.260 Remington as an Elk Rifle

[Bravo 4]

Wow, FEENIX that is beautiful country!

 

[FEENIX]

Wow, FEENIX that is beautiful country!

Aye Sir!

 

[MudRunner2005]

I will agree.
Maybe (until recent) it's because it seems like the bullet manufacturers have only made "real" long range bullets for these calibers. Is it due to the popularity of these calibers? Or is it just easier to get these calibers a higher BC and still shoot through a standard or factory twist barrel? Some is because guys just like horsepower so to speak, or the mine is bigger than yours mentality.
I say "until recent" because in the last couple years they have focused on other calibers, such as a 7mm and the newer 180+ grainers. However to shoot such projectiles requires a faster twist, so it strays away from masses and taylors to a niche in the shooting community.
I have been a Military Sniper for many years and I have noticed a trend. I, like you, get a kick out of hearing about how the military is using something and so that's what people think they need it. When mostly I'm thinking: 1. The "military" isn't using that, maybe one or two guys in the military, or 2. We don't always use the best stuff because we don't really get to choose our issued gear. The U.S. Military is slow to catch up with the rest of the world on all but new technology.
Even the shows I see on the Military/History channel makes me shake my head because they are crap, and this stuff is being fed to the masses. It's a joke, and folks won't know any better.
As for the .260, it'll kill anything you want and especially at those ranges. But I, like many others here, wouldn't recommend it for larger tougher game. I've seen what elk can do when hit multiple times by larger projectiles. I have a lot of respect for how tough they are.
Just my opinion.
Good post Mud.

It's nice to have a civil debate, compared to the crap-slinging contest that normally goes down in these type of threads. I have (not intentionally) caused a few myself based on my personal opinions, but we all have our favorites and preferences.

Yeah, you KNOW it's going to be a good eavesdrop, when you hear one person say to the other, "You know, the snipers use those..." or "I'm looking for a .338 Lapua for deer hunting...Which one do you recommend?" (I have actually heard this at my local store here in Alabama, where deer don't get much bigger than 250 lbs.). The employee asked the guy what distances he would be shooting, the guy replied, "Long range...You know, 5-600 yards..." I had to walk away back over to the reloading isle to keep from laughing. The employee was trying not to laugh, too, because he saw the look on my face as I walked away. The employee he asked is also a buddy of mine who is former military, we both use the same gunsmith, and we both know enough about guns to not sound stupid (I'm sure some opinions on this will vary). He tells me stuff like that happens daily...Sometimes multiple times.

I'm sure most of the snipers still use the old faithful M24 .308 Win.

Thanks for your service. One of my good buddies is a former Ranger Sniper, he told me he still prefers the .308 Win to just about anything.

 

[benchracer]

A number of years ago, when elk hunting first opened in Kentucky (I lived there at the time), some record book elk were taken with .243's. This was, of course, done at short range, but it shows what is possible when the hunter does his part. Since then, Kentucky has set a legal minimum of .270 for elk, so this whole discussion would be a moot point for any place with similar regulations.

Over the years, I have seen some interesting discussions on LRH regarding elk rifles, elk bullets, and desirable shot placement. I have never hunted elk, but I am interested in such discussions because I hope to have that opportunity some day.

My thinking is that a person should use as much rifle as they can shoot well when pursuing elk. If a .260 is the most a person can handle and shoot well, and it is legal for elk in the area where they plan to hunt, then it is an elk rifle, though it will have to be used with its limitations in mind. Bullet selection, maximum effective range, and shot angles/placement will all have to be carefully managed.

In my own case, though I am a 6.5 fan, I own rifles chambered for more powerful cartridges and I am capable of shooting those rifles well, so I would not consider using my 6.5's for elk. I have a 7x57 loaded with 160 NPT's that I think of as a reasonable starting place for someone who is recoil shy. I think of a .30 or bigger as desirable, but not required. It all depends on hunting conditions and shooter limitations.

 

[HARPERC]

......I have been a Military Sniper for many years and I have noticed a trend. I, like you, get a kick out of hearing about how the military is using something and so that's what people think they need it.........

Zip, Zero, No, military experience, I might be overthinking your post. A fair piece of this thread has turned around to heavy for caliber bullets.

From what I can read it appears the military, has either led or kept up with that trend from the .223 up. Would that be correct, or is your experience different?

 

[RobStar]

It seems like jfseaman gave a very reasonable and well thought out response earlier.

Of the two mature bulls, a 6x6 and 5x6 plus two cows I've taken in the past 16 months with my 300 win mag 180gr TTSX, all with solid vitals hits from less than 300 yards it's not like they just drop dead immediately like a lightening strike. Pretty much all four have simply stood there for a few seconds, their heads tilt and they either sit and drop or fall over to the side.

The internal destruction and damage has been substantial but I have developed a huge respect for how hardy these animals are. Other than one of the bulls, the rest needed to be put down when I got to them.

As I venture into LRH now, I'm definitely looking at other calibers and bullets that maintain more long range energy than my 300wm.

I think if you're asking the question now you already know the answer and only want someone or some group to approve of it. How does that affect your confidence? What is the purpose of going smaller if there's any doubt whatsoever except for the sake of seeing how small you can go?

I'm not judging just commenting.

Robert

 

[Bravo 4]

Zip, Zero, No, military experience, I might be overthinking your post. A fair piece of this thread has turned around to heavy for caliber bullets.

From what I can read it appears the military, has either led or kept up with that trend from the .223 up. Would that be correct, or is your experience different?

If I'm reading your post correct, then I would say yes. For the most part the military has led the way in firearms, ballistics, cartridges, projectiles, equipment, training,etc. Look at how popular some things are: 30-06, .308, .223, AR rifles and accessories,...and so on. For multiple reasons: they are popular due to "the military uses it", maybe its "tacticool", guys in or who were in have experience with it, military surplus, the military has done all the experimenting-trials- and work on said equipment,...and so on.
As much time and money as they sink into research and trials you'd think we would have the best equipment. Not so much; why does Remington, Knights Armament, Leupold, Sierra, Barrett, Beretta keep winning these contracts when there is better equipment out there (especially for the money they pay for this stuff)? I can think of a couple reasons; people who make these decisions are usually just plain ignorant, they have used said companies for so long, and some people are padding their pockets when they shouldn't be.
My reaction to the phrase "the military uses it" are usually: really...who? Or I say not to because there is better equipment out there and maybe for less money.

Disclaimer: guys I'm an angry, disgruntled grunt that does not claim to be an expert at anything! So take my posted comments as you may.

OP, sorry for diverting your thread.

RobStar, good post as well.

 

[FEENIX]

I'm curious what the OP is going to do with the ALL the information provided esp. with his comment ...

D.Cam

I dont have any experiance to speak of. I have shot one Large Bull, and I used a 300 Win Mag 180gr at just over 400 yards. He turned and walked up a hill for about 100 yards turned back and looked at me before he waivered and stumbled and went to the Ground. The bullet went through the lungs and broke the far shoulder. I agree with you totally, as after that experiance I had a lot of respect for Elk, or big Bulls.
This year will be only be a one time thing and it will be on a Cow and I will be shooting a .243 AI............I dont plan on it becoming a habit. If I lived in a place where I could buy an Elk tag over the counter I would probably be shooting a 30cal Magnum.
Its enjoyable to post a question like I did to see all of the different opinions.....but for the most part those people, like yourself, who have lots of experiance all have the same feelings and opinions. For several years I wanted a .338-06, still do, kind of.................but after I buy a new quad I will be saving up for a new Rifle...............and I will be back here looking for more advice and opinions from those with the experiance that really matters.

Greg

Well with the the opinions I have heard I still dont feel that a 300 Mag is the way to go...............To much recoil, should have a MB, better weigh 10+ lbs.........

A 6.5-06 would be a huge improvement over a .243 Just might be the way I will go.

G

... from a 2013 thread >>> http://www.longrangehunting.com/forums/newreply.php?do=newreply&p=833240

 

[Pdvdh]

Ive been told over and over that a .243 and the 105 berger is no Elk Rifle.
So whats all the negative thoughts?

What's your definition of an Elk Rifle? A rifle that will kill an elk with a broadside hit to the ribcage, or to the brain? Or a rifle that will effectively kill an elk with the other less than perfect presentations?

There are many calibers available that will kill elk, depending on the distance, the bullet, and the hit location. Only you can decide which of the multiple available options is an Elk Rifle for you.

A .243 would be a deer and coyote rifle for me. But I could kill an elk with it if my life depended on it.

 

[silvertip-co]

Women and young people often kill Colorado elk all seasons long with 243 and 100 or 105's. 260 140 is fine.

 

[Pdvdh]

I know a guy on Kodiak Island that's shot hundreds of blacktail deer with a .22 Magnum. A person can make whatever they want out of that. What I make of the information is that it's possible to kill a deer with a .22 Magnum. Even though it's illegal to hunt deer in Alaska with a .22 Magnum.

 

[hawk45]

This thread brings up several thoughts.

1. I'm a firm believer that there is a right tool for every job. I'm also a believer that different tools are the right tool for different people based on skill. If I have a 300WM and a .243, and I'm going for deer at 300 yds, I'd take the .243. If I was going for a big elk at the same distance, I'd move up to the 300WM. This also assumes I'm a good shot with each at that distance. The 300WM also becomes more of an asset as all targets move further out. Again assuming my skill can maintain those distances with the tool.

I don't know what you have in your safe, but if you have a .243AI and don't have a Magnum or other LA cartridge, maybe skip the 7-08 build and do a LA build that better suits the game you plan to hunt? Covering the basics is key in a system.

2. This is a comical but relevant quote from Chris Rock.. "Just because you can drive a car with your feet, doesn't mean it's meant to be done.".

Cheers,
Hawk

 

[wilkup]

Just to shake things up a bit...
I prefer to hunt Roosevelts with my 4.5 lbs custom Marlin 1894 chambered in 44 mag with a 17'' barrel. I don't get shots over 50 yards typically and throwing 310gr hardcasts leave BIG holes =)
I'm guessing if this little rifle will leave them dead, so will your 260. Just figure out a safe distance to pull the trigger from.
Good luck and have fun!

If a 243 with a 105 VLD can do this at over 600 yards...
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hY0w1c-gf18
I'd say you're fine with the 260, providing you can hit what you aim at.

 

[RobStar]

......If a 243 with a 105 VLD can do this at over 600 yards...
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hY0w1c-gf18
I'd say you're fine with the 260, providing you can hit what you aim at.

Nice video! I can't tell if she was cold/frozen or in shock!