Smallest / Minimum Calliber for Elk

[7mm MAGNUM]

I've always been a proponent of "shot placement" as opposed to caliber dimension,
But the smallest caliber I'd use on either a bull or cow Elk would be a 6.5 mm.

I've used both a 7mm Mag and a .300 ultra mag when out elk hunting, the one I choose
at the time I head out depends on the lands I'm hunting. Either one I'm very comfortable
with in the 300 yard ranges as I practice that yardage consistently

 

[bkc]

I have made 3 successful shots at mule deer at 250 yards plus with my 30-06 after 35 years I'm now shooting a 270wsm I would not hesitate taking a 300 yard shot at a bull with Winchester CXP2 150 grain these new polycarbonate tip bullets are deadly. Both my brother in law harvested A zone bucks at 125 yard plus and they both just folded we both were using 130 grain. I will see how well the 270 wsm will do with elk since I was lucky and draw combo Elk and Deer tag in Montana as well as X1 tag in Calif I hope to see how the 270 dose on mule deer...............guess I will report later

 

[tbrincefield]

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Mntngoat @ Apr 21 2008, 01:43 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div>

I have a friend that has taken many with a 7-08. The latest super duper whiz bang magnum doesn't make a person a better hunter.


ML[/b]

Bing-o. I've had my .30-06 since I was 12, and I will have it until I die or it breaks. I plan to kill everyhting I can with it, so that means every big game animal in north america.

 

[sancho]

the only "downside" of the .06 is that it is so vanilla.

but i attribute that to it being such a fantastic caliber. i have friends that look down on it, because it is just so boring and mundane. i love mine. i have shelved my other rifles. i spent money, and installed a VXIII, had some trigger work, and other things done to sweeten it. my rifle is beat down, with a shiney new scope. i will hunt with it forever also.

thinking of selling my .257 weatherby.

 

[outdoorsman35]

hello all. doesn't the weight of the bullet matter also? i don't think the diameter is the only variable. i have a question. i am going to shoot a cow elk and i imagine they can range in size. i have a load dialed in for my 30-06 with 165 grain bullet. i am confident i can put it where i need to. a lot of you will probably say that that would be fine for cow elk. is there some competing receommendations for me to buy the 180 grain bullet and develop loads for that for elk?

Thanks!

 

[7mm MAGNUM]

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (outdoorsman35 @ Sep 4 2008, 12:47 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div>

hello all. doesn't the weight of the bullet matter also? i don't think the diameter is the only variable. i have a question. i am going to shoot a cow elk and i imagine they can range in size. i have a load dialed in for my 30-06 with 165 grain bullet. i am confident i can put it where i need to. a lot of you will probably say that that would be fine for cow elk. is there some competing receommendations for me to buy the 180 grain bullet and develop loads for that for elk?

Thanks![/b]

It's my personal opinion that the weight of the projectile does have a roll in the variables. I'd think that the "kill energy" that is developed by the combination of the diameter and weight plus speed will produce an initial "shock" that will help with a clean kill. With my 7 Mag I use both the Hornady 162g. BTSP and 175g. RN

The energy created with the combination of weight and speed are somewhat similar however but the 162g. has
better ballistics at longer ranges due to its configureation.

My .300 Ultra Mag I use 180g. partitions and 180g. Barnes TSX's. Both calibers and listed combinationns are plenty good enough for either Elk or Moose sized game.

 

[suavegato]

foot pounds of energy consists of 2 factors, weight & speed. you can achieve the "knock down power" with a lighter faster round that you can with a slower heavier round... so it's a combo of both. a .30-06 with 165 grain pill should be MORE than enough for a cow elk, assuming good shot placement and 300 yards or less. "Could" even go farther but MHO is that you are more than safe inside of 300 yards with 165 grain .30 cal projectile. If you have a good load worked up with the 165, don't bother to make up a whole new one just to gain 15 grains... Esp. if you're load with the 165 is fast! do you know the FPS?

 

[7mm MAGNUM]

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (suavegato @ Sep 4 2008, 03:35 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div>

foot pounds of energy consists of 2 factors, weight & speed. you can achieve the "knock down power" with a lighter faster round that you can with a slower heavier round... so it's a combo of both. a .30-06 with 165 grain pill should be MORE than enough for a cow elk, assuming good shot placement and 300 yards or less. "Could" even go farther but MHO is that you are more than safe inside of 300 yards with 165 grain .30 cal projectile. If you have a good load worked up with the 165, don't bother to make up a whole new one just to gain 15 grains... Esp. if you're load with the 165 is fast! do you know the FPS?[/b]

VERY true,... however you don't want to have your FPS exceed the twist rate of your barrel !

I developed a load for my 7 Mag that went a bit too fast and the accuracy fell way out there.

You''ll KNOW when that happens,... trust me! I went from a very accurate load to something that
printed all over a 8" target @ 100 yards.

 

[AZ Jim]

I would agree the 165 grn. bullet should be adequate for cow elk especially if you have already sighted it in and it shoots well. That being said, if you were just starting I would recommend the 180 grn. using one of the many well constructed bullets out there. From my experience elk are tough critters and can take a shot. The 180's provide for a little more penetration if you hit bone.

My furthest shot on elk was just over 300 yards. It was a cow and estimated to weigh 550 lbs. on the hoof. The bullet went right into the boiler room, double lung above the heart. The bullet stopped under the skin on the offside after breaking the leg / shoulder. She still ran over 100 yards. I believe in a medium heavy, for caliber bullet when hunting elk.

On the other hand my son shot a cow elk through the heart with a .243 Win. at 80 yards with a 100 grn, Nosler Partition. The bullet did not hit bone and landed just under the skin on the offside. The elk took 10 steps an fell over dead. Shot placement is critical no matter what you use.


AZ Jim

 

[wmidbrook]

I've enjoyed calling in 3 bulls so far before Sept. 1. All of these elk were closer to me than 50 yards and all branched bulls...no shots offered. For me, it's more about getting close up and personal with my quary than taking that 900 yd. shot with a .50 cal bmg just 'cause I could.

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE </div>

Well if you want that kind of answer, the State of Colorado rule is the that it needs to have a minimum of 1000 foot pounds at 100 yards[/b]

And Washington state is in alignment with that statement--it applies nicely to muzzleloaders.

I think there are many good calibers with less umph than a .270 if one were to refrain from shooting beyond 150 yards:
6.5x55 swede
6 mm rem
243 win
35 rem
30-30
etc.

But, for the average joe...I think most guys can tolerate a 270 or 7mm-08's recoil and with practice can get acceptable shot placement out to 200 or maybe even 300 yards. Nonetheless, there is little doubt in my mind that a well place shot from a .338 at 300 yards is somewhat more likely to anchor a big bull right then & there as opposed to a .270.....but, why quibble over a 100 extra yards worth of tracking if you are 50% more likely to place a pill from a .270 in the boiler room than one from a .338?

 

[Huntr Pat]

I voted 243 as a smallest cal, But I hunt with a 7mm Weatherby Mag-other back ups wood be my 308/270.
But I primarily Bow hunt.

 

[Salty Bum]

This is an interesting article about this subject.

http://www.huntingmag.com/big_game/ideal_elk/index.html

 

[oldworld124]

I agree. That was an interesting article.

I shoot a .270 as well as one of my hunting buddies. I am going for my first elk this year. My buddy has taken 4 elk with his .270 . I guided him on the last one he took. All of those elk were taken with one shot each. We have always been extremely careful with shot placement. I have shot many, many deers and some pronghorns and mainly use the .270.

Just my 2cts worth.

 

[macktruckturner]

I voted for .24 cal, on both - for reasons that have already been discussed. Right now I've got five rifles, a T/C Encore with a .223 Rem barrel that presently has no sights and a .260 Remington barrel with a 3-9x scope up top, my 1894 in .30-30 with a Williams peep out back and a hooded post up front, my Mosin-Nagant M44 with sights machined with a dull spoon, and a chamber bored w/ the handle of that same spoon, and my Remington 572 .22 rabbit 'n squirrel slayer. Ultimately that leaves me with two realistic choices, the T/C with my .260 barrel, or my .30-30. I can shoot the caps off 2L coke bottles at 200m with the 1894, consistently and from a variety of positions. If I'm hungry, and dinner walks within that range, it is going down. That said, if you know what you can do with a given rifle, do what you have to do. You have to shoot what you are comfortable with, and if you hunt the way I hunt, you know your limits.

 

[Sigma]

What do you guys think, should I give the 6.5x55 a try? Not a handloader, I've got Lapua Mega 155 gr. loads. Otherwise, it's the old '06 shooting 185 gr. Lapua Mega's.

How do you think the Swede would do on elk at 300? Shots would of course, be well placed.

 

[hatchet1]

as stated many,many times above,your shot placement is key, just make sure your not shootin that copper crap
and you'll do just fine

by the way,i am a huge fan of the .270win&257wby mag.both have done the
job on some awnry and tuff critters,i also shoot a.325wsm&.300win mag,of the 4 i just mentioned,if it came down to
just keeping one gun,it would be my .270win, just my

got it for my 16th b-day,we have a relationship...

 

[Sigma]

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (hatchet1 @ Oct 3 2008, 07:57 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div>

as stated many,many times above,your shot placement is key, just make sure your not shootin that copper crap
and you'll do just fine

by the way,i am a huge fan of the .270win&257wby mag.both have done the
job on some awnry and tuff critters,i also shoot a.325wsm&.300win mag,of the 4 i just mentioned,if it came down to
just keeping one gun,it would be my .270win, just my

got it for my 16th b-day,we have a relationship...[/b]

I think the .270 is a great round. But I also believe that the better loads for the Swede outperform the .270, especially handloads. It's no secret that the 6.5x55 retains more velocity than the .270 at all ranges.

Two factory loads compared: 6.5x55 Lapua Mega 155 gr. compared to .270 Federal 150 gr. Nosler Partition:

6.5x55 Muzzle 100 200 300 400 500
Velocity 2559 2421 2288 2159 2033 1913
Energy 2253 2017 1801 1603 1423 1259

.270 Muzzle 100 200 300 400 500
Velocity 2850 2650 2460 2280 2110 1940
Energy 2705 2345 2020 1735 1480 1255

At 400, the .270 loses 740 fps, whereas the 6.5x55 loses only 526 fps. At that range, both velocities are very close, also remaining energy. Even further out, the Swede begins to surpass the .270 although initial velocity at the muzzle was close to 300 fps less. Now, that's a well engineered round. When you add better sectional density (= better penetration) and lower recoil to the mix, the Swede gets the nod, IMO. Proof that the Mauser bros. in Oberndorf knew what they were doing over 100 years ago.

 

[hafpakcerts]

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Sigma @ Oct 11 2008, 08:28 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div>

It's no secret that the 6.5x55 retains more velocity than the .270 at all ranges.

Two factory loads compared: 6.5x55 Lapua Mega 155 gr. compared to .270 Federal 150 gr. Nosler Partition:

6.5x55 Muzzle 100 200 300 400 500
Velocity 2559 2421 2288 2159 2033 1913
Energy 2253 2017 1801 1603 1423 1259

.270 Muzzle 100 200 300 400 500
Velocity 2850 2650 2460 2280 2110 1940
Energy 2705 2345 2020 1735 1480 1255[/b]

Hey Sigma, did you read the numbers that you posted? It looks to me that the 270 is faster at all ranges quoted. I'm not here to knock the swede as I'm sure plenty moose have fallen to it.

 

[Sigma]

Would I post the numbers and not read them? The Swede is not faster, the chart demonstrates the Swede's ability to retain velocity. I.e. the 6.5x55 starts out a full 300 fps slower than the .270 but has near the same velocity and energy at 500. According to the chart, at 500 yards the .270 loses 910 fps but the 6.5x55 only loses 646 fps. Cool?

 

[Sigma]

Would I post the numbers and not read them? The Swede is not faster, the chart demonstrates the Swede's ability to retain velocity. I.e. the 6.5x55 starts out a full 300 fps slower than the .270 but has near the same velocity and energy at 500. According to the chart, at 500 yards the .270 loses 910 fps but the 6.5x55 only loses 646 fps. Cool?

Double post -