quote:

A 140 gr Creedmoor bullet is going to have well under 1,000 foot lbs of energy at 800 yards. Are you seriously suggesting that's sufficient energy? What 140 grain 6.5mm bullet is going to expand sufficiently at 800 feet per second?

Notice how I changed terms from Ft Lbs to FPS in the same sentence? That was an accident. Sorry. Seems you've seized on a mistake to prop up your position that popping off at deer at 800 yards with a 6.5mm Creedmoor is appropriate. I call that intellectual dishonesty, but whatever.

I've been hunting since the mid-70s. Even then the minimum recommended energy for a whitetail from a rifle was 1,000 ft lbs. Among the vast majority of hunters, it still is. And 1,500 for elk. Read the likes of Craig Boddington and the other major outdoor writers. He's referenced in the video I posted. 1,000 lbs. Even certain states' wildlife agencies recommend those energy levels, like Colorado. The Creedmoor isn't there at 800 yards. And if you don't think energy, particular in a light rifle bullet, is important in anchoring an animal that can still run a long distance into a thick swamp all while spilling copious quantities of blood, well... Retained energy is absolutely important.

As far as velocity goes, you need velocity to create energy. You need energy to expand bullets. You need expansion to transfer as much energy (impart shock) as possible to increase trauma. You need energy to break through bones and minimize deflection inside the animal. To retain 800+ Ft Lbs of energy at 800 yards (which is already well below the recommended threshold) you have to stay in the 140+ gr range bullet weight. Bullets in that weight range suitable for hunting whitetail or mule deer are going to be softly built with high sectional densities and ballistic coefficients. You are going to need higher velocities and more energy than you are getting at 800 yards to expand them reliably and impart shock. 1700 FPS is at the the low end of velocity needed to expand the bullet, and likely too slow to impart much shock. The trauma inflicted will be tantamount to the diameter of the bullet, maybe a wee bit more. The wound channel will be very narrow. When your dealing with this scenario, shot placement is absolutely critical. It's critical all the time but even more so under these circumstances. At 800 yards, that's a real challenge.

800 yards is 200-300 yards too far the ethically hunt whitetails with a 6.5 Creedmoor. There's not enough velocity or energy at that range. Bullets that retains the most energy at 800 yard need more velocity and energy at that range to expand reliably and impart shock than they are getting. Facts didn't suddenly change with the coming of the 6.5 Creedmoor. It has its place, but it's not going to defy the laws of physics. That's why in established hunting circles, the 6.5 Creedmoor has been pretty much met with a big ho hum. But it apparently has sparked a huge amount of interest in the recoil shy, look-at-how-far-I-can-hit-a-deer, crowd.

quote:

But it's certainly capable of a clean kill at that distance, and the fact that you are disputing it just exposes your ignorance again.

I already said it's capable. Argue honestly if you want to debate.

It's capable. But the numbers just aren't there to make it anything close to optimal at extreme ranges like 800 yards. Yeah, some could, and have pulled it off. But there's a lot of space between your muzzle and a whitetail or a mule deer 800 yards. And unlike steel plates, they tend to move. Sometimes at the moment you pull the trigger. No one that's ever hunted for any length of time hasn't had that "oh shit" moment. The further away a deer is, the less likely everything will be perfect when the bullet gets there. That's why any ethical hunter wants to keep the ranges reasonable, and wants to use enough gun. Deer aren't targets. Hitting the edge of a plate is no big deal. Losing a deer because your shot and bullet didn't do what its supposed to is a big deal.

This message has been edited. Last edited by: Micropterus,

I have no stake in this discussion, and frankly no opinion since I'm limited to shotguns for deer in in my land where I hunt. so carry on. But I would point out that the minimum caliber to hunt deer with a rifle in my state is .22winmag. So that's like 150ftlb at 100y.

When I hunted in Maine, I remember the .22 Magnum was minimum caliber for deer. It can be done. But walk into a lodge on a deer hunt with a .22 Magnum, and you'd likely get a long lecture from the lodge owner.

This discussion is still interesting to me, albeit beyond what I could contribute to—except for one thing: When has any thinking person believed that the laws legislatures pass about any topic, much less hunting, are always based on science, logic, or even common sense (whatever that might be)? No matter what the endeavor, it ought to include at least one of the three, and hunting a deer with 22 WMR doesn’t. Elephants have been killed with handguns; that doesn’t make hunting them with a handgun a good idea for the average hunter, and even when it’s a not-so-average hunter, doing so is a stunt of the “See what I did!” variety, not for any other reason.

Speaking of stunts, my grandfather's brother-in-law (at the time) owned a couple of hunting lodges in Maine (Camp Wapiti, The Driftwood). Harold Schmidt was his name and he was a bear hunter. He was friends with Fred Bear of Bear Bows. Back in the 60s or 70s, he got the brilliant idea to hunt bear with a spear. (He did it long before that dumbass sponsored by Under Armor.) He cut out a spear tip from a saw blade and soldered it to a copper pipe. He sat in one of his stands and killed a small bear with that spear. He was charged by the Maine wildlife authorities for hunting with a "contrivance" which violated Maine law. Apparently, he was able to successfully defeat the charge. And, at least for awhile, bear hunting with a spear was legal in Maine. He was featured in Bowhunting Magazine for doing this. From what I remember, he always regretted spearing that bear.