22 Hornet for deer?

[Brian Pfleuger]

Actually, #4 might well out penetrate a 22 hornet. The hornet may be loaded with fragile varmint bullets. If so, a solid chunk of lead would easily out penetrate it. Especially at close range, varmint bullets might explode on impact and not penetrate more than a few inches.

Neither one is a particularly good choice for deer, except under certain circumstances. Buckshot, at close range. 22 Hornet, with the right bullet, placed in the right spot.

[dahermit]

Actually, #4 might well out penetrate a 22 hornet. The hornet may be loaded with fragile varmint bullets. If so, a solid chunk of lead would easily out penetrate it. Especially at close range, varmint bullets might explode on impact and not penetrate more than a few inches.

So I have heard. However, in my actual experience on several deer (about 8) using an 87 grain Hornady varmint bullet, the bullet does not "blow-up", but sheds the jacket while the core continues on to exit the deer. I will ask you this: Is your opinion of varmint bullets, especially for the .22 Hornet based on experience or just what you have deduced from what you have read?

Neither one is a particularly good choice for deer, except under certain circumstances. Buckshot, at close range. 22 Hornet, with the right bullet, placed in the right spot.

Again, I ask the same question: Is this your opinion based on experience with either #4 buckshot and/or the .22 Hornet on deer, or something that you have deduced from what you have read?

[Doyle]

That 87 grn varmint bullet you are talking about is almost twice the weight of the puny little 45 grn Hornet bullet. You are still mixing apples and oranges.

[Brian Pfleuger]

Originally Posted by dahermit

So I have heard. However, in my actual experience on several deer (about 8) using an 87 grain Hornady varmint bullet, the bullet does not "blow-up", but sheds the jacket while the core continues on to exit the deer. I will ask you this: Is your opinion of varmint bullets, especially for the .22 Hornet based on experience or just what you have deduced from what you have read?

Again, I ask the same question: Is this your opinion based on experience with either #4 buckshot and/or the .22 Hornet on deer, or something that you have deduced from what you have read?

Ah man, you got me! I'm just an Internet conjecturist. I've never even killed a deer, not even sure what they look like. Do they have 6 legs or 4, it's hard to tell from pictures on the web.

*Eight* whole deer with one bullet?! I can't compare to that. Especially a bullet that's near on double the weight of what would be used in a hornet.

I mean, I've killed HUNDREDS of woodchucks with actual varmint bullets like what WOULD be used in the hornet, at ranges from 5 feet to near 400 yards, and a few dozen deer of my own, along with countless killed by friends and relatives, with weapons from archery to 20ga, 16ga, 12ga, 10ga shotguns, rifles and muzzleloaders... but what would I know about what it takes to penetrate or kill one?

But, I apologize for having the nerve to, not even disagree, but merely point out that certain bullets under certain circumstances, might not behave exactly as your experience indicates.

[dahermit]

*Eight* whole deer with one bullet?! I can't compare to that. Especially a bullet that's near on double the weight of what would be used in a hornet.

Yes, it is double the weight of a .22 Hornet bullet, but it is still a varmint bullet that many shooters think blows-up on game.

I mean, I've killed HUNDREDS of woodchucks with actual varmint bullets like what WOULD be used in the hornet, at ranges from 5 feet to near 400 yards, and a few dozen deer of my own, along with countless killed by friends and relatives, with weapons from archery to 20ga, 16ga, 12ga, 10ga shotguns, rifles and muzzleloaders... but what would I know about what it takes to penetrate or kill one?

And of course, unlike with deer hunting were you gut and skin the deer and observe the effects of the bullet, did you ever once gut and skin a woodchuck to see how the bullets performed? Especially kills made with a .22 Hornet? Or, are you making assumptions about bullet performance? In short, unless you have shot a deer with a .22 Horner, recovered it, skinned it, gutted it, and examined the effects of the .22 Hornet on deer, you really cannot say for a fact that a .22 Hornet is not effective on deer...can you?

But, I apologize for having the nerve to, not even disagree, but merely point out that certain bullets under certain circumstances, might not behave exactly as your experience indicates.

That is absolutely true...that is why I made no statement about the effectiveness of a .22 Hornet on deer...I do not know; so I do not state that something is or is not true. I do ask questions though, because someone just may have the actual experience with the round in question.

[dahermit]

No but I'm wondering at what range did you get that kind of penetration. I'm guessing it was relatively short range. Couple that with the fact that you have many .24 pellets doing damage gives you a dead deer. On the other hand, that .22 Hornet shot at 100 yds won't penetrate as deep and won't do the required shock damage necessary for a consistently clean kill.

The average distance deer are shot in here in Michigan is 40 yards. So is a .22 Hornet not adequate for shooting a deer a 40 yards? Will it have enough penetration?

[dahermit]

I don't understand what generates this kind of thinking though. Is it curiosity? Is it love of a particular caliber and a longing for it to be more usefull than it really is? Is it being cheap and not wanting to buy a 30 caliber rifle? Is it a quest to gain more confidence in it as a self defense round - like "if it will kill a 180lb deer it will kill a 180lb man so now I feel better about it being my only HD/SD firearm..." Is it the challenge of using a caliber to take game with a caliber that a majority of people think is underpowered - like showing people up, showing that you can accomplish something that others say can't be done? Is it curioisty - like using deer the way one might use a block of ordinance gelatin?

No, that is not it...keep asking...when you get the right answer, I let you know.

[Doyle]

The average distance deer are shot in here in Michigan is 40 yards. So is a .22 Hornet not adequate for shooting a deer a 40 yards? Will it have enough penetration?

Yes, you might have sufficient penetration at that range IF you don't hit a bone. Then again, even if you do you still won't have enough energy to create a shock wave sufficient to to get a clean kill. Yes, the deer will die but it is likely to be in the next county several days later.

No matter how you slice it, a .22 Hornet is still a VERY poor choice for deer.

[dahermit]

Yes, you might have sufficient penetration at that range IF you don't hit a bone. Then again, even if you do you still won't have enough energy to create a shock wave sufficient to to get a clean kill. Yes, the deer will die but it is likely to be in the next county several days later.

What "bone" are you talking about? Ribs? How thick do you think a deer rib is?
What do you mean by "shock wave"? Do you mean "hydrostatic shock"? Is there such a thing? Exactly how much energy must remain to create a shock wave sufficient to get a clean kill? Did you know that there are many gun people who say that there is no such thing and that death is brought about by blood loss? How many deer have you shot with a .22 Hornet to give you the confidence to state your opinion as facts?

[Doyle]

How many deer have you shot with a .22 Hornet to give you the confidence to state your opinion as facts?

NONE. I'm not stupid enough to try.

[Shotgun693]

I've killed hundreds of deer, most at less than 30 yards. I've never used a round lighter than a .357 mag using a good penetrating bullet. Is .22 Hornet to light for deer? You bet. Is it possible to kill a deer with a .22 Hornet? Sure. I know a couple of local jerks who regularly spotlight deer with a .22 rf. Just because it will kill does not make it the right caliber for the job. I once saw an African kill an Elephant with a spear, it took 3 days to die but it was dead.

[jmr40]

I don't understand what generates this kind of thinking though. Is it curiosity? Is it love of a particular caliber and a longing for it to be more usefull than it really is? Is it being cheap and not wanting to buy a 30 caliber rifle?

It comes from men who grew up in the depression and used what they had. Everyone that I know who hunts with the 22 Hornet are old timers who grew up with only 1 gun in the house and found a way to make it work for everything. A box of shells was supposed to last for years and every shot brought home meat.

I wouldn't use one, because I have better choices, but know many who do with no problems.

[langenc]

""No but I'm wondering at what range did you get that kind of penetration. I'm guessing it was relatively short range. Couple that with the fact that you have many .24 pellets doing damage gives you a dead deer. On the other hand, that .22 Hornet shot at 100 yds won't penetrate as deep and won't do the required shock damage necessary for a consistently clean kill."" from first page--

22 Hornet is barely a coyote bullet at 100 yds let alone a deer.

At 20 yds or less, if an ememgency, by an experience shooter.

[bamaranger]

I knew two ol'boys who were hoghunters for the gov't. Their rifles of choice were the Savage 34 in .22 Hornet! They also routinely deer hunted w/ their Hornets. The only shot they took, hogs and deer, was at the base of the ear.
They shot either 45 gr SP or a reload "heavy for caliber" and I suspect it was 50 or 52 gr SP. Absolutely would not use any HP.

Eventually, the gov't got more involved and issued them rifles, 'o6's which they despised, to heavy and loud they said.

Would I use a Hornet on deer given any other (larger ) choice, no way!

[idek]

...so there's this old boar black bear that's been nosing through my trash behind the garage, and I've got this 17HMR...





Sorry. I don't mean to be a troll. I just couldn't resist.

[Sarge]

Hodgdons lists a 55 grain load that does 2652 fps. I have intentionally loaded the .223 down to just above that level, with 55 grain bullets, to keep them from blowing up on deer. Killed them just fine out past 150 yards, got full penetration and made the heart look like this.

How dead do you need to make them? I get mildly annoyed when people who haven't actually used something, in the field, suggest that it should be outlawed simply because it doesn't fit their preconceived notions- or they assume basic rifle marksmanship is beyond the abilities of anyone willing to apply themselves.

[GM2]

It is illegal to hunt Deer with 22 cal in my State but if it were I would not do so.

[huntinaz]

How dead do you need to make them? I get mildly annoyed when people who haven't actually used something, in the field, suggest that it should be outlawed simply because it doesn't fit their preconceived notions- or they assume basic rifle marksmanship is beyond the abilities of anyone willing to apply themselves

I agree with this. There are numerous situations where a semi-capable hunter could do just fine killing deer with a small caliber like a 22 hornet. Of course it isn't optimal for most situations, the average joe will be under-gunned because he takes crappy shots. So as a general rule, yeah it's not a good choice. But to say it's unethical and a stupid idea for EVERYONE in ALL situations is just being argumentative.

I guarantee you I could kill deer cleanly with a 22 hornet. I choose not to because with bigger calibers I don't have to be so picky, and in AZ you can kill one deer a year, and it has to be a buck, and you get one week to hunt them, and our deer herd is crappy... but if I lived in the east or midwest and could kill 400 deer a year within 100 yards all day long from bait then by God I would have to mix it up a bit. Sometimes I'd bring the 45-70, sometimes proly the 22 hornet.

I'd take a 22 hornet all day long at 30 yards over a 357 handgun, I'll tell you that much.

[maddyfish]

Seems to me with Mosin nagants seeling for around $100, that my be a better option if this is a budget concern.

[dahermit]

I get mildly annoyed when people who haven't actually used something, in the field, suggest that it should be outlawed simply because it doesn't fit their preconceived notions- or they assume basic rifle marksmanship is beyond the abilities of anyone willing to apply themselves.

Hey! Are you telling me the world is not really flat? That the Sun does not revolve around the world? Or, that cats will kill a baby by drawing its breath away when it sleeps? Everybody knows those things are true...without actually testing to find out. So many opinions stated as fact! Why is it so difficult for someone to say: "I have never actually shot a deer with a .22 Hornet, so I do not know how well it would or would not kill a deer."
"Preconceived notions", thanks Sarge.

[dahermit]

...Is it possible to kill a deer with a .22 Hornet? Sure. I know a couple of local jerks who regularly spotlight deer with a .22 rf. Just because it will kill does not make it the right caliber for the job...

Based on your actual testing by shooting deer, what is the cartridge that is the bare minimum for killing deer?...I am confused because I have heard the same arguments used against using a .223 as I have read here about the .22 Hornet...and also sometimes the .243 Winchester.

[dahermit]

Hodgdons lists a 55 grain load that does 2652 fps. I have intentionally loaded the .223 down to just above that level, with 55 grain bullets, to keep them from blowing up on deer. Killed them just fine out past 150 yards, got full penetration and made the heart look like this.

Sarge! Actual testing...how could you! But let me caution you, the posters are going to say that a 55 grain bullet in a Hornet is still slower than your .223 load, so that is not a fair comparison. Or, that heart shot represented a "perfect" shot, or the Hornet bullet jackets are thinner, or any fool can see that the .223 case is so much bigger than the .22 Hornet case, or...

[Doyle]

This thread is starting to remind me of why it isn't smart to wrestle with a pig. You'll just get muddy and the pig will probably enjoy it.

[dahermit]

This thread is starting to remind me of why it isn't smart to wrestle with a pig. You'll just get muddy and the pig will probably enjoy it.

Or argue with a person who is so limited that they think platitudes are logical arguments? To them, platitudes are logical arguments.

[Sarge]

Based on your actual testing by shooting deer, what is the cartridge that is the bare minimum for killing deer?...

The .40 S&W in a Federal 165 HST, which needs to be applied relatively close and with some precision. The one I shot (100 pounds?) was supposedly disabled but it bolted for heavy traffic when I walked up on it, so I snapped a shot into the center of its shoulder at maybe 12-15 yards. It was down in one stride and dead as a post when I walked up on it.

The guy who recovered it (for meat) felt a bump on the offside shoulder, slit the skin there with his pocketknife and handed me a perfectly-expanded HST. It didn't look like the ad photo bullets; there was considerable gristle and bone fragments ground into the front of it. I've shot or seen a dozen deer shot with various .357 loads that didn't do this well. It sure sold me on the 40/165/HST as a carry load.

Is the .40 S&W the 'Everyman Deer Cartridge'? Probably not. It is still basically a 38-40 Rimless Short and the 38-40, with far less efficient bullets than we have today, fed a lot of folks when it was popular. So did the .22 LR, which nearly made deer extinct here in MO during the Great Depression. The better you shoot, the less power you need*

The above refers to the clinical killing of an animal, period.

* The late Stephen Camp, a prince of a fellow and respected member here, killed at least four deer with the 9mm.