Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 13

Thread: What does it take to kill a deer?

  1. #1

    What does it take to kill a deer?

    "What does if take to kill a deer?" by Russ Chastain

    link here
    /l\ Y gwir yn erbyn y byd /l\

  2. #2
    He makes several good points. I am a bit confused as he does admit that the Taylor Knock Out factor does fall apart in his .44 magnum/.270 comparison yet goes back to hard and fast TKO preferences for his personal guns. What he doesn't mention specifically -yet is easily gleaned from the reading- is that "numbers" don't outweigh judgment. What he does mention is that shot placement is key, no matter what you use.

    Interesting read, thanks.~Muir

  3. #3
    I'm pleased you found the piece interesting, Muir.

    On a similar tack I have just found this on Youtube - http://www.youtube.com/profile?user=...OpticsBlog#p/u

    Again, thought provoking stuff which may run contrary to many a personal assumption.

    (I think I know of somebody from over Chester way who might like what he sees here!)
    Last edited by Iwrch; 27-06-2010 at 15:18.
    /l\ Y gwir yn erbyn y byd /l\

  4. #4
    Quote Originally Posted by Iwrch View Post
    I'm pleased you found the piece interesting, Muir.

    On a similar tack I have just found this on Youtube - http://www.youtube.com/profile?user=...OpticsBlog#p/u

    Again, thought provoking stuff which may run contrary to many a personal assumption.

    (I think I know of somebody from over Chester way who might like what he sees here!)
    hi,

    just watched the 308 150grn vs the 308 180grn

    larger impact but same penetration ....

  5. #5
    The TKO theory has been entirely discredited scientifically, there are several other explanations that do offer scientific proof for their theories;

    http://www.rathcoombe.net/sci-tech/b.../wounding.html

    http://www.chuckhawks.com/energy_transfer.htm

    This was done on another thread here not that long ago.

    ft
    Blindness to suffering is an inherent consequence of natural selection. Nature is neither kind nor cruel but fiercely indifferent.

  6. #6
    Quote Originally Posted by flytie View Post
    The TKO theory has been entirely discredited scientifically, there are several other explanations that do offer scientific proof for their theories;

    http://www.rathcoombe.net/sci-tech/b.../wounding.html

    http://www.chuckhawks.com/energy_transfer.htm

    This was done on another thread here not that long ago.

    ft
    Thanks for that flytie, that rathcoombe link appears, from what I've read, to describe my position on the matter almost exactly and so will save me much typing and discussing when the subject of hydrostatic shock and the like comes up again :-)

    It is easy reading and makes short work of most of the gun writer "theories" on how you kill a deer.

  7. #7
    Quote Originally Posted by caorach View Post
    Thanks for that flytie, that rathcoombe link appears, from what I've read, to describe my position on the matter almost exactly and so will save me much typing and discussing when the subject of hydrostatic shock and the like comes up again :-)
    Did you get as far as "Before I become too dogmatic and overstate the situation, let me concede that there may be some merit to the idea that hydrodynamic (not hydrostatic) impulse..."? Let me concede..... there may some merit..... perhaps not quite so cut and dried? Hydrostatic.... hydrodynamic...? You say tomato, I say ...... ?

  8. #8
    Quote Originally Posted by Bandit Country View Post
    Did you get as far as "Before I become too dogmatic and overstate the situation, let me concede that there may be some merit to the idea that hydrodynamic (not hydrostatic) impulse..."?
    Yes indeed, he believes, as I do, that there may be occasions when such things do indeed happen. He also presents clear evidence that there is no case for relying on such magical events to reliably kill a deer and discusses some of the evidence supporting their existance. My most recent post on the subject is copied below:

    This has been done to death previously but, in short, my experiences are that there is no realiable peer reviewed science to support claims of mysterious pressure waves being a reliable way to kill something. If mysterious pressure waves were a reliable method of killing deer then there would be no need for a carefully aimed shot: it would be sufficient to shoot your target in the rear leg, or ear, and the mythical forces of doom would cause it to drop dead.

    So, while some may claim to believe in such magical forces and, indeed, there is fairly good anacdotal evidence for their existance, I suspect that their belief is weak as the very same people aim to hit the heart/lungs or CNS when shooting. When they start shooting for the ear, or left rear leg, with proven success then I will give further consideration to the theories.

    Until the science indicates otherwise I will continue to believe that shooting a hole in a vital organ causing, in the case of heart/lungs, rapid loss of blood pressure is the only reliable route to humane shooting of a deer.

  9. #9
    Established Poster
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Location
    The New Forest, Hampshire
    Posts
    134
    Quote Originally Posted by Iwrch View Post
    "What does if take to kill a deer?" by Russ Chastain

    link here

    I am fairly new to shooting and even in this document it mentions that placement is key. Arguably, shooting a less heavy kicking calibre should allow for greater accuracy, should it not? Flinch etc.

  10. #10
    No disrespect to Muir but, these topics usually originate from the US.

    I always smile when I see things like 'my abc kills deer better than your xyz', when you read deeper, you generally find that they are basing their judgements on less than a dozen deer per year, shot at varying ranges and conditions. The samples are simply not big enough and the variables are too great to form any sort of conclusion.

    I am not going to get into a peeing up the wall contest but, I have shot a lot of deer each year, for a number of years, with a number of calibres, in a number of different situations and all I can say with total honesty is two things:

    1. If you hit the deer in the correct place it will be killed with any deer legal calibre (uk) as long as the range is such that the bullet still has sufficent energy.
    2. If you fail to hit it in the correct place due to poor marksmanship, poor equipment or poor judgement then it may not be killed. In this case, it is better to make a bad shot with a heavier bullet than a light one but, it is better to hit it correctly in the first point.

    The point that I am really making is that, unless these surveys and theories are proved over samples of deer shot in thousands rather than tens and, all the variables are assessed, then they seem pretty pointless to me.

    JC

Similar Threads

  1. How on earth can you kill a Deer!!!!
    By Joshua in forum Deer Stalking General
    Replies: 29
    Last Post: 08-05-2010, 11:12
  2. Will this finally kill off the RSPCA?
    By jimbo123p in forum Deer Stalking General
    Replies: 2
    Last Post: 21-04-2010, 08:30
  3. Preparing the kill
    By Dano in forum Deer Stalking General
    Replies: 12
    Last Post: 13-02-2009, 15:09
  4. Tikka last kill
    By sikamalc in forum Deer Stalking General
    Replies: 2
    Last Post: 15-05-2008, 08:08
  5. Perfect placement does not always kill.
    By MarkH in forum Deer Stalking General
    Replies: 3
    Last Post: 20-07-2007, 17:23

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •