones you made or as much as you practice, why use a cheap projectile that may have voids and be defective for a serious hunting issue when you can use a high tech one that is perfect?

Some guys say why use a handgun when you have something easier to shoot more accurately and more powerful to increase your chances for a solid hit? Don't you owe it to the animal to be as responsible as possible? Can you possibly believe that one? :grin:

Some guys won't bow hunt period. I am one of those. Too much room for error. You move, he hunches, twing, twang, twung. Same thing as a bullet deflection. It's just that a branch ain't there.

It's all what we get used to (or decide to over look) that changes "our" perception from irresponsibility to confidence.

charger 1
10-20-2007, 10:45 AM
Years ago Larry Moore had an article in the AR Magazine where he stated the 150 gr. jacketed pointed bullet busted brush as well as any projectile. Bob B

Well I guess I'm saying I disagree...Would anyone agree that that 150 would do better than a 25 grain 17 rem ? If so would a canon ball not cut straighter than the 150?

And as for Bass's equation, we hunt solid hard and dirty to MAYBE see one deer each in a 3 week period. And for the same reason as some u you guys are shipping sawdust around as flux and some considering it a marvel whereas I had a chuckle. Baby we got trees up here, and I mean we got trees. Some of the areas I had described to me as jungle in africa were laughable compared to our underbrush. Do I clear things best I can, use the best boolit to cut the one or two twigs I may have missed, or give up hunting.... I was wondering can all the flat landers here put together tell me that all combined they have never wounded a single deer with all clear. I can honestly say that with all the pains taking effort I gotta go through, and the "Take absolutely nothing for granted " Mentality I've had to adopt I've never left deer one...

Bret4207
10-20-2007, 11:01 AM
It's all relative. A bullet/projectile that nicks a branch 4" from the deer is going to hit the deer darn close to where it was aimed. Make it 12' and it's a different story. Make it 12 trillion miles ( as in knocking an Earth bound asteroid off course) and it's more different yet.

That being said IMO a heavier, longer boolit will deflect less than a light, short design. A projectile revolving faster will be more deflected (ie- 6.5 in a 7.5 in twist boolit vaporizing) and common sense says a really fast bullet will become unstable more readily than a somewhat slower one, although that I could be totally wrong on that. I don't have the physics or math background to figure that.

Larry Gibson
10-20-2007, 12:00 PM
Bret4207 is pretty much correct, all bullets that "nick" a branch with be deflected. Cutting a branch clean or going through one (especially soft woods) is another story. We recently did a lot of penetration testing for baffles at our range and found many bullets of .30 and larger caliber or those with high sectional density and stout construction continued on fairly straight. I've also noticed this when shooting through brush over the years for S&Gs just to see if the wooden dowel (I think it was Askins who wrote the first article I read on it years ago) test was correct or the "myth of slow heavy blunt nosed bullets being best.

I also ran a dowel test along with shooting through a lot of brush as stated. However instead of just using a paper target behind the obstruction to see what happend if the bullet did hit the target. I used a large detergent box filled with newspaper 6- 8" thick inside with a 8" bull on it for for aiming and to replicate the heart/lung area of a deer. I found that bullets of stout enough construction (regular hunting bullets) of good sectional density (the heavy for caliber bullets) that cut the branch or went through one could still be counted on to hit the bull out to a considerable distance behind the brush. The bullets were still going point forward and completely penetrated the box of newspaper. I had no doubt those shots would have killed the deer in short order. I found that hitting the bull with such shots was not difficult out to 5 yards (the maximum distance from the brush of my tests).

The smaller light weight caliber, high velocity bullets (under 7mm and over 3000 fps) were coming apart after cutting or penetrating the branches. If they hit straight on in the bull penetration was good and the deer would likely have been kiled cleanly. However most that hit the box of newspaper sideways lacked the momentum to penatrate and a wounded deer woud have been the result. Hits in the bull were very "iffy" with the target at 5 yards from the brush.

Thus from my own tests over the years I've come to the conclusion that when hunting in brushy country use a heavy for caliber bullet (preferably .30 or larger) with good sectional density. know with absolute, positive, undeniable, no doubt, 100% proof positve that it is a legal deer behind the brush and or worse yet another hunter. If the deer is more than a couple feet behind the brush side step a couple steps as you may get a clear shot through or around the brush.

Would I shoot at game through brush? Yes I have but only twice in my lifetime of hunting. I really prefer not to shoot through brush though. Both were with an '06 one using the Hornady 180 SPBT and the other using the Nosler 180 Partition. Both were successfull shots with the Hornady cuting a sagebrush branch and plowing straight into the bedded mule deer. The Nosler Partition nicked a pine bough and was deflected about 5" from point of aim but was a killing shot on the 5 point elk anyways.

A long time ago in the jungles of a far away war we had an axiom; what is "cover" to 5.56 is only "concealment" to 7.62 NATO. There was, and still is, a lot of truth to that.

Larry Gibson

35remington
10-20-2007, 12:50 PM
In principle, I suppose I go along with the heavy bullet argument.

In actual practice, unless you can guarantee exactly HOW that bullet strikes brush, as in centering the obstruction rather than nicking it on an edge, it's a crapshoot as to whether the bullet will go where intended.

I'm a high percentage guy. I will avoid the situation whenever possible, clearing shooting lanes around my stand. If the deer/whatever is unalarmed and moving slowly, I will wait for a better shot.

My ability to place the shot with the gun being used is way more valuable than any "brush bucking" capability, real or imagined.

If, say, Charger's favored "bluforce" is considerably less accurate/shootable than another choice with less "brush bucking" capability, I will go with the more accurate gun and load every time.

And pick my shot. Much better percentage of hit probability than aiming through a mass of brush and trusting the slug to get through it without making a destabilizing impact before it hits the critter.

Bret4207
10-20-2007, 01:08 PM
Are we talking theory here or did the rest of us wander into a pissing match?

monadnock#5
10-20-2007, 01:48 PM
I read the article by Mr. Askins the younger in the AR many moons ago. He did same testing as you are proposing. From that testing he came up with a couple of hard and fast rules. If you're in the brush and the deer is in the open, don't shoot. If it's the deer in the brush, and you're shooting a heavier for caliber round, and you're willing to take the chance, you might get lucky.

S.R.Custom
10-20-2007, 02:13 PM
A study on the matter:
http://www.theboxotruth.com/docs/bot40.htm

charger 1
10-20-2007, 02:35 PM
A study on the matter:
http://www.theboxotruth.com/docs/bot40.htm

To be honest there wasnt as much gunfire there through crap as I would typically fire in my back yard in a week long period. But I would think it to proves you can up your chances of making it through that one unseen twig with the proper projectile selection. I'll go back to my original however exagerated example of the canon ball. I dont think we notice much deflection with that puppy. So I say again I think if you hunt in the brush you try certainly to get the best circumstances possible. Beyond that you can pick a set up which launches a more brush busting projectile

S.R.Custom
10-20-2007, 03:14 PM
To be honest there wasnt as much gunfire there through crap as I would typically fire in my back yard in a week long period. ..
True, but it does give some illustration as to how a bullet's path is influenced by incidental contact with brush. With this example in mind, one can judge (guess) for himself to the extent his own shot will be affected, how far away game can be on the other side, etc.

In other words, this example has done more to quantify the effect of brush on various projectiles than all the previous speculation and invective in this thread. Use the knowledge as appropriate, your mileage may vary.

44man
10-20-2007, 03:33 PM
Since none of us shoots cannon balls, my way is still best! Anything in the way, don't shoot. Is the deer REALLY that important???? that you might cripple it and lose it?
We are talking ethics here, not a pissing match. I don't care how many branches or sticks you shoot through, if it is a live animal on the other side, hold your fire and wait. No shot? Forget the animal! There are other days and chances.
Find me a PH that will let you shoot through the brush!
It is starting to sound like a redneck thing--shoot no matter what, luck might be yours. Sorry, I will not fall into that catagory.

charger 1
10-20-2007, 03:55 PM
Since none of us shoots cannon balls, my way is still best! Anything in the way, don't shoot. Is the deer REALLY that important???? that you might cripple it and lose it?
We are talking ethics here, not a pissing match. I don't care how many branches or sticks you shoot through, if it is a live animal on the other side, hold your fire and wait. No shot? Forget the animal! There are other days and chances.
Find me a PH that will let you shoot through the brush!
It is starting to sound like a redneck thing--shoot no matter what, luck might be yours. Sorry, I will not fall into that catagory.

Well this is kinda odd, because I find that if I know the gun, surroundings and projectile I've been just fine...Personally I'd shoot a deer through a manageable amount of brush with the right setup (and have) long before I'd dream of hunting one with a handgun irregardless of caliber supposing it was even at the zoo and I could stick the muzzle in its ear... I've always humoured at the way hunting magazines will talk about the worlds biggest 375 had to have just the right monolith etc etc. Then when time came there was the same guy out after the same critter with a handgun. LIKE WHAT

Bass Ackward
10-20-2007, 04:52 PM
In other words, this example has done more to quantify the effect of brush on various projectiles than all the previous speculation and invective in this thread. Use the knowledge as appropriate, your mileage may vary.


Super Mag,

Quantifies? I disagree. That's one fixed range shooting through equal and opposing size sticks that are fixed at a short distance. One stick deflects and the other stick corrects to a degree. That's why he didn't see as much dflection with spitzer bullets. Not very often that happens in brush. A single 1/2" branch that deflects can have a much greater influence on flight from my experience. That's why single tests really don't work to be able to draw ANY conclusions.

If you want to know the truth, his experiment would more closely represent bullet deflection of a chest shot deer more than anything else and that's about it for me. If he removed half the sticks he would have seen much different results especially when he nicked one with any spitzer bullet. That's why you need many different tests.


All,

We have had a MAJOR bout of EHD this year. Our numbers of dead deer in both valleys runs close to 100. This is approximately 85-90 percent. I see maybe 8 deer a night spotting now compared to 80 to 100 before.

So is it ethical to hunt them after this debacle? This is what I wrestle with now.

S.R.Custom
10-20-2007, 05:30 PM
So is it ethical to hunt them after this debacle? This is what I wrestle with now.

Don't worry. Fish & Game will tell you exactly what to do. ;)

hydraulic
10-20-2007, 07:51 PM
My wife shot a .243 Model 700 for a number of years, with 87 grain hornadys, and killed several nice bucks DEAD! The one hanging in the local bank is hers. Then she hit one in the shoulder, 30 yds away, blew out bone and meat and the buck was lost. In between them there was a little ash sapling about the size of a pencil , which she did not see, with a bullet hole in the left half. I will always believe that little 87 grain bullet was deflected because she was close to the deer and she is a good shot. Maybe a heavier bullet would have been deflected, too, but I think it would have at least broken that shoulder down and we may have saved the deer. I traded her .243 for a 7mm08 Model 7 and she shoots 140 grain bullets, now. She still want her .243 back. Anyway, even if we don't take shots through the brush, we can still have unseen obstacles that will deflect a bullet, especially light, high velocity bullets like the .243.

Blackwater
10-20-2007, 08:57 PM
I guess you can put me in the "it depends" group, if there is one here. I can tell you that when I was young and first started hunting deer, and had read several "studies" in the glossy mags about "brush busting bullets," I had a medium sized, small racked 8 pt. whitetail stand directly behind some young pines. The tip of a limb was directly blocking the whole of the chest area, but the deer was only 6 ft. at most behind the limb, and the white tips of pine limbs are quite soft. The white tip of this limb was directly over the heart, up close behind the shoulder. I was shooting a 165 copper coated pointed bullet from an '06. The deer didnt' move, and was suspicious. I think he smelled me? Whatever the reason, he stood and stood and stood there, turning only his head and antlers.

I had quite a while to think about the situation, and - being young and, well, you know - I decided I'd waited long enough, and I slipped off the safety. The deer was only 65 yds. away, and only about 4-5' behind the limb, and I had managed to convince myself that I could make a killing shot through that soft pine tip.

I pulled the trigger, and .... not one dang thing happened except for the muzzle blast. I didn't move because I was sure the deer would have the courtesy to fall dead like I was used to them doing. The deer didn't move, and I couldn't believe it was just standing there, I was SO sure of the shot. Well, being sure, in THIS case, only led to disappointment, and after a few seconds of the deer standing there, and moving his head slightly to try to determine where the sound came from, I finally realized that if I was going to eat venison that night, I'd have to fire again. I can be slow like that sometimes.

As slowly as cold molasses in Alaska's winters, I eased my hand forward, eased the fired case back, caught it with my left finger so it didn't "tink" against the receiver in ejection, palmed the fired case, then eased the bolt forward to chamber another round, and upon slowly easing my right hand back to the grip and trigger, the deer FINALLY stepped forward about a step and a half, clearly exposing his vitals to my crosswires. Another pull of the trigger and I had venison quite easily.

Walking over to that soft pine limb tip, I found that my bullet had hit almost perfectly where I'd aimed it, at the soft, pulpy white tip. As Bass I think it was noted, I'd figured that with all those pine needles, they'd deflect the bullet back and forth, keeping it close enough to the original line of sight that the deer would have been dead on the first shot. It was a fine theory when it came to that pine tip. Only problem of course, was that it hadn't worked.

I've done some tests through the years, and have never since tried to knowingly shoot through brush of any form. Two years ago, I did make a mistake, however, with my Guide Gun .45/70 with 300 gr. Hornadys. That big ol' doe dropped like a sack of sand at my shot, and kicked a few times and lay still. When I got to that one, I found that the light under the pine canopy had fooled me, and the deer had crossed BEHIND a tough bunch of @ 1/2" brush shafts rather than in front of it, and my bullet had cut several of those tough limbs before hitting the deer's neck vertebrae and blowing one joint out the off side of its neck. I figure I was just flat lucky.

I've shot through 20 ft. of thick, tangled 3/16-1/4" very tough brush after the bullet had passed through a single thickness of pasteboard (target frame), and some 35' or so behind that pasteboard, with a 130 gr. .270 condomated bullet, and had a group of some 45-50 shots group into some 15" or so. Like Bass and I think someone else stated, I figure the bullet hit so darn many of those limbs along its 20' path through the tangle, that the wibbles compensated for the wobbles over that distance and as thick as the tangle was, there's just no way that didn't happen.

After reading a whole lot, and doing a fair amount of testing, I think I know less about this subject than I did before starting it, so ... like I said, put me in the "it depends" category, though I'm not sure just how many factors there are in this matter upon which "it depends." Consequently, I'm with 44Man, and I ain't shootin' through any brush KNOWINGLY at game. Just too darn many factors for me to figure in, and my crystal ball's at the shop, so I can't "see" whether I'm bound to be lucky that day or not.

If I HAD to shoot through brush, though, I'm definitely with Chargar and would take a 12 ga. and slugs, followed by a long, fast spinning bullet (gyroscopic stability CAN at least at times and in some circumstances help), and if the bullet point were flat, I'd feel just a teensy bit better about that, too. Several friends have made some amazing shots through brush with the humble little .44 mag., and at least one of these deer kills had the deer some 30-35 yds. past the 1/2" limb that was directly in front of the muzzle (about 6-10 ft.) and the bullet STILL took that deer very cleanly.

Me? I think shooting through brush will ALWAYS depend a lot on pure dumb luck, and I've just never been the lucky type, so that's why I just don't knowingly shoot through brush. I WILL, however, shoot through a small opening in that brush, if I can get my crosshairs still enough to do that. I know my trajectory at all ranges so that if I can get a 1.5" or larger opening, and that opening is over the vitals, I'll take a shoot-THROUGH-THE-HOLE shot, but NOT a shoot through the brush itself shot. That's just me, and I guess all morals and ethics are personal matters, which is what I consider this question to basically be about. When one has shot as much as Chargar, and knows the capabilities of his rifles and ammo as well as he does, I'll be the last to criticize his taking the other view, though. Like I said, I've never been the lucky type, and as Clint said in Dirty Harry, "A man's gotta' know his limitations."

Just my thoughts, and some of my experience in this realm.

NVcurmudgeon
10-21-2007, 01:08 AM
I guess I am in 44 man's camp. My concern is not about which is the best rifle to shoot through brush with. It has more to do with hunting ethics and safety. I don't shoot if there is anything between me and the target, and especially if the animal is in brush. Under those conditions I would be worried about allowing an animal to get away wounded, and about what other critters may be in the unpredictable path of my deflected bullet; other game animals, human beings, livestock, whatever. This policy may explain why I have a lifetime bag of ten or so deer and one antelope in fifty years.

Lloyd Smale
10-21-2007, 05:20 AM
I think i have as much or more hunting ethics as the next guy. I practice quality deer managment in an area where its not a popular thing to do. But to be honest faced with a shot at a once in a lifetime buck armed with either a big bore handgun or rifle with a hardcast bullet. Pine needles or even a small amount of brush probably wouldnt keep me from shooting. Ive done enough penetration testing to know what my guns will shoot through and what then wont. I wouldnt shoot if the brush was 50 feet in front of the deer but if the deer was standing right up close to it ive got no doubt whatsover that a 450 grain hardcast bullet is going to make short work of it and the deer and probably another deer on the far side. Would i do the same with a 223 or even a 243 NOPE! But when a bullet will penetrate a 4 inch pine tree and still go 21 inches through wet print testing (ive done it) Id say it will go through a small amount of brush as long as if it gets slightly deflected it doesnt have far to travel afterward. To me its no more of a unethical shot then taking a shot at a moving deer or shooting one at 400 yards. Theres a ton of variables there too and guys do it all the time. I live in an area where we hunt deer in some swamps that are thick enough that you cant see but 25 yards at times. When we do deer drives in the swamps my 444 and 4570 and even my 44 mag carbine are very popular at camp. Even the guys that hunt with 270s and 06s and mag rifles know enough from experience to leave them at camp. Is there a real brush bucking gun that will shoot through brush at 100 percent reliablilty. Absouletly not. But theres not doubt in my mind that some do better then others. You can set up all the wooden dowel tests you want and just like setting up a penetration test to a point you have to take it with a grain of salt. I can show you that a 475 revolver will outpenetrate a 458 mag with its best loads too. If faced with a cape buffalo which do you think id prefer!!!

charger 1
10-21-2007, 05:24 AM
I guess I am in 44 man's camp. My concern is not about which is the best rifle to shoot through brush with. It has more to do with hunting ethics and safety. I don't shoot if there is anything between me and the target, and especially if the animal is in brush. Under those conditions I would be worried about allowing an animal to get away wounded, and about what other critters may be in the unpredictable path of my deflected bullet; other game animals, human beings, livestock, whatever. This policy may explain why I have a lifetime bag of ten or so deer and one antelope in fifty years.

In some circumstances (believe it or not) it is possible to know weather the path is clear of any and all other life forms and thusly its just the projevtile making the trip you need worry about. Semi or fullt destabilized boolits seldom make it 40-50 miles..The nice thing about 30 mil spread over such an area and 80% of them in three cities, boy when you in da bush, you in da bush

Larry Gibson
10-21-2007, 01:05 PM
Well I guess I'm pretty damn unethical then. I've already admitted to shooting through brush twice at big game and I shoot jack rabbits through sage brush all the time. Light weight, fast stepping varmint bullets don't fair too well there, they break up on the sage. However a heavy cast bullet plows right through and kills 'em dead. Oops, those aren't "brush busters" they're sage busters. Guess I'll just have to go turn myself in to the "ethical cops", well maybe someday.

Larry Gibson

44man
10-21-2007, 01:49 PM
I have to apologize for saying "REDNECK", I was NOT referring to southern people but to the dumpers and poachers anywhere in the country.
I went bowhunting this morning and seen 18 deer. We have WAY too many and the doe need reduced. I only had one sure shot with nothing in the way and shot a nice one. Could I or should I have tried more shots? NO WAY. Could I have taken more shots with the revolver? YES, because distance estimation is not as critical. Would I have shot through the brush? NO, there are other deer and other days.
Shooting at jackrabbits is not the same as shooting at big game. A small animal can be missed clean or killed with a marginal hit, not so with a big animal that can be lost.

leftiye
10-21-2007, 02:46 PM
Another picture- We never see 18 deer in a day here. Unless it is before the season, and they are all in one herd.

(It kinda amazes me, here I live in god's country. Gazillions of empty and/ or wilderness square miles, and youse guys in the south and east have three month seasons, can take a deer a day , total of 18 or 20).

We get two weeks (actually less), but that don't matter. Did you know that deer can go down rabbit holes? After opening morning you might as well stay home (the deer are in full adrenaline mode thereafter). Me pass up 18 deer any day of the season, I should be so lucky! Them marginal shots HAVE to be looked at!

charger 1
10-22-2007, 06:12 AM
Another picture- We never see 18 deer in a day here. Unless it is before the season, and they are all in one herd.

(It kinda amazes me, here I live in god's country. Gazillions of empty and/ or wilderness square miles, and youse guys in the south and east have three month seasons, can take a deer a day , total of 18 or 20).

We get two weeks (actually less), but that don't matter. Did you know that deer can go down rabbit holes? After opening morning you might as well stay home (the deer are in full adrenaline mode thereafter). Me pass up 18 deer any day of the season, I should be so lucky! Them marginal shots HAVE to be looked at!


Exactly
Its hard to get fellas from difirrent areas to empethize with having to do the best of the best at not shooting through brush. But after that making sure you have honed your equipment incase you have to do just that

44man
10-22-2007, 08:21 AM
Yes, I agree some of you just have a hard time finding a deer. You should see my yard when the mulberries, peaches, pears and apples start to fall. I have a very hard time with spots to hang a stand because it just doesn't matter, pick any spot and I will see deer. It didn't use to be like this though, only the last few years.
I started bow hunting and muzzle loader hunting in OHIO back when there were almost no deer there. If you seen one, you called the paper! :mrgreen: I would still get one every year, then go to Michigan for another and then PA for a third. I had to hunt hard but the right shot was still important to me. I got to know deer and how they interact with other deer and hunters so it got very easy for me. I now have over 230 deer with bows and something like 365 total kills. Almost all of the gun kills were with a muzzle loader or revolver, sold my rifles after a few, too easy. Give me some snow and a flintlock and I will track down and kill one.
I quit shooting bucks unless I can give the meat away.
Nothing like a friend in another state, he gets 17 or more a year but uses a rifle. He feeds a lot of poor people. I can't give more then 3 away and I keep 2 for myself. Sometimes I let my bow hang and just watch them. Or I stay in bed, don't feel like cutting meat.
I just can't say anything about what shots some of you need to take, I understand your deer situation. I wish I could send you some. :drinks:

charger 1
10-22-2007, 10:16 AM
Yes, I agree some of you just have a hard time finding a deer. You should see my yard when the mulberries, peaches, pears and apples start to fall. I have a very hard time with spots to hang a stand because it just doesn't matter, pick any spot and I will see deer. It didn't use to be like this though, only the last few years.
I started bow hunting and muzzle loader hunting in OHIO back when there were almost no deer there. If you seen one, you called the paper! :mrgreen: I would still get one every year, then go to Michigan for another and then PA for a third. I had to hunt hard but the right shot was still important to me. I got to know deer and how they interact with other deer and hunters so it got very easy for me. I now have over 230 deer with bows and something like 365 total kills. Almost all of the gun kills were with a muzzle loader or revolver, sold my rifles after a few, too easy. Give me some snow and a flintlock and I will track down and kill one.
I quit shooting bucks unless I can give the meat away.
Nothing like a friend in another state, he gets 17 or more a year but uses a rifle. He feeds a lot of poor people. I can't give more then 3 away and I keep 2 for myself. Sometimes I let my bow hang and just watch them. Or I stay in bed, don't feel like cutting meat.
I just can't say anything about what shots some of you need to take, I understand your deer situation. I wish I could send you some. :drinks:




It sounds like our caribou situation. Its not called caribou hunting. Its called caribou shooting:drinks:

leftiye
10-22-2007, 02:50 PM
It sounds like our caribou situation. Its called caribou shooting:drinks: Yep, I'd say that I probly hunt much harder than 44 does. You don't find what ain't there, so if'n I have a hard time finding a deer, it ain't that I'm not a better hunter than I was 40 years ago. (ya think?)

JMax
10-22-2007, 04:29 PM
A lot of words and opinions but if you can find a copy of "Deadly Weapons" done by Richard Davis of Second Chance this question was studied, documented and put to bed. Most calibers up to and including the 50BMG were used. The basic conclusion supports the original premise of this thread with documentated tests.

44man
10-23-2007, 02:52 PM
The only sure thing is that when you shoot at an animal and there is something in the way, nothing is sure! :coffee:

charger 1
10-23-2007, 04:59 PM
The only sure thing is that when you shoot at an animal and there is something in the way, nothing is sure! :coffee:

Its all relative. Up here we would say that of anything handgun calibered

44man
10-24-2007, 12:22 AM
This always brings to mind the toy guns our troops now use. Compared to the good old 30-06 that would shoot ball ammo through trees and take down block walls with enough shots. No place to hide except under ground. They can carry more ammo but it takes 100 times more shots for each kill.
I had some tracers years ago and set a target on a big tree. I seen the tracer going up in the sky so I started testing the penetration. I shot through 2 feet of green oak, the bullet nose was sticking out the far side and the tracer smoke was pouring out the entry hole.
I had a 7mm-08 for a while and when target shooting from different positions, I hit a branch and sprayed the target with shrapnel. Did the same with a 220 swift on a blade of grass. If you want to bust through something, nothing better then a shotgun slug.
I do know if I had to go into battle, I sure don't want a .223, I want Ma duece! :mrgreen: