Hornady SST 7.62x39 for Whitetail Deer

J

jackstrawIII

New member
Need some input here.

I was in the market for a new short-range (100 yards and less) deer rifle. After doing a bunch of reading and thinking, I bought a CZ 527 chambered in 7.62x39. It's a great little gun and shoots very well with 125 grain Hornady SST ammo.

With that said, now that hunting season is approaching, I'm having second thoughts. A few friends have questioned my choice, and now I'm wondering if I'm a bit under-gunned.

According to Chuck Hawks (a writer that I respect, and often agree with), here are minimum requirements for a deer rifle:

Caliber: .243
Sectional Density: .200
Impact Velocity: 1500 fps
Kinetic Energy at Impact: 800 ft lbs.

The Hornady SST round checks most of those boxes:
Caliber: 308
Sectional Density: .183 (a bit low)
Impact Velocity: 2040 fps at 100 yards
Kinetic Energy: 1138 ft lbs at 100 yards

I could look at numbers on a screen all day, but I'm still unsure. So... here's my question: has anyone actually killed deer with this round? If so, what was your experience as far as quick/clean kills?

Thanks in advance.
 
S

smee78

New member
I am also looking at using this round for my x39 AR for hunting. Should be close to a 30-30 ballistic wise. I also currently like the Winchester Power Point ammo, shoots good and consistent out of my AR.
 
Last edited:
J

jmr40

New member
Chuck Hawks is not my idea of a knowledgeable writer. I rarely find anything to agree with him about.

The 7.62 is just fine for deer at well over 100 yards.

A 243 was the minimum for deer 50-60 years ago, but with today's better bullets and loads is near perfect out to 300-400 yards and has been used much farther and on game much larger than deer. A 223 is acceptable on deer out to 100ish.


Chuck Hawks is still living in the 1960's. All cartridges are more alike than different. Pick one, hit the right spot and have a sharp knife.
 
M

marines6433

New member
I remember my father telling me that during the depression, when he was a kid, grandpa used a .22 LR to head shoot deer up to 30 or so yards. Guess the ammo was cheaper than the .30-30, his Model 94 used.
 
S

Scorch

New member
Instead of a 123 gr bullet, look at a 150 gr or similar bullet. The 123 gr start out faster, but by 100ish yds the 150 gr takes the lead and carries the energy farther. I have a 1893 Mauser I rebarreled for 7.62X39, and I shoot the 154 gr Tulas into an inch or so at 100 yds, and can hit well out to 300 yds. The 123s start dropping a lot beyond 250 yds. Just my experience.
 
J

jackstrawIII

New member
Scorch,

I had a very similar thought regarding using heavier bullets and bought some 154 grain Tulas. However, now I'm wondering if sticking to an American made "premium" bullet is more reliable? Also, since this is a 100 yard gun, the initial speed/energy benefit of the lighter bullet might help?

Do you think the 154 grain Tulas can be counted on to expand reliably?
 
J

Jack O'Conner

New member
One of my USAF buddies hunts deer near Manassas, Virginia with same rifle as yours. Abundant doe tags for this area provide much venison for his freezer. He hunts with Winchester Power Point ammo and knocks 'em dead every time. This Russian cartridge will kill deer sized animals without any problems at typical woods distances.

Good hunting to you.
Jack
 
D

deerslayer303

New member
I have killed two deer with that round out of a Norinco SKS both under 100 yards (typical distance around here) with regular Remington 125gr. PSP ammo. Both deer took very few steps and the round performed great. The round is every bit as effective as my 30-30. I would not hesitate to use it. Some people think you need the latest and greatest super duper ultra magnum to take deer at normal distances. It's B.S.

Sent from my SM-G900V using Tapatalk
 
G

Gunplummer

New member
I have to agree with Scorch and the other 150 grain crowd. I still have a 7.62x39 bolt gun I worked up years ago. I have been using Remington round nose Corlokt .308 in it for years. @ 100 yards it is deadly accurate and they open up just fine. I don't know if they are in production right now, last year everybody was out of stock. I stay away from "Premium" bullets. In my experience, they are usually worse in either accuracy or expansion. Kind of like gunwriters. They work better on paper.
 
T

tahunua001

New member
I've been hunting with a 6.5 grendel for the last 3 years. for the last 3 years, including this morning I have gotten deer with 125gr and less ammo, most were with 123gr ssts which are travelling at nearly the same velocity as a 123 from a 7.62x39mm. all were 150 yards and less. I even took a 200 pound elk calf with it, you'll do just fine with a x39. I've taken deer with far less, even a 9mm once upon a time.

oh, and since I've now met my quota for meat in the freezer, I am now planning on spending the rest of hunting season with a SKS loaded with 123gr SSTs so go figure.
 
W

Wyosmith

New member
I and my wife have killed 4 deer and 4 antelope with Russian factory 7.62X39 soft points and hollow points. The 123 gr soft points worked very well, the 122 gr hollow points broke up badly and penetration was poor. The 154 gr soft points penetrated well, but expansion was poor. These are the same bullets loaded into the 7.62X54R and I am sure they were made to expand at the higher velocities of the larger round.

I loaded some Hornady 123 gr soft points for a friend and he has killed 2 antelope and 3 deer with his AK. All his kills were perfect with good expansion and good penetration. Only 1 bullet was recovered. It retained 89 grains of weight.
 
S

smee78

New member
Wyosmith, do you know the range your friend was shooting at? Also would you be interested in sharing your load info for this round? I hope to get to the bench this winter to get some rounds developed.
 
M

Mobuck

Moderator
"Instead of a 123 gr bullet, look at a 150 gr or similar bullet. The 123 gr start out faster, but by 100ish yds the 150 gr takes the lead and carries the energy farther."

I don't follow this "theory" at all. At the ranges for which a 7.62x39 is suitable, the diff between 123 and 150 is inconsequential. In fact, the 123 bullet may be more effective at slightly longer range IF it's constructed to expand at the lower velocity.
Regarding the Hornady SST, I recommend it w/o reservation. I've seen the PPU 123 RNSP suggested on some forums but compared SxS (as close as field conditions will allow), the PPU is considerably below the performance of the SST(plus the SST will run through a semi-auto).
 
W

Wyosmith

New member
Smee, my friend shot deer and antelope at various ranges but he said he didn't pay much attention to them all except for the fact that the longest shot he made was about 175 yards. So it's safe to say all shots were at 175 and less.

The load I put together for him was WW brass and primer, 25 Gr of 1680 and the Hornady 123 gr bullet seated to the canalure and lightly crimped.
 
J

jackstrawIII

New member
Wyosmith, do you have any idea what speed that load was moving at? Wondering how it stacks up against the SST.

Also, thanks everyone for the great comments. I really appreciate people sharing their experiences, it's helping me feel a lot more confident that this load will do what I need it to.
 
W

Wyosmith

New member
Sorry jackstraw, but I have none of those notes now. I did chronograph it, but I gave the load and the notes to my friend who got the ammo.
I do remember it was on the fast side, so I would have to guess about 2300 FPS, but that's just my guess. He and I were both shooting form 16" barrels.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top