Home Forums Hunting & Shooting Hunter's Campfire Why magnums for deer & antelope

I find it intersting that each year more and more out-of-staters show up with long barreled magnum rifles to shoot mule deer and antelope. Neither creature is armor plated nor is it impossible to stalk within the lethal shooting distance of common non-magnum cartridges.

Craig Boddington claims that extra large mule deer are more difficult to anchor than average sized deer. This does not match my own experiances with this species of deer. Any mulie (no matter how large) shot through both lungs will quickly topple over whether hit with a .243 or 30-30 or 308. From my experiances, the placement of the first shot is far more important than diameter of the bullet, weight of the bullet, or any other single factor.

Why do the popular magazines have this annual habit of promoting magnum rifles for shooting very ordinary sized animals such as mule deer and antelope? Why do these self proclaimed expert authors typically reside in states which do not even contain huntable populations of the very animals featured in those articles?
Buck

It's that old vicious circle again, Laddy. Many years ago, writers of old convinced a significant number of readers -- including many who later became writers -- that only a far-reaching magnum was suitable for hunting big game. Readers lapped this lore up, in part because most of 'em hankered to hunt game they'd never hunted before, in far-away states where they'd never hunted before, and wanted to be ready with an adequate magnum.

When I was a lad new at all this, typical hunting rifles from coast to coast and from tropics to Arctic were .30-30s, .32 Specials, .250 and .300 Savages, .270s, and .30-06s. Writers wrote about new stuff, and readers who had to have the latest bought everything they wrote about. By gradual evolution, NEW became BIG became NECESSARY, in the minds of readers and writers alike. Readers and writers have conditioned each other's thinking along these lines. Get an article published saying that a .250 Savage is a good mulie gun, and you'll get a lot of flak from readers maintaining that ya gotta have a magnum.

Maybe you can explain to me why so many readers who shoot no more than one deer a year (and often fewer) feel qualified to judge the opinions expressed by writers who've shot several a year for years.

I've wondered that myself for years now. I guide antelope hunts in eastern NM annually and I'm amazed at the people who insist on a 300 win mag for an antelope. Dont get me wrong, the 300 mag is a great cartridge but it seems to be a little much for an antelope. The majority of my hunters flinch from it so badly that they miss completely or have to shoot the antelope a number of times in order to finally kill it and by then there is practically no edible meat left, not that there was much to start with on an antelope. I had one husband/wife couple hunting a few years ago she using a single shot 30-06 and he using a 300 win mag. She got a really nice antelope the first day with one shot with the antelope dropping in its tracks. He finally hit a samller antelope the afternoon of the second day, taking 7 shots total to finish the job. The antelope would have gotten away wounded if he hadn't luckily shot off 2 legs giving him a chance to reload. I'm no expert but I've seen more one shot kills with cartridges like the .257 Weatherby mag, .270, 30-06's than any large bore magnum and I think its because of better shot placement due to reduced recoil/noise. Just my .02.

Personally, this gun writer has never promoted magnums for pronghorn and deer, though I have killed a few of each with various magnums. Have always found the .257 Roberts to be plenty of gun. If I feel like carrying something a little bigger, say if elk might be around on a mule deer hunt, you'll probably find me packing a 7x57, .270 or .30-06.

I know Craig pretty well and he has always liked to put bigger holes in game. If that makes him happy, I'm all for it, but recommending a .300 magnum for mule deer is a little much. Heck, I've guided hunters who couldn't even handle a 7mm magnum's recoil well enough to hit a pronghorn at 200 yards.

My favorite antelope rifle for the few that I've shot has always been the .25-06. Haven't seen any need for anything with more energy, recoil, or blast. In fact, I wonder whether my loaded-down .220 Howell's down-range performance isn't quite adequate for clean one-shot kills on antelope (75-grain Hornady A-Max, 3,600 ft/sec at the muzzle and still going 2,700 ft/sec with 1,200 ft-lb of energy at 500 yards). Some skillful antelope-hunters have been using the .220 Swift and the .22-.250 with satisfactory results, and my .220's down-range performance outstrips these old classics by a surprising margin in every category of down-range performance. And a child can shoot it without pain.

I could not agree more concerning the 25-06 being just right for deer size game.

Would you consider the 220 Swift to be a magnum centerfire .22 ? How about the 25-06 ? Is it a magnum .25 caliber ? No? But the .257 Weatherby is? Why? There's not much difference in performance between the two if loaded with 100 gr. bullets.

How is the term magnum defined when applied to a cartridge? Does it have to have a belt? A silly looking shoulder ? Or be way over bore in powder capaciticy? Or is it a silly advertising hype name?

Personally, I have no use for 30 caliber or larger bullets in a centerfire hunting rifle. I don't hunt anything that needs that much tipping over. But I do like to have my bulletts moving along in the 3400 -3500 fps range. The 220 Swift and 25-06 will do that quite nicely with the lighter bullets. I lean real heavy on the "speed kills" theory of fast light bullets for thin skined, light boned critters because I have always been pleased with the results. I agree that a 300 Win Mag is way more gun than is needed for deer / antelope size game. But I also think a 30-06 and a .270 are more than necessary too.

I don't think magnumitis is only the fault of writers and advertising. As everyone knows, bigger is always better. That's just American values. <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/wink.gif" alt="" />

Lever Lad

To echo what my compadres, Dr. Ken and John have already said, a magnum is neither necessary or, in my opinion desirable, for most species of game in this country. I did shoot one pronghorn with a 7mm Remington mag only because I had just gotten it and was dying to shoot something with it. On the other hand, I shot a 1500 pound moose with a 270 for the same reason. Both died very quickly. As pal John says, a 257 is plenty for either pronghorn or mule deer. Personally, I've taken about 85% of all the game that I've taken with a 270. Except for the big bears, I've not found the need for much more gun for anything in North America.

As far as I am able to tell, game animals these days still have the same hair and skin that they have always had. I have yet to find one armored with kevlar.

If someone feels better carrying a 300, 338, or 458 for that matter, that is just fine with me. Just don't tell me (or anyone else) that it is necessary. I have found the quality of the bullet and where you put it is far more important that the caliber of the rifle.

If I have ever recommended a magnum for pronghorn or mule deer, I must have fallen in the firewater jug!

Tom

For an antelope hunt in a good area I take my .243. It shoots 100gr Hornady's into a softball size group from a sit with a tight sling, at 300 yds. I think I could kill about as many with that as with my 7mm Mag.

But for a mule deer or combo hunt, I usually take my 7mm Mag. It takes me three or four years to save for a good hunt, and the really good ones are not behind every bush. It shoots as good as the .243, with more punch at the limits.

Will it out perform a .270? Not. But it's the best "out there" gun I own.

lad,

I shall try, without making an a$$ of myself, to explain my theory on this turn of events.

First a little history: I work in the American auto industry. I understand that most people who have no relatives in the industry think we are overpaid.

As I am sure most of you in the west are aware, a lot of hunters who venture into Wyo, Mont, and Id, are autoworkers. Most of these workers have wives who also work. Therefore, dual income households allow some of us (not me) to indulge in semi-exotic hunts.

Most of you would not believe the amount of peer pressure these guys put on each other to see who has the biggest rack of horns. It seems that the guy who has the biggest trophy is the rooster who can strut the tallest and the loudest. Every trophy hunter wants to be that rooster.

Personally, I view hunting as a food gathering activity. I don't shoot what I don't eat and I eat what I shoot. i believe that to be ethical. There are many here who do not share my views. I have known many hunters who give the meat away. And many of them whose wives won't even allow the meat in the house. (As if it would contaminate every thing else in the freezer.)

If I were out hunting mule deer and I saw 4x4 @ 200 yds, then noticed a 6x6@ 500 yds, I'd just get a good steady kneeling rest and shoot the 4x4. Then go home and enjoy some good venison steak. Most other hunters I know whould stand there offhand and shoot @ the 6x6 trying to hold "right on". That is why all these eastern hunters are buying 7mm and .300 Supermagnums. Then putting 6x24 scopes on them. If they can see it, they want to shoot it. Hunting means nothing to them. All they want is the ultimate bragging rights. And when some lucky someone does happen to get a big one, everyone sits around with spittle dripping off their chins looking at the pictures and wishing it were them.

Unfortunately, the mainstream outdoor rags seem to propagate this philosophy. It does seem that you never see a full page photo of a barely legal spike buck.

I do hope that you all understand that this is just my premise. And, of course, I hope I didn't sound overly emotional about this whole thing. I just think that many people hunt for the wrong reasons. Just my 2 peso's worth.... <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/smile.gif" alt="" /> the9.3Guy

Just to present the other view what with laser rangefinders we have technology making long hits far easier. Most game cartridges run out of energy first.

Some people can shoot "magnums" very well. Some of us shoot so much that we are like an old prizefighter and we can take it.

A old buddy of mine went out West to hunt antelope and he brought his Ruger #1 in .300 WM. He insisted on a long shot and he made one over 300 yds. So all of us are not beginners.

To each his own but I ask you how are you going to improve things anyway?

I see no need for a magnum for antelope, but I consider the 7mm Rem Mag more of a modern day 30-06. Recoil is just a tad more than the 06, and the 7mag is a flat shooter with alot of bullet options. In making a recommendation to a new shooter, I wouldnt encourage a heavy magnum rifle for deer, but, as several others have stated, blanket statements against magnums is uncalled for. Some of us spend alot of time shooting our mags, and we are flat accurate with them By the way, I dont use guides either, that is not hunting in my book, that's just buying game. I dont need no babysitter when I go hunting.

Anybody who thinks 300 yards is "long range" on an antelope should watch somebody like "carbonman" shoot a South Dakota prairie dog at over 1,000 yards -- and then, not sure that he'd already hit it with his first shot, shoot it again to make sure. (Post mortem check of the dead 'dog showed two hits.) I've hit a passel of 'em out beyond 500 yards with .223s and .22-.250s, but 1,000 yards shows me what real shooting is. An impressive number of VHA members (not including me, alas!) have shot 'em at 1,000 yards and much farther.

-- or Alan Hall make a called head shot on a Wyoming badger at what the Zeiss range-finder told me was 880 yards.

-- or my old Virgina buddy hit groundhogs at 500 yards and beyond, with a .22-.250.

(It ain't braggin' when you're talking about somebody else, who really did it.)

"It ain't braggin if you can do it"

Babe Ruth

A 270 Win will do everything a 7mm Mag will do. I own, reload, and shoot both and the 270 with 130 grain bullets is about perfect. The longest run a deer made after the shot from my 270 is maybe 20 yards. The 7mm Mag is fine but why burn all the extra powder and take the extra recoil for nothing. Rick

If I have a 9.3 x 62 that pushes a 250 grain barnes X past 2500 fps, do I have a magnum or not? If the bullet is the issue that matters, then any premium bullet made today can be a magnum if used properly. I also have a .25-06, which is pretty flat shooting, they tell me. I personally can't say how flat it shoots from experience, having only 200 yards or so to shoot here in Tennessee. I can't wait to get to go somewhere like Texas where the shots are really long. I shot my first Texas whitetail at 35 yards with a .41 Magnum revolver. Lucky I had my "gunbearer" (hope he doesn't read this) with a rifle if I was charged or the range was too long. It did take two days to get within stalking range, not just setting in a tree stand, to get a deer. As long as I am still confused on what a magnum is, and where to use it for, is my .376 Steyr a magnum or not? It uses less powder than my .375 H&H to get the same velocity, so it's not a magnum. It still shoots a 250 grain bullet at 2500 fps+, so again it seems to not quite fall in the non-magnum catagory...
I took a .308 Winchester with 180 Remington factory loads on my first mule deer hunt. It wasn't a trophy but it was in the freezer. Range, 75 yards, in the mountains of Wyoming. I did see a cow elk at 15 yards and a spike bull at 100, but then again I was mule deer hunting.
I worked in one of those car factories a while too. The work was sometimes hard, always boring, but at least it paid for those hunting trips later.

As a consumer, the appeal to me has always been "flatter shooting" But in fact, that is a great marketing phrase that you will hear every sales guy in every gun shop use when selling these things. The fact is that while they certainly (are) flatter shooting, the difference is so small that it is of practically no use to most hunters (including local experts).

The most common comparison that you hear is 7RM vs. '06. The actual advantage in the magnum is that it extends the PBR by approx 25-35yds over the '06. Beyond the PBR for each cartridge, you have to hold over anyway. I fail to see what difference it makes whether you hold over 16" for a 400 yd shot (7 mag 160 gr) or 19" ('06 165 gr).

If you use a RF you further remove the advantage of the magnum since you (know) how far it is, you (know) how much to hold over. It makes no difference at all how much that hold over is.



I'm a avid consumer of guns, but sure don't buy magnums anymore.

JimF

I'm sure many Easterners only shoot one a deer a year. But many western states offer depredation hunts in addition to extra regional licenses. Last time I checked, a South Dakota resident can receive 7 deer licenses. This figure does not include Tribal hunts nor depredation permits.

When I was a kid in Wyoming we bought antler-less antelope licenses over the counter with no limit. There were years when we had to rent freezer space for alll the meat.

I doubt if any single American gun writer has shot more antelope than me. The figure is way over 100 antelope harvested using various hunting rifles. No archery, black powder, nor handguns for me. No thanks. Yet I'm not passing myself off as an expert either. I'm still learning about antelope behavior and habits.

I really don't care if a guy uses a 340 Weatherby for his 120 lb antelope trophy. All I ask is that the gun writers halt this nonsense of advising magnum rifles for such an easily toppled animal. The average Easterner of 25 years ago brought a .270, but now its a 7mm magnum. GEEZ. In another 25 years will be yet something even MORE powerful? Where does the foolishness end?
Buck

The simplest, cheapest way to extend the point-blank range is to mount the scope higher above the bore. For an explanation, have a look at my article "Secrets of the SAHABA" (scope-axis height above bore axis) in a recent issue of Varmint Hunter Magazine.

A higher scope-axis height above the bore axis pushes both the near and far points of the point-blank range, as well as the zero distance for the point-blank range, several yards farther from the muzzle.

The bullet has to rise higher to cross the line of sight, then rises higher to crest at the specified maximum height above the line of sight, and after it drops to cross the line of sight again (also farther out), it drops to the maximum specified distance below the line of sight at another farther range.

So just buy higher rings if all you want to do is extend the point-blank range a little.

Take for example out of Nosler #5 the 270 Win vrs the 270 WSM. With each shooting the same 130 gr BT out of 24" barrels the std 270 makes 3158 fps and the magnum 3307 fps. Comparing them in energy at 400 yds the std has 1543 fpe and the WSM has the same at 465 yds!. On trjectory the std is 34" low at 400 yds with a 250 yd zero and the WSM has the same drop a 420 yds.

On it goes. Pick your range and the magnum will outperform. Now some are such good hunters that they can do it with a sharp stick. Others are on an expensive guided situation and time is running out. Some are into rifles and others don't care or practice. To each his own. But I still ask how are you going to improve things? So far no answer except the magnum is there?

As for hunting in the North East we have a two deer limit here in Ct firearms on public land, two more for the muzzle loader and two more for the bow. There is also private land hunting with two the limit except for three in Fairfield County. I have had crop damage permits. You get five permits and then just go and get five more. Many of us have taken thirty deer or more a year. This is for young guys with a burning desire. My freezer is full to the top.

A friend of mine won some IPSC championship a while ago. I may have spelled that wrong but I mean it's a pistol competition. Since handgun hunting is in I asked him what pistol he used for deer hunting and Tom said that "When I hunt deer I use the best rifle that I have" Now that's just opinion and to each his own.

Now I have walked right up to antelope and they stayed there laying down but sure enough you get on a plane or drive thousands of miles and pull a weak rifle out to do the job more power to you when those antelope are not the tame ones you remember from last summer.

Rick, your post states that you obviously have NO experience with a 7mm to make such an ignorant statement. The 7mag is to a .270 what a .300WM is to a .30-06. More case capacity=more powder=more velocity=more energy. I don't know where you are getting your info, but you are way off base my friend. Having loaded and shot both for many years, I can tell you their is a substantial difference between the two. Show me ANY .270 (regardless of barrel length under 30 inches) that will pitch a 140 grain bullet at 3,200-3,300 fps. The 7mm mag will EASILY do 3,300 with a 130 grain pill in a 24 inch barrel. Show me any .270 that will do that!!!! How can you state such nonesense that they are the same animal???? Just curious what you are sniffing <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/wink.gif" alt="" /> Flinch