@memtb what are your absolute two favorite bullets/powder combination (don't need the load data) in the .338WMMy wife killed her first elk with a borrowed .243 Win. and will quickly tell you it was pure luck. She's since taken game with a 264 WM, a 270 Win, and for the past 28 years ….a .338 WM.
She will not hesitate to tell you she much prefers the .338 WM for taking game! Without any real knowledge of ballistics, forum discussions, and other drivel…..she can easily make up her mind on which cartridge she deems as more effective!
Do ya have a source for "depleted uranium" bullets in something under .284"……she may go back to children's rifles!memtb
.338 225 Grain ELDX for Elk
- Thread starter Hunterjones
- Start date
Help Support Long Range Hunting Forum
memtb
Well-Known Member
Just like the bloodshot meat……ya just do a little trimming, or so I'm told!
We use cartridges with real bullets……"uranium" bullets not needed! 
memtb
memtb
Well-Known Member
We "only use one bullet! We started with the original X bullet in '95, then to the TSX, and once introduced the TTSX…… all in 225 grain.
Federal Premium (nickel plated) cases, Federal 215's, a generous helping of RL 22 beneath a Barnes 225 grain TTSX. Our chrono shows 2950 from the 24" barrel.
Shooters Calculator has her @ 1900 fps @ 800 yards in our usual hunting conditions.
She's not shooting long range……as her personal limit is 500 yards! memtb
Last edited:
Hunterjones
Well-Known Member
2950 and a 24" barrel is smokin'
memtb
Well-Known Member
But, it's been pretty effective! 
memtbThanks! I'll see if I can get
Some TTSX
memtb
Well-Known Member
The TTSX's are a bit hard to find …..but, I don't think that they'll disappoint! Unless you take shots at ranges where you've lost sufficient velocity for adequate/reliable expansion!
You may try something other than RL 22, supposedly it's pretty temperature sensitive ….but, we have a lot of it! You may find something of very similar burn rate that is more temp stable! memtb
Right now I have 225sst, 230 eld-x RL 22 and Fed215. I am in no rush. No hunts planned anytime soon
How much proof can anyone produce that all these bullets mentioned do not penetrate deep enough, vaporize, explode, crater, splash, absolutely destroy meat that cannot be simply trimmed or rinsed, etc, etc, etc?
I hear a lot of people talk about it, but then it turns out they've only heard about it. I've also seen a lot of people misunderstand what they're looking at and fail to properly comprehend the results- jumping to the wrong conclusion.
Everyone is entitled to their own options and personal preference, but let's maybe not get carried away with the hearsay. That's not actually helpful.
Rant over.
I hear a lot of people talk about it, but then it turns out they've only heard about it. I've also seen a lot of people misunderstand what they're looking at and fail to properly comprehend the results- jumping to the wrong conclusion.
Everyone is entitled to their own options and personal preference, but let's maybe not get carried away with the hearsay. That's not actually helpful.
Rant over.
W
Wyo37
Guest
My point exactly
memtb
Well-Known Member
I personally experienced it with one bullet many years ago, that supposed to be for large and potentially dangerous game. These were 300 grain bullets designed for a .375 H&H.
These were shot at a mv of approximately 2600 fps. Two of the three failures were on small big game (a deer and an average size Black Bear), both were broadside shots and both bullets failed to ex… I was able to only find small shards of jacket material in the animal.
The 2nd animal (a small spike elk) was shot from behind (a Texas Heart shot) …..an easy, 60 or so yard shot on a standing elk. I initially thought that somehow I had made a poor shot.
Upon seeing the other 2 failures, and subsequent complete, catastrophic failures on test materials (several different types) proved that these bullets were "very fragile"!
If these bullets supposedly designed for large game failed miserably…..I'll be darned if I will shoot a bullet at game that is advertised by the manufacturer to expand violently upon impact and actually state that there bullet will not penetrate deeply!
These may be fine for deer and antelope and varmints, but IMO are not desirable for taking large game…..unless a perfect behind the shoulder impact or perhaps a spine shot is achieved!
I hope that you will not give the typical, "the animal died didn't it"…..which is a crock of feces response!
Hunters can whatever they choose to use…..however, I want a bullet that offers a higher degree of reliability in the advent that the "fairy tale" takes a bad turn! memtb
These were shot at a mv of approximately 2600 fps. Two of the three failures were on small big game (a deer and an average size Black Bear), both were broadside shots and both bullets failed to ex… I was able to only find small shards of jacket material in the animal.
The 2nd animal (a small spike elk) was shot from behind (a Texas Heart shot) …..an easy, 60 or so yard shot on a standing elk. I initially thought that somehow I had made a poor shot.
Upon seeing the other 2 failures, and subsequent complete, catastrophic failures on test materials (several different types) proved that these bullets were "very fragile"!
If these bullets supposedly designed for large game failed miserably…..I'll be darned if I will shoot a bullet at game that is advertised by the manufacturer to expand violently upon impact and actually state that there bullet will not penetrate deeply!
These may be fine for deer and antelope and varmints, but IMO are not desirable for taking large game…..unless a perfect behind the shoulder impact or perhaps a spine shot is achieved!
I hope that you will not give the typical, "the animal died didn't it"…..which is a crock of feces response!
Hunters can whatever they choose to use…..however, I want a bullet that offers a higher degree of reliability in the advent that the "fairy tale" takes a bad turn! memtb
W
Wyo37
Guest
You do you. But if you honestly believe a 225gr bullet, specifically an eldx, won't kill an elk from muzzle velocity to 1800fps, I don't know what to say.....
I prefer lower starting velocities and eldm's, personally. I will post a report on how the 108eldm does in hopefully a couple of elk this year. I suspect they'll perform just like the 140s. Perfectly.
I prefer lower starting velocities and eldm's, personally. I will post a report on how the 108eldm does in hopefully a couple of elk this year. I suspect they'll perform just like the 140s. Perfectly.
memtb
Well-Known Member
Wyo37, I'm not certain if this post was directed to me or not….but, I'll respond as if it were!
I would never begin to suggest that a 225 grain ELDX from a .338 WM (or most any other .338) will not kill an elk! I only say that there are better bullets. If and I repeat if, the bullet integrity/design/ limitations are similar to the 143 ELDX in 6.5…..I think (my opinion) there are better bullets available to the would be elk hunter!
Heck, a well placed 22 LR "can" kill an elk, but again…..there are better options.
I strongly believe that the hunter, who may have limited opportunities to hunt elk should try and get a bullet that offers a greater range of shot options or has a higher success probability when everything goes wrong!
For those of us that are blessed with living in elk country, and will have many opportunities ……we can either pass on any less than ideal shots ……or if an indiscriminate hunter, wound/maim an elk with a "failed shot" and move on to find another! But, now I venturing into "Hunter Ethics" which is "verboten"! memtb
Last edited:
If you have paid attention to my posts/threads, particularly the ones regarding bullet construction and terminal ballistics, you'd already know I'm not that basic. There's definitely more to it than that, but there's also way more to "every soft constructed bullet will perform bad" or that they have such limiting factors, etc.
I feel like I've explained ad nauseam how to set yourself up for success with lots of different types of bullets. It's not actually that complicated and the windows aren't as small as some would have you believe.
