7.62 x 39 commie on deer

[ScatterGunner]

good morning to everyone -

this subject may have addressed already.

had some friends over last night and we all decided this would be my first year to hunt deer. i have more than a few rifles to use but would like to know if anyone here has taken white tail with the 7.62 x 39?

in comparing it to a 30-30, which is an accepted deer cartridge, the 7.62 has less muzzle energy but more energy downrange due to what looks like the effects of a better BC. if the 1000 FT/LBs is the minimum energy needed than the 7.62 should be limited to less than 100 yard shots. sierra makes some nice looking 150 grain soft points which when loaded to 2100 fps "should" do fine. most factory ammo looks to be 123 - 125 grain fmj, FMC, or steel/lead composite bullets with one remington offering being a 125 grain soft point.

any advise or experience you can share on this is appreciated.

"SG"

[Swampman]

I think Federal makes a nice pointed soft point hunting round.  I know they use to.

[Natty Bumppo]

I have a couple of friends who have taken several deer each with 7.62 x 39's, out to 200 yds, with no problems.  I've also seen them put down 200 lb humans with ball (nonexpanding) ammunition out to 200 yds.  I don't own one, but wouldn't hesitate to hunt deer with one in a pinch.

[ShooterSATX]

First of all, I love Military cartidges...5.56 or 7.62.

I don't buy into that 1000 lb/ft energy crap...explian bow hunting. The .308 Winchester is a great round to hunt North American Game. Take a look at the numbers and you will see that it holds it's own against the best of 'em (30-30 and 30-06 included). I own and hunt with one. I would feel more than properly armed out to 350 yards.

How many men have fallen to the 5.56 (M16) or 7.62 (this was the Military's sniper round for how long?)...If it can take down a man at range, why would you think that a properly placed shot would not do the same on a deer?

[teddy12b]

I can't imagine why a 7.62x39 wouldn't kill a deer with a good shot.  What kind of gun are you thinking about using?  Just guessing it'll be an AK or SKS and if so, you'll be able to take a follow up shot if you mess up the first one.

[ScatterGunner]

i have a 7.62x39 handi that i bought a couple of years ago.

where i live the farthest shot would probably be 25 to 50 yards at most.

"SG"

[teddy12b]

Escially at those ranges a 7.62x39 should work.  I've never actually used it for hunting, but I've done some target shooting with them.

[Dixie Dude]

I know someone who shot a 6 point buck and a doe behind him at 92 yards with one shot from an SKS using 125 gr Wolf ammo.  He found the bullet in the doe.  So it is definitely equivalent to the 30-30. 

[petemi]

My favorite deer caliber is the .308.  Explain bow hunting?  All you guys correct me if I'm wrong, but I believe an arrow kills proportionate to the wound channel it creates and has little relationship to the shocking power of a firearm.

[Swampman]

I believe we are talking about the 7.62X39 and not the 7.62X51 NATO

[kyelkhunter3006]

One guy I know has killed every deer he's ever taken with an SKS carbine and the 7.62x39.  He still hunts mostly, takes a stand very once in a while, and he's dropped at least 50 deer with it, including a heck of nice 10 point in full rut with a neck that was so swollen he looked like a steer.  He killed it at around 50yds while it was fighting another smaller deer, but he's dropped them out to almost 200yds.  In an accurate rifle, I'd take a 200yd shot and not think twice about it.

[LaOtto222]

petemi - I agree with you...Of course an arrow kills by bleeding a deer. There is no shock value at all.

If a lucky bow hunter hits a major artery, the deer will go down fairly quickly due to bleeding out quickly. A deer will "hump" up when shot or may act as though nothing happened even when shot through the lungs. There have been poor bow hunters that shoot a deer and not even sure if they hit or not because the deer does not react to the arrow. They have to get on the trail and look for blood sign because they had no idea if they made a good hit or not. My Grandfather hated bow hunters, because they would arrow a deer and then were too lazy to track it down. He found 3 - 4 dead deer on his farm every year from bow hunters. He would find an occasional one with a slug wound too, but not near as many. He would not let bow hunters on his property, but the wounded deer would come over from another property. Bow hunting is an art form that should only be practiced by the people willing to put the time in to put the arrow where it belongs and limit their shots to with in their range and pass on shots that they are not sure they can make. My hats off to the REAL outdoorsman that puts the time in and knows his limits. Sounds kind of familiar about gun hunting too. The difference is the distance you can be effective.

[petemi]

I believe we are talking about the 7.62X39 and not the 7.62X51 NATO

First of all, I love Military cartidges...5.56 or 7.62.

I don't buy into that 1000 lb/ft energy crap...explian bow hunting. The .308 Winchester is a great round to hunt North American Game. Take a look at the numbers and you will see that it holds it's own against the best of 'em (30-30 and 30-06 included). I own and hunt with one. I would feel more than properly armed out to 350 yards.

How many men have fallen to the 5.56 (M16) or 7.62 (this was the Military's sniper round for how long?)...If it can take down a man at range, why would you think that a properly placed shot would not do the same on a deer?

You're correct Swampman, I'm replying to the above quote.

[petemi]

Yeah, the 7.62X39 is effective.  A trespasser killed 3, maybe 5 other people with an SKS a few years ago over in Wisconsin.  I don't recall how many.  We, my wife, kid and I had three Russian chrome bored SKSs and traded them in on better quality.  I think the Handi 7.62x39 meets that quality standard.  There are lots of good rifles chambered in that caliber, and it doesn't have to be semi-auto.  And yes, if it kills people efficiently, it will certainly take deer.

[DCRthe3rd]

With a sks converted to manual operation "per Pa law" I have taken deer with it , to the dismay of some my bullet has been none other than a 154gr sp from wolf , prior to using this bullet I played with it a bit "tested" if you will as I figured no way was such a cheap bullet going to hold up , truth be told , its a darn fine bullet even considering its cost. I used it and I'd do it again.

[knight0334]

If you are using a NEF/H&R 30-30 rifle, the 30-30 could still have the advantage at further ranges because you could use pointed tip bullets then(if you roll your own).  Not much of an advantage, but the 30-30 is capable of pushing the same bullet faster due to powder capacity.

The Handi's have a hard time igniting the primers of mil-spec 7.62x39 ammo, and in many states - you have to use a bullet that is designed to expand on impact.  ..which rules out mil-ball ammo.  That leaves you with hunting grade ammo.

[Daniel Laws]

I killed a nice doe last year with my godless commie chambered handi.  Bang, flop.  Hit her right behind the shoulder, about a third of the way up on the body.  Using my handloads, Hornady 123 gr soft points, Win. brass and primers, don't remember the powder.  Massive tissue damage, exit hole about 2 in. diameter.  Also killed one with the 30-30, wouldn't sneeze for the difference between them.  My 13 yr. old son prefers the 7.62X39, says it doesn't kick as hard as the 30-30.  He's only 5'5'', 120 lbs soaking wet.  If recoil is an issue, take the commie, if not, either one works.

[ScatterGunner]

well thanks for all the excellent information and insightful comments.

in summary:

it looks like a 123 to 150 grain soft point will effectively harvest a white tail deer.

ball ammo, as well as milsurp is out. i have had problems with milsurp but no FTF's with cast bullet hand loads to date.

good point on the 30-30 handi being able to fire a spitzer or other pointed bullet would exceed the 7.62x39 exterior and terminal ballistics.

commies are still godless!

in summary i am going to order some H322 and sierra 150 grain soft points and work up a load that will produce cold barrel accuracies needed for 50 to 100 yard hunting.

thanks guys!

"SG"

[Swampman]

If it doesn't work out, you can always rechamber to .303

[stolivar]

He used a Saiga, not an SKS in Wisconsin.


steve

[petemi]

He used a Saiga, not an SKS in Wisconsin.


steve

Thanks Steve, I thought it was an SKS.  Do you know what the courts did with that guy?

[will36]

I have a AK-47 with a 6" barrel and I have killed many deer & wild hogs with it.  A 7.62x39  round will kill anything on the planet  with correct shot placement. There have probaly been elephants in Africa killed with AK's.

[Natty Bumppo]

The AK is probably the most used weapon in Africa by game poachers on elephant and rhino - of course they use fully automatic weapons and a crowd of people and continue shooting until the animal goes down.  They're not interested in meat, only the horns and tusks.  I'd think twice about shooting a rhino or elephant with a Handi in 7.62x39, though - no, I wouldn't - I wouldn't think about it at all.   

[mitchell]

  And yes, if it kills people efficiently, it will certainly take deer.

i call BS i've shot deer with a 223 and if you shoot them behind the shoulder they will run a long way. now i've seen people shot in shoulders, neck, gut and all other places and they all fall in their tracks. it takes a lot less energy to kill a person thenit does a deer.


but that being said , yes i think a 763X39 will kill a deer just fine. use the right bullets and don't take em out too far and you'll be just fine

[Natty Bumppo]

Well, the NATO .223 (5.56 mm) round is designed to wound/incapacitate rather than kill, because a wounded man needs help and a dead man doesn't (you can also carry about twice as much ammunition).  The 7.62x39 was designed to kill people.  The Soviets came up with the 5.45 mm round in response to the .223, for the same reasons.  I've seen deer drop in their tracks with one shot from a .243, and a man fight like hell shot 3 times with a .308 (M14).  While a deer, on average, is tougher than a human, if a round will kill a man, it will certainly kill a deer.  I guess it depends on the man (or the deer) as to what they do after they're shot.

[TribReady]

You're planning on using good bullets so you will be just fine.
Know your range limitations and enjoy.  It will definitely work fine on deer.

[AtlLaw]

the NATO .223 (5.56 mm) round is designed to wound/incapacitate rather than kill,

While it is not my practice to question the opinions of others, sometimes I just can't pass over an idea stated as a fact that I believe is incorrect.  If I am wrong I have learned something and apologise in advance for questioning your statement.  So, can you give me a reference for your statement in the design specifications of the 5.56 cartridge or any bullet used therein?

More on topic, I would not hesitate to use the 7.62x39 for deer, but I would rank it right up there as being almost as marginal as another cartridge, an all-American 308 based, perennial favorite around here!    'course I think, as if anybody really cares what I think, that the 30/30 is also in that group and I'm hunting with 2 of those this year!  

[Natty Bumppo]

I surrender.  That is my opinion, and although I've heard it said by many people, I can't prove it as fact.  That the 5.56 is less likely to cause a first round kill than a 7.62 is a fact, however, which I've seen in practice.  In fact ( ), a year or 2 ago, the Army was studying a more "robust" round to replace the 5.56. a 6.8 mm round, in the XM-8 rifle, and came close to accepting it.  Instead, they've reopened their study and may be going another way.  Bottom line is, the 5.56 round isn't as lethal as the 7.62 round it replaced, and it doesn't have the same penetration through building materials.  The Army has re-issued an ass load of M-14's for use in Iraq and Afghanistan for those reasons (they've also send a bunch of old M113 APC's to Iraq, because the M-2 Bradleys and Strykers are too big to be as manueverable in urban warfare).

While I can't prove the design specifications of the 5.56 round, I did find this info that supports my statement:

2. APPLICATIONS OF WOUND BALLISTICS DATA
At many points in the Army Research, Development, and Acquisition (RDA)
cycle, the requirement arises for quantitative comparisors of weapon performance
among competing candidates. Development of these quantitative comparisons is
the business of the various agencies in the Army assessment, evaluation, and
analysis communities; the comparisons are used to support major milestone
decisions throughout the RDA process. For weapons which are primarily
designed for an antipersonnel role, one quantitative comparison of interest is the
ability of the weapon to degrade a soldier's effectiveness in performing military
tasks.
In any armed conflict, the objective is to neutralize the opposing force. While
killing an enemy soldier certainly accomplishes this, incapacitating him (i.e.,
destroying or degrading his ability to complete his tactical mission) achieves the
same goal and places an additiona; burden on the opponent's medical and
logistical resources. Tt is actually the weapon's ability to incapacitate, not wound
severity nor killing potential, that is of interest to weapon designers. . .

This came from a 1991 paper put out by the U.S. Army Ballistics Research Laboratory.  It can be found at http://www.dtic.mil/cgi-bin/GetTRDoc?AD=ADA240295&Location=U2&doc=GetTRDoc.pdf .  The quoted language can be found at page 1 (not page i).

[bluebayou]

I surrender.  That is my opinion, and although I've heard it said by many people, I can't prove it as fact.  That the 5.56 is less likely to cause a first round kill than a 7.62 is a fact, however, which I've seen in practice.  In fact ( ), a year or 2 ago, the Army was studying a more "robust" round to replace the 5.56. a 6.8 mm round, in the XM-8 rifle, and came close to accepting it.  Instead, they've reopened their study and may be going another way.  Bottom line is, the 5.56 round isn't as lethal as the 7.62 round it replaced, and it doesn't have the same penetration through building materials.  The Army has re-issued an ass load of M-14's for use in Iraq and Afghanistan for those reasons (they've also send a bunch of old M113 APC's to Iraq, because the M-2 Bradleys and Strykers are too big to be as manueverable in urban warfare).

While I can't prove the design specifications of the 5.56 round, I did find this info that supports my statement:

2. APPLICATIONS OF WOUND BALLISTICS DATA
At many points in the Army Research, Development, and Acquisition (RDA)
cycle, the requirement arises for quantitative comparisors of weapon performance
among competing candidates. Development of these quantitative comparisons is
the business of the various agencies in the Army assessment, evaluation, and
analysis communities; the comparisons are used to support major milestone
decisions throughout the RDA process. For weapons which are primarily
designed for an antipersonnel role, one quantitative comparison of interest is the
ability of the weapon to degrade a soldier's effectiveness in performing military
tasks.
In any armed conflict, the objective is to neutralize the opposing force. While
killing an enemy soldier certainly accomplishes this, incapacitating him (i.e.,
destroying or degrading his ability to complete his tactical mission) achieves the
same goal and places an additiona; burden on the opponent's medical and
logistical resources. Tt is actually the weapon's ability to incapacitate, not wound
severity nor killing potential, that is of interest to weapon designers. . .

This came from a 1991 paper put out by the U.S. Army Ballistics Research Laboratory.  It can be found at http://www.dtic.mil/cgi-bin/GetTRDoc?AD=ADA240295&Location=U2&doc=GetTRDoc.pdf .  The quoted language can be found at page 1 (not page i).

Dude, always heard it, but no one could ever produce it in print.  Thanks

[Haywire Haywood]

I've always heard that too.  Kill one man and you eliminate one man from the line.  Injure him, and it removes him and 2 of his buddies who have to take him the the aide station.

Ian