And this is why I personally don’t agree with head shots….
- Thread starter It’s a girl with a gun
- Start date
Deerkeeper2
Well-Known Member
Agree, and having shot quite a lot of park deer (and a fair few wild ones too) over my career, I can say that the face on shot is my preference every time if I am head shooting. If for no other reason than if a deer is looking at you it is much less likely to move its head than if it is looking away. I will take the side on shot on occasion, especially on reds, but it is not my preferred choice.
It is about shot placement (the head) as that is where you are aiming regardless of quarry, A fox is a lot narrower with the fur than people realize. The neck of a big red is deceiving as the lower part of the mane is long so if you middle it then you are in the wrong place (ment)
I turned down a big fallow buck last night as the thing was front on and in tall cover, had he turned sideways and the neck was clear you would have seen the picture.
People head shoot rabbits as they don't get any meat damage, the thing is people say "deer" as it is the only quarry in the world
Last edited:
I don't know much about different calibres and their terminal effects. Only what I've used myself.Away yesit’s either kill/drop or miss. Towards you with certain calibres could result in a blown of jaw, I dare say your big cals will be ok but why take the chance?
My preferred head shot on fallow is with the animal facing straight towards me, and I use 58grain bullets in .243
Seems pretty effective.
I can see the attraction of a facing away shot, but I think the animal is more likely to move, or turn it's head side on (particularly if it gets suspicious that there's someone behind it), so the risk is actually greater, not less as you suggest. That's my opinion anyway, but I'm just as likely to be wrong as right!
I think there's not much to choose between the two, and whichever you're more comfortable with is equally suitable, really.
Not in the slightest bit looking for confrontation, but that just doesn't make sense.
Head shots shouldn't be the default shot of choice, but there most certainly are times where it's warranted and useful. I wouldn't advise novices to attempt head shots in most cases as there are many variables to consider . . Range, angle, the likelihood of movement, and not least the stalkers own ability. Personally, I'm very comfortable with a facing head shot under the right circumstances. Such as this evening. Buck at 130 yards in wheat, off quad sticks with my unmoderated .270, facing me after stopping to a call. Scope is fixed-mag' 8 x 56.
Does this make me a clown? Or an experienced stalker who's comfortable with what he and his equipment are (and aren't) capable of. Doesn't pay to be too dogmatic about these things. Practice, experience, confidence, and being lucky enough to have a deer present itself well enough all play a part in how you choose what shot to make. I completely understand the concern about it potentially going wrong, but experience tells you when this choice of shot will pay off, or when it's marginal. If it's the latter, it's not the shot to take
I did say with smaller calibres more than anything! But still what would have happened if you were a little bit off? Where would you have hit it? From the back of your high/low or slightly off to the side it’s still a dead deer. From the front (with a smaller cal) that bullet energy gets soaked up in the nose believe me I’ve seen it,and even from the side with a larger cal and your slightly low that’s a jaw and they take some catching with a dog. I’m just going off past experiences with b type stalker and doe stalkers. Hey folk can do what there want
i just don’t think it shows your dmq best practice and I just won’t have it
Last edited:
You mean front on head shots like this? I mean clearly I made an unforgivably stupid decision here…
Attachments
Again, it comes down to confidence and capability. If I was neither, then a head shot is a very poor option. Far too many stalkers overestimate their own abilities, even with the best of kit. And I have to say in my view the use of high magnification scopes can be a contributing factor. I use fixed mag' scopes. 8*56, 6*42, and a 4*32 on my woodland .308. I've taken head shots on roe with all three, and not once has the result been anything other than decisive. Get close enough, get steady enough, and stay within your own ability, and 'What if?' should never factor into the equation. If it does, then there's no shot
Yea well done you what excellent marksman you are,pat on the backYou mean front on head shots like this? I mean clearly I made an unforgivably stupid decision here…
Dunwaters
Well-Known Member
You’re possibly missing a trick, agreed, the head is fairly mobile, unless you give it something to look at, however the neck is far less likely to move.
Aim for the highest bit of it you can see, you’ll still get your instant knock down and clean carcass.
You also get to keep the head intact, if thats a factor for you.
I'm really not comfortable taking neck shots, so tend to avoid that option.
Again though, it's about the right shot for the circumstances. I won't necessarily opt for a head or neck shot, but if it's a viable option then I'll take it. I shoot for the meat, and I absolutely detest seeing carcasses ruined with poor or ill-judged bullet placement. I'd estimate head or neck shots account for around 20/30% of the deer I shoot
Side on i agree I won’t ever do that.
But front to back or back to front I’m happy with.
What’s wrong with front to back ?
You’re happy with back on but not front on. They require about the same amount of accuracy.
Your objection to front on seems to be to do with limited penetration. I think this shot illustrates that penetration is not really a problem.
Dunwaters
Well-Known Member
Whats missing from this thread is any acknowledgement from the “ best practice” practitioners that chest shots can and do go wrong too.
Chest shots absolutely do go wrong, they go wrong often enough that quite a few of us stalk with a tracking dog in tow and I’m obliged as a condition of my lease to have access to one.
No single shot placement is 100% guaranteed every time at every distance with every firearm for every user.
I suppose nothing with a .270 or .308 ;heavy bullet job) but I’ve seen countless noses blown off with light .243/22.250/.222 that’s my reasoning why.
Dunwaters
Well-Known Member
That makes no sense.
Why would you refuse to accept an animal with a virtual guarantee of a clean undamaged carcass when you’re in the meat processing business?
Similar threads
