If your low on a back of the head shot then you hit the neck,if your low in a front on shot you hit the nose. With a heavy calibre it won’t matter but light cals is not advised. Plus it is not best practice
And this is why I personally don’t agree with head shots….
- Thread starter It’s a girl with a gun
- Start date
Absolutely right. I've had my share of runners and lost deer. Thankfully (touch wood) I've never messed up a head shot. Although I remember one instance where a neck shot buck showed absolutely no reaction to the shot, and merely walked into cover. I was so convinced it wastage clean miss that I actually started to move away. Something made me go to the shot site and check though. A scout about showed faint traces of blood, and fifty yards away was a stone dead buck! My guess was it was due to the bullet not expanding due to it being a side on neck shot. Lesson learned. No more side on neck shots.
Good enough reasoning I suppose pal.
If you look at that shot, it ploughed through the nose.
I say again it’s not best practice. Why not just shoot it in the neck or wait for a body shot? Why take the chance of greater increasing the risk of a c**k up?
Nickb
Well-Known Member
When a head shot works it's great but it's when it goes wrong it's a pain.
One night I was night shooting Sika and a stag was looking straight at me , the shot went a bit low hitting it in the nose. The stag took off , we tracked it with a trained deer dog for a couple of miles but still never found it.
Each to their own , whatever suits you but I never take head shots now preferring neck shot if I have to but usually it's a chest shot.
One night I was night shooting Sika and a stag was looking straight at me , the shot went a bit low hitting it in the nose. The stag took off , we tracked it with a trained deer dog for a couple of miles but still never found it.
Each to their own , whatever suits you but I never take head shots now preferring neck shot if I have to but usually it's a chest shot.
Is the risk really greater?
There's a lot of fresh air around a deer's head. A shot that's badly placed might indeed cause a horrible injury, but equally it might miss altogether. A "clean miss" is quite likely to be exactly that.
There's no fresh air around the kill zone of a chest shot. A badly placed chest shot is still quite likely to hit the deer. It may be immediately fatal, or it may not. It might result in a horrible injury of which the deer will eventually succumb, long after everyone has given up searching for it. A supposed "clean miss" when chest shooting is quite likely nothing of the sort (unless people really are talking crap in threads like this one:
What Accuracy Do You Require from Your Deer Hunting Rifle? ) so I suspect that injuries from chest shooting are perhaps far more common than anyone would care to admit.
Last edited:
Ranger22
Well-Known Member
I shoot a lot of deer in the head, mainly facing me as that’s what I prefer. Never from the side and always within my abilities and comfort zone. Very rarely do I neck shoot, not comfortable doing that. Nobody should feel pressurised into taking a shot because they have a cull to meet, the deer will be there another day
There seems to be a certain element of "aim for the biggest bit and then it doesn't matter if you get it wrong", and yet there's folk insisting that they wouldn't entertain a rifle that didn't consistently shoot sub moa. Something doesn't add up somewhere
I think most factory rifles do shoot sub moa now a days with the right ammo and custom jobs certainly should be half moa at least if it’s loaded correctly. I repeat it’s not best practice!! Would you have passed your dmq level 2 with a side on or front facing head shot?. It’s been done a million times and will continue to be done in the future that’s I’m sure but that doesn’t make it the best shots to take. When we were doing big numbers the amount of head shots taken was minimal because you aim for the big bit (front shoulder) and get em on the deck to make sure you get paid. Head shots have been missed and cocked up with the after thought of bigger I should have waitedThere seems to be a certain element of "aim for the biggest bit and then it doesn't matter if you get it wrong", and yet there's folk insisting that they wouldn't entertain a rifle that didn't consistently shoot sub moa. Something doesn't add up somewhere
very occasionally it paid off the other way .you can always walk away and get it another day surely?We are deer stalking, if the animal is to far away we stalk closer.
Wrong angle so the bullet will damage the carcases we wait/move position.
The outcome I seek is a humane kill and and minimal carcase damage.
If the game dealer only accepted head shots, so be it, you spent more time stalking to get the opportunity or shoot less deer.
Nobody has to pull the trigger.
Wrong angle so the bullet will damage the carcases we wait/move position.
The outcome I seek is a humane kill and and minimal carcase damage.
If the game dealer only accepted head shots, so be it, you spent more time stalking to get the opportunity or shoot less deer.
Nobody has to pull the trigger.
gelert
Well-Known Member
I hear what you're saying but my main focus is shooting deer in the most ethical way possible and use which ever shot presents itself best as I deemed fit.
I'm not in the least bit concerned of loosing a shoulder if the shoulder is the only shot presentable.
Thousands of perfectly clean and undamaged chest shot deer have been entering and will continue to enter the food chain every year.
I agree, but alas things can and do go wrong. Your three examples look to be a great reminder of this. The damage on the second animal is not the norm, and shouldn't be regarded as such.
I wouldn't go so far to call the stalker "unethical" because of meat damage, but they do need some educating.
Hindsight is a wonderful thing, what seems a perfect shot doesn't get divulged until you start skinning the beast. Even then it's a long step away from just putting in the bin and discarding completely.
Again, I hear what you're saying but minimizing waste shouldn't be the deciding factor in choosing which shot you take IMO.
I feel there are more underlying factors that contribute to minimizing waste than just shot placement itself and of course presenting a clean and undamaged carcass doesn't start or end with the shot.
Not every deer shot will be done so for monetary gain, and not every deer shot by members on here go to the game dealer.
From an ethical standpoint, the majority of us will salvage absolutely everything on a deer before some bits we cant do anything with are given to the dog.
Again, I understand from you're perspective you want as much financial yield as possible from your park deer.
Last edited:
Because I don’t think it does increase the risk of a f*ck up.
O
Well I hope that day never comes for the deer’s sake.i hope I’m as good as you wen i get older
Everyone f*cks up sooner or later, regardless of placement.O
Well I hope that day never comes for the deer’s sake.i hope I’m as good as you wen i get older
But a front on head shot, off a stable rest, at short range is not a terribly risky shot, and certainly no riskier than a back on head shot.
It’s also probably no riskier than a hurried chest shot off sticks at 180m in a wind. Or many other shots that people routinely take but which strangely don’t attract the level of performative outrage as head shots.
There's clearly a big difference between someone who takes a headshot because they're comfortable doing so and it's well within their capabilities, and someone who takes a headshot because it's the only opportunity that presented itself and they're desperate to kill a deer.
Unfortunately, the former often get tarred with the same brush as the latter.
Unfortunately, the former often get tarred with the same brush as the latter.
gelert
Well-Known Member
I think the replies to this thread would contradict your somewhat sweeping statement.
The majority have said they would pass up on a head shot,but understand the merits.
While others would take a head shot if they were comfortable and content and within their means/capability and comfortable with the best shot that presented itself.
Similar threads
