Is this 3030 load a deer killer?

  • 8.9K Views
  • Last Post 07 January 2020
elbow posted this 11 February 2016

New load in my Model 94. It is deadly accurate but Im wondering if its a good deer killer, Im kinda new to cast. I am useing a Lee C309 170f mold, a 50-50 mix of wheeleight lead and pure lead, and 22 grains of IMR 4198. Im hunting Vermont deer which can go over 200 pounds. Looking for advise on this setup, ie bullet performance, velocity, any info or opinions. Like i said it is deadly accurate. Thanks, Craig

Attached Files

Order By: Standard | Newest | Votes
onondaga posted this 11 February 2016

Based on Lyman data your load produces 1600 fps. 200 pound Deer need to be hit in the vital with a load producing 1,000 foot pounds on impact for an ethical harvest. Your load with a 170 gr bullet at 1600 fps only has 966 foot pounds at the muzzle and is not a humane harvest load at any distance. Your bullet needs 2057 fps to deliver 1,000 foot pounds at 100 yards. That will take 24.3 grains of IMR 4198 to be an ethical harvest 100 yard Deer rifle with your cast 170 gr bullet. Your alloy is not strong enough for that load level, you will need a BHN 15 alloy like Lyman #2 You sound like you have a nice target load at 1600 fps but that is not a humane Deer load at all unless you are point blank shooting the brain through the eye.. I shoot your same bullet at 2050 fps with H4895 from my 100 yard Deer rifle. The load groups 2.2” @100 yards for me. I cast the bullet in #2 alloy and my mold is honed large, I size check the bullet at .310” for my 30-30. I also shoot the RD 165 FNGC about that speed, it shoots a little better and has a much bigger flat nose than the Lee bullet. Gary

Attached Files

  • Liked by
  • M3 Mitch
norm posted this 11 February 2016

In a 30-30 I have used a 190 gr. bullet at 1900 muzzle velocity using 12-13 bhn bullets. Have killed deer out to 150 yards with no problem.

Attached Files

  • Liked by
  • Bud Hyett
Scearcy posted this 11 February 2016

I any 30 caliber I prefer to keep muzzle velocity above 1800 fps.  I know you didn't ask about your bullet choice but the RCBS 180 FN (really about 190 grains) is my preferred hunting bullet for a 30-30 or a 30-06.  Having said that there are many suitable bullet choices.

Attached Files

  • Liked by
  • Bud Hyett
Larry Gibson posted this 11 February 2016

You might want to consider a change of powder for your deer 30-30 loads.  I suggest Hodgdon's LeveRevolution.  A charge of 34.5 - 35 gr under your Lee 170 gr bullets should run 2150 - 2175 fps+/- out of your M94. That is a 200 yard deer killing load, even the larger ones you have up there. I also use COWWs +2% tin and then mixed 50/50 with lead for my hunting alloy in a Lyman 311041.  They weigh out at 175 gr.  I also use a soft NRA 50/50 lube and size them at .311.  Loaded over 34.5 gr LvR they run 2155 out of my 20” M94 and 2174 fps out of my 21” Contender Carbine.  I clean the barrel every 7 - 8 shots to maintain best accuracy if right at 2 moa.  More than that and fouling picks up opening the moa to 3 - 4.  Keeping the barrel clean isn't a problem for hunting as if I've not got the deer in 7 shots I might as well go home and clean the rifle anyways......   Here's 7 shots out of the magazine tube at 100 yards fro my M94 Carbine.  Paster is 1".   This LvR load will still retain about 1600 fps at 200 yards which is what your load is producing at the muzzle.  The ability to have adequate bullet performance out to 200 yards is the real benefit of such a load.   LMG   

Concealment is not cover.........

  • Liked by
  • M3 Mitch
jeff houck posted this 11 February 2016

I used an RCBS 180 gr. GC FP bullet over a case full (to the base of the bullet) of old WW ll surplus 4831 powder. Velocity was 1875 fps. Family members regularly took our N. Idaho White Tail deer out to 100 yds. The bullets always passed completely through quartering or broad side shots. The alloy was 10 bhn nuclear medicine lead. 

Attached Files

onondaga posted this 11 February 2016

http://www.castbulletassoc.org/forum/view_user.php?id=9641>elbow

Craig, it is likely your groups will open up a bit when you increase the load to 24.3 grains IMR4198. Consider the effective 100 yard distance and the vital size of 10 inches. At worst your groups will be ~ 5” at 100 yards and that still fits in the vital at the distance.

You don't mention gas checking your bullet, I hope you do as accuracy will be less at that load level without a gas check and gas checks extend the load range of your alloy strength about 10%.

If your WW alloy is from clip on WW and not stick on WW you are in better shape. The clip on WW alloy has enough Antimony that the alloy can be drop quench hardened as the bullets are cast. That will raise your BHN  to the strength needed for 24.3 grains IMR 4198. Put the pure lead aside and harden your clip on WW alloy bullets and you will be fine. Although the Lyman #2 alloy I recommended will expand better on impact due to #2 Alloy Tin content malleability.

If you are curious about the 1,000 foot pound vital hit impact on deer size game for a humane harvest, That comes from hunting guide associations all over the world. It is not something new that I made up. I first read about that in the 1960s in the Herter's Guide Manual and it was old news then. It is good standard for ethical harvest. Your current load with 22 gr IMR 4198 falls way short in power for ethical harvest.  A good guide would not allow you to use that load on 200 pound Vermont Deer at any range and would sight you in with good ammo for your Deer or send you home. He would likely insist you use factory 30-30 ammo because your particular cast load is too weak for ethical harvest.

Gary

Attached Files

  • Liked by
  • M3 Mitch
JeffinNZ posted this 12 February 2016

Nice soft alloy and the load duplicates the .32-40 “deer load” so no reason it will not work inside ethical ranges.

Cheers from New Zealand

Attached Files

  • Liked by
  • Ross Smith
Brodie posted this 12 February 2016

I have only seen two animals killed by “bullet energy” alone :  One was a small sparrow that landed on a bush I had a target attached to I hit the bull with the 500gr. full house load in my .458 Win. when I went up to check the target the bird was lying there dead.  2. I shot at a running jack rabbit with that same rifle and a 490gr. cast bullet at near 2000fps.  I hit the ground under the jack  knocked him about 3 ft. into the air.  When I skinned the rabbit there were no holes in him but a great bruise in the area of his chest.

Where you hit the animal counts more than what you hit them with.  Like a warden told me: "They shoot elk up here all the time with a 22rf.".   But, that being said you also need enough bullet going fast enough.  A low speed 30 cal bullet going through the lungs is equivalent to an arrow with a field point on it.  It won't do enough damage to ensure a quick clean kill.   Conversely, if you gut shoot a deer with a 375 H&H you still have a gut shot deer. Brodie

B.E.Brickey

Attached Files

  • Liked by
  • M3 Mitch
TRKakaCatWhisperer posted this 12 February 2016

elbow wrote: ... Im hunting Vermont deer which can go over 200 pounds. ... Thanks, Craig

My step-dad got two deer a year every year (in Northern Vermont) for his lifetime.

I remember him preferring the 303 Savage over the 30-30 because the factory loads were 190gr vs 175gr.  (otherwise VERY similar)

FWIW.

 

Attached Files

onondaga posted this 12 February 2016

http://www.castbulletassoc.org/forum/view_user.php?id=1118>Old Coot

I am not selling energy to kill Deer. Lyman figured it out well over 100 years ago that a flat nose 30-30 bullet in Lyman #2 alloy needs to strike a deer with 1,000 foot pounds to the vital for the bullet to double in diameter and pass through a deer leaving a  60 caliber wound to efficiently shock and bleed out the Deer quickly and humanely.

Gary

Attached Files

Brodie posted this 13 February 2016

I didn't think that you were trying to sell energy as a way to kill game Gary.  I say what I do because so many people are fixated on energy figures that they forget just about everything else.  I know that you are an experienced and ethical hunter.  We all have our pet peeves and this is one of mine.  Every year the gun and sports writers talk energy when they should be talking about accuracy penetration and bullet performance.  Hunters have picked this theme up and I wish I had a $ for every time some one has talked about how hard the elk are to kill now.  I even had a Warden tell me how much better the 7mm mag was than the 7x57 mauser while looking at the two elk I had inadvertently killed with one shot (if I had known where that yearling bull calf was I never would have shot the cow).

I used to hunt with a 270 Weatherby , but I got tired of the excess tissue damage and weight of the rifle.  It was a great tool for longer ranges and I killed a lot of game with it, but they wiped the bison out with black powder and cast bullets.

See what I mean about my personal objection to “energy” as a bench mark for a proper load.  I guess that it gets me going because so many shooters get the mistaken idea that if they use a cartridge with enough “energy” it matters little where the bullet hits, and we both know that isn't true.  My reply was not meant to be personal at all, I just try to dispel the “energy only” myth whenever I can.  It has become kind of a reflex.  I am sorry if you misunderstood me. Brodie

B.E.Brickey

Attached Files

corerf posted this 13 February 2016

I shoot 10 lb ++ jack rabbits (baby kangaroos) at 125 yds Plus/Plus with 22 LR from a 7.5 inch scoped pistol, not once in a while when Im lucky, its the only shots I take. Regular Federal milk carton round nose. The meat slap is very very late in report, the rabbit flops over dumbfounded and when I get there its dead or expiring. I figured out that at 100 yards with my 38/357 it didn't matter how I loaded down or up, I still damaged way too much meat and had a rainbow trajectory. So I prefer the 22 at that distance. It takes a while for me to haul my butt across the desert 125 plus plus to get there. I suppose it does suffer some. Not sure how that differs from a bludgeoning tip on an arrow shaft hitting the animal at 50 yards. Ever broken ribs and punctured a lung doing so, I haven't but it seems like a horrible way to expire. Getting squished sideways!

The 22 bullet never leaves the animal in this case. No expansion either, Looks like they are unfired for the most part.

And yes it is relevant as if you parallel mass/vel/range/animal density/shot placement potential----- its a perfect analog. Sorry I agree with the earlier analog presented to a broadhead and as well the differential of vitals and gut shot with other more proper cartridges. The 30-30 at low velocity if the bullet is hard enough to not come apart during penetration will adequately kill at the distance indicated, and further, it will not fully penetrate through though..

But nobody said it needed to! Animals die when vitals are damaged. Not when vials or leaked out in liquid form hydrostatically from a 3 foot long hole in their torso ALTHOUGH its nice when a 2 inch cavity is opened for 4 feet, they die pretty fast! 16 inch thick animal, heart is at 8 inch, that how far the bullet must penetrate. If an arrow head with high wide profile can go “through” a deer at 50 yards (bones in the way and all) at 300fps “muzzle” then a 30 cal bullet maintaining its shape can do the same. No it won't turn the light off on the animal, but US BOWHUNTERS here in CA and most across the nation know that your going for a fairly long walk to go get your animal that ran off like someone poked it in the ass with a cigarette cherry, even with a double lunger . I suppose bowhunting has become inhumane from the definitions presented above.

I suppose since its deadly accurate as the OP indicated, that a head shot deals with the problem fully. If its that accurate, shoot like it. Then Lyman's rules don't matter. Shoot it with a potato gun.

Attached Files

45 2.1 posted this 13 February 2016

One thing most people forget...... the harder the alloy, the more speed it takes to make it work. That nice soft alloy in a hollow pointed handgun cartridge will kill easily at 400 ft-lbs when put in the right spot.

Attached Files

  • Liked by
  • Ross Smith
Bud Hyett posted this 13 February 2016

A friend's daughter is shooting a .30-30 Marlin 336 with the SAECO #315 bullet at 1800 fps and getting a deer each year for the last five years. This is from a blind at less than 100 yards and she is a patient shot. The alloy is the older wheel-weight alloy with 2% tin and 4% antimony, sized .311 with gas check.    I helped her Dad set up this load for her practice sessions and she liked the recoil and accuracy  He bought her factory ammo and she did not like either the noise, recoil or accuracy. She never announced she would use the cast load, just  came home with a deer and a smile on opening day. 

Farm boy from Western Illinois, living in the Magical Pacific Northwest

Attached Files

  • Liked by
  • Ross Smith
tdoyka posted this 14 February 2016

i just looked up lyman's reloading handbook 49th ed, that says imr4198, starting load 18.0gr for 1600fps, max load is 24.0gr for 2000fps. i don't have a chrony but i figure a 170gr boolit with 22gr goes roughly 1800fps. i'm pretty sure that it will kill a deer out to 150 yards away, probably a little more.

the 1000lb is complete horsepucky. i shoot alot of deer with a arrow that doesn't even come close to 1000lbs. i wonder what a 250gr 44 mag with a 7 1/2” barrel and a charge of unique going 1000fps has? i wonder if a 50cal flintlock has? 444 marlin? 45-70? horsepucky.

Attached Files

onondaga posted this 14 February 2016

http://www.castbulletassoc.org/forum/view_user.php?id=8568>tdoyka

I am an archer too and broad-headed deer hunting arrows don't kill by foot pounds, they kill by cutting and bleeding not shock at all. My broad-heads will shoot through a  steel bucket full of sand at 25 yards because they cut a path with sharp edges and don't need anywhere near 1,000 foot pounds to do that. The OPs load won't even go through the same bucket of sand or a 200 pound Vermont Whitetail vital and is not an ethical load for Deer. His load is less than 1,000 foot pounds at the muzzle and decreases continuously with range. I recommended a load that has the minimum recommended ethical power for reliably harvesting Deer to 100 yards when you hit anywhere in the 10” vital of a Deer. Even if your bullet goes in between the heart and lungs, the shock passing through the area mortally damages the lungs and heart with a bullet passing through that delivers 1,000 foot pounds on impact. Bullets kill by shock damage, broad-heads kill by slicing and bleeding.

It has been suggested by Lyman to guide associations and hunters that 1,000 foot pounds to the vital with a bullet is the point reliable fatality begins for humane harvest of Deer sized game.  Sure less will do in many instances, but the ethical reliability is lower. Guide associations accepted this standard immediately to ensure their clients are not under-gunned as the OPs 22 gr. load makes him under gunned for Deer.

And Yes, I do have all my deer hunting rifles, including Muzzle loaders. specifically setup to deliver humane harvest energy shock to my longest hunting shot range. I see less as unethical. And I wish everybody did.

My personal most recent example is my new kit built Traditions 50 Cal Flintlock. It is setup specifically to deliver 1,000 foot pounds at 100 yards with the Lee 250 gr R.E.A.L. Less would be unethical for my Deer hunting shot range maximum of 100 yards. I believe the research from Lyman and follow their recommendation for ethical harvest. I have harvested about 70 Whitetails with decisive 100% mortality following the Lyman recommendation.

An unusual exception is archery hunting Squirrels with blunt tipped arrows. This is my favorite hunting, the blunts instantly kill Squirrels with shock to the chest or head. Paunch or rump shots with blunts are just messy and then crippled Squirrels get very loud and take a second hit.

Gary

Attached Files

  • Liked by
  • M3 Mitch
Westhoff posted this 14 February 2016

Working in Northwest Montana in the middle '50s, I learned that many (most) of the locals used a 30-30 during deer season - and when the season was closed they used a .22 long rifle to harvest their “government beef". Most shots were well under 100 yds, and most of them were pretty good game shots, in or out of season.

So if you get fairly close, and your shot is reasonably accurate, even a .22 lr is adequate for deer.

However, back when I was still hunting (hills are too steep nowadays), I used a 30-40 Krag or a 30-'06. I didn't NEED the meat, and if I killed something I wanted it to die quick, not feel the hurt.

Wes

Attached Files

shootcast posted this 15 February 2016

I have been lucky in the area I live to shoot as many deer as I have. They don't live long enough to get 200 lb. on the property I hunt. But I take deer half that with no problems . If it's accurate and you place your shots you'll do fine. It helps to hit bone. You get plenty of penatration but little expansion. I have taken more deer with my 30-30 than any other rifle I own. Most with cast bullets. As far as energy goes my T/C contender super 14 would run short on the recommendations. A facing standing doe fell were it stood from a cast bullet of wheel weights. It was only about thirty yards but the bullet entered the chest and was retrieved from the hide at the rear ham. I admit I have lost deer but I have lost them with jacked bullets also. It happens. I have taken deer with at least four different cast bullets. My pick is the RCBS 180 FN. However I have to run it in a taper die in order to keep the gas check above the shoulder and allow extraction from chamber if not fired. I use IMR 3031 and it will push that bullet 1900 fps. This from a T/C contender carbine. I hunt in the woods so I don't take long shots. Hope this helps, good luck.

Attached Files

  • Liked by
  • Ross Smith
onondaga posted this 15 February 2016

http://www.castbulletassoc.org/forum/view_user.php?id=8754>shootcast

Your 180 @1900 is not a slacker. At  70 yards 1033 foot pounds are left and at 100 you have 897 foot pounds.  The energy at 100 yards is likely fine for smallish 110 pound deer but I'd want more for a 200 pounder at 100 yards.

You can run your numbers here: http://handloads.com/calc/index.html

Gary

Attached Files

shootcast posted this 15 February 2016

I agree that more is better but you can only get so much out of a 30-30. If you would shoot a 200 pound deer with factory 30-30 loads and be comfortable than why have a problem with this load. From the bullets I have used and the results I have seen the heavier the bullet with the widest metplat ( flat nose ) kills best. I like to hunt from a ladder stand so I shoot down and not across the woods. A feeding deer goes nowhere when head shot. No meat loss . If it's horns you want take a broadside shoulder shot.

Attached Files

45 2.1 posted this 15 February 2016

I handgun hunt. In my state the reg's are 500 ft-lbs at the muzzle. Normally I shoot my own cast hollow points at about 600 to 700 ft-lbs. I have taken well over 200 deer that way.......... all are in one side, do a lot of damage then leave a good hole with a good number of DRT. I don't adhere to using solids, shooting bone and expending whats left in a hillside beyond the deer at all. I makes a difference when you know what works versus following someone else's recommendation.

Attached Files

shootcast posted this 15 February 2016

You have taken more deer than I. If it works and it sounds like it does than keep using it. Many years ago I experimented with a Lyman mold in 22 cal. Had my dad convert it to a hollow point design. Wanted a ground hog bullet. Never could get it to shoot before the change or after. Sometimes the nose area would break into petals which was OK . Gave up on it. I'm certainly no expert can only tell you from my experience .

Attached Files

gnoahhh posted this 15 February 2016

A 170 grain SOFT .30 bullet at 1800 fps is A-ok for deer, IMO, but only if the animal is stationary and presenting a decent angle for a kill shot. I wouldn't chance using it on a running deer no matter how confident I was- there's too much chance for an edgy hit in which case you and the deer are screwed (of course that could be said when using a .30 Whizbang Magnum too). 90% of my deer hunting the last 15 years has been with 180-190 grain bullets in that velocity range and I'll be darned if I can tell a heckuva lot of difference in performance from jacketed factory ammo.

As for muzzle loading, since 1990 I have used one of two ML's for deer, and have actually killed more with them than when using CF rifles: a .50 Ithaca Hawken, 50gr. FFFg and patched round ball (I call it my “50/50” rifle) and .45 Vincent Ohio-style rifle with 60 gr. FFFg and PRB. No muss, no fuss, even though energy with the two is squarely in the .38 Special/.357 Mag realm. We are talking deer here fellas, let's not over-think this. A mandate of 1000ft.lbs. of energy is bunk, IMO.

Attached Files

echale3 posted this 15 February 2016

Seems to me that there might be a few of you posting on here that either A.) never hunted with cast bullets, or B.) are so hung up on foot pounds of energy that you discount the effectiveness of bullet design when it comes to terminal performance.

Cases in point--the first buck I ever took (~180 lbs dressed) was with a Dan Wesson 357 SuperMag pushing an air-cooled WW 220 grain LBT WLN out the front end at 1400 FPS. The slug went in, punched a big hole through the heart, and went out the far side of the chest. The deer went about 30 yards and fell over stone dead.

I've also knocked over multiple good sized deer (DRT) with a TC Contender in 7mm TCU, shooting an air-cooled WW 132 grain NOE “Thor” slug at just over 1800 FPS.

Both my loads fall shy of the “magic number” of 1000 ft-lbs, yet I have personally used them to kill dozens of deer because I choose a bullet design that has excellent terminal effectiveness and use an alloy suited to the slugs I hunt with at the velocities I achieve with my pistols.

What I'm getting at is that terminal performance, whether the slug is jacketed or cast, is more about bullet placement and design than it is about muzzle energy.

Attached Files

  • Liked by
  • Ross Smith
shootcast posted this 15 February 2016

Sounds right to me. The retained energy for long shots is what I think they are worried about. But I can't make long shots in the woods. Lyman suggest an alloy not harder than  number 2 max. Also say Wheel weights are better and even softer if you can get it to shoot. Air cooled wheel weights haven't always expanded the way I would like. But again I have cast Lee slugs for 12 ga. And blown holes clean through the boiler room and they still can run 100 yards before they drop. I just like hunting with my T/C carbine.

Attached Files

Rossi.45 posted this 17 February 2016

there should be a sliding scale for power needed in the field . . . armchair and novice shooters need +1000lbs of energy - the idea that one size fits all is ridicules and only encourages people to generalize.

Attached Files

tdoyka posted this 17 February 2016

yep, it sounds right to me too.

i use a 30-40 krag 1898 spr armory(bubba got it) and with a 165gr ranch dog with 25.5gr of h4198 it gets roughly(no chrono) 1800fps. at 100 yards with 5 shots(open sights) it goes 1 1/4 - 1 1/2". this was my grandpap's rifle that he left to me. last year i took it out and i shot a doe(around 160 pounds) that was laser range finded at 93 yards. i shot it on the on side shoulder, took out the first lung, took out the top of the heart, took out lung #2 and then it took out a rib before it exited. the deer was drt. the entrance wound looked like a .311” went in and it came out the exit wound about 3/4 - 1". the heart looked like it was set up on a drill using a .311” bit. there was little if any meat that could be wasted. the boolit used was a clipped on ww at around 12-13bhn.

i'm pretty sure that a 170gr going about 1800fps would do the same thing to a deer that weighs 150-200 pounds. 

Attached Files

Hamish posted this 18 February 2016

The way the OP has been defecated on with obtuse fallacy and pseudo scientific conjecture, I will be very surprised if he ever posts again.

I'm so relieved that the deer I've killed with a 12 inch 30-30 didn't know they couldn't die from ir.

Attached Files

onondaga posted this 18 February 2016

http://www.castbulletassoc.org/forum/view_user.php?id=8417>TheAmishGolfballShooter

That is a good golf ball shot !!!!!!

Gary

Attached Files

357Maximum posted this 18 February 2016

elbow wrote: New load in my Model 94. It is deadly accurate but Im wondering if its a good deer killer, Im kinda new to cast. I am useing a Lee C309 170f mold, a 50-50 mix of wheeleight lead and pure lead, and 22 grains of IMR 4198. Im hunting Vermont deer which can go over 200 pounds. Looking for advise on this setup, ie bullet performance, velocity, any info or opinions. Like i said it is deadly accurate. Thanks, CraigElbow

Your load is plenty to do what you seek. Put it in the right spot and get your tag out.   Please do not let those that hunt with calculators and theories ruin your fun.  Deer are not coated in Kevlar and deer die every year to 32-20 ballistics, they simply are not that tough.  This is coming from a guy that has actually killed deer with 32-20 and you have a bit more going for you with your bullet weight.  I read it in a book knowledge and pseudo scientific numerical regurgitation and foot pounds of b.s  is not needed to hang a buck on your wall or put venison in the freezer. Use what you got and slay away.....It will work just fine and you chose a great alloy for what you are doing.   

Attached Files

badgeredd posted this 18 February 2016

elbow wrote: New load in my Model 94. It is deadly accurate but Im wondering if its a good deer killer, Im kinda new to cast. I am useing a Lee C309 170f mold, a 50-50 mix of wheeleight lead and pure lead, and 22 grains of IMR 4198. Im hunting Vermont deer which can go over 200 pounds. Looking for advise on this setup, ie bullet performance, velocity, any info or opinions. Like i said it is deadly accurate. Thanks, Craig

never mind the key board hunters, your alloy and velocity are more than adequate if you limit your shots to a short ranges and can shoot accurately. Shot placement is far more important than theoretical energy figures.

Attached Files

onondaga posted this 18 February 2016

http://www.castbulletassoc.org/forum/view_user.php?id=7197>badgeredd, and all that disregard history:

Lyman doesn't even reference their historical scientific workup of humane harvest load levels anymore because of people like you that call it "theoretical energy figures." as you have. The history isn't lost, and you are welcome to opine that you all know better after you have killed your paltry number of Deer with undocumented “well placed” weak loads that are inhumane to game animals. Why you reject Lyman's work on humane harvest load levels is a reflection on you personally that validates anti-hunting sentiment of anti-hunters and anti-gun ownership. You reject American history and you insult good hunting ethics.

I appreciate the work of Lyman for American hunters.You and I are very different people and I give up on you about ethics as Lyman has given up on you and I have never been able to accept your inconsiderate, non-humane and inconsolable reasoning about harvesting of game animals. You ignore well documented scientific research that was designed to help you ethically hunt by a respected very old and still running American hunting oriented company, Lyman.

I am the hunter that puts down, tags and reports to the Department of Environmental Conservation the Deer that you have wounded.

Gary

Attached Files

357Maximum posted this 18 February 2016

Please tell me more about these crippled deer from Michigan going to New York state and needing to be put down when they get there. I am all ears on this one as that is just frigging astounding. Do they walk, run, take the bus, a train, a plane? DO they get frequent flyer miles?

As someone who has humanely killed around 215 deer I can tell you one thing for certain. Calculators do not kill....BULLET PLACEMENT KILLS. If numbers killed we would all be hunting with calculators and slide rules. Please go outside next deer season and quit breathing so much of that oil laden chert dust, I think it is affecting your brain. I do not do much posting here and you are one of the biggest reasons. Why you are still allowed in the door with bile and vile you “ooze"...I haven't a clue. If I owned this joint you would be GONE. Not a personal attack but if you view it that way, that's fine. I have said all I need to say and I will take my timeout/ban if I have one coming. I will leave that up to the judges here as I am just typing what everyone else is thinking.

Attached Files

Hamish posted this 18 February 2016

I have composed and deleted several posts attempting to be civil, but 357 has it right.

Remember that thread you posted a while back apologising for being too much of yourself Gary?

You're doing it again.

Attached Files

badgeredd posted this 18 February 2016

onondaga wrote: http://www.castbulletassoc.org/forum/view_user.php?id=7197>badgeredd, and all that disregard history:

Lyman doesn't even reference their historical scientific workup of humane harvest load levels anymore because of people like you that call it "theoretical energy figures." as you have. The history isn't lost, and you are welcome to opine that you all know better after you have killed your paltry number of Deer with undocumented “well placed” weak loads that are inhumane to game animals. Why you reject Lyman's work on humane harvest load levels is a reflection on you personally that validates anti-hunting sentiment of anti-hunters and anti-gun ownership. You reject American history and you insult good hunting ethics.

I appreciate the work of Lyman for American hunters.You and I are very different people and I give up on you about ethics as Lyman has given up on you and I have never been able to accept your inconsiderate, non-humane and inconsolable reasoning about harvesting of game animals. You ignore well documented scientific research that was designed to help you ethically hunt by a respected very old and still running American hunting oriented company, Lyman.

I am the hunter that puts down, tags and reports to the Department of Environmental Conservation the Deer that you have wounded.

Gary SO...what you are saying is the 32-20 that in “history” was touted as a “deer cartridge” along with the 44-40, 38-40, 32-40 and many more that do not have 1000 ft pounds of energy at 100 yards are insignificant. Good for you.

Let me see your “documented” hunting history please.

My deer are put down, tagged and reported also, but I am not able to recall the shot placement or even the numbers according to the state. The ONLY deer I have not killed cleanly was because of a ricochet that caused a bad hit. ENERGY alone had no impact on any of the several scores of deer I have harvested. Shot placement was responsible for all of the kills, period.

Your so called ethics amount to nothing in that being able to kill a deer cleanly is about shot placement. I suggest you get off of your horse and learn how to hunt. Shot taken at 25 to 50 yards do not require anything near 1000 ft/lb of energy.

Attached Files

Fg1 posted this 18 February 2016

A hole through the lungs or heart dispatches quickly no matter at what speed . An exit is a big ++ for tracking and to accelerate bleed out but all in all either will do the job .

Attached Files

excess650 posted this 18 February 2016

Fg1 wrote: A hole through the lungs or heart dispatches quickly no matter at what speed . An exit is a big ++ for tracking and to accelerate bleed out but all in all either will do the job .You got that right Frank. :dude: I've actually taken WTs in NY and never needed more than a single shot be it from a muzzle loader or shotgun slug.  Honestly, I never saw any limping in from Michigan. 

Attached Files

357Maximum posted this 18 February 2016

TheAmishGolfballShooter wrote: I have composed and deleted several posts attempting to be civil, but 357 has it right.

Remember that thread you posted a while back apologising for being too much of yourself Gary?

You're doing it again.

I have tip toed around a certain person and held my nose and thoughts on several forums for far too long regarding a certain individual.  Sometimes one just has to speak the truth of the matter and take the consequences for that desperately needed action.  

Attached Files

elbow posted this 18 February 2016

Wow! This was my first post on this forum. I must tell you all I am not new to deer killing, I have shot 90 of them, with longbow, recurve, compond, 308, 3030, 243 and muzzleloader. I am new however to cast bullets and reloading. Using this same load I did shoot a 147 pound bear here in Vermont, hit it broadside in the chest at 35 yards, it went 75 yards and required a follow up shot to the head. The reason I asked the original question was that I have no track record other than the one bear to draw from using cast bullets and the load i described on bear on deer. Seems like there are hard feelings and two schools of thought, no need for that stuff. Guess Ill just keep hunting and see how the load works. Thanks , Craig.

Attached Files

Fg1 posted this 18 February 2016

Craig , if it works , use it :)

Attached Files

45 2.1 posted this 19 February 2016

onondaga wrote: Lyman doesn't even reference their historical scientific workup of humane harvest load levels anymore Gary I doubt they took in to consideration the 200+ years of the colonists and pioneers shooting said deer with their 38 caliber and smaller squirrel rifles (RB with BP) either. Do the energy figures on those and tell us about it.

Your energy figures are for tyros shooting AT deer at 250 yards.

Attached Files

badgeredd posted this 19 February 2016

Craig,

From your post I think you'll be just fine with the load you described. Obviously you have put in some time and know what an ethical shot is so let that be your guide.

Attached Files

357Maximum posted this 19 February 2016

I always find it comical, cool, and very refreshing how guys that get into guns/deer hunting with a “bow hunters mentality” USUALLY have a real grasp on what it takes to kill a deer.   Killing a few deer with a longbow/recurve/selfbow and sharp rocks lashed to a stick just gives a feller a different perspective I guess. 

Attached Files

45 2.1 posted this 19 February 2016

357Maximum wrote: Killing a few deer with sharp rocks lashed to a stick just gives a feller a different perspective I guess. 

Mike-    I still have that sticker cane arrow with the hand flaked point you made. I like looking at it above my computer desk. Thanks again for it.                                                                                 Bob

Attached Files

357Maximum posted this 19 February 2016

45 2.1 wrote: 357Maximum wrote: Killing a few deer with sharp rocks lashed to a stick just gives a feller a different perspective I guess. 

Mike-    I still have that sticker cane arrow with the hand flaked point you made. I like looking at it above my computer desk. Thanks again for it.                                                                                 Bob

You are most welcome Bob.  The first time I dropped one of them arrows into a deer it far and away eclipsed all my other kills up to that point.  Selfmade hickory flat bow, hanmade shoot arrow, self knapped chert point + 1 whitetail doe = WHAT A RUSH

Attached Files

muley posted this 19 February 2016

elbow

don"t get dishearted, sometimes the boys get carried away. I believe if u use that load from the bear hunt , it would work ok on a deer. a bear ,can sometimes absorb a little more shock. good luck with ur endeavors.

Attached Files

357Maximum posted this 19 February 2016

muley wrote: elbow

don"t get dishearted, sometimes the boys get carried away. I believe if u use that load from the bear hunt , it would work ok on a deer. a bear ,can sometimes absorb a little more shock. good luck with ur endeavors.

Good advice, same kind of idea as this:

?v=1ZXHsNqkDI4

Attached Files

MostlyOnThePaper posted this 19 February 2016

onondaga wrote:

If your WW alloy is from clip on WW and not stick on WW you are in better shape. The clip on WW alloy has enough Antimony that the alloy can be drop quench hardened as the bullets are cast. That will raise your BHN  to the strength needed for 24.3 grains IMR 4198. Put the pure lead aside and harden your clip on WW alloy bullets and you will be fine. Although the Lyman #2 alloy I recommended will expand better on impact due to #2 Alloy Tin content malleability.

Gary Why would anybody alloy stick on WW with pure lead, which is essentially the same thing? I should think for the parameters discussed in the original post air cooled 50/50 would work perfectly.

Attached Files

echale3 posted this 19 February 2016

Well, Onandaga, I'd look to the not-so-paltry number of deer I and others on here reported killed that either dropped in their tracks or expired after going a very short distance using what you posit as inhumane/unethical means and allow that to be the final arbiter on the “inhumane/unethical” matter, your opinion and assertions on the matter notwithstanding.  You can be an unethical hunter with a belted magnum as easily as you can with a smallbore rimfire. Speaking of history, there was a time when muzzleloaders and black powder were all we had in the way of firearms to hunt medium to large game such as deer, elk, buffalo, etc.  A relatively light weight (compared to today's bullet designs) pure lead round ball going about 1000 FPS doesn't pack much punch in the energy department, but it's highly effective at killing game (or people) when the vitals are hit. The Lyman data you cite regarding bullet expansion is for an alloy that is comparatively harder and rather less ductile than air cooled WW or any of the tin-lead alloys commonly used in BPCR, and definitely more so than pure lead.  While your argument about the velocity needed to achieve expansion with Lyman #2 alloy may hold some weight for that alloy when considering the use of a bullet design that would need expansion to make a wound channel larger than bore diameter, it doesn't necessarily hold true for bullets cast from alloys that are comparatively softer and more ductile, or from modern design cast bullets made with hunting in mind.    With regard to cast bullet expansion on impact, it's not necessary for a quick, humane kill, provided your bullet is appropriately designed.  A heavy-for-caliber bullet with a wide meplat doesn't have to be going very fast to create a wound channel significantly larger than the diameter of the bullet.  I personally find that, in terms of terminal performance, a non-expanding cast bullet sporting a wide meplat striking the vitals at a reasonable velocity is easily equal to the performance of a bullet relying on higher velocity to create expansion when hitting the vitals.  That said, expanding or not, cast or jacketed, a bad hit is a bad hit, whether it be from a 50 BMG or a 17 HMR. 

Attached Files

Brodie posted this 19 February 2016

I remember a jack rabbit I hit with a ball from a 36 Navy reproduction.  Shot in the right shoulder while running (probably hit more by chance than by skill) at about 10 yds. it did not have a left side.  I can not believe to this day that the ball expanded that much.  But, back then beer cans were made from steel and a ball from that 36 would make a larger hole on exit from an empty can than upon entry. Brodie

B.E.Brickey

Attached Files

TRKakaCatWhisperer posted this 19 February 2016

elbow wrote: ...Guess Ill just keep hunting and see how the load works. Thanks , Craig.

You've got a grip on it!  ;)

 

Attached Files

R. Dupraz posted this 19 February 2016

Old Coot:     This has nothing to do with the original topic but your post about the Jack reminded me of an old tom turkey that I took some years ago. It was with a .40 cal percussion loaded with a patched round ball and 60 grns. of Goex 3f at about 40 yds through the wing butts. The destruction was pretty amazing.

Attached Files

Brodie posted this 19 February 2016

Yes RD. , the destructive power of pure lead round balls at low velocity is pretty awesome.  The only question I Have is : “Does your projectile have enough mass to ensure adequate penetration?".   I have found bullet weight to be more important than velocity. Brodie

B.E.Brickey

Attached Files

R. Dupraz posted this 19 February 2016

I have not hunted anything bigger than turkey with that .40 so really can answer your question regarding penetration. All I can say is that the ball kept on going somewhere. Although there probably have been scores of white tails killed with the .40 through out our history, I personally would prefer something a little bigger.

I agree that bullet weight is more important than penetration. All one has to do to understand this is look at the firearms development in this country. From the eastern woods and relatively small game to the far west where much larger calibers were needed for the really big game. While our ancestors couldn't increase the velocity much with black, they met the challenge by increasing the caliber.

Guess I better quit hijacking this thread.

Attached Files

  • Liked by
  • M3 Mitch
rodwha posted this 04 March 2016

onondaga wrote: http://www.castbulletassoc.org/forum/view_user.php?id=9641>elbow,

Based on Lyman data your load produces 1600 fps.

200 pound Deer need to be hit in the vital with a load producing 1,000 foot pounds on impact for an ethical harvest.

Your load with a 170 gr bullet at 1600 fps only has 966 foot pounds at the muzzle and is not a humane harvest load at any distance.

Your bullet needs 2057 fps to deliver 1,000 foot pounds at 100 yards. That will take 24.3 grains of IMR 4198 to be an ethical harvest 100 yard Deer rifle with your cast 170 gr bullet.

Your alloy is not strong enough for that load level, you will need a BHN 15 alloy like Lyman #2

You sound like you have a nice target load at 1600 fps but that is not a humane Deer load at all unless you are point blank shooting the brain through the eye..

I shoot your same bullet at 2050 fps with H4895 from my 100 yard Deer rifle. The load groups 2.2” @100 yards for me. I cast the bullet in #2 alloy and my mold is honed large, I size check the bullet at .310” for my 30-30. I also shoot the RD 165 FNGC about that speed, it shoots a little better and has a much bigger flat nose than the Lee bullet.

GaryThere's a problem with the theory of needing 1000 ft/lbs for an ethical kill. If this were so our forefathers would have all perished as their muzzleloading rifles only had those figures at the muzzle, but with a ball having a poor BC it sheds energy fast, yet they didn't have issues bringing home the venison. And what of those who rode along the buffalo herds shooting their .44 cal cap and ball pistols at point blank?

Attached Files

rodwha posted this 04 March 2016

A .50 cal muzzleloader uses a 0.490” ball that weighs 177 grns and has a BC of 0.069. An average hunting load uses 70-80 grns of powder, but we will use 100 to prove the point.  Using Pyrodex RS which is quite similar to typical black powders you get 1851 fps for 1347 ft/lbs of energy at the muzzle. At 25 yds it's down to 1006, at 50 it's at 750, at 75 it's at 570, at 100 yds it's at 456, and at 125 yds it's down to 386 ft/lbs yet will go nose to tail through an adult deer. Visit a traditional muzzleloader forum and talk to the guys using a patched ball and ask them about needing even 500 ft/lbs of energy for an ethical kill.

Attached Files

M3 Mitch posted this 29 April 2016

Guys, regardless of what some of us have pulled off with small cartridges, can we just agree that the original poster would be better off with a heavier load of a slower powder, even if it gives a bit worse accuracy, than the load of 4198 he's using now? That's not to say the current load won't work or can't work, just that he can do better.

I think the 1000 ft-lb class load has been proven over time to get the job done fast and right under almost all reasonable circumstances, and of course no deer can tell the difference between 900 and 1100 ft-lbs, but a considerably lower impact velocity in a 30 caliber is going to require turning down longer shots or shots at less desirable angles to still be able to count on a humane kill. I'm not certain, but suspect the 1000 ft-lb criteria is mostly intended for say 270 to 338 caliber rifles. A 45-70 flat nose bullet probably can get good clean kills with less energy.  Because it does not need to expand to create about the same wound channel as an expanded 30 caliber.

It's not like he's being asked to drive that bullet to 3300 FPS. Loads are around and have been offered that will meet the standard.

Attached Files

onondaga posted this 30 April 2016

http://www.castbulletassoc.org/forum/view_user.php?id=9290>M3 Mitch

You made some generalizations that aren't accurate.

The 1000 ft-lb class load is based on 150-200 pound Deer and does not relate to caliber as you say 270 to 338 caliber rifles or 45-70 rifles either. The standard is not based on penetration or wound channel either. The 1000 ft-lb class load standard is based on psi on impact with a vital zone,  and that 1000 ft-lb impact alone being humanely capable of stopping a heart with shock-wave intensity.

Gary

Attached Files

45 2.1 posted this 30 April 2016

onondaga

You have also made some generalizations that aren't accurate.

There are a whole lot of people out there that do not aim anywhere close to the heart area...... and they kill deer easily doing so. The quite narrow view you're expounding doesn't help.

Attached Files

Larry Gibson posted this 30 April 2016

"Guys, regardless of what some of us have pulled off with small cartridges, can we just agree that the original poster would be better off with a heavier load of a slower powder, even if it gives a bit worse accuracy, than the load of 4198 he's using now? That's not to say the current load won't work or can't work, just that he can do better."   M3 Mitch stated my own position exactly.  I have shot many, many deer with numerous .30 cal cast bullets over the years.  I've found the 311041 or similar cast bullet of medium to soft alloy at 1900 - 2200 fps is by far the best to use.  That load kills very quick out to 200 yards if the bullet goes into the heart lung area.  Yes I have also killed a few with lessor velocity and with less powerful cartridges.  However, I don't do that anymore as I prefer to kill an animal quickly for humane and other reasons.  No criticism intended of anyone for using less as long as they do kill and recover the deer.  I'm only stating my own preference after killing many deer and having a few heartbreaks in there too.   LMG

Concealment is not cover.........

Attached Files

  • Liked by
  • M3 Mitch
onondaga posted this 30 April 2016

45 2.1 wrote: onondaga

You have also made some generalizations that aren't accurate.

There are a whole lot of people out there that do not aim anywhere close to the heart area...... and they kill deer easily doing so. The quite narrow view you're expounding doesn't help. The vital area for Deer as noted in the Guide Associations using the Humane Harvest 1,000 foot pound standard is defined as a 10 inch circle including the heart, and lung area does not define the hit as a heart or lung hit, only that 1,000 foot pounds impact in that area will reliably stop the heart of the animal with impact shock transferred to the heart.

Look at this way in a similar situation for humans. Strike a human in that area with a baseball bat hard enough and you can stop a human heart with just shock impact from the bat and no penetration is required. Blunt tipped arrows in archery hunting for small game work the same way with no penetration and kill by shock stopping the heart of small game animals.

The standard was developed and still used by Hunting Guide Associations to prevent the type of shots you mention that are no where near the vital area to discourage customers of the guides from taking less reliable shots on game that lessen the quality of the hunt for the customer and the guide.

If you disagree or don't want to acknowledge the standard, so what. Be aware that professional guides that use the standard will not allow you to hunt until you agree by contract to use the standard while being professionally guided on your hunt.

 The snappy mouth  response of a guide with a customer that balks at the standard is that ” If you can't demonstrate your ability to hit that 10” circle at the distance we agree on hunting, you cannot hunt with me. We are going to the range to test your ability to hit a 10” circle at 200 yards. Then I will set your maximum range based on your one shot. You get 1 shot to prove yourself or you don't hunt here with me.” The professional guides do not want bad shooting jerks that don't follow directions on a hunt. The one shot test is common from good guides.

Perhaps you have never hunted with a good professional guide. It is a unique experience and so is reading, “Professional Guide's Manual Written for Northstar Guide Association” by George and Jacques Herter in 1960.

Gary

Attached Files

  • Liked by
  • M3 Mitch
rodwha posted this 30 April 2016

The 1000 ft/lb theory doesn't hold up anyhow as muzzleloaders using a lightweight patched ball has shown that it can kill quite quickly with 1/3 of that energy figure and doesn't produce much, if any, hydrostatic shock. It's a farce to say X amount of energy is necessary for a humane and quick kill.

Attached Files

onondaga posted this 30 April 2016

http://www.castbulletassoc.org/forum/view_user.php?id=6596>rodwha  You verify why I have chosen to ignore you. I regret that I un-clicked “ignore” on you and read your last comment.

Attached Files

rodwha posted this 30 April 2016

Because you don't like being disproven?

Attached Files

rodwha posted this 30 April 2016

To be clear the projectiles I'm talking about are of a much larger caliber. Even if these get no expansion, which after about 75 yds tends not to, they still leave a nice wound size. The round ball has killed animals just fine with much less energy than this magic 1000 number. It's absolutely absurd to say a magic number must be reached when history (modern too) has shown it to be a false statement.

Even the .45 Colt and .44-40 have killed plenty of critters and people effectively, quickly, and humanely and comes nowhere near this magic number. But I guess it just doesn't work well either since voodoo hasn't been used...

I have no idea if a much smaller caliber, such as the suggested load, would be a quick enough killer. I'd think it would be adequate for close shots, but I'd prefer something more substantial not knowing for certain.

Ballistics gel can be made (a bit pricey) and given a way to see what might be expected as far as wounding and penetration. Even wet phone books could give an idea. Better than guessing...

Attached Files

rodwha posted this 30 April 2016

To be fair I was quite skeptical of a ball when I bought my .50 cal muzzleloader. By modern thinking (not an exact number necessary, and not one of 1000 ft/lbs) a projectile with such a poor sectional density and with a poor ballistic coefficiency that sheds velocity rapidly, there was no way I could understand how this could be exceptable beyond 50 yds. I spent time and asked questions and sought evidence and found it in abundance. A ball with barely more than 300 ft/lbs goes clean through medium game beyond 125 yds and can and will drop them DRT with a solid hit. No more tracking was necessary compared to modern stuff as we all know that even a good hit with a good bullet may still leave you with some tracking to do. I still can't get over this absurd 1000 ft/lb rule as it would even dismiss most commercial .44 magnum ammo, which is a ludicrous idea. Even the .357 mag has been shown to be effective, though most consider it minimal.

Attached Files

  • Liked by
  • M3 Mitch
Brodie posted this 30 April 2016

Now that we have all proved that WE ARE ALL RIGHT AND RIGHTEOUS  can we stop beating this poor horse.  It died two pages ago. Brodie

B.E.Brickey

Attached Files

rodwha posted this 01 May 2016

I suppose kicking this horse depends on those who want to sell the idea of magic numbers despite the evidence. Maybe something like that holds more water with very small calibers, but it's a complete farce where larger calibers are concerned.  And where would that leave us with mid sized calibers such as the one mentioned? I don't claim to be any sort of expert and I'm here for a conversation. But I'll call BS when I see it. And I'm calling it.

Attached Files

45 2.1 posted this 01 May 2016

onondaga

There is a difference between hunting and sniping. I suggest you learn it. I would not shoot at a deer at two hundred yards when I can get within 20 yards on the ground and kill it with a bow or handgun with a cast bullet. Your references pertain to jacketed bullets and novice sport hunters. I'm also old enough to have read the Herter's catalogs and some of their claims............

Attached Files

Brodie posted this 01 May 2016

There is a reason you guys don't go to bars and pick fights.  People with a snoot on and in person tend to hit.  Not just throw words around. Yeah, you disagree.  You have made your points.  Let it lie. I don't know about everybody else:  I did not take a poll.  But, I for one have heard enough of your opinions on this subject.  Please, before this  becomes very uncivil , let it lie.  We all know how you feel on this subject.  Act like grownups for cripes sake and just walk away without throwing taunts back over you shoulders. Brodie

B.E.Brickey

Attached Files

waksupi posted this 02 May 2016

I've shot deer with a 6.5X55 at under 1700 fps. Killed them just as dead as anything else. They travel about thirty yards, and are done. Just put the bullet where it needs to go. A hole through the lungs works.

Attached Files

Hamish posted this 25 May 2016

Old Coot wrote: There is a reason you guys don't go to bars and pick fights.  People with a snoot on and in person tend to hit.  Not just throw words around. Yeah, you disagree.  You have made your points.  Let it lie. I don't know about everybody else:  I did not take a poll.  But, I for one have heard enough of your opinions on this subject.  Please, before this  becomes very uncivil , let it lie.  We all know how you feel on this subject.  Act like grownups for cripes sake and just walk away without throwing taunts back over you shoulders. Brodie Brodie, I am sorry you're distressed by the discussion.  Maybe you'd best not read this thread anymore, it's bad for your blood pressure!  :P The crux of the matter is, as long as there is a group that includes “That One Guy” who thinks he knows so much, but nearly EVERYONE disagrees with him, then this kind of thread is inevitable. Its always been that way, it's human nature to only put up with so much hocum before the group self adjusts the BS levels, and I don't see much changing anytime soon. Sad, but true.

Attached Files

rodwha posted this 25 May 2016

Indeed. He was banned from the other cast boolit forum for his behavior.

Attached Files

Brodie posted this 26 May 2016

Dear Amish, We are all entitled to our beliefs and opinions whether they coincide with how others feel or don't.  What distresses me is not your opinion, but the idea that Gary or I or LMG or anybody else in the whole world MUST AGREE WITH YOU.  Why can't you just let it drop instead of continuing to pound on somebody who doesn't agree with you?  Must all of us recognize that you are the ultimate authority on all things?

This is a forum where not everybody is going to agree all the time, and continuing to pound on a person because they don't see it your way is rude, irresponsible, and just down right stupid.  Be enough of a gentleman to just let it go.  The other guy may be wrong or it may be you or both of you may just have your heads where a Proctologist practices medicine.

Brodie.

B.E.Brickey

Attached Files

Hamish posted this 28 May 2016

Old Coot,

You make it sound as if I personally dog pile on Garry at the drop off the hat. I suggest you review my posts. (There is one missing from when I blasted him for telling a member his accuracy problems were because he was a crappy shot, among other things.).

I could care less about what opinion he espouses, but ANYTIME I see him or anyone else posting in an arrogant, obtuse, deprecating, insulting manner, I GUARENTEE I will call them on it. When he or any other repeatedly hammers on with some Wikipedia vomitus that defies reality, EXPECT A REALITY CHECK.

If you have not already done so, I would suggest you put me on “Ignore".

Attached Files

Brodie posted this 28 May 2016

Stay away from mirrors Amish.

I guess it is true what they say about pigs: ” Never try to teach a pig to sing.  It wastes your time and annoys the pig."  I guess that I will have to quit.

I don't care about your differences with Gary's ideas, beliefs, and attitudes.  If you will bother to notice I disagree with him a lot.  But, I don't make it personal.  If you want him thrown out of here don't talk to me about it.  Go to the board or John A.  Be careful though they just might consider the source. 

By the way:  If you are Amish then what are you doing on a computer? If you aren't Amish; where can I get some of these religious sect golf balls you claim to shoot? Brodie

B.E.Brickey

Attached Files

Hamish posted this 28 May 2016

Brodie, my last post was meant to be my last comment on the subject in the sprit of peace on the forum, but you've said a couple of things that need to be addressed.

If you don't care then discontinue public discourse on the matter.

Insofar as the idea of Onandaga, or any other member, is or will be, either publicly or privately, lobbied for banning by myself, is something that has not, and will not be, even remotely suggested.

You suggesting it is the first hint of such an idea and is the worst kind of aspersion. By posting it you create the suggestion that my 3 or 4 posts to him have been an unrelenting witch hunt. That's dirty pool and I expect this to be the last time for it.

Attached Files

ex-ramslammer posted this 02 January 2020

I any 30 caliber I prefer to keep muzzle velocity above 1800 fps.  I know you didn't ask about your bullet choice but the RCBS 180 FN (really about 190 grains) is my preferred hunting bullet for a 30-30 or a 30-06.  Having said that there are many suitable bullet choices.

Attached Files

M3 Mitch posted this 03 January 2020

Well, Onandaga is no longer with us, but, I think he made some good points on here.  I'm surprised he didn't mention bullet alloy, but, I learned from him that Lyman #2 alloy is a very good one for proper "mushrooming" of the bullet, wheel weight alloy varies, linotype tends to shatter, not what you would want on deer.  The old Lyman 170 grain flat point bullet is a proven good 30-30 hunting bullet, and with slower powders can be loaded to fully duplicate the ballistics of jacketed 170 grain ammo, in most cases.

"Use enough gun" - Robert Ruark

Attached Files

jchiggins posted this 03 January 2020

Until we have feedback from the deer, it's all conjecture.

Attached Files

  • Liked by
  • Ed Harris
  • Bud Hyett
Ed Harris posted this 03 January 2020

Shot placement trumps energgy, but I still agree with Larry.

Within 50 yards his slower .30-30 load with soft alloy will work, but so does my .44-40 and it doesn't need to expand!

I've killed a dozen or so deer with black powder and patched .45-.50 cal. round balls, and a couple with .44-.45 cap & ball revolvers too, but always well inside 50 yards at woods range.

 

 

73 de KE4SKY In Home Mix We Trust From the Home of Ed's Red in "Almost Heaven" West Virginia

Attached Files

  • Liked by
  • M3 Mitch
  • Bud Hyett
Hamish posted this 07 January 2020

From Onandaga's original post

in this thread:

"Based on Lyman data your load produces 1600 fps. 200 pound Deer need to be hit in the vital with a load producing 1,000 foot pounds on impact for an ethical harvest.

Your load with a 170 gr bullet at 1600 fps only has 966 foot pounds at the muzzle and is not a humane harvest load at any distance.

Your bullet needs 2057 fps to deliver 1,000 foot pounds at 100 yards.  That will take 24.3 grains of IMR 4198 to be an ethical harvest 100 yard Deer rifle with your cast 170 gr bullet.

Your alloy is not strong enough for that load level, you will need a BHN 15 alloy like Lyman #2

You sound like you have a nice target load at 1600 fps but that is not a humane Deer load at all unless you are point blank shooting the brain through the eye..  Gary"

 

 

 

 

Attached Files

  • Liked by
  • M3 Mitch

Our 5326 members have posted 74890 times in 4790 discussions

Latest Members:
Members Currently Online:

No one online at the moment

 

About Us

The Cast Bullet Association is an organization of shooters who enjoy shooting cast lead bullets in rifles and handguns for competition, hunting, or informal target shooting. The Association's central purpose is to help shooters enjoy casting bullets

NetBuilderPro by Morganids IDS Inc. • All Right Reserved © Cast Bullet Association 2016;  Legal Disclaimer