.410 slug for shot of less than 75 yards?

I have a 6 year old that really wants to hunt. Is a .410 slug enough to be effective at 75 yards or so. I'm a little concerned it is not enough gun.

Similar to a 30-30 I would imagine.

Really? If that is the case, I do not really see a problem.

Provided your shotgun will shoot them well (meaning it is either rifled bore or properly choked), there's no reason not to use them. Shot placement is key, but that is true with any weapon, regardless of power. Never seen a deer die of being shot in the leg, even with a .416 Rigby...

I would limit shots to 50 yds though- that should be about the outside of what your shotgun will shoot accurately, and that's the point at which the round drops below 500 ft/lbs of energy...

effective on what? I would think a 410 accuracy would be a stretch at 75 yards.

In addition to effective range of the bullet, what about the effective range of the shooter? I'd not be comforable shooting open sights with a smooth bore .410 with slugs at 75 yards. Have you considered a scoped .30-30? Recoil is not much different, especially with the newer reduced recoil, you can add a scope, and he could then accurately shoot that distance with a bullet that would bring down any hog or deer efficiently. I would be concerned about him missing with the unscoped shotgun and getting frustrated (I've had several friends have this happen with their kids).

That's a good point. I think you are probably right.

I know that I shot my first deer with a .410 slug at 15 yards from a box stand when I was 7, and I made a perfect double lung shot. The deer bedded down a few times, and we never recovered it. That's the only deer I've hit that I haven't recovered in the 17 years since then.

This is just a one time antidote, the .410 should work, but that is my experience.

In my opinion, a 410 slug should work fine, BUT I would keep the range 50 yards or under. In my younger days, I shot quite a few slugs out of my old single shot 410, and I killed a bunch of stuff with them but never a deer. If your gun will shoot them accurately, go for it.

I think you would be better off letting him shoot a deer with a 222 than a 410 slug.

The problem with a .410 slug is that it starts off with a low fps to begin with then loses it's downrange energy really fast. I was looking up the ballistics and came upon a website that can explain it way better than I can.
http://mcb-homis.com/slug_410/

Nearly every kid on our lease took their 1st deer with a smooth bore single shot 410... but I think 60 yds was the longest shot.

The problem with young kids is you can never really tell where they are aiming... Lots of practice before season and even buy a paper deer target, would be my suggestion.

And last I'm gonna say 6 is probably too young.

There are a lot of people who have no problem hunting with a 357 magnum handgun, but in real world hunting, there isn't a dimes worth of difference in 357 ballistics and 410 slugs.

More than a dime's difference.

Say at 20 yards, a .410 slug actually has more kinetic energy than a .357 bullet. A .357 158 grn bullet compared has about 500 ft lbs at 20 yards. The remington .410 slug only slightly off that figure, but the Federal .410 slug was almost 650 ft lbs. But range out to 100 yards, the .357 retains about 375 ft plbs energy. Federal .410 about 275 ft lbs. Remington only slightly more than 200 ft lbs.

But there is of course more into it than kinetic energy.

Using the Taylor Knockout number, calculated by multiply projectile mass, velocity and bore diameter. The .357 slug used compared to the Federal .410 slugs. Both are equal at 20 yards. Remington came out considerably worse though.

Taylor Knockout calculated at 100 yards though, the .357 comes out way ahead over all .410 slug options.

Comparing the .410 to the .357 for deer hunting, the .357 would still be a much better option than the .410 related to accuracy and bullet performance. And though it may be equail in TK value at 20 yards; at longer ranges the .410 comes closer to a 38 special. The TK number for a .38 Special and a Remington .410 slug are identical at 75 yards which is the range asked about in the original question.

First, let me thank everyone who responded. I have really learned quite a lot. After careful consideration, the 6 year old and I discussed that it is just a little too early to shoot his own deer. We had that discussion earlier today. But I am glad to know that the .410 is at least a possibility.

A .410 may have a bit more recoil than a six year old will be comfortable with. A .223 with a good bullet will have less recoil & be far more accurate & easy for a kid to shoot, while putting about any deer in the dirt with a well placed shot.

I think that is a wise decision, let him just shoot a couple of years.
IMO a kid should understand the concept of death before he is allowed to kill an animal, six is a little young.

It depends on the kid. Both my boys killed their first deer at 6. My younger son was actually "ready" at 5, but I had made "6" the magic number and held him back.

With as much anti-hunt propaganda on TV, if a kids wants to go hunting, you had better take him no matter what their age.

Should work as long as you take a good lung shot. I shot one in the shoulder with a .410 and the deer just ran away. Bled some but never did find him.

He'll hunt - with me. I do not feel like I can get a gun to fit him so that he can make consistent accurate shots. I think we'll shoot for 8 as his magic number.

A 410 and a 30-30 are no comparison. A 30-30 kicks much harder and had more power, what a dumb comment.

The most accurate 410 with slugs I've had was a Winchester 9410 and it was 2" at fifty yards.

A 410 slug is not packin much punch at 75 yards but it will kill a deer. As always it depends on how the planets are aligned as to how fast.

A 410 does not compare to a 357 mag bullet out of a rifle length barrel unless you are smokin 420.

A 357 mag is bad news for a deer to 125 yards in a rifle and very recoil friendly even with buffalo bore or doubletap rounds.

I would say first hand a 357 rifle or a 30-30 with reduced recoil remingtons would do a much better job

Rossi and many others make .45 LC rifles in both lever and single shot actions. The .45LC can be loaded mild to relatively wild in these modern rifles and provide plent of power at the said ranges with even less recoil than smaller caliber higher velocity centerfire calibers (ie. .30-30. I have shot quite a few hogs with a Uberti .45 and killed my first deer years ago with a .45 Rossi 92. I find it more favorable than a .357 when using non cowboy action loads.

I'll throw in with JThoele. The 45LC is good to go and has no recoil in standard loading. With hot loads, the recoil picks up but not as much as a 30-30 and then, it gets close to lowerend 45-70 performance.