Elk taken with 10mm - Page 2

Clutch Cargo · 10-14-2012, 14:08

Interesting that it's legal.

uz2bUSMC · 10-14-2012, 14:21

Quote:

Originally Posted by dkf

Both are highly edited videos. The first video shows him shooting twice with the first shot doing nothing. Yeah real friggin effective.

How many shots did they edit out between the first and last shot? I prefer not to have to shoot an animal twice if at all possible and have a quick humane kill.

This thread is a prime example of why many states have laws with minimum caliber requirements for certain game. It is obvious there are many people out there that cannot be responsible enough to pick the right tool for the job.

Why. You can be a life long (medal winning) handgun shooter and be a beginner hunter. Not everyone starts hunting early in life. The right handgun and that experienced shooter should have no problem humanely taking an animal.

What's your criteria for the "right tool for the job"?

dkf · 10-14-2012, 14:32

Quote:

Originally Posted by uz2bUSMC

What's your criteria for the "right tool for the job"?

For what?

uz2bUSMC · 10-14-2012, 14:36

Quote:

Originally Posted by dkf

For what?

Well, medium game.

dkf · 10-14-2012, 14:40

Quote:

Originally Posted by uz2bUSMC

Well, medium game.

For me minimum rifle heavy for caliber .243, minimum handgun .44mag/.45lc.(deer) Not long range. Preferred for deer is .308, .270, 30-06 and etc.

uz2bUSMC · 10-14-2012, 14:45

Quote:

Originally Posted by dkf

For me minimum rifle heavy for caliber .243, minimum handgun .44mag/.45lc. Not long range. Preferred for deer is .308, .270, 30-06 and etc.

So, I guess you use full tilt .44 and .45lc with the heaviest available bullets then?

SCmasterblaster · 10-14-2012, 14:45

Quote:

Originally Posted by dkf

For me minimum rifle heavy for caliber .243, minimum handgun .44mag/.45lc.(deer) Not long range. Preferred for deer is .308, .270, 30-06 and etc.

I agree with your choices.

dkf · 10-14-2012, 14:58

Quote:

Originally Posted by uz2bUSMC

So, I guess you use full tilt .44 and .45lc with the heaviest available bullets then?

That is what is nice about using a tool more suited for the job. You do not have to use the heaviest and fastest loads. Something like a 240gr XTP or flat nose hardcast is fine for me.

uz2bUSMC · 10-14-2012, 15:14

Quote:

Originally Posted by dkf

That is what is nice about using a tool more suited for the job. You do not have to use the heaviest and fastest loads. Something like a 240gr XTP or flat nose hardcast is fine for me.

Well man, I hope you know that the 240grain .44 has a SD of .185 and the 230grain 10mm is at .205SD and looks to be a fine tool for the job for anyone. The 200grain 10mm is at .179SD which is more comparable to the 240grn .44 and should be more than fine for a deer, especially at 800+ ft lbs from a 6" bbl. The difference between .400 and .429 is pretty nil if we are talking hardcast. The penetration of either is more than enough for a deer.

Kingarthurhk · 10-14-2012, 15:21

Quote:

Originally Posted by dkf

You can kill a deer with a .22lr or an elk with a .223. It does not mean either are ideal for the job. What these videos of the magical 10mm, .45 and etc do is make people who do not know any better think the 10mm or any service caliber is ideal for hunting medium to large game. They are not.

You mean like the thread where people wanted to go deer hunting with a 9mm. People were adamantly advocating that silliness.

I have to wonder at what distances. Was it it wondering lost under a deer stand, and took a near point blank to the brain pan or spinal cord?

uz2bUSMC · 10-14-2012, 15:22

Quote:

Originally Posted by Kingarthurhk

You mean like the thread where people wanted to go deer hunting with a 9mm. People were adamantly advocating that silliness.

I have to wonder at what distances. Was it it wondering lost under a deer stand, and took a near point blank to the brain pan or spinal cord?

Can't you go back to that other thread and cry while hugging a tree instead of this one?

Tiro Fijo · 10-14-2012, 15:24

For elk, Elmer Keith recommended a minimum of .33 cal. in a rifle to consistently & humanely harvest them. Obviously, bullet technology has advanced since then but hunters haven't. Technology very rarely trumps fieldcraft for hunting. Personally, I think even an accomplished & wise hunter would not venture below a large 30 cal. today with modern hunting bullets for elk with a rifle.

The playing field for handguns has changed dramatically with the X Frame S&W revolvers. If you discount them you are left with the .44 & .45 cal. Rugers using a large Keith style SWC or a WFN at 50 yds. & in the hands of an accomplished shot a few may stretch it out to 100 yds. with iron sights. Since penetration is far more important than expansion in these scenarios I would avoid the HP's. Just my 2 cents.

Tiro Fijo · 10-14-2012, 15:25

Double post.

ModGlock17 · 10-14-2012, 15:25

Here's a thread for hunting. 10mm ! Enjoy them pictures. Get a drink, first.

All the Best.

http://www.glocktalk.com/forums/show....php?t=1373461

SCmasterblaster · 10-14-2012, 15:53

Quote:

Originally Posted by Tiro Fijo

For elk, Elmer Keith recommended a minimum of .33 cal. in a rifle to consistently & humanely harvest them. Obviously, bullet technology has advanced since then but hunters haven't. Technology very rarely trumps fieldcraft for hunting. Personally, I think even an accomplished & wise hunter would not venture below a large 30 cal. today with modern hunting bullets for elk with a rifle.

The playing field for handguns has changed dramatically with the X Frame S&W revolvers. If you discount them you are left with the .44 & .45 cal. Rugers using a large Keith style SWC or a WFN at 50 yds. & in the hands of an accomplished shot a few may stretch it out to 100 yds. with iron sights. Since penetration is far more important than expansion in these scenarios I would avoid the HP's. Just my 2 cents.

Elmer Keith lives on in 2012!

dkf · 10-14-2012, 16:01

Quote:

Originally Posted by uz2bUSMC

Well man, I hope you know that the 240grain .44 has a SD of .185 and the 230grain 10mm is at .205SD and looks to be a fine tool for the job for anyone. The 200grain 10mm is at .179SD which is more comparable to the 240grn .44 and should be more than fine for a deer, especially at 800+ ft lbs from a 6" bbl. The difference between .400 and .429 is pretty nil if we are talking hardcast. The penetration of either is more than enough for a deer.

Whew just so the sectional density is close. They must be equal then.

Quote:

You mean like the thread where people wanted to go deer hunting with a 9mm. People were adamantly advocating that silliness.

Well a 147gr FMJ will penetrate through a deer and the diameter is only slightly smaller at .355" vs .401" so it must be ok.

uz2bUSMC · 10-14-2012, 16:11

Quote:

Originally Posted by dkf

Whew just so the sectional density is close. They must be equal then.

Well a 147gr FMJ will penetrate through a deer and the diameter is only slightly smaller at .355" vs .401" so it must be ok.

Um, yea... a 147grn fmj 9mm would probably have no problem penetrating through a deer. I mean, if you don't think so I'd guess you really don't know how sectional density works for non expanding projectiles. Same reason .357 with hardcast has been successful on deer. Doesn't take much energy to penetrate far when bullets aren't expanding. So as far as deer are concerned, they won't know much difference. They are not hard to kill.

You probably can't come up with any good reason why the 10mm is not suitable for deer, you should probably just quit wasting your time.

dkf · 10-14-2012, 16:27

Quote:

Um, yea... a 147grn fmj 9mm would probably have no problem penetrating through a deer. I mean, if you don't think so I'd guess you really don't know how sectional density works for non expanding projectiles. Same reason .357 with hardcast has been successful on deer. Doesn't take much energy to penetrate far when bullets aren't expanding. So as far as deer are concerned, they won't know much difference. They are not hard to kill.

You probably can't come up with any good reason why the 10mm is not suitable for deer, you should probably just quit wasting your time.

A 147gr 9mm FMJ can penetrate through a deer, that is why I said it. I was using your flawed logic to sarcastically say it must be an adequate deer round then. I will try and explain things further next time so you can keep up.

uz2bUSMC · 10-14-2012, 16:45

Quote:

Originally Posted by dkf

A 147gr 9mm FMJ can penetrate through a deer, that is why I said it. I was using your flawed logic to sarcastically say it must be an adequate deer round then. I will try and explain things further next time so you can keep up.

All it needs to do is penetrate the deer, as with any round. They are not hard to kill. But please, give your reason why the 10mm is not adequate for the animal we are discussing.

uz2bUSMC · 10-14-2012, 17:50

Quote:

Originally Posted by uz2bUSMC

But please, give your reason why the 10mm is not adequate for the animal we are discussing.

Thought you would have nothing.

Remington 870 · 10-15-2012, 11:50

Good hits count, poor hits and misses dont count. makes no difference if its an elephant gun or a pee shooter. if you hit an animal the wrong way in the wrong place it makes no difference the weapon it will still suffer and not die.

davsco · 10-15-2012, 12:11

Quote:

Originally Posted by uz2bUSMC

Thought you would have nothing.

it may be adequate but that doesn't mean it's the best tool for the job. hunters should use the heaviest caliber they can shoot safely and accurately to do all they can to provide for a humane and quick harvest. clearly you don't need a .458 or .460 but let's face it, a 10mm with some 400 - 500 ft-lbs of energy at the muzzle is a far cry from a 30-06 with an actual ton (2000) ft-lbs of energy out to 200 yards.

put it another way, if you knew you would continue being shot until you actually died, what would you want to be shot with? a .22, a .223, 10mm, 30-06, .340wby, etc?

Kingarthurhk · 10-15-2012, 16:11

Quote:

Originally Posted by uz2bUSMC

Can't you go back to that other thread and cry while hugging a tree instead of this one?

I am not crying or hugging a tree. Neither am I going to leap out of a deer stand in a ninja suit, tackle a buck in rut and glock him with 9mm.

uz2bUSMC · 10-15-2012, 16:24

Quote:

Originally Posted by davsco

it may be adequate but that doesn't mean it's the best tool for the job. hunters should use the heaviest caliber they can shoot safely and accurately to do all they can to provide for a humane and quick harvest. clearly you don't need a .458 or .460 but let's face it, a 10mm with some 400 - 500 ft-lbs of energy at the muzzle is a far cry from a 30-06 with an actual ton (2000) ft-lbs of energy out to 200 yards.

put it another way, if you knew you would continue being shot until you actually died, what would you want to be shot with? a .22, a .223, 10mm, 30-06, .340wby, etc?

Might wanna check your energy numbers for the 10mm again. The 10mmm does provide quick and humane harvests on deer and has been doing so for a lot of people for a long time. They don't need a .458 as you said they also don't require an '06, all they need is penetration of the vitals which
10mm will do without a problem.

uz2bUSMC · 10-15-2012, 16:26

Quote:

Originally Posted by Kingarthurhk

I am not crying or hugging a tree. Neither am I going to leap out of a deer stand in a ninja suit, tackle a buck in rut and glock him with 9mm.

Well, if you did leap out of a tree in a ninja suit, that should be all you need.