50 BMG vs deer? Yes, someone did it.

[spainy79]

Supposedly. This video was uploaded about a week ago and the comment section is back and forth on what actually happened to this deer. I got caught up in it myself and after reading other comments I stopped. It's all a broken record. Watch the video through and you'll see exactly why. There's so much to debate here.
[video=youtube;6P3uwl5HzzQ]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6P3uwl5HzzQ&lc=z230etaiapnicr1xp04t1aokg0p unqwyhxk0gibgjg3wrk0h00410.1513317183010284[/video]

I did a search to see if this was already on here and came up with nothing.

 

[phylodog]

Great video. Now you'll have every moron from Maine to New Mexico trying to suck the eyes out of deer by missing them with a .50BMG.

If it's legal, I don't care one way or the other if someone wants to kill a deer, elk, moose, bear, mountain lion, bobcat, coyote or pronghorn with a .50BMG. I don't personally care to try it, having shot a fair bit of the caliber, I don't like it. It isn't particularly accurate and I am not impressed, entertained or empowered by recoil.

 

[Mark 1911]

Buddy shot a deer in WI with a 7mm Rem mag, could fit my fist in the exit hole. Bullet selection makes a difference too, but that combo was too much

 

[voidsherpa]

People do this ****, and they dont even have a phantom camera setup.

 

[Spear Dane]

Horseshoes, hand grenades and now...50 BMG. Dayum.

 

[Que]

I can’t say that I’m a fan of this option. The term “hunter” can have a few definitions, but if someone is harvesting an animal for sustenance, I don’t believe they would choose this round. Did he really initially believe that round would have done such a minimal amount of damage? I don’t understand the reasoning, but some people will push the necessary limits on anything.

 

[Hookeye]

Actually on another forum some folks say they've used it, and the big bullet zips through..........not much damage.
I know a guy that shot a small deer through the heart and IIRC clipped shoulder on exit....... something like a 4" exit hole.
Bullet type and what gets hit. I dunno what bullet he used. IIRC yardage was under 300.

In the vid...........did he really miss or just zip it through the eyes?

My guess is he aimed for the eyes, and if he really did miss.........pushed the shot high.
Was there an autopsy done of the skull? If so I didn't see it.

People can claim anything. Proving it however...........

 

[spainy79]

My argument stated the bullet passed through the eyes and just didn't have time to expand. Some questioned why was there no visible bullet hole or why didn't the deer's head explode upon impact? There were several comments asking that and that's about the time I stopped with it on Youtube and brought it here for everyone to enjoy. There should be some purple text at the end but I'm lazy.

 

[Bigtanker]

In the comments, Demo Ranch was brought up quite a bit. This is the video they are referring to. Matt shoots a .50 through a house of cards and it doesn't blow them over.

[video=youtube_share;YrHpe5Z93wM]http://youtu.be/YrHpe5Z93wM[/video]

 

[spainy79]

In the comments, Demo Ranch was brought up quite a bit. This is the video they are referring to. Matt shoots a .50 through a house of cards and it doesn't blow them over.

[video=youtube_share;YrHpe5Z93wM]http://youtu.be/YrHpe5Z93wM[/video]

I linked his video in my original Youtube comment as well.

 

[spainy79]

The other thing that gets me about this is probably within a month ago (probably late November) Keith Warren took to Facebook and was asking for opinions on whether or not he should try to take a deer with the 50. I believe my reply was "Just because you can doesn't mean you should". A lot of the other comments were leaning the same way; some were a little asinine in their reasoning but nonetheless there were not many approvals. Fast forward a couple weeks and all of a sudden there's a video of Keith taking a deer with the 50. I think his mind was already made up regardless of FB comments or that the hunt had already took place and he was getting a feeler on the subject matter. I need to just stop. Spending too much time on this. I just wanted to bring this to the attention of some like minded and level headed hunters/gun owners and get their opinion...as to me...not Keith Warren. Or is Keith still like minded and level headed as the rest of us for enjoying the hunting aspect and just using different tools for the job? See...I've edited this twice now. Need to stop.

 

[CountryBoy19]

I can’t say that I’m a fan of this option. The term “hunter” can have a few definitions, but if someone is harvesting an animal for sustenance, I don’t believe they would choose this round. Did he really initially believe that round would have done such a minimal amount of damage? I don’t understand the reasoning, but some people will push the necessary limits on anything.

To be fair to the guy, he was going for a head-shot, he waited for the head-shot to present. I don't know that it's fair to judge him for excessive damage etc. If it humanely kills the animal, I'm all for it.

Actually on another forum some folks say they've used it, and the big bullet zips through..........not much damage.
I know a guy that shot a small deer through the heart and IIRC clipped shoulder on exit....... something like a 4" exit hole.
Bullet type and what gets hit. I dunno what bullet he used. IIRC yardage was under 300.

In the vid...........did he really miss or just zip it through the eyes?

My guess is he aimed for the eyes, and if he really did miss.........pushed the shot high.
Was there an autopsy done of the skull? If so I didn't see it.

People can claim anything. Proving it however...........

It looks to me like a classic head-shot doe. You can see the skull cap has been blown out from over-pressure inside the skull. I've seen head-shot deer before, 1 by my wife with a .308 this year. The bullet didn't have time to expand, small entrance hole into brain cavity, and small exit hole, entire skull cap ruptured up, nothing left inside. I'm guessing that if it went in through 1 eye and out through the other like you think, the pressure in the brain cavity was lower, thus the only slightly raised/ruptured brain cavity. Plus, what's all the white stuff in his video? If that is the supposed eye-balls that got sucked out, low-pressure (maximum vacuum at atmospheric conditions is ~15 psi) cannot possibly atomize that tissue into such a fine cloud of mist. But direct impingement with tissue can. I concur that this guy shot her right through the eyes, and I would bet there is a nice .510+ hole right through the bone that is between them.

 

[JimH]

Anybody notice the gray squirrel to the right of the doe? Bet his heart rate jumped right up! I'd be willing to bet the deer was hit in the eye.

 

[Que]

To be fair to the guy, he was going for a head-shot, he waited for the head-shot to present. I don't know that it's fair to judge him for excessive damage etc. If it humanely kills the animal, I'm all for it.

I wasn’t judging excessive damage, but his initial comment about the damage and believe occurred. That round would have taken off most, if not all, of the deer’s head. As for a humane kill, I agree that it really doesn’t matter. If used for head shots, the entire body would be unharmed and could be consumed, which could be better than a smaller round that could possibly blow out part of the shoulder meat.

 

[Hookeye]

I don't use crazy stuff, but don't worry about meat damage either.
Is what it is.
Screw the shoulders.

 

[Hookeye]

I don't like head shots.
Ugly-ing up critters just isn't my style.
Only do it sometimes on chucks (pest control).
Game animals, nope.
Even on squirrels (and I only shoot pineys)............I go through the shoulders.
They're a pest, but darn cute ones.

To each his own.

 

[Winamac]

 

[Leadeye]

Been around 50 for a long time, but never did appreciate it for shooting around here. Out west it would be interesting but with range and high level of penetration I never wanted to shoot it locally.

 

[bobjones223]

Ohhhh what the He!! I will through my thoughts into this post.

I agree that this was a through the eye shot.

I am not trying to stir things up with the "ethical" hunter debate but I have shot two squirrels with 7.62X39 just because I could. My buddy said "You shoot it, you eat it!" to which I said "Absolutely!".

So back to the point I was making that I believe that it is a matter of mass, speed, and penetration. In my experience with the squirrels I ended up with one hole in each the size of a pencil. It actually did less damage and bruising than a .22!

It was my theory that it was traveling so fast and had such a short penetration mass that it caused the projectile to just slice right through.

.50bmg rounds have a very hard thick jacket due to the pressures involved with the round. If you send it through one eye and out the other you are really only contacting two small water balloons and some thin bone. I can say for the record I have never shot a .50BMG nor have I ever seen the damage from one but I have to believe the physics are the same.

 

[shibumiseeker]

.50bmg with most factory rounds will do less damage to a deer than a .458socom with hunting rounds. Ft-lbs energy only means something if it can be dumped into the target. Now, stand several deer in a row...