PDA

View Full Version : For all that want a soft boolit



44man
12-02-2005, 10:58 PM
or a soft nose boolit in their big bore revolvers for deer! How about a lesson on hard cast, specifically the .44, 320 gr LBT WLNGC. First picture is the entrance.

44man
12-02-2005, 11:08 PM
This is the exit. Notice the bloodshot areas on both pictures all the way from the lower chest, under the shoulder and way up the neck.

44man
12-02-2005, 11:10 PM
This is the off shoulder when I was butchering. Now explain why anyone would want an expanding boolit or a soft boolit. It would only make a bigger mess. It took me most of the day to clean this up.

waksupi
12-03-2005, 12:24 AM
44, I find this very interesting. Having shot a couple truck loads of game with cast, I can never remember having that much bloodshot meat. And really, I see more tissue disruption, than actual blood shot on your kill. I've used calibers from .6.5, through. .45.
I do wish others would post thier autopsy reports, as then we may be able to hunt down the true optimum caliber, for minimal blood shot, and killing effectiveness. Some may see it as morbid. I see it as research.
So far, from my experience, I am thinkng the .35 will be hard to beat. I would like to see some field reports from people using .375, .400, or anything else.

StarMetal
12-03-2005, 12:26 AM
45-70 hands down. Hard to beat, puts the animal down, doesn't destroy alot of meat. That's my choice.

Joe

BOOM BOOM
12-03-2005, 02:24 AM
HI,
With cast I have only used 44 mag in pistol, 250gr SWC air cooled WW, 3 shots=3deer, all at 100yds to 70yds. all went down where they were hit.
The same bullet in the 444 marlin did the same 3 shots=3 deer.

BOOM BOOM
12-03-2005, 02:38 AM
HI,
I agree air cooled WW seem to do just fine in 44 cal. & up.
It would be interesting to see reports on smaller cal. bullets to get an idea of where one would need to actually use a softer alloy.
I'd bet the 41 mag would do just fine with air cooled WW on deer at ranges of 100yds or less.

44man
12-03-2005, 10:00 AM
I have taken a pile of deer with the .44, .45, 45-70 and .475 revolvers all with hard cast boolits with large meplats. This was the worst! Even the entrance hole was very large and torn. It gives me a better appreciation of the killing power of the lowly (now days) .44.
The smaller calibers need some expansion but more important is weight so the expanded boolit will penetrate.
I do not own anything smaller then the .44 so I can't discuss the effects. The only thing I remember all these years is that a survey showed deer hit good with the .357 were lost 50% of the time. Due to this research that was done and the many times I had to help friends try to find deer, I have never even thought about buying a smaller revolver.
This deer was as bad as the one I hit years ago with a .280 where the bullet exploded in the chest and sent shrapnel out the other side. Thats when I sold my rifles!
I found that with other then a spine or brain hit, any deer that drops at the shot is seriously damaged. I don't think this is a good situation as far as preventing meat damage.

9.3X62AL
12-03-2005, 10:51 AM
Ric--

35 caliber? As in, 357 Magnum from revolver? Be careful--such text can be flammable. I got a Michigan whitetail in 1984 with that caliber, a pre-Enlightenment harvest with the Speer 146 SWC-HP from a S&W 586 x 6". The bullet traversed the critter, and it fell over after a few steps. Short-range shot, about 15 yards, from a tree stand.

How projectiles work to bring down game or halt aggressive action is a subject that gets hotly contested at times, especially when handguns are the platforms being discussed. I think lead RB's, alloy SWC's, jacketed soft point rifle bullets, and broadhead arrows all can harvest game animals--but it's a certainty that each one works in a different way to get the job done. Another certainty is that each wound created by any of these methods is a law unto itself--just too many variables at work skewing the outcomes.

I think the best we can do is to place the shot as accurately as possible on that target (primary) and do the best we can with the load and its projectile to enhance lethality (secondary). This second element would involve the load's intrinsic accuracy to facilitate Element #1, the projectile's diameter and weight along with what Hatcher referred to as "shape factor", and velocity to convey momentum, sustain penetration, and enhance tissue disruption.

It's pretty obvious that any increase in projectile velocity, diameter, and weight is a plus that favors enhanced lethality--but there's a break-even point at which recoil becomes an issue, at least for some of us. Full-house 44 Magnums in a 4-inch Model 29 are about as much of that recreation as I care to endure, and my 44 Magnum is a Redhawk for that reason. Most of its shooting involves 240-250 grain SWC's at or under 1200 FPS, following Elmer Keith's advice that "1200 FPS is all you need" with his boolits in that caliber.

There are a lot of formulae out there that attempt to predict a caliber's field or defensive merits based on calculation. Most of these involve a process where one of the objective measurements--velocity, boolit frontal area, or weight--gets squared to determine the caliber's "value". Staying as close to "real world" as we can......the only one of these three measurements that actually does increase to the square of its linear progression is frontal area. This is consistent with the premise advanced by Thompson/LaGarde and Hatcher, and although its motivation was to justify adoption and continuation of use of the 45 ACP service pistol, it is interesting to note that part of the research process involved the shooting of live stockyard cattle to assess the effects of the loads in question. The conclusion that a large caliber, medium to heavy weight projectile at slow to medium velocity did the best work on live targets while transmitting tolerable recoil remains valid to this day.

For field/hunting venues, I think the Thompson-LaGarde-Hatcher findings can be combined with increased velocity (to flatten trajectories) to arrive at some loose conclusions about caliber selections for cast bullet hunting. Using these guidelines, the 41 Magnum, 44 Magnum, and 45 Colt certainly qualify for deer hunting purposes. I would add the 10mm and 357 Magnum if the hunter is willing to pass on any shot not offering both close proximity and good angle. In all cases, boolits should be appropriate to the task--wide flat nose or SWC profile, and minimum SD of about .200.

waksupi
12-03-2005, 11:09 AM
When I say .35, I speak of the .35 Remington, .35 Whelen, .358 Winchester, rather than pistol caliber. If I was going to use a .357 mag., it would certainly have a fairly heavy cast bullet in it, and I'm sure it would do the job in reasonable range, with good placement.
I don't know if there is a Holy Grail for a hunting caliber/cartridge. I've killed bucks with the 6.5 Swede, with bullets flying along at around 1700 fps, with excellent wound channel. And I know thirty bores, 8mm's, .44, .45's all work, as I have taken game with all bore sizes. I guess maybe I've answered my own question, as all have worked effectively, as long as the bullet is placed in the proper location.

9.3X62AL
12-03-2005, 11:23 AM
Gotcha.

That 9.3 x 62 with the 270 grain round flat nose going 1700 FPS should do some good work--it's basically a 36-06 with shoulder blown forward 0.1" or so. I'm looking forward to seeing what the rifle will do with these castings now that good glass is installed atop it.

45 2.1
12-03-2005, 01:03 PM
Alot of people on this forum have taken very large piles of deer. No one way did them all in. Some of us have found out how to drop game and not mangle that game up. Those little 357 mags have taken alot to. It depends more on where you hit them than what you hit them with (as long as its appropriate for what your doing). Each to his own, but if you tell me yours is the only way, then you will soon be talking to yourself.

StarMetal
12-03-2005, 02:23 PM
I know alot of you have taken deer with the 357 mag, but in my opinion and quite a few gun writers that are hunters, it's anemic. I've had quite a few personal friends that have used it and don't anymore. Before you jump on me remember alot of deer have been taken with lesser rounds...like the 22 rimfire for example, or the 25-20. If I had to pick one handgun for deer hunting, it sure wouldn't be a 357 mag.

Joe

Bullshop
12-03-2005, 02:27 PM
I gotta tell ya that when you put the lowly little 357 mag in a sealed breech like a 94 Marlin or some such without barrel cylender gap it is one potent little package with capabilities far beyond what its miniature stature would suggest. I also recall from my ancient past a couple deer dropping in thier tracks to a 6" L frame when the L frame first hit the streats. I was single with paycheck and just had to have one of those.
I dare say if for some reason I were limited to posess only a Marlin 94 357 mag we here at BS headquarters would not go without meat!
BIC/BS

StarMetal
12-03-2005, 02:34 PM
Dan,

I agree with your theory on the 357 in a rifle. Let me say too that if I only had my 541-S Remington custom sporter 22 rimfire I too would not go without meat!!! Would you agree a 35 Remington is better then a 357 mag rifle?

Joe

versifier
12-03-2005, 03:37 PM
IMHO, it takes a shooter with the self control to refuse to take a shot at too long a range or at a marginal angle to make the .357mag, or any smaller handgun or rifle cartridge work to kill cleanly. A man may well have the marksmanship skills to be able to hit targets at very long ranges, but that doesn't mean that he should try such shots on live game. I see it as more of an ethical question. If a quick, clean kill cannot be assured, I have NO BUSINESS pulling the trigger. I think the .357mag in a handgun has no more practical range on deer than a bow, 25-30 yards, and needs the same degree of self restraint to use it both ethically and effectively. Would I use it? Yes, and I have when I had to. Are there better choices? Of course there are, and I use them now that I can.
It's like the old story about the dynamite shack. The lightbulb was burnt out, so the guy lights a match to find what he needed. He gets out without mishap. Just because he didn't get blown into the next county, doesn't mean it's a good idea, or that he should feel good enough about it to try it again next time. A smarter man would bring a flashlight and replace the bulb, or at least leave the door open....

StarMetal
12-03-2005, 04:29 PM
...and it should be an approved explosion proof flashlight too!

Joe

Bret4207
12-03-2005, 05:38 PM
44- What velocity did the boolit hit at, estimated of course, and would you have a photo of one of the boolits? Hard cast or dead soft may not make much difference if the velocity is such that the so called "hydro-static shock wave" effect forces fluids into the meat and between the tissues. I would think a hard, flat faced .430 boolit at, say, 1350 fps would cause just as much destruction as a .358 cal WW boolit traveling slower, but expanding to the same .430, at least at exit. Could be the larger diameter and hard alloy doesn't allow any displacement of the lead as the boolit enters the skin, causing the fluids to precede the boolit and force them through the meat. Regardless of the alloy and hardness you got the deer and made a fine shot too by the look of it.

Beyond the bloodshot tissue, I've sometimes found a softer alloy works better in certain guns. I always thought it was a matter of the bore sealing better or that particular barrel otherwise responding better to the softer alloy, usually straight WW. Plus, I'm lazy and straight WW doesn't require blending. Water cooled WW has worked better in some rougher barrels, so I know a harder alloy can make things easier for some guns. Maybe the day will come when I'm in need of some linotype type hardness, but not yet. Your sucess and the accuracy you've achived sure does make me think long and hard about trying some harder boolits though.

David R
12-03-2005, 06:55 PM
I was once told by a man that teaches guns and shooting.

"If you want to kill a man, you have to shoot him where he lives" He was talking about heart, lungs, head, neck........

I agree 100%. Same goes for deer. My personal opinion, for a handgun if the caliber starts with a "4", then its a good one.

Bullshop
12-03-2005, 07:55 PM
Well Joe I wouldnt say the 35 Rem is better across the board I would only say better for some things. On the same token I would also have to say the 357 mag would be better for some things. The bigger one better for bigger things the smaller one better for smaller things, but both good for deer the smaller one being slightly more limited as to range. If you compair the little mag with what at one time were considered top notch deer slayers like the 44/40 and 38/40 I dont see the 357 as lacking in comparison. Deer havnt gotten any tougher since then but hunters have largly lost the ability to hunt in comparison.
I seem to recal reading in Verals book that he was using a Marlin 94 in 357 mag for elk and he felt that with HIS WFN design and hard enough to resist expanding the package was more than adiquit.
You would probably be surprised to know how populer the 35 Rem is here with native villigers for moose. As I said bigger for bigger. The most populer with villigers by far is the 30/30.
If you have access to a Marlin 357 mag try in it the Lyman 215gn SWC/GC. IT was designed for the 357 max but realy turns the little mag into a performer in both accuracy and penitrating power.
BIC/BS

9.3X62AL
12-03-2005, 09:12 PM
Thankfully, I'm not limited to just a 357 Magnum revolver for my deer hunting. Like most of the posters here, I have a pretty good selection of deer-capable firearms and cast boolit ammunition with which to hunt them.

Which one is the "best"? Tough question. Terrain makes a lot of the decisions for you--am I sniping them across a meadow at sunrise, or diving into buckbrush and chamise during the day to roust them out of their beds? There are a number of places I hunt that handguns have no place in--it's rifle country, and with Noslers--not castings.

Gotta be flexible.

Bass Ackward
12-03-2005, 10:23 PM
This is the off shoulder when I was butchering. Now explain why anyone would want an expanding boolit or a soft boolit. It would only make a bigger mess. It took me most of the day to clean this up.



44,

A bigger mess with a softer bullet .... is not necessarily true. If the resulting expansion slows the bullet internally, less velocity is available upon exit to produce shock or clotting. The energy is transfered inside the animal hopefully where the vitals are instead on on the exit surface. If not, then bleed out is still a fall back if bullet weight is sufficient to continue full penetration.

My guess is that you encountered clotting damage that was probably caused more by bone fragments from the shoulder blade, than the actual bullet. Had the shot angle been exactly the opposite and the entrance and the exit hole switched, maybe no surface clotting damage would have taken place.

That's the problem, to many maybe's to draw a conclusion on one animal. We all form opinions based on our experiences. Yours is no less valued because it favors hard bullets in handguns. I did once too. That is the other problem. We tend to change our minds as we go along.

44man
12-04-2005, 12:23 AM
First, I am not against anyone using the .357 for deer as long as they are a good shot, shoot within range and use the proper boolits. I owned one years ago and loved it. It was extremely accurate. I just prefer the larger bores for deer. The .357 has taken a lot of game! The only thing I never liked was a lot of .357 bullets are not right for big game and you have to choose carefully.
I looked in my book and the 320 gr LBT is going 1316 fps average. I use 21.5 grs. of 296 and Fed standard LP primers. I don't have any left so can't take a picture but it is the store bought boolit. I made a mould that is a copy and weighs 330 grs. but I shot all of them up too. Looks like I have to cast some more. My friend came over and I have a range in my woods, boolits don't last me long and since I won't use this gun anymore this year, I shot them all. My next deer will be shot with the Ruger Old Army cap and ball. Or maybe the .45 Vaquero. Who knows what I will grab! The 45-70 BFR hasn't been used yet either. Decisions, decisions.
Bass, the entrance side of the deer was as bad as the exit side. The insides were totally destroyed. The heart and lungs were mush. I don't think I want a softer boolit then WW metal. That flat nose is all that is needed. Now with a smaller caliber, softer is better as long as you have weight.

BOOM BOOM
12-04-2005, 01:12 AM
HI,
This is one interesting thread!
Many years back, late 60s or early 70s I was able to get a large doe road kill & did some terminal ballistics w/ the 357 & 44 mag both shot out of ruger single actions. 357 the 6& 1/2" barrel, the 44 the 7&1/2' barrel.
The 357 useing lyman book max loads of 2400 or unique, w/ both the 146gr speer HJHP & then the 158 gr SWC cast WW alloy at ranges of 25yds will penatrate & exit chest, front shoulders ,& hips.They will not go stem to stern & exit. I probably would shoot a deer at 100yds or less w/ a 357 .
But let me say I would prefer to use my 44mag.

kenjuudo
12-04-2005, 08:41 AM
Boom Boom, Being in hog farm country, I've taken advantage of the large amount of ballistic testing medium and have found the same results you have. The country I hunt is thick river bottoms and ravines that rarely offer more than a 40 yard shot. A quick count of the tags hanging in the garage puts the number of deer killed with a .357 at 28, 17 of those head shots. Now if my eyesight and skill allowed 60 yard shots with a handgun I would also carry a my .44 into the woods more often. I seem to have to let more deer pass on by every year, I seem to remember most all of them were in range when I was younger.

9.3X62AL
12-04-2005, 09:15 AM
No way in hell would I try any shot past 75 yards on a game animal with a magnum revolver--owing to the iron sights atop my handguns and my abilities with same. The 357 or 10mm would get an absolute max of 50 yards AND ideal angle. This is not a limitation imposed so much by the calibers as by the sighting systems and the limitations of the operator.

I have a '73 Winchester in 44-40 WCF that has harvested mule and blacktail deer in the hundreds in the hands of my great-grandfather, grandfather, and ranch hands--and a number of black bears. This work was all done with factory loads of some kind, so we're talking 200-215 grain bullets at 1200 FPS or less. This is 10mm-41 Magnum handgun intensity, with the ability to place shots a little further away due to sight radius. I doubt seriously that deer were fired upon much past 50 yards very often--the topography and vegetation argued against such stunts as much as the caliber's capabilities. The rifle was in service from the late 1890's through the early 1930's, when the ranch folded under the combined pressures of my grandfather's passing and the Great Depression.

Interesting to note that during that time no one considered a caliber upgrade--per my grandmother before her death, the '73 was called "the big rifle", the Marlin 27-S in 25-20 "the little rifle", and the Colt SAA in 32-20 was "the pistol". "Old School", even in the old days. I asked her if deer shot with the 44-40 ever got away--she said, "not when I shot them, or Elmer" (my grandfather). Ammunition was expensive, and acquiring ammo meant a day-long trip on crummy one-lane dirt mountain roads into town (San Bernardino). Deer were also quite plentiful, so those factors combined with the discerning shot placement claimed by Grandma Paine to make the most from the rather humble ballistics of the standard 44-40 cartridge in a 19" barrel.

44man
12-04-2005, 10:57 AM
Deputy, how right you are! All of us old timers know that velocity in a big bore doesn't mean much. Penetration works as well and that old 44-40 will penetrate just fine. The trend today seems to be to shoot lighter and lighter boolits as fast as possible where a big, heavy, slow boolit will work as well or better.
My .44 would kill as well with less damage if I reduced the velocity, however, the load I use is more accurate then any I have ever tried and that is more important to me then how fast it is going.
When I was young, I could hit small targets out to 400 meters with a handgun and open sights. Those days are gone, eyes ya know. So all of my hunting guns now carry red dot scopes. WONDERFUL things for us old timers!
The strangest thing is that I can use the sights (if you can call them sights.) on my Vaquero to hunt with and have killed deer cleanly to 100 yd's. Yeah, I know, it's goofy!
I won Ohio state IHMSA big bore with my .44 BH with 79 out of 80 and state small bore with my Mark II with 57 out of 60 with NO SIGHT SETTINGS at the start. I once put 12 straight shots through a 5 gallon bucket at 400 meters with my Super Redhawk.
Those days are gone and all I have are memories. I shake more and can't see as good. The red dot is saving me!

BOOM BOOM
12-05-2005, 01:32 AM
HI,
So here is the other half of my tests, once again on a good sized road kill deer.
Range was under 25yds. used Ruger SBH with 7&1/2" barrel. Loads were 225gr speer 1/2 J HP& the Lyman 250gr gc Kieth style SWC. On top of either 11grs unique, or 21grs 2400 which I liked better back then.
Both bullets & both loads completely penetrated shoulders,hips, chest, & stem to stern.
This is why I always carry the 44 when I can.
But I'm still no Elmer Kieth. I would shoot a deer at 150yds if everything was perfect & I could grab the 7MM/06 if the deer didn't go down fast.
Unfortunatly I've only used my ML for at least 10yrs now. Utah will not even let you have a pistol in camp during the ML hunt.

9.3X62AL
12-05-2005, 01:51 AM
This year's deer load for the local muleys and blacktails was #429421 at 1100 FPS from my Model 624 x 6.5". No shots at fur, but the load work was fun.

I'm still playing around with the 44-40 now and then, and the thing keeps throwing fliers. After 30-35 shots, the rifling edges start caking lead a little, too. The bore isn't pristine--usable, but worn. Methinks a gas check design is the answer, a 215 grain round flat nose with that little copper cup grabbing the lands a little better down that long gas pipe.

BruceB
12-05-2005, 02:41 AM
When it comes to cast bullets that will be used on game from handguns, all I want my bullet to do is stay in one piece, retain its shape to a large degree, and PENETRATE.

The only critter I ever took with a .38/.357 was an Arctic wolf that had the serious misfortune of crossing my path the morning after I'd zeroed the K-38. The load was VERY serious for a .38 Special, being 358156 in 1/3 lead-2/3 linotype, and loaded over 13.5 grains of 'old' 2400 for a solid 1300 fps. The bullet took him broadside through the shoulders from 40 yards and he hit so hard he bounced, DRT. Apart from finishing shots on some caribou etc., that's my experience with .35s on "game". I wouldn't hunt deer with a .357 by choice with any bullet, but that's just my opinion.

I HAVE put .44 Magnum cast bullets, same alloy as above, through a number of bison and moose. These were either finishing shots or "curiosity", just to see how they'd do. Lyman's 429244 (about 255 grains) cleanly penetrated some big bison through-and-through, on both head shots and shoulder area hits....THAT surprised me, and the bullets still had plenty of energy left, judging by the impacts on the far side. My wife killed a very active bull moose from 65 yards with the same 429244/1400+ fps load with two neck-area hits, fired from her 7.5" SBH....she wasn't hunting with the revolver, but it's all she had left to use at the time. Moose died in his current tracks, no further travel.

Based on the above-demonstrated performance, I've long since decided that I would NOT need anything more than a .44 Magnum in handguns if using cast boolits. Bigger guns MAY perform better than the .44 with jacketed bullets, but good grief, if the .44/250 CB load will go through BISON, why on earth would I need more so-called "power"??

If hunting with a rifle and cast bullets, it's my OPINION that for my peace of mind, all the .30s and smaller will stay in the lockup, and my deer rifles would start with the .338. Some .338 cast softpoints are on hand now for research. I greatly regret not getting a shot at an Alberta elk with my CB softpoint load from the .416 Rigby. I DO want an expanding bullet in the rifle load, where there's enough sectional density to keep an expanded front-end moving for deep penetration. Handgun penetration (with conventional cartridges and guns) would decrease radically if the bullet expanded much, which is why I want the boolit to retain its original shape as much as possible. I've finally amassed enough newsprint for a wet-pack test on these cast rifle-caliber softpoints, and hope to carry out some shooting in the near future, weather permitting.

So...if I go handgunning for deer or larger, it will be with a .44 Maggie, and if I take cast boolits in a rifle after critters, it will be at LEAST a .338/220 softpoint, and more likely a .40+ with 350 or more grains of softpointed WW at 2000-plus fps. Yes, I KNOW I don't "need" such things for some situations, but by golly I WILL be prepared for the worst, with something that will do the job without any doubt at all as long as I do my part.

I'm very curious to see how the cast softpoints work on wet-pack, because if they do as well as I fondly hope, they could open some new areas of effectiveness with cast bullets.

Bret4207
12-05-2005, 07:34 PM
As usual, an excellant post by Bruceb. Now you've got me thinking about the expansion arguement. Maybe Ol'Elmer was right and the non-expanding idea is best. You put a slightly different twist on the idea.

BOOM BOOM
12-06-2005, 12:29 AM
HI,
Two things.
Matt my nephew reports a large feral hog shot w/ a 41mag 210gr hornady XTP, over 22grs ww296. Bullet penatrated both shoulders & was under skin on off side.
I assume most of us know the Afican hunters have used solids on all game, relying on bullet placement & penatration to do the job with great success. Also all hunting of the 1800s & early 1900s was done w/ lead and none expanding bullets.
The expanding bullet is a great invention, has great effectiveness, but is not nessacary to make reliable humane kills.

MT Gianni
12-06-2005, 12:45 AM
My first deer wth a handgun was a Model 19 and 125 gr jhp. I was not a caster and had my pistol with me when the buck stepped out below me at about 40 yards. I was shooting a lot of ppc at the time and hit him square between the shoulder blades looking down and he was blood shot through most of the front quarters, but dead in his tracks. I would do it again with a good cast bullet if I was shooting 1000 rds a month and knew where it would hit. Gianni

Blackwater
12-06-2005, 03:41 AM
A lot of good observations, experience & opinions here. I agree with all who noted that it's more where you hit them. I hunt Georgia whitetails that are typically (but not always) on the smallish side. For some 40 years, what I've seen indicates that on whitetails of whatever size, if you hit them right it really doesn't matter as much whether you use a .22 LR or a .45/70. Hit right, you're gonna eat venison.

I never gave the .45 ACP much credence as a deer caliber, but a buddy recently shot some of my 230 gr. Lee LTC's at 960 fps and 1010 fps on two deer, and the load and caliber performed admirably. Both were excellent hits, though. Broke both shoulders on one and the offside sholder on the other. Dead right there on both counts.

This guy has been on the list for a number of farmers locally as a cropper of crop damaging deer. He's used everything from .22 LR (all he had at the time) to the large magnums. He got better results on deer with the 9mm JHP's than he did with the .45 ACP with either lighter JHP's or 230 FMJRN's. The 9mm. penetrated a bit deeper, and this mattered on average.

He's also shot them with .38 Spec. & .357 (142 gr. Lee HP & 158's in lead, and 125-158's in J-bulets), .45 LC (all sorts & wts of bullets), .44 mag, and a few small samplings with other calibers. What amazes me most is that there's not a greater difference between the big stuff and a good hit with a .22 LR. The .22 LR is legendary as a penetrator way beyond what most give it credit for. Put one in the right place and unalarmed deer go down a lot faster than many think, with a fair number (astounding considering caliber, enerty, etc.) going down in their tracks with a body shot. Miss a little, though, and the .22 LR may give you a merry chase for quite a ways before you find your venison.

Results with the cast bullets though, have been superior to either caliber with the J-bullets in the ACP. Amazing, ain't it? Who'd a'thunk a big, large diameter bullet with a flat point at decent velocity would .... yeah .... you're right .... I should'a known! :oops:

He doesn't use a pistol past about 50 yds. any more these days, and just loves the way the .45 carries - so flat & packable .... and deadly. It just doesn't get any better than that.

Shooting deer sized stuff with a pistol is intriguing, and the more I see of it, the less I think I understand, except that good hits kill quickly no matter what the caliber, so long as it'll penetrate enough to be effective. Yeah, nose shape, velocity (to a point) and all sorts of other factors DO enter in, but they play a far smaller part in the matter than where you hit them. Bigger IS better. I'm just surprised it's not a LOT better, and this has been going on for years now.

So what do I shoot? .44 mag, .30 Herrett and .357 Maxi. Haven't taken a deer with the .44 SuperB yet, nor the Maxi barrel, but I've seen enough to take them afield with complete confidence. Like 44 Man, I just wish my eyes were better with irons, so these days will most likely limit myself to @ 50 yds. unless I'm shooting the Contender with a scope and have a good rest. What I really wanna' do is take one with the little .256 Win. Mag. barrel. No doubt in my mind that a good bullet (likely 75 gr. Speer FP or a cast bullet maybe) will feed me well.

Like I said, the more I see of deer kills, the less I realize I really know. Funny how that works, ain't it?

44man
12-06-2005, 10:23 AM
Years ago, when I hunted PA with archery equipment, I killed at least 5 deer that had a white lump on a rib. When cutting the lump open, a .22 bullet fell out. The result of poachers and squirrel hunters just shooting at deer. I have to wonder how many are actually running around after surviving these shots! I was hunting 3 miles from the road too. I would not put any faith in a body hit from a .22.

BOOM BOOM
12-22-2005, 12:28 AM
HI,
My friend Dennis shot 5 ferel pigs at 200+ lbs 1 shot each 44 mag hot 300gr XTP bullet.
I've noticed alot of folks using the 300gr bullet in the 44 of late.
I wounder why?
The 250gr has always preformed very well for me.
My friend Wade shot & killed several deer w/ the 357 mag before he went to the happy hunting grounds. I believe they were shot at 100yds or less & all w/ j bullets.

Bass Ackward
12-22-2005, 07:18 AM
I've noticed alot of folks using the 300gr bullet in the 44 of late.
I wounder why? The 250gr has always preformed very well for me.


Boomer,

For a lot of guys it is harder to shoot a light bullet accurately in a straight case than a heavy one.

Increased bullet mass improves ignition with more inertia, aids it further by taking more time to size and engrave than a light bullet, and usually has more bearing area and a better BC.

Thus the old cast phrase, "always use the heaviest bullet per caliber."

These are all advantages that sometimes cover for reloading sins, that are discussed in length here, and basically go undiagnosed for most guys in the reloading process. Cast or jacketed.

robertbank
12-22-2005, 08:42 AM
BruceB - You ever spend time over in Ft. Simpson? SOn born there. Spent two years in Pine Point as well.

Like the 30-30 for deer and will soon go cast after loading soft points for years. Downloaded 30-06 works as well and accurate. Hunting with handguns is illegal up here but did put one down with .357 Mag after animal was spine shot.

Stay Safe

Bob

BruceB
12-22-2005, 12:50 PM
Howdy, Bob.

[QUOTE=robertbank] "BruceB - You ever spend time over in Ft. Simpson? Son born there. Spent two years in Pine Point as well.

Hunting with handguns is illegal up here but did put one down with .357 Mag after animal was spine shot."

I've been through Ft Simpson quite a few times, generally on the way to doing some mining exploration or on hunting trips. We flew out of there on a couple of moose trips with Paul Jones in SimpsonAir's Norseman (For others: " Norseman" is a 1930s-vintage Canadian-built fabric-covered bushplane, using the same Pratt & Whitney R1340 as the later DeHavilland Otter. Hell of a good aircraft, and many are still in daily service. Also, "Fort Simpson" is a small, mostly-native village on the banks of the Mackenzie River.) I wonder if they still ration booze there?

My 33 years in the north spanned the entire existence of the town of Pine Point (on the south shore of Great Slave Lake, east of Hay River, now no longer there.) I did mineral exploration during the great staking rush of the early '60s near the future site of the town BEFORE the main orebody was found, and I visited the place fairly often up to the time it was erased from the landscape. Makes a feller feel pretty old, seeing things like that happening within his lifetime. Build a town, people it with hardworking folks, kids born, grow up, schooled, move away to pursue their own lives, lead-zinc resource runs out, and now.... literally nothing is left of a thriving town of well-over a thousand people.

Handgun hunting in Canada....heh, heh....I won't tell if you don't tell. Yep, it's absolutely verboten, but that doesn't seem to stop many rural-living folks. It always amazed me to enter any decent gunstore in Canada and find DOZENS of good holsters hanging on the racks....in a country where by law, your pistola MUST be transported locked inside a box, with a trigger lock installed, and ONLY to a government-approved range. So, why holsters? Things that make us say,"Hmmmmmm...." with a secret smile.

REDTAIL
10-05-2008, 03:34 AM
I did not see any of the pictures that you posted 44

missionary5155
10-05-2008, 06:42 AM
From what I have seen.. shot .. and read about.. if the pistol caliber starts with a 4 the meat is in the door.. I would include the .375 SUPERMAG in that group also. The .357 Max (Supermag) is an OK choice but shorter distances. The older I get (57) the less I enjoy helping track down whitetails shot with .357 mag...

44man
10-05-2008, 08:59 AM
I had to delete a bunch of pictures because I was getting too many.
But we did a test yesterday and I tried my 45-70 BFR. Here is what happened to a 300 gr Hornady rifle bullet compared to a 378 gr cast.

Whitworth
10-05-2008, 10:06 AM
Not to mention the fact that the hollow-point went less than half the distance as the hardcast in the medium we used to test penetration........

waksupi
10-05-2008, 10:38 AM
Sonofagun. This thread has been going on since 2005!

Dale53
10-05-2008, 10:56 AM
This is an interesting, and rather enlightening discussion. I don't have the experience on deer that many of you have. I have only taken six deer (we get rather large bean and corn fed whitetails in this area) but have carefully examined all while dressing them out. I have also observed the autopsies of 35 or so Canadian Black Bear. It has been quite interesting to say the least.

All of my deer have been taken with the .44 magnum. Five of them fell to a Keith 240-250 gr bullet driven at 1200-1300 fps. My last one was taken with the Lee C430-310-RF. I have long hunted in an area that doesn't require an instant drop to keep another hunter from claiming my deer. That has given me the opportunity to take "meat saving shots" (three were hit in the neck and the rest, low behind the shoulder). Of course, the neck shot deer were instantly on the ground. The ones shot behind the shoulder (a high percentage shot but one that does not guarantee a instant drop) ran from 35-100 yards. The hard cast bullet guaranteed "thru & thru" and a good blood trail that made trailing an easy task. It also caused minimal meat loss (that is important to me).

The bears were all shot with high power rifles (we were hunting in Canada) so little relevance here except it proved that both methods can work, and work well.

I have read Veral Smith's little blue book and while there may be some questions on his data, for the most part it is a well thought out and valuable resource. One thing I absolutely agree with him, is that a properly designed hard cast bullet of sufficient caliber doesn't need to expand. It just flat does its job.

If I were to hunt in an area where I was over run with other hunters, I would take a broadside shot directly through both shoulders and accept the meat loss. Otherwise, I would take a "low behind the shoulders shot" IF PRESENTED and expect to track a bit. I am confident that a hard cast bullet of .41 caliber or better traveling at 1200-1300 fps will penetrate CLEAR THROUGH regardless of the angle (even end for end) and get the job done.

Understand one thing, BY FAR, the most important thing is that we do OUR job. Make a good shot, EVERY TIME, and our chosen caliber, from .41 up will do ITS job. I practiced a lot in the weeks prior to hunting season to absolutely make certain that I WOULD get a good hit.

Thinking out loud...

Dale53

44man
10-05-2008, 12:46 PM
Dale, I could not agree with you more.
Whitworth shot the RD 265 gr, .44 boolit through 33" of wet phone books and news paper. I hope he posts the picture of the huge volcano entrance hole. All of the jacketed bullets just made bullet size entrance holes.

Junior1942
10-05-2008, 01:12 PM
Great post, Dale. I'm planning to use the Lee 310 @ 1100 fps this year in my SBH inside a certain ~80 acre super-thicket wherein hides a certain super-buck we call Mossy Horns. I'll strap the pistol across my belly and crawl into the thicket on my hands and knees.

The bullet alloy is stick-on wheelweights which are harder than pure lead and softer than regular wheelweights.

Dale53
10-05-2008, 01:36 PM
Junior1942;
You'll be very happy with the performance of the Lee 310 RF at 1100 fps. It is, no doubt, more than needed on deer (I see NO deficiency with a Keith 240-250 at 1200 fps on deer) but will not hurt at all. In fact, it would be desirable on the larger big game.

Thanks for the kind words, fellows and gals.

Dale53

Lloyd Smale
10-05-2008, 02:36 PM
ive got to try that bullet!!
Dale, I could not agree with you more.
Whitworth shot the RD 265 gr, .44 boolit through 33" of wet phone books and news paper. I hope he posts the picture of the huge volcano entrance hole. All of the jacketed bullets just made bullet size entrance holes.

Scrounger
10-05-2008, 02:57 PM
If you're going to be crawling in, I think I'd try attaching a holster behind my right shoulder, sort of like the quiver Indians carried their arrows in. Sounds like the real fun is going to be getting that beast out of the thicket after you ventilate him...

44man
10-05-2008, 04:15 PM
You guys can have the thickets! :bigsmyl2: I was driving deer in Ohio and went into a briar patch. I never thought about the nylon blaze orange vest but the briars grabbed me good. I was stuck and needed two guys to help get me out. Now I walk around the thick stuff! [smilie=w:

Bass Ackward
10-05-2008, 04:59 PM
You guys can have the thickets! :bigsmyl2: I was driving deer in Ohio and went into a briar patch. I never thought about the nylon blaze orange vest but the briars grabbed me good. I was stuck and needed two guys to help get me out. Now I walk around the thick stuff! [smilie=w:



Oh boy!!! :groner:

44man
10-05-2008, 06:31 PM
I didn't have that hat on to help either! :veryconfu

Junior1942
10-05-2008, 07:44 PM
You guys can have the thickets! :bigsmyl2: I was driving deer in Ohio and went into a briar patch. I never thought about the nylon blaze orange vest but the briars grabbed me good. I was stuck and needed two guys to help get me out. Now I walk around the thick stuff! [smilie=w:44man, read my article about "Buck Gates." See http://www.castbullet.com/hunting/gate.htm

There's two hundred year old oak trees in the Mossy Horns thicket. They were hollow, etc., when the land was logged maybe twenty-five years ago, so they were left standing. Around each tree is a ~30 yard wide circle free of underbrush due to the oaks oozing tannic acid. Standing beside one of the oaks, you're in a brush free circle surrounded by a seemingly impenatratable wall of briars, vines, thorny bushes, etc.

But if you sit on the ground and lean over, i.e., get your eyes close to the ground, suddenly there appears a network of tunnels spread out from the oak like the spokes of a wheel. To traverse a tunnel, you have to do it on hands and knees. I'm headed into the center of the thicket. I'll get on my back in a spot where I can turn my head and look down a couple of tunnels.

Whitworth
10-05-2008, 09:18 PM
ive got to try that bullet!!


Lloyd, that bullet works like a charm and actually weighs closer to 280 grains cast. I will be posting the penetration test at some point tomorrow.

unclebill
10-12-2008, 11:25 AM
45 2.1

i really like this sentence of yours.

Each to his own, but if you tell me yours is the only way, then you will soon be talking to yourself.