What type of .30-06 ammunition to use for deer hunting?

[10point]

On Sunday, November 06, 2016 at 5:26 PM, eagle rider said:

Yeah accuracy is soooo overrated!!!


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Well its all  relative  for example Ak 47s are not know for  accuracy  and they  probably have killed more humans and animals then any other weapon on earth anything that can hit a 8 inch plate at 100 yards with 1000  foot pounds of energy at  that distance  is good  enough to  hunt deer in most parts of New york state where most shots are taken  under 75 yards . 

In my opinion

 

 

[Pygmy]

I have hunted from New Mexico north to Alaska east to Newfoundland and then back south to Georgia...

I am not a long range specialist or an exceptionally good shot..In fact I SUCK at shooting offhand.

However I have found that a rifle that groups around 2" from the bench at 100 yards is plenty accurate enough for the medium to big game hunting that I have done...I limit my shots to around 400 yards and seldom take a shot unless I have a dead steady shooting position... I have killed my fair share of game at distances from 100 to 400 yards and have hit a lot more than I have ever missed..

        Rifles that shoot 1 " groups at 100 yards are nice..I have a couple....However, as a hunting rifle, a rifle that shoots a 2" group at the same range is just as effective a hunting implement at the ranges that most of us shoot game...

[Buckmaster7600]

I have hunted from New Mexico north to Alaska east to Newfoundland and then back south to Georgia...
I am not a long range specialist or an exceptionally good shot..In fact I SUCK at shooting offhand.
However I have found that a rifle that groups around 2" from the bench at 100 yards is plenty accurate enough for the medium to big game hunting that I have done...I limit my shots to around 400 yards and seldom take a shot unless I have a dead steady shooting position... I have killed my fair share of game at distances from 100 to 400 yards and have hit a lot more than I have ever missed..
        Rifles that shoot 1 " groups at 100 yards are nice..I have a couple....However, as a hunting rifle, a rifle that shoots a 2" group at the same range is just as effective a hunting implement at the ranges that most of us shoot game...

From now on I'm going to pm you my thoughts so you can write them for me. You said the same thing I was trying to say just way better.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Pygmy]

Thanks, Stubby....<<BLUSH>>...

[eagle rider]

Well its all  relative  for example Ak 47s are not know for  accuracy  and they  probably have killed more humans and animals then any other weapon on earth anything that can hit a 8 inch plate at 100 yards with 1000  foot pounds of energy at  that distance  is good  enough to  hunt deer in most parts of New york state where most shots are taken  under 75 yards . 
In my opinion
 
 

The anti's plus Hillary and Chuck would love to read that one. If it's all the same to you I'll stick with shot placement being everything, pick a piece of hair on the vitals. Focus on it and squeeze the trigger. If you have 1000' pounds left wherever that distance is then your being ethical. Shot placement is everything. I'd also bet that AK47 soviet sewing machine has maimed and wounded a lot. Last time I checked we are all about ethics and doing the right thing. No umpire in the tree next to us telling us right from wrong. We have to feel it down to our bones. So no sir, in my opinion there is no credibility comparing modern sport hunting to anything a AK47 was ever intended to do by Kolosnikov.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[eagle rider]

I have hunted from New Mexico north to Alaska east to Newfoundland and then back south to Georgia...
I am not a long range specialist or an exceptionally good shot..In fact I SUCK at shooting offhand.
However I have found that a rifle that groups around 2" from the bench at 100 yards is plenty accurate enough for the medium to big game hunting that I have done...I limit my shots to around 400 yards and seldom take a shot unless I have a dead steady shooting position... I have killed my fair share of game at distances from 100 to 400 yards and have hit a lot more than I have ever missed..
        Rifles that shoot 1 " groups at 100 yards are nice..I have a couple....However, as a hunting rifle, a rifle that shoots a 2" group at the same range is just as effective a hunting implement at the ranges that most of us shoot game...

I'd say 2" groups at 100 should be the worst we should use and try to do better. There're no points lost for accuracy ever. Talk to the ag land hunters. They'll not only tell you the same, they'll say it's more important because they are often shooting in the last moments of legal light. 2" at 100 is 8" at 200. Recall this is a game of acceleration over distance so the physics of it is Point of impact x Distance squared. (2x2)2"= 8". Still okay for a deer at 200 yds. The furthest I ever shot a deer in NY unrested was a nudge better than 200 yds. The rifle was an older 77 in 270 Win that I should have never sold. Different story. In Flint Virginia on cattle land our shots start at that distance and go well beyond 300. We check our zero at 300 our fist day on that ranch every year.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Trial153]

Doesn't surprise me how many people embrace mediocrity.

[Trial153]

Doesn't surprise me how many people embrace mediocrity.

[Culvercreek hunt club]

2 hours ago, eagle rider said:

 2" at 100 is 8" at 200. Recall this is a game of acceleration over distance so the physics of it is Point of impact x Distance squared. (2x2)2"= 8". Still okay for a deer at 200 yds.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I think you better check that math again. 

 

[10point]

3 hours ago, eagle rider said:

The anti's plus Hillary and Chuck would love to read that one. If it's all the same to you I'll stick with shot placement being everything, pick a piece of hair on the vitals. Focus on it and squeeze the trigger. If you have 1000' pounds left wherever that distance is then your being ethical. Shot placement is everything. I'd also bet that AK47 soviet sewing machine has maimed and wounded a lot. Last time I checked we are all about ethics and doing the right thing. No umpire in the tree next to us telling us right from wrong. We have to feel it down to our bones. So no sir, in my opinion there is no credibility comparing modern sport hunting to anything a AK47 was ever intended to do by Kolosnikov.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

If your only going to hunt deer in places that you cant see past 75 yards .

You dont need a gun designed to take 400 yard shots to hunt deer at 75 yards 

Is the point of my example .

People hunt with handguns 

Do you think  most or any  handgun shooters are  doing 2 inch groups at 100 yards  no .

The guy who is using a hand gun knows he is not going to take long shots .

Same with a bow people know the limits of the weapon they  choose to use.

 

 

 

[Padre86]

On 10/27/2011 at 2:12 PM, mossy725 said:

Wondering what everyone thought in regards to .30-06 ammunition for deer hunting? This is the first year my area is allowed to use rifle, so I was curious.

I've been looking into Winchester Super-X ammo (180 grain).

Thoughts/opinions?

Just looking for a lot of stopping power up to 150-200 yards.

Thanks.

.30-06 is widely recognized as one of the most versatile all-around calibers.  You hear about hunters using it for deer and even slightly smaller game as well as for Moose on the larger end of the spectrum.  I don't know about it's reputation with grizzly bear, but I've heard more than a few outdoor writers exclaim that it can take pretty much any kind of game you'd expect to find in North America.

 

I'd look to experiment with the different loads to see which one works for you.  Realistically, anything 150gr and up should be capable of taking a whitetail at the distances you are talking about.

[Buckmaster7600]

Accuracy is cool. But I want a bullet that performs terminally the way I want it to way more than I want a bullet that shoots a same hole group.

For example I have a Ruger 77/44 that will shoot 265gn interlocks into a ragged hole at 100yds. I shot a few deer with that bullet and it wasn't expanding at all. I tried a bunch of different bullets and 240gn xtp's that I can't get to shoot under 2" have performed phenomenally on deer and I haven't had one go more than a few feet after being hit by them.

The vitals on a deer are a big target. Accuracy is fun to play around and try to achieve and most of that reload have spent a lot of money and time chasing our tails to squeeze a quarter inch out of a group.

I'm sure if I did more stand hunting and field hunting "something I truly don't enjoy" I would have a different outlook on accuracy but I have changed gears and all the time I used to waste trying to tweak loads for accuracy I use that time to load stuff that I know shoots fine and functions fine and shoot a lot.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Culvercreek hunt club]

6 minutes ago, Buckmaster7600 said:

Accuracy is cool. But I want a bullet that performs terminally the way I want it to way more than I want a bullet that shoots a same hole group.

For example I have a Ruger 77/44 that will shoot 265gn interlocks into a ragged hole at 100yds. I shot a few deer with that bullet and it wasn't expanding at all. I tried a bunch of different bullets and 240gn xtp's that I can't get to shoot under 2" have performed phenomenally on deer and I haven't had one go more than a few feet after being hit by them.

The vitals on a deer are a big target. Accuracy is fun to play around and try to achieve and most of that reload have spent a lot of money and time chasing our tails to squeeze a quarter inch out of a group.

I'm sure if I did more stand hunting and field hunting "something I truly don't enjoy" I would have a different outlook on accuracy but I have changed gears and all the time I used to waste trying to tweak loads for accuracy I use that time to load stuff that I know shoots fine and functions fine and shoot a lot.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Let me ask you. I used to do quite a bit of still hunting but it doesn't seem to be a big part of how I hunt now. I would think that that a stalker or still hunter would want a tack driver out to about 50-75 yards. Stalk up on a bedded buck or having a bad angle or the odd placed saplings and having to thread a shot through to get to the desired location. It seems it might be more critical than an open field target with full vitals view. No?

[shawnhu]

I'd say 2" groups at 100 should be the worst we should use and try to do better. There're no points lost for accuracy ever. Talk to the ag land hunters. They'll not only tell you the same, they'll say it's more important because they are often shooting in the last moments of legal light. 2" at 100 is 8" at 200. Recall this is a game of acceleration over distance so the physics of it is Point of impact x Distance squared. (2x2)2"= 8". Still okay for a deer at 200 yds. The furthest I ever shot a deer in NY unrested was a nudge better than 200 yds. The rifle was an older 77 in 270 Win that I should have never sold. Different story. In Flint Virginia on cattle land our shots start at that distance and go well beyond 300. We check our zero at 300 our fist day on that ranch every year.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Your math is wrong, might want to check it again.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Buckmaster7600]

Let me ask you. I used to do quite a bit of still hunting but it doesn't seem to be a big part of how I hunt now. I would think that that a stalker or still hunter would want a tack driver out to about 50-75 yards. Stalk up on a bedded buck or having a bad angle or the odd placed saplings and having to thread a shot through to get to the desired location. It seems it might be more critical than an open field target with full vitals view. No?

There are a bunch of things I think are more important than accuracy. I shoot a lot and 99% of it is freehand and I don't know of anyone that is pinpoint accurate freehand especially having walked X amount of miles to get to that shot, being out of breath, shooting free hand and being in a hurry accuracy suffers. There are people who are way better at the game than me but if I'm tacking I have snow and I know I will find the deer so I try to get a good one in them and as many as I can after that. Most guys that I know that still hunt and track don't even use scopes.

Hunting the big woods and tracking is my passion it's how I grew up hunting. My views on topics are vastly different from many who have never done it. I will take shots that most would consider "unethical" if my scope is sighted in and I'm not checking to make sure it still is on I don't shoot from a rest. My family has an old stone pit that we roll tired of the bank with cardboard inside to practice shooting at running deer.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[shawnhu]

There are a bunch of things I think are more important than accuracy. I shoot a lot and 99% of it is freehand and I don't know of anyone that is pinpoint accurate freehand especially having walked X amount of miles to get to that shot, being out of breath, shooting free hand and being in a hurry accuracy suffers. There are people who are way better at the game than me but if I'm tacking I have snow and I know I will find the deer so I try to get a good one in them and as many as I can after that. Most guys that I know that still hunt and track don't even use scopes.

Hunting the big woods and tracking is my passion it's how I grew up hunting. My views on topics are vastly different from many who have never done it. I will take shots that most would consider "unethical" if my scope is sighted in and I'm not checking to make sure it still is on I don't shoot from a rest. My family has an old stone pit that we roll tired of the bank with cardboard inside to practice shooting at running deer.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

We all hunt a little differently, nothing wrong with tailoring your equipment to maximize your efficiency the way you prefer to hunt.

Although I'm more about accuracy, doesn't mean that I need to disagree with your tactics. But rather, we should all have a mutual respect for each other's hunting style, as long as its legal.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[shawnhu]

Sticking to the topic, about ammunition selection, here's what I did when I was purchasing factory ammo for my CF.

I would only look at hunting ammunition and not self defense or FMJ type of ammo. If the ammo didn't have terminal performance on game, I didn't want to waste my time with it.

Then I looked at price as I enjoy shooting at the range, so long term price of ammo was important to me. I then gradually went up in price in search of a factory load that met my personal requirements. Unfortunately, my pursuit led me to spending a ton on factory ammo and have since started to reload.

My search for a load that would satisfy my personal preference in a game round has led me to purchasing many Nosler, Sierra, Hornady, Barnes, etc game bullets. Each bullet purchased is intended to be used on game and research has shown the terminal performance of each of these bullets should perform. From there, the search for a load I am satisfied with begins. I'll never have to worry about a round that won't perform terminally because I start with only bullets that perform. Weather or not I find a load that I'm satisfied with is a different story.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[chas0218]

Honestly for deer you only need something around 150 grains, 180 is heavy for deer and wont likely expend all the bullets energy into the animal. 

[grampy]

We all hunt differently. We all hunt with different guns and shoot at different distances. My feeling is, as long as the hunter can "CONSISTENTLY" put their round in the vitals at whatever the distance they are shooting, with a terminally efficient  bullet type. Then it's all good! And I love using the Federal Premium Nosler Bullistic Tip ammo that a member here, recommended! Dead right there results with great accuracy!

[10point]

I like still hunting stalking tracking deer 

For the most part .

Staying in one spot in a ground blind or tree stand more then  2 or  3  hours i just cant stand much of that .

Moving around tracking stalking i can go all day long . Using the bullet that does the most tissue damage is more importent to me then  groups . Because you  may have to take shots at not the most ideal angle. 

But if i was hunting a corn field i sure would be using the gun with the best  accuracy longest range  . Everyone uses the tool they think is best for the job .but some just want the exstra challenge of  using something less then Hi-Tech.

Handgun shotgun muzzleloader bow  recurve crossbow xct. 

For example 

Not everyone wants to use a 300 weatherby mag that shoot sub 1 inch groups at 100 yards with a  Leupold MARK 8 3.5-25x56mm ER/T Illuminated  Riflescope  to hunt deer at  30 yards from a tree stand or box blind but some guys do .

Its all about what your golds are .

People use what ever the law says you can use . There is no right and wrong way to hunt as long as you do it with in the rules of the law .

 

 

[chas0218]

39 minutes ago, 10point said:

I like still hunting stalking tracking deer 

For the most part .

Staying in one spot in a ground blind or tree stand more then  2 or  3  hours i just cant stand much of that .

Moving around tracking stalking i can go all day long . Using the bullet that does the most tissue damage is more importent to me then  groups . Because you  may have to take shots at not the most ideal angle. 

But if i was hunting a corn field i sure would be using the gun with the best  accuracy longest range  . Everyone uses the tool they think is best for the job .but some just want the exstra challenge of  using something less then Hi-Tech.

Handgun shotgun muzzleloader bow  recurve crossbow xct. 

For example 

Not everyone wants to use a 300 weatherby mag that shoot sub 1 inch groups at 100 yards with a  Leupold MARK 8 3.5-25x56mm ER/T Illuminated  Riflescope  to hunt deer at  30 yards from a tree stand or box blind but some guys do .

Its all about what your golds are .

People use what ever the law says you can use . There is no right and wrong way to hunt as long as you do it with in the rules of the law .

 

 

You're right that is why people buy (insert cheap gun) with (insert cheap scope) in (insert cheap caliber) to kill deer. Every gun in working condition and no defects should shoot a 2" group at 100 yards off a bench with some remington core-lokts or similar ammo. Some will shoot better but for your average Joe Blow in NY majority of shots will be 150 yards or less. That group at 150 might open up to 3" for some but still more than acceptable to kill a deer. An 8" group is not acceptable tolerance for killing a whitetail sized animal. 8" to the rear of the deer will be guts, 8" high you're looking at back strap or complete miss, 8" low or forward and clean miss. To me that is horrible accuracy and would be selling or contacting a manufacturer about the issues that gun has.

If the gun is 2" group out at 100 the 8" group wouldn't be until 400 yards, you would double the group distance for every 100 not quadruple. 

Edited November 8, 2016 by chas0218

[10point]

15 minutes ago, chas0218 said:

You're right that is why people buy (insert cheap gun) with (insert cheap scope) in (insert cheap caliber) to kill deer. Every gun in working condition and no defects should shoot a 2" group at 100 yards off a bench with some remington core-lokts or similar ammo. Some will shoot better but for your average Joe Blow in NY majority of shots will be 150 yards or less. That group at 150 might open up to 3" for some but still more than acceptable to kill a deer. An 8" group is not acceptable tolerance for killing a whitetail sized animal. 8" to the rear of the deer will be guts, 8" high you're looking at back strap or complete miss, 8" low or forward and clean miss. To me that is horrible accuracy and would be selling or contacting a manufacturer about the issues that gun has.

If the gun is 2" group out at 100 the 8" group wouldn't be until 400 yards, you would double the group distance for every 100 not quadruple. 

Well that was just a  extreme example but people do hunt with smoothbore shotguns  that  probably alot only  group 8 inches at 100 yards  depending on the ammo you use. And alot of deer have gone down with them over the years .

 

[chas0218]

10 minutes ago, 10point said:

Well that was just a  extreme example but people do hunt with smoothbore shotguns  that  probably alot only  group 8 inches at 100 yards  depending on the ammo you use. And alot of deer have gone down with them over the years .

 

Between my father, grandfather, and myself we all shot smooth bores with iron sights for a number of years (them a lot longer than me) and out to 100 yards the largest group we got was 6" and that was because the front sight loosened up. Otherwise a 4" group at 100 yards was no problem. I don't know anyone that is dumb enough to shoot a smooth bore out to 200 yards that just isn't ethical. Even then it shouldn't be an 8" group.

[10point]

8 minutes ago, chas0218 said:

Between my father, grandfather, and myself we all shot smooth bores with iron sights for a number of years (them a lot longer than me) and out to 100 yards the largest group we got was 6" and that was because the front sight loosened up. Otherwise a 4" group at 100 yards was no problem. I don't know anyone that is dumb enough to shoot a smooth bore out to 200 yards that just isn't ethical. Even then it shouldn't be an 8" group.

Like i said that  was a   extreme example 

And when you shoot off hand and your excited  from seening a deer your  4 inch group with iron sites can easily  become 8"  

What you can hit shoot under stress and real world  hunting conditions is difference then what you shoot at the bench .

What your able to do when your under stress is more imported when your hunting . In my opinion especially if your stalking tracking deer .

I know guys that are great at the bench have rifles that shoot 1 inch groups all day long  but get buck fever in the field and cant hit the side of a barn .  Then i know old timer  guys that use your basic shot gun with iron sites or even beed and never miss a deer . The Shooter means as much or more then the weapon in the end . 

 

 

 

[Padre86]

6 hours ago, Trial153 said:

Doesn't surprise me how many people embrace mediocrity.

 

3 hours ago, Culvercreek hunt club said:

Let me ask you. I used to do quite a bit of still hunting but it doesn't seem to be a big part of how I hunt now. I would think that that a stalker or still hunter would want a tack driver out to about 50-75 yards. Stalk up on a bedded buck or having a bad angle or the odd placed saplings and having to thread a shot through to get to the desired location. It seems it might be more critical than an open field target with full vitals view. No?

A "tack driver" sounds nice on paper, but as others have implied, it's not necessary for hunting, especially at the distances a hunter will realistically encounter in the northeast.  And no, that's not embracing mediocrity.  Rather it's all about practicality.  I want a caliber/rifle setup which is accurate and powerful enough to mortally wound a deer at 200 yards.  

 

You can build a rifle, or in fact buy one from a factory, which will shoot under 1 MOA @ 100 yards.  It will cost money.  It will need a good scope.  The barrel should be free-floated with a good bedded stock.  A heavier barrel profile and stock will greatly help with shot consistency.  The question is do you want to be lugging around and beating up a rifle that costs that much money...and more practically-speaking do you want to be carrying around all that extra weight.

 

IMHO, anything within  or close to 1-2 MOA @ 100 yards (group sizes that are 1-2") is more than sufficient for hunting in the northeast.  YMMV depending on terrain, but in most of the areas I've been to 200 yard shots seem to be the max (most shots are much closer than that due to the terrain and vegetation).  If we were talking about building a rifle for hunting out west, where longer range shots are much more common, I'd say a setup closer to 1 MOA would be desired...but again that added performance will come with a weight penalty in most cases.

 

I'm an avid target shooter.  I've taken my long range .308 setup out to 800 yards...it's a lot of fun to learn and then apply the fundamental and make your shots connect at those distances.  But the priorities for a rifle that can ping steel at long distances and the priorities for a rifle that will be carried around the woods for miles to make a single shot at 200 yards, or more likely much closer, are somewhat different.

Edited November 8, 2016 by Padre86