30 Caliber for Deer

[jvs]

When I was much younger, and getting closer to my first year of hunting, I can specifically remember my Grandfather saying...

"when ever you go for Deer or other 125 pound+ animal that is roughly the size of a man, a rifle no smaller than a 30 caliber should be used."  Being yooung at the time, I had no reason to question him.  I think he tried to impress on me early on that certain calibers should be used for specific game animals.

Since Vietnam was getting into full swing at the time, I don't know if he was trying to educate me on specifics or just relaying general knowledge.  But those words have always come back to me whenever I got out to look for a new Deer rifle.

My Grandfather liked a 35 Remington 200 gr, my uncles like 308's and 30-06's.  I guess no one in the family ever strayed from my grandfathers advice over time.  Even now I like the 30's for deer. 

I have friends that have 7 mags, 270's (the ballisitic twin of the 30-06) and 264's, even .338 ultras.  I see some lighter calibers at the range around hunting season, like 243's & 25-06.  Some I honestly consider to either be too small or way too big for deer.  And I often wonder if my grandfather was right or if everybody just didn't get the word.  Sometimes it does my heart good to see a youngster at the range, obviously in his early hunting career, toting a .30-30.

I think if I ever felt like I had to buy another deer rifle, I would still get a .30.  It would be strange to get anything else.

[Coyote Hunter]

...
I have friends that have 7 mags, 270's (the ballisitic twin of the 30-06) and 264's, even .338 ultras.  I see some lighter calibers at the range around hunting season, like 243's & 25-06.  Some I honestly consider to either be too small or way too big for deer.  And I often wonder if my grandfather was right or if everybody just didn't get the word.  Sometimes it does my heart good to see a youngster at the range, obviously in his early hunting career, toting a .30-30.

I think if I ever felt like I had to buy another deer rifle, I would still get a .30.  It would be strange to get anything else.

All due respect to your grandfather, I think he was wrong – there are many fine deer cartridges that are smaller than .30.

Two of them are in my safe – a .257 Roberts and a 7mm Rem Mag.  Others include the .25-06, .257 Weatherby, 6.5x55, .260 Rem, .264 Win Mag, 7mm-08, 7x57, .270 Win and .280 Rem.

[Tunaman]

Deer really are not that tough. I think that anything from a 24 cal. on up does the job just fine. I have seen more deer killed and killed more deer with sub 30 cal. rifles than 30 and up and they seem to die just fine. Save yourself some wear and tear and try a smaller caliber, you will like it.

[jvs]

At the time he was no more 'Wrong' than you are Coyote Hunter.  It was a much different time and a different place, with different current events.  What I don't get is how YOU decide what was right or wrong back then.  You probably have no clue what life was like back in the 60's, nor do you care. 

He was one that never owned more than one rifle his whole civilian life, and was not one of the egomaniacs that constantly pollute the airways and internet with some of the most useless information on miniscule differences in calibers and performance.

He had an opinion, and he taught right.  And I positively believe he would look at you as a nut.

[Cement Man]

Whoa, JVS!

I don't think any one would want to insult your grandfather's advice in any way; and like me, would implicitly respect and admire him because he was an elder and a hunter.  In the context of his life, his knowledge, his means, and his experience, it was great advice!

I started hunting in the 50's, so I was around in the 60's.  Deer and deer sized game have been stunningly put down with sub- .30 cal cartridges for a century (+/-).  There is no argument that the .25's, 6.5's, .270's, 7's, etc. (some dating to the 1890's) are and were totally adequate for deer and much, much more.  That is just a fact.

My first and favorite deer cartridges are .30's.  Me and your grandfather would have gotten along just fine.  But, you said that "I often wonder if my grandfather was right or if everybody just didn't get the word."  So, I think it is quite respectful and fair to offer some information about other cartridges that are absolutely just as effective (if not more so) than our old favorites.

Back when your grandfather gave you that advice I would venture to say that the average fellow had a shotgun, a .22, and maybe a deer rifle.  The "average" rifle buyer back then was more of a subsistence hunter, and equipment choices were more limited -especially in terms of cost, knowledge, and availability.  "High-powered" rifles were more of an exotic consideration to some folks.  The old arguments of bore size and bullet weight vs. velocity (Keith vs. O'Connor) were more heated and popular at the time.  With ex-GI's from three wars, .30's ruled.   There is a lot to be said about context.  Maybe your grandfather was trying to make a point with you, and felt that was the proper context to present it in.

I don't think there was any disrespect implied or offered to your grandfather or his advice.  I'll bet he was a great guy and a good hunter. 

[Badnews Bob]

.30 cal works well on pretty much everrthing that lives on oxygen. I sure don't think your Granfathers chocie was wrong, but in todays world there are a lot of calibers that work equally well on deer, On both sides of that .30 cal size. I personally like .35 cal and my .45-70s, but I wouldn't hesitate to take one with a .243 or .257 and when I get my .280 and 7x57s finished they are going deer hunting.

Grab a .30 cal thou JVS you can't go wrong there. Just put the bullet where it matters.

[Swampman]

"when ever you go for Deer or other 125 pound+ animal that is roughly the size of a man, a rifle no smaller than a 30 caliber should be used."

Still good advise, your grandfather was a smart man.

If you read Elmer Keith's books, he points out that there were not a lot of good sub-.308 bullets in those days.  That's why he hated small bore rifles.

[Cement Man]

In the context of today, I bet he would agree that

.30's are always great, but there are others - some smaller and some larger, that can be just as good, if not better!

 

[Graybeard]

I was around and old enough to know what was what in the '60s. While the .30 was king then as it is today really and the .30-30 and .30-06 ruled the roost they were not the only rounds suitable for deer then just as they are not now.

Back then the 7x57 was in fairly common use and then as now is an excellent choice for deer. It was my first centerfire rifle. For those who were lever action fans and there were many in those long ago days there was the excellent .35 Remington and the .32s as well.

The .250-3000 Savage was about in its hey day still and the .257 Roberts and .25-06 tho still wildcats were in active use and excellent choices for deer. By that time the .243 and 6MM Remington were gaining a lot of followers tho in that time the 6MM still had a too slow twist for the heavier bullets. I'm not and never have been a fan of the 6mm bore for deer so won't really go so far as to call them excellent choices but they are used and were used by many with success even in the 60s.

On the subject of military rounds the .303 British close but not quite a .30 and the 8x57 as well as a bunch of various 6.5s from all over the world were commonly sold at near give away prices. They too were used by many.

So no not even in the '60s was it true that deer rounds began or ended at .30 caliber but then as now there sure is nothing wrong with a .30 and for sure it's never a bad choice.

[jvs]

Thanks to all those submitted responses to this thread without insisting that he was WRONG in his advice.

He did the best he could with what he had.

While the advice may have become outdated, at the time is was cutting edge and worth its weight in gold.  Some of the calibers mentioned here were around back then, but there wasn't many of them produced.  Most people were happy with just one rifle, and really couldn't afford more.  Not until a good portion of the gun buying population fancied themselves as Rambos' or Carlos Hathcocks and had more disposable income, was there a want for more than one rifle in any household.

Had I stuck to his advice, and bought just one or two 30's, I would have much more money in bank accounts instead of in the cash registers drawers.  I am not much different than Coyote Hunter when it comes to what is in my Gun Cabinet, so it is safe to assume that even thought I still think of that advice, I didn't follow it very closely.  I spoiled myself by buying any rifle I wanted, just because I wanted it.  Not because I really needed it.

That is why the advice still rings in my memories.  All in all, he was right. 

Without debating calibers.

[Coyote Hunter]

Deer really are not that tough. I think that anything from a 24 cal. on up does the job just fine. I have seen more deer killed and killed more deer with sub 30 cal. rifles than 30 and up and they seem to die just fine. Save yourself some wear and tear and try a smaller caliber, you will like it.

As I said, no disrespect to your grandfather, but if he believed “a rifle no smaller than a 30 caliber should be used” for deer, even in the 1960’s, as far as I’m concerned he WAS wrong.  Just because he was A) old, and B) your grandfather, makes no difference.

By the way, I graduated high school in the 60’s so I do know a little about what things were like back then.  Grew up on a farm in a family of hunters and fishermen.

What was available in sub-30 cartridges back then?

1891 = 6.5mmx55 Swedish Mauser
1893 = 7x57 Mauser
1915 = .250-3000 Savage
1925 = .270 Winchester
1934 = .257 Roberts (Remington version)
1940’s = .257 Weatherby Magnum
1955 = .243 Winchester
1957 = 7mm Express Remington (.280 Remington)
1962 = 7mm Remington Magnum

There were others as well, of course, but this list will do to prove the point that there were many good sub-.30 caliber deer cartridges available in the 1960’s. 

That is not to denigrate the .30's as deer cartridges.  My safe includes a .30-30, .308 Win, three .30-06's, and a .300 Win Mag for a reason. 

[Swampman]

but this list will do to prove the point that there were many good sub-.30 caliber deer cartridges available in the 1960’s.

No, it just proves there were sub-.308 cartridges available in the 1960’s.

His grandfather gave good advise.  Nothing has changed since then.

[Coyote Hunter]

but this list will do to prove the point that there were many good sub-.30 caliber deer cartridges available in the 1960’s.

No, it just proves there were sub-.308 cartridges available in the 1960’s.

His grandfather gave good advise.  Nothing has changed since then.

How silly of me - I should have realized that the .250-3000 Savage, .257 Roberts, .257 Weatherby, .270 winchester, 7x57, .7mm Express (.280) Remington, and 7mm Remington Magnum are all VASTLY INFERIOR to the .30-30 that jvs thinks so highly of...

Not.

[jvs]

Swampman,

Don't even try to reason with the guy, he's so wrapped up in himself he doesn't care to even hear another point of view.

[Swampman]

How silly of me -

Not unusual, you could have stopped there.

[Tunaman]

 

[Cement Man]

I've noticed when arguing with my wife.....  What's right, doesn't matter.  It's who's right that is really the issue.  I feel right at home. 

Seems that some pretty reasonable posts have been made here to explain some pretty reasonable viewpoints on a fairly simple issue.

Enough of this one for me.

[trotterlg]

I have a 25-20 sitting in my safe that has probably killed more deer than anyone alive here has seen.  Seems the deer have grown tougher in the years since it was made, now the bullets it shoots just bounce off them, you need one of the 30 or 338 magnums now just to make them take note, and at least a 375 to kill one.  Just amazing what a marketing clown can make people believe.  Larry

[Tom W.]

JVS's grand dad said what he thought was sage advice, and JVS listened. So what's the problem with that? I taught my Sons to bring the cross hairs of the scope up the front leg of the deer until they reached the middle of the front shoulder and then fire.  It worked for them, and we seldom had to track a deer very far if at all...although I suppose some would say that a neck or lung shot is preferred....

[Brithunter]

Thanks to all those submitted responses to this thread without insisting that he was WRONG in his advice.

He did the best he could with what he had.

While the advice may have become outdated, at the time is was cutting edge and worth its weight in gold.  Some of the calibers mentioned here were around back then, but there wasn't many of them produced.  Most people were happy with just one rifle, and really couldn't afford more.  Not until a good portion of the gun buying population fancied themselves as Rambos' or Carlos Hathcocks and had more disposable income, was there a want for more than one rifle in any household.

Had I stuck to his advice, and bought just one or two 30's, I would have much more money in bank accounts instead of in the cash registers drawers.  I am not much different than Coyote Hunter when it comes to what is in my Gun Cabinet, so it is safe to assume that even thought I still think of that advice, I didn't follow it very closely.  I spoiled myself by buying any rifle I wanted, just because I wanted it.  Not because I really needed it.

That is why the advice still rings in my memories.  All in all, he was right. 

Without debating calibers.

   Sorry but I do believe your living in a dream  especially with this statement:-

While the advice may have become outdated, at the time is was cutting edge and worth its weight in gold.  Some of the calibers mentioned here were around back then, but there wasn't many of them produced.   

I'll bet that there were more 303's and 8mm Mausers made than any 30-06 

Now what he stated was his belief and preference not what was or is factual or even true but that's the way it is. Let's look at the time line:-

   Cartridges liek these had been in production for many years :-

303=1892
7x57=1892
8x57 Modern version =1905
6.5x55=1894
6.5x54MS=1903
243 Win =1955
250-3000 Savage =1915
257 Roberts = 1934
264 Win Mag =1958
280 Rem =1957
284 Win =1963
7mm Rem Mag =1962

   And no doubt I have missed a few  no your granfather had his opinions and passed them on and it's possible that he was uneducated where it came to other cartridges.

[Swampman]

I'll bet that there were more 303's and 8mm Mausers made than any 30-06 

And they are +.308 calibers, but they aren't as good as the .30-06.

You just can't beat the .308+ calibers for deer hunting.  The smaller calibers are ok for lung/heart shots on deer sized game.  I just get tired of trackin' so I shoot through both front sholders if I can.  An exit hole is important to me.

[Graybeard]

There certainly was no harm in the advice he gave and a lot of folks followed it and really for the most part Swampman still did until recently when he succomed to the lure of a .270. You really can't go wrong with a .30.

Had I stuck to his advice, and bought just one or two 30's, I would have much more money in bank accounts instead of in the cash registers drawers.

Wow how true. If I had done that and not bought and/or traded for the other perhaps 300-400 over the years I'd sure have a lot more money today and the gun shops a lot less.

[Coyote Hunter]

JVS's grand dad said what he thought was sage advice, and JVS listened. So what's the problem with that?...

No problem with someone passing on what they think is good information, but thinking something doesn’t make it so.

Do I have a problem with .30’s and larger for deer?  Absolutely not – they work very well.  But to say, as jvs’ grandfather reportedly did, that nothing smaller should be used for “Deer or other 125 pound+” animals is unsupportable based on the 10s of millions of such animals successfully taken with such cartridges.

There were plenty of good sub-.30 caliber deer cartridges for jvs’ grandfather to choose from even back in the 60’s – including some that had undoubtedly been around longer than his grandfather and are still popular today. It has often been reported that the Swedes take more moose with the century-old 6.5x55 than any other cartridge - I guess they don't know it is inadequate for 125 pound deer...

[Swampman]

I guess they don't know it is inadequate for 125 pound deer...

I guess they don't have access to good cartridges, so they make do with what they have.

[Cement Man]

I've been there.  They do have access to good cartridges, just like we do.  And the "Swede" is one of them.  They also understand that there is more than one bullet dimension and characteristic that counts for successful performance.  Their understanding goes beyond bore size. Amazing, huh?

[Swampman]

Would that be like bass fishing with 2lb test?  There's a lot to fishing, but starting out with adequate tackle is a good first step.

[Cement Man]

Well, no.  It isn't like bass fishing with 2# test.  I don't think that is a very appropo analogy. Nobody has suggested shooting deer with inadequate cartridges.

Of course, I am sure that we can find someone who says that you need 50# test for bass fishing as well, with the exclusion of anything less.  That would be more in line with your reasoning.

Maybe a better corallary to the 2# bass fishing would be - getting into a discussion without adequate knowledge or understanding of facts and an attitude that one's viewpoint is exclusively the correct one.  Would that fit this discussion?

[WyoStillhunter]

A .308 or 30-06 using 150 gr. or 165 gr. bullets is going to be hard to beat for deer hunting although boring to some, not very romantic.  The standard 30 calibers are adequate, effective, available, time tested, proven, etc.

It's great that perfectrly reasonable choices are also available in both directions -- smaller AND larger calibers.

[Coyote Hunter]

A .308 or 30-06 using 150 gr. or 165 gr. bullets is going to be hard to beat for deer hunting although boring to some, not very romantic.  The standard 30 calibers are adequate, effective, available, time tested, proven, etc.

It's great that perfectrly reasonable choices are also available in both directions -- smaller AND larger calibers.

Amen.  These days the .sub-30 choices are even wider than they were back in the 60's.  Both the .260Rem and 7mm-08 are superb deer cartridges, just to name two of my favorites.  The .25-06 as well (although Remington standardized it in 1969, the 60's were just about over).

[Bart Solo]

A few years ago my son took a 350 buck with a 6MM.  One well placed shot, and it dropped dead within 12 feet.  There are a lot of cartridges less than 30 caliber that take lots of deer every year.

That said, I wonder if the wisdom the grandfather was imparting wasn't true from his perspective. Only in the last few decades has ammunition improved to the point that you can humanely take deer with a 243 and larger caliber. When I bought the 6MM my son used back in the early 70s there was a great debate about the use of high velocity 243 cartridges in deer hunting. I remember all the talk about shocking power of a modern 100 grain bullet traveling at 2900-3000 fps. That debate has subsided.  Some still think the 243 is inadequate, but not many. Of course, there is no debate about the 6.5 Swede, the 7MM-08, the 25-06, the 270 and a host of others. They are all great for taking deer.