USING THE 7.62X39mm FOR BUCK HUNTING?

1895ss

Dimitri wrote:

1895!

Yes I'm not saying its a good hunting round, by the way at under 100 yards it should do baslisticlly the exact same as the 30-30WCF

Dimitri

Aaaaahhhh .......... Angel

I won't tell Bushy you compared his .30 WCF model 94 to this, Embarassed

cartridge........... nope I won't! Surprised

4rum · Member Joined: Jan 06, 2007 Posts: 211

I think we need to examine the original question. We then need to take into account personal opinions. Then we need to look at the ammunition as much, or more, than the calibre or weapon it was used in.

Hard antimony lead, inside a full metal jacket bullet is hardly meant to effectively transfer enough energy or shock to tissue to bring about a mortal wound, unless in a crucial area. Then, as 1895ss states, most anything will do the job.

I personally have killed whitetail deer with .22 long rifle rimfire, .22 hornet, .25-20, .221 fireball, .222 Rem, .223 Rem, .250 Savage, .243 Win, 6mm Rem, 6.5X55 Swedish, .270 Win, 7mm Mauser (7X57), .30-30 Win, .300 Savage, 308 Win, .30-06 Springfield, 8mm Mauser (8X56) 12 and 20 guage rifled slugs .... muzzle loaders and compound bow.

With diminuitive calibers, I had the patience, if not the good sense, to wait for a near perfect shot.

And yes... I did have a little experience back in the late 60's with both the M-16 and the AK-47 Kalasnikov.

Also had demolitions where we were TAUGHT about 'dirty tricks', booby traps, and anti presonell ordinance. In particular the M14- anti-personel mine. It is small, about the size of a vi-eenie weenie can. It is designed to take of part of your foot... to cripple... to maim... to demoralize the enemy. An altruistic infatuation with arms and/or armament is fine... for collectors.

It is once again, only MY opinion, that the 7.62 X 39 is very minimal in power as a hunting calliber to "drop a big buck". But again, if in a modern firearm, in good repair, with good ammunition with a bullet design condusive to taking deer sized game at the velocities this caliber can reasonably be expected to generate and in it's respective reasonable range and energy potential... if you do your part, it will kill a deer.

Crackshot

Federal 7.62X39 123 gr High shok SP! reeeaaaalll good ammo for the 7.62X39!
Winchester 123 gr SP, another fine factory load for the 7.62X39! (the one I use when to lazy to load) drops em like a ton of brick inside 150yds.

In my hand loads I use the Sierra 125gr SPT pro hunter not sure of the exact loading until I look in my logs.

Arron

Ruger did also make and I think still does, a All Weather MKII in 7.62x39mm, this with a good bullet design say a 125gr Balistic tip should give you what you want at any woods type range. Basically if you can hit a paper plate at a given distance then you should be able to put the bullet in a deer's vital area. Most deer are not large animals in fact most of the time they are smaller than an average human, so it is a reasonable extrapolation that if it is effective on a human at a given range then it will be as effective on a deer of roughly the same size. I also know of several folks taking large Loess Hill whitetail deer with .22LR rifles, but these folks are still alive so I would rather not say who they are as they could still be held legally liable for taking these deer, also was head shots right behind the ear, or in through eye socket. Another maker I am thinking of is CZ in the 550 American line. From what I know of these rifles they are worth a look for the price. And as they are bolt actions then they will give very good accuracy. A battle rifle only "needs" to be able to hit a man sized target at range, doesn't matter where just so it is a body, preferably center of mass hit. And most of the deer I have seen have about the same sized area. NOW; having said that I am of the school of keeping the hits inside a paper plate at range. When you can't hit the plate every round then then you stop and back up the range until you can put every round into the plate. That is as good as you "need" it too be for a hunting situation. Through handloading and or alot of shooting you can figure out what is the best from your fireram of use.

guncollector

I killed a feral hog with a single shot from an SKS about 6 months ago. I was using some Silver Bear 125 grain Soft Point bullets. I wouldn't want to trust this round on a trophy whatever but it did drop that hog in a hurry. We've got an overabundance of feral hogs on our hunting lease and try to dispose of as many as we can. The SKS being semiauto was why I had it out there in first place.

gelandangan

I killed a couple of goats using my new .300 Whisper. With supersonic loads, the caliber is similar to the 7.62x39.
Although a lot of people believe that it doesnt have enough punch for a deer, I believe, with the correct bullet placement I should be able to collect plenty of venison. maybe more than if I use my trusty 308. Afterall, a deer is just a large goat. The hit from a subsonic pellet does not destroy as much meat.

Vince

4rum makes a few valid points.

Lets discount the military rifle....it is a great battlefield rifle, but it is still a military rifle and cannot be realistically compared to a quality hunting rifle, either semi auto or bolt action.

The 7.62mmx39 round in its MILITARY form is designed to wound or kill the enemy. It doesn't really matter which because either way it will take the enemy soldier off the battlefield. In fact, if a soldier is wounded then it will take as many as 5 extra soldiers off the battlefield to tend him...a total of 6..... well that's the way it is with the aussie army. So, you make up your own mind as to what the MILTARY round is designed to achieve.......for me, I believe that when it was designed it was to incapacitate an enemy soldier, not necessarily kill....just take him out of the game.

Now, if you apply the above to a hunting situation it isn't too hard to see that the 7.62mmx39 round, in its MILITARY configuration is NOT a hunting round.....never was and never will be. Sure it will kill sometimes, but not every time. None of us want to see an animal wounded and suffering, we want a clean kill EVERY time. However, if you reload this round, or buy aftermarket rounds, then it becomes a different story....but that has been ably covered by others here so there is no need to reiterate.

Cheers, Vince

shrpshtrjoe

Well said Vince Very Happy

Joe

Bushmaster

My pal Vince...Man I couldn't have said it better myself. I have always figured and told people, to no avail I might add, that a military (designed) rifle is not a hunting rifle and shouldn't be in the field and used to hunt game animals...I will, however, not deter anyone from owning one. It is our RIGHT to have the cast off (obsolete) weapons of our military. They, as you said, were designed for the incapacitating a soldier in a battle situation. As Joe said..."Well said Vince"...Kudos... Very Happy

Dimitri · Super Member Joined: Nov 25, 2005 Posts: 5946

Bushmaster,

I don't know about military rifles not working as hunting rifles, Enfields, Springfields, Mausers, and other real battle rifles were used to provide for families all over when times were tough and a commercial hunting rifle was out of the question. Hense why there are so many sporter rifles around and why the 30-06 (US-Canada), 303British (Britian, Former British Colonies etc) and 8mm Mauser (Central Europe) were and still are the most popular rounds in the world and are popular in the countries that used them in their militaries. Smile

Now "Mickey Mouse" rifles chambered in miltiary "Assult cartridges" are a different story. Thouse are best to be kept to shoot small game. Smile

Dimitri

Bushmaster

Dimitri...You will note that I am using a Browning A-Bolt .30-06. Not a 1903 or a garand...My rifle is a true hunting rifle same as any sporting rifle chambered in 308 Winchester. Yes in a pinch a military rifle can be used for survival. But that wasn't what it was meant for...Why are you picking on me anyway. Vince started it. I'm just agreeing with him...Geeezz...............................Someone call this young man's parents...He's out of control...Again. Very Happy

Nice job Vince...Got me in trouble again....

Dimitri · Super Member Joined: Nov 25, 2005 Posts: 5946

Bushmaster,

Reason I mentioned your comments not Vinces is that he points out the problems when using FMJ and not reloaded or commercial hunting ammo, you on the other hand said that military rifles shouldn't be used in the feild. Which is what I disagree with, they can be used almost just as well as a commercial rifle with the same hunting ammo in them. Wink

With hunting rounds the 7.62x39mm will kill a deer just as good under 100 yards as the 30-30 (roughly) so what is the difference between a SKS (for example) shooting the 7.62x39mm or a Winchester or Marlin shooting the 30-30WCF if they will both kill the deer just as effectivly ?? Confused

Dimitri

Vince

Bushmaster wrote:

Geeezz...............................Someone call this young man's parents...He's out of control...Again. Very Happy

Nice job Vince...Got me in trouble again....

Hey 'Mitri.....be cool mate. Laughing

What Bushy said is true.....a pure military rifle does not compare to a hunting rifle. Having said that, the military rifles of days long past went hand in hand with the hunting rifles of the day....they were essentially the only rifles about. The only real difference between these rifles was the standard of finish and the number produced...along with some mods for military use of course. This is why the older bolt action military rifles make for fairly reasonable hunting rifles, except for the calibre in SOME cases.

However, once the two markets separated and the design boffins started designing and building rifles to purely military specifications and uses then things changed. The military firearm became a weapon for the battlefield and the hunting firearm became a tool designed for exactly that...hunting.

It is no mistake that many early military sniper's rifles were either hunting rifles or copies of hunting rifles built a little more robustly. The reason for this is because they possessed the necessary attributes that a sniper needed for his role, attributes not necessarily found in the military rifles......the most important being accuracy and sometimes calibre. Even the ammunition they used was different to that used by the common garden variety soldier.

So there ya go mate. Sure, some early bolt action military rifles lend themselves to being sporterised and making pretty reasonable hunting rifles, but the same cannot be said for many of the semi auto military rifles produced in later years. Imagine trying to hunt with a Thompson Tommy gun, or the Brit Sten Gun wtf

....nah, thats just plain silly. Laughing

Around the end of WWII the two lines of design became separate industries.... although they do cross paths ocassionally. Improvements made in both types of firearm assist in the production of the other, but never the twain shall meet....just like race cars help with normal car design.....but the two can never be compared...just like military rifles and hunting rifles. Very Happy

Does that help things Bushy? Very Happy

Cheers, Vince

Dimitri · Super Member Joined: Nov 25, 2005 Posts: 5946

Vince,

Well said. By the way even today sniper rifles are based on the hunting rifles which are based on rifles that were military issued at one point or another. Laughing

Take the M24 (US Army) and M40 (US Marine) Sniper rifles, they are based on the Remington M700 which is based on the Remington M721 which its based on the Remington Model 30 which is essencally a factory sporter of the P14 and M1917 rifles which the British designed and were used in World War 1 by Britian and the US. wtf

Most "claw feed" or "control round feed" rifles are based or are simply sportized clones of the Mauser 98 action as well. Smile

In my opinion they meet so much you cant define a line. Smile

The Thompson and Sten would be ruled out for hunting for me because of their calibers. My FN49 on the other hand is a semi automatic and it makes a fine hunting rifle IMO shooting the 8mm Mauser. Smile

Dimitri

Vince

What you say is true Dimitri. You mention some damn fine rifles.

The aussie sniper rifle for many years was an accurised .303, designated SMLE Mk III* (HT), and then they went to a Parker Hale M82 which was pretty much a hunting rifle with a heavier barrel. Both worked well in the hands of a competent sniper.

Today the sniper has rifles that their predecessors could only dream about. Purpose built, extremely accurate rifles that even leave most hunting rifles in their dust. And the calibres...who would have ever thought that the .50 cal BMG round would end up in a sniper's rifle?

But, back to the AK47, its clones and the 7.62mmx39 round.....a good battlefield rifle with an effective battlefield round....but certainly not an effective hunting tool.

Cheers, Vince