Clipping a rib with the .270

[25 Sharps]

A heavier or heavier jacketed bullet will produce similar results. Admittedly only in Scotland, but the clean chest shot (back off the shoulders, in the engine room) afforded by the .222 in combination with Norma’s propriety 50grain bullet was a superb roe killing round, with absolutely minimal extra damage to the carcass, more often than not a thumb width sized home on the exit, and if through the ribs rather than breaking one, a nominal sized entry wound. Before moving up to the ‘big rifle’ (.243) I shot hundreds of roe with that round, and Lear ed that the gilding jacket was thicker than those of other brands. Once or twice I compared notes with fellow stalkers using .222 but with other bullets, almost all of which had a bad ye deny to blow up and fragment (typical varmint rounds), with all too predictably disastrous results on the carcass. I recall with horror the appalling mess one roe struck with a .270 by a guest was, the first I’d seen flattened with such a ‘cannon’, I don’t recall the bullet weight, but I do recall the deer had been effectively blown in near half, and the rumen and most of the intestines had been evacuated from the inside of the beast - it really shocked me that anyone would countenance using such a heavy, clearly damaging calibre on a roe deer. This being said, we’d grown up with the ‘small is beautiful’ mindset, and had zero experience in anything else, our aim was to produce clean carcasses for the game dealer.

More generally, it’s been my experience that for larger calibres, a heavier bullet travelling at relatively modest speed tends to produce less by way of hydraulic and bruising damage, especially when any bullet designed with a slightly heavier gilding material thickness is used.

Just my opinion and experience.

I usually use my 25-45 (.223 necked up to .257) for roe and munties, just about the perfect cartridge.

But there’s a few fallow where that chap was including a couple of heavy bucks so took the .280 just in case. Saw them, just over the boundary .

 

[Norfolk Deer Search]

Just for the sake of the thread, skinned this one tonight.

View attachment 432573
View attachment 432574

No real hint of the damage with the skin on.

Lost a shoulder, everything else all good, but it was butchered by me for home consumption so no real issue.

.280 with a 124 gr yew tree at about 120 yards.

Christ almighty, now you know why I’ll NEVER entertain that bullet

 

[75]

That I do admit, we shot this one early morning so we decided to drive around a little more since there was a one or two extra areas we could check before heading too the larder, It probably sat on the side for an hour and a half or so.

I'd be interested in thoughts from others who shoot in areas with longer extractions - on the hill or bigger deer (which always seem to take longer to get out than, say, a muntie!). But I think this is the greatest contributing factor. There are a couple of spots where I shoot that have bad access or a long drive around to get to the carcass. Those always seem to be the ones that are "badly shot". They can look terrible when skinned as the blood has pooled between the fascia and spread far and wide. Suspended and gralloched immediately is my personal preference, but if that's not possible I'll try and gralloch asap, empty as much blood out as possible (easier said than done on a large beast on your own) and, if I can get it somewhere clean, rest the carcass upright on it's chest so all the blood runs out, rather than lie it on its side. Even after gralloching, I think there is still enough blood in there to cause some "bruising".

 

[sauer]

This roe took a step as trigger was pulled ...if you shoot enough it happens occasionally .... that feeling when you feel trigger and the bang and see leg moving forward ....

Beast folded, never moved ....
It had intestines out exit hole but nothing burst... poked back in and gralloched fine
Details

170yds
6.5 PRC 114grn TLR yew tree ....
Thought lost 1/2 saddle but trimmed surface bruising off its fine

Still decent yield o meat in freezer

Paul

 

[VSS]

Just for contrast.....





About to butcher it now. No waste

 

[Tim.243]

Just for contrast.....


View attachment 432627


About to butcher it now. No waste

Nut shot just like cattle/horses

 

[sauer]

I only lost handful of meat from in-between ribs .... enough to get upset about? Hell no

2.... would i have head shot at 170yds ?
Hell no ....

3. Shot was 170yds due to openness / the ground ..... so if only taken head shots id have left empty handed...

So lost ribs and a freezer stock up
Or head shot and potential miss no beast to fill freezer or at worst as beast steeped forward a blown jaw a beast run off and a slow horrible death if not tracked or followed up ...

Ill stick to engine room shots and filling freezer

Paul

 

[Freeforester]

It’s bigger brother, a pleasure to work on…



Others, less so…

 

[Mungo]

A heavier or heavier jacketed bullet will produce similar results.

Admittedly only in Scotland, but the clean chest shot (back off the shoulders, in the engine room) afforded by the .222 in combination with Norma’s propriety 50grain bullet was a superb roe killing round, with absolutely minimal extra damage to the carcass, more often than not a thumb width sized hole on the exit, and if through the ribs rather than breaking one, a nominal sized entry wound. Before moving up to the ‘big rifle’ (.243) I shot hundreds of roe with that round, and learned that the gilding jacket on the Norma bullet was thicker than those of other brands. Once or twice I compared notes with fellow stalkers using .222 but with other bullets, almost all of which had a bad tendency to blow up and fragment (typical varmint rounds), with all too predictably disastrous results on the carcass.

I recall with horror the appalling mess one roe struck with a .270 by a guest was, the first I’d seen flattened with such a ‘cannon’, I don’t recall the bullet weight, but I do recall the deer had been effectively blown in near half, and the rumen and most of the intestines had been evacuated from the inside of the beast - it really shocked me that anyone would countenance using such a heavy, clearly damaging calibre on a roe deer. This being said, we’d grown up with the ‘small is beautiful’ mindset, and had zero experience in anything else, our aim was to produce clean carcasses for the game dealer.

More generally, it’s been my experience that for larger calibres, a heavier bullet travelling at relatively modest speed tends to produce less by way of hydraulic and bruising damage, especially when any bullet designed with a slightly heavier gilding material thickness is used.

Just my opinion and experience.

Strangely, one of the only carcasses I’ve had rejected from a dealer was shot with a .222. Norma 50gr as well.

It was a freak - had gone in through the top of the shoulder and then hit the spine. It exploded very violently, making an enormous mess.

I think it was the extensive saddle damage that put the dealer off.

By contrast, I’ve shot .270 and 6.5 PRC in the spot you describe (a bit back off the leg, a touch high) and had very neat little wounds. Though usually only if the animal was quartering away. Otherwise, it’s as you describe: chainsaw deer!

 

[nun_hunter]

I see the logic in rewarding stalkers who deliver high-quality clean carcasses, well-gralloched, minimal damage but I think there are a few practical issues with introducing flexible pricing based on post-processing inspection.

Firstly, shifting to a quality-based pricing system would introduce a whole layer of admin, tracking, and trust issues. Matching each carcass to a stalker by tag number is possible, yes, but in busy game dealer operations handling hundreds of carcasses, things can slip. Not to mention disputes over how quality is assessed what qualifies as “too much fat” or “too much damage”? These are often subjective, and unless there's a clearly agreed grading standard (and qualified staff to apply it consistently), it opens the door to tension between dealers and suppliers.

Secondly, most stalkers aren't commercial producers — they're managing deer for habitat, agriculture, or sport, most in their spare time. They value simplicity. Turning up, getting paid a flat rate, and moving on suits that model. Introducing retrospective pricing based on downstream inspection might just discourage casual or part-time stalkers from supplying altogether.

Finally, while you’re right that this approach would benefit the most meticulous stalkers (and they do deserve recognition), it could also widen the gap between them and others doing good, ethical management in trickier conditions. Not every area produces lean fallow or textbook shots.

Matching a stalker to a tag is not just possible, it 100% should be what's happening otherwise what is the point of a tag? Surely game dealers are notified if a carcass they submit has been saddle shot or a haunch ruined and then charged accordingly? Why would this not be passed onto the stalker?

I'd have to ask my dealer how they vary their pricing and go about charging for different shot placements or fat percentage. They make it work and I for one appreciate the variety.

I'd have thought casual or hobby stalkers would be in a better position as they can take time to decide what deer to shoot and the shot placement. Those who need to get numbers down can take quicker "easier" or "safer" chest shots to get multiple deer down. The extra numbers make up for the lower price paid.

As has been mentioned before, a lot of stalkers using game dealers only do so to offload carcasses so they can shoot more. They may produce good quality carcasses or may put a lot of damaged meat through but that isn't their concern, shooting more deer is.

 

[homer]

It’s bigger brother, a pleasure to work on…
View attachment 432634


Others, less so…
View attachment 432635

Cant beat a good clean carcass. There a thing of beauty.