uncle matt

I have some important questions in response to your 9mm inquiry. Where are you hunting and what size are the deer there? Florida has these tiny little deer that I would think a heavy (158+), maybe +P, or +P+ would do a nifty job on at close ranges you described and you can drill the hole where you need to. Can you get + ammo in your area or is it LEO only? Are hot and heavy handloads an option?

Another consideration....................

most everyone's got a shotgun around. Any 12 or 20 smoothbore with foster slugs would more than adequate - no matter the size of the deer. Just go get some Sluggers or something and there will be no question whatsoever as to whether or not there's enough energy available to deliver to your target.

Uncle Matt (in IL) "Where us boys shotgun em deer!"

superman8791

i appreciate the inquirys guys, i felt that this would be the overwhelming response. I was only thinking of it and was wondering if anyone else had tried it. My line of thinking was in sheer grains of bullet...if you think about it the 9mm 115 grains is bigger than some small, but adequite deer rifles .243, 25.06,etc...The problem, however is energy, after looking at some ballistics the 9mm is pretty sad. I have no doubt I could do it , but to do it consistenly with good results would be questionable.Thanks for the imput guys.

Phillycheese

9mm seems to work fine for this woman and her deer... and it's a nice sized buck at that, here is the link:

http://www.ar15.com/forums/topic.html?b=1&f=11&t=299936

CanWoodsman

As a 25.06 user you are a little off line with that comment. Although some may use 100g. rounds for deer most use 115-120g bullets. The 25.06 pushes a 120g. round at aprox. 3000 fps, very far superior to anything the 9mm could ever achieve. Adequite is not accurite as the round maintains 1200 ft/lbs at 400 yards. It is far better than adequite and retains more energy than many popular deer rounds such as the 30-30 for example.

dead_eye

personally i dont think its a good idea, the otherday i was shooting my uncles 44mag which holds quite a bit more powder than a 9mm luger and when i was done shooting it i went to the sand pile behind my paper target and by just running my fingers through the sand an inch or two deep i found 8 of the 12 shots i took. I was shooting from about 25 to 30 yards. My point is that those loads just dont retain the energy they need.

BarnesX.308

Great suggestion. A pump, semi or double could crack off a quick follow up, too. If you want to spend a few bucks, get a Marlin lever gun in 45/70 or 450 Marlin.

Charley

With heavy bullets and plus P pressures, I have no doubt that the 9x19 would work ok at close range, maybe 50 yards max. Trouble is, with the relatively low bullet weight and energy involved, you would have absolutely NO margin for error of any kind. Just because something can be done doesn't make it a good idea!

Briman

Or maybe they dump their energy very efficiently. A SWC with a wide meplat or a jacketed hollowpoint has alot of frontal area and is going to stop short in sand.

Try this analogy- you are sitting on a beach, first try jamming your hand in the sand fingertips first, then try jamming your hand in the sand with a balled fist- which do you think will penetrate further?

Big slow bigbore bullets are just as effective as high velocity small bullets, but for entirely different reasons.

dead_eye

yeah i see your point, i suppose it would, I was shooting round ended wadcutters, but the gun i was shooting has more powder than a 9mm, so i dont know how it would all even out, but i stand by my previous statement of it not having enough power for a clean kill

CanWoodsman

As said earlier in this thread I have a 25.06 but I also use a Ruger 96/ 44 mag. for dogging & close in shots. Have shot both bear & deer with the 44 mag. and yes it does have enough power for a clean kill. I use 240 g. semi jacketed hollow points and out to 100 yards they are deadly.

Best Wishes