Buck Hollow Sporting Goods - click or touch to visit their website Midwest Habitat Company

Shot Placement??

cybball

cybball

Well-Known Member
Ok, this is going to sound dumb, but I'm going to ask it anyway. Last season was my first for muzzleloader. I shot a doe, but shot her through both lungs (I'm a bowhunter at heart). I've been told that a shoulder or neck shot is better. What is the thought on this? Shoulder sounds about right, as I can see it taking out the shoulder and one or two lungs. Thoughts??

Thanks.
 
Gun or bow hunting, I always go for the lungs. I like saving as much of the meat as possible. Shooting through the front shoulders makes tracking easier, but much nastier to dress out and you ruin some meat. Plus, I think the animal suffers a lot more with that shot than a double lung shot. I'm not good enough make a successful neck shot, but effective if its done right. Seems like there is more room for error on that one though.. A lot less brown to hit there...
 
Shoulder wastes meat but usually takes less tracking. Depends on if you are worried about them getting off the property. Not much for neck shots, only taken one or two but it was DRT.
 
To me it depends on the angle of the deer and your confidence in the gun you're shooting. Standing broadside I'll take the shoulders out. I tell my kids to follow the leg straight up for an aiming point. Never had one go far, and many are down in their tracks. Although you ruin a little meat, it's just front shoulder scrap anyway and isn't really that much. If I get a deer facing me at 100 yards or less I'll take the throat patch shot every time...assuming I've got a solid rest. These deer just crumple :grin: If the deer is in classic quartering away position, then I imagine trying to take out the far shoulder...just like a bow shot.

NWBuck
 
I always go for the double lung shot. If you take out both lungs, tracking should be very minimal (unless its an elk; they can go FOREVER with no air in their lungs). With 2 different caliber rifles (.30 and .257), the farthest I've ever had to track an animal was 50-60 yards with both lungs hit. I've had a couple drop right in their tracks, but that was attributed to the hydrostatic shock of the bullet (Barnes TSX). The one time I took out a deer's shoulder (.30-06 @ 200 yards quartering away) it was a bloody mess and I hated wasting the meat. I wasn't trying to take out its shoulder, it was just part of the shot angle. Neck shots are pretty much quickly lethal due to the shock to the nervous system, taking out a major artery/vein and, sometimes, the wind pipe; however, you have much less room for error. I'm with SCOFFIN in that double lung shots seem to be more humane in addition to giving you more wiggle room for shot placment in the vital zone.
 
I personally go for the lungs, but it really depends on the angle of the shot. Neck shot seems like a good way to badly wound a deer.

I work with a guy who rifle hunts in Missouri and almost all they do are head shots. That's worse than a neck shot in my mind. Yeah, if you are 100% sure you can hit a deer in the head EVERY TIME, go for it. But that's an awfully easy target to miss.
 
  • Deleted by N/A
Show…
Sounds like I'm fine then. I did double lung that doe and she shot out like a race horse and crumpled up about 60 yards into her sprint. Just wanted to be sure I was on track.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top Bottom