Adequate Cartridge for Elk???

[JaseinMT]

It is fun when dangerous game hunting somehow gets into a discussion of deer/elk hunting. A century ago, guys were hunting ALL of the dangerous game in Africa with cartridges that are considered marginal for whitetails nowdays. 6.5 M-S? 7mm Mauser? They have killed hundreds of the most dangerous animals in Africa. So by that standard, your deer rifle is likely superb for elk, since it could kill lions, elephants.

It is always the bullet hitting the animal in vital areas that kills. It will never be a cartridge, chambering, or rifle that does the killing. The only elk I've seen lost were shot with big cartridges making less than optimal hits. I've never seen a bullet bounce off an elk. I've known many that use a 243 or 6mm for elk who have never even had a rodeo, just dozens of recovered animals. The bottom line is that ANY cartridge has the potential to kill an elk. Most guys can't shoot that well, and think that more power is somehow going to make up for it, which is sad to me. Elk hit in the vitals die, like anything else. You need the penetration of a 22lr to get it done.

I'm tired of the sales pitch rehashing that happens on these forums, which is why I don't bother to get on or comment often, but I couldn't resist the opening. 7mm Mauser, killing everything since 1898!

 

[cohunter14]

There you go, we now have the answer...everyone go get a 22lr and practice your shooting. Sooner or later you will be ready for your elk hunt...

 

[Barrelnut]

There you go, we now have the answer...everyone go get a 22lr and practice your shooting. Sooner or later you will be ready for your elk hunt...

More than that, you should also be ready for your Lion hunt!

 

[bigngreen]

I've seen hundreds of elk taken and guided and culled a fair number of elk and I have never seen a chambering make up for a crappy shot placement. I've had to track elk hit with 375's poorly, the last bull I put down was shot with a 300 RUM at a moderate range but with poor bullet placement it took me a couple days to get in a position to kill him and it only took one round with good shot placement from a much smaller cal to kill him.

I watch probably close to a dozen elk killed last year by kids using a 243, not a single one lost, but they listen to where you want them to hit it and one round through the vitals, a little stumbling and they got their elk. Only had one put a second round through a bull but it really wasn't needed once I opened him up, just dead on his feet.

I shot a 520gr solids from a 458 for a while, solid medicine for rhino or elephant by any standard and if I shot elk through the vitals they died and if not they ran, same with every chambering I've used to kill elk, shoot them through the vitals with a bullet that opens and makes it to the opposite side and their dead, period!

If a 243 is the best rifle you can shoot and you handle it well I'd far rather have you on an elk hunt than someone with a ground canon that they are scared to death of, would a 300 be better, only if you can shoot it as well as the 243.

Last 4 elk of last season were all taken over 800 yards with either a 6.5 or a 338 RUM, the only one to run was a cow that hit by the RUM a touch back but still catching the lungs, everything else dropped or took the hit wobbled and fell. Elk respect shot placement not how much powder you blow down your barrel, maybe lions do but not elk!

 

[Barrelnut]

I'm sure we have all been there and done that below. They were probably all using a 458. Except the last guy. 243 all the way baby!gun)

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vNYwusa8xUY]lion hunt .A man was about be be eaten - YouTube[/ame]

 

[JaseinMT]

The end of that video had contact info?? That was an advertisement?!? Holy S&))!! That guide with the "Wait...wait..."; no sir, I think I will shoot while it is sitting there looking at me. A whole lot of missing with a lot of big guns. Too familiar.

 

[MMERSS]

With choices it's sometimes beneficial to examine the "whys" to a choice rather than solely "what" choice is made. Not everyone hunts in the same terrain, same weather, same band of harvest range, has the same shooting experience, has the same precision potential hunting firearm, and so on.

Case in point, there is not doubt the rifle I've harvested the majority of deer with additionally would be capable of harvesting elk. However this same deer rifle for my type of elk hunting would not be a wise choice. Fact to the matter it would be an irresponsible choice. The band of harvest ranges can easily surpass 800 yards, uncertainty with winds varies and the terrain can be very difficult to recover an elk in once an animal moves into the thicket. An enjoyable experience with an elk hunt can turn sour if an elk is not harvested quickly. The quicker the better. An elk moving as little as 200 yards from where it was shot can be extremely difficult to retrieve. The deer rifle, for that matter any non-magnum cartridge, is not even in the for consideration elk hunting picture.

To date I have yet to experience a lost big game animal due to a shot with a magnum cartridge. Unfortunately I've witnessed the opposite watching other hunters shooting non-magnum cartridges. I've also not yet experienced a magnum causing someone I hunt with to shoot "poorer." Heck some pretty petite females have harvested some nice animals near and exceeding 1k with ultra magnums and heavy 338 magnums. The size of the cartridge and weight of bullet had no bearing with their shooting potential.

Each will experience their own type of hunting and shooting conditions. Based on those factors there is an adequate choice, a better choice, and a plain not so smart choice as would be my deer rifle used to elk hunt.
[FONT=&quot][/FONT]

 

[Kudu1]

The modern hunter has a huge selection of calibre's and weapons available to hunt with - Elk (contrary- to popular belief) are really not that hard to kill - a well placed bullet from a 6.5mm cartridge will do it nicely as would a 270, 280, 7mm etc etc.......

If people want to spew rubbish about Bell - do so - but for heavens sakes, do try and get it a little right!


Bell recorded all of his kills and shots fired. It was a business to him, not pleasure, and he needed to record expenditures.

He shot exactly 1,011 elephants; about 800 of them were shot with Rigby-made 7x57mm (.275 Rigby) rifles and round nose 173 grain military ammo.

He shot elephants with a Mannlicher-Schoenauer 6.5x54mm carbine using the long 159 grain FMJ bullets and noted that it was probably the most beautiful rifle he ever had, but gave it up due to faulty ammunition.

He shot his first safari with a Lee Enfield in .303 British and the 215 grain army bullet. Thereafter he kept a ten shot Army& Navy Lee Enfield as a sort of back up and in the hope he might find ten elephants silly enough to stand around long enough for him to use the whole magazine.

He went to rifles chambered in .318 Westley Richards for a while, which is a .32 caliber cartridge firing a 250 grain bullet at about 2400 fps, but found the ammunition unreliable and again returned to the 7x57mm. He later wrote that the .318 Westley Richards was more of a reliable killer for certain shots, while the 7x57 was a "surgeons" rifle.

He also recorded that one of the reasons why he favored the 7x57 was that the ammunition was more reliable and he could not recall ever having a fault with it; whereas British sporting ammunition, apart from the .303 military ammo, gave him endless trouble with splitting cases.

He owned a .450/400 Jeffrey double rifle made by Thomas Bland & Sons, but did not use it after his first safari, as he considered the action not rugged enough and the Mauser repeating action to be just as quick as a double for aimed shooting.
He wrote about being able to drop an elephant with a light caliber rifle if he shot it in the same place that he would have shot it with a heavy rifle and realised this fully when he saw that elephants shot with a .303 died just as quickly when shot in the same place as a .450/400 double rifle with both triggers wired together, so they went off at the same time.

To judge ammunition expenditure and his own shooting, he calculated an average. He discovered that with the .275 (7x57mm) he fired an average of 1.5 shots per kill. This means that half the time he only needed one shot. That is a fair performance for such a large number of elephants killed with a rifle and cartridge that was intended for deer hunting.

It is also interesting to note that, although Bell is the most famous proponent of using small caliber "nitro" rifles for large game, he did not discover the technique, nor was he its earliest advocate. Well known hunter Arthur Neumann, for example, had been shooting elephants with a .303 Lee Metford rifle for years before Walter Bell got into the business.

WDM Bell is forever associated with the John Rigby & Sons Mauser rifle and the .275 Rigby cartridge. ".275 Rigby" was the British designation for the German 7x57mm Mauser cartridge. This cartridge propelled a .284 caliber, 173 grain bullet at around 2300 fps and the bullets he used for elephant brain shots were full metal jacketed solids. He declared once that a soft point bullet had never sullied the bore of his rifle.

It is interesting to compare these ballistics with what is commonly regarded as essential performance today.

 

[MMERSS]

It is interesting to compare these ballistics with what is commonly regarded as essential performance today.

Elk (contrary- to popular belief) are really not that hard to kill.

Kudu,

Very interesting post and detail. I enjoyed the read.

Yes it is interesting comparing ballistics. After all we are in a long range forum. I'm hesitant to equate a specific range to long range as there are many variables at play where one range may not be long range to another. However as a base line to start somewhere the NRA for centerfire competition lists medium range starting at 300 yards and long range starting at 800 yards.

I love ballistics and compare them all the time. The predominant reason why I shoot magnums can be summed up in two words. Lag time. Having an average game harvest range of over 800 yards, the minimum range the NRA classifies as long range, has been quite the challenge. I just haven't gotten to the point with experience yet where I could classify those long range elk as an animal relatively easy to kill. Some hunters may find elk easy to kill, I'm just not there yet and most likely never will.

 

[backyardsniper]

I am a huge fan of the 300wm. I think it is probably one of the greatest cartridges ever made for several reasons. It is a very one size fits all cartridge as I like to say from mice to moose. It can be loaded from 125gr balistic tips to 230gr berger bullets. Now that being said. I am booked on the LRH group hunt in wyoming this year and this will be my first elk hunt. I have a lot of experience with larger cartridges and I put probably a little over a thousand rounds of various centerfire rounds down range each year ranging from 300wm to 338 lapua, at ranges usually from 400-1000yds. I had planned to shoot my 300 on this trip but after some consideration, based on things like longest possible shot I could encounter, wind conditions in that area, and the fact that I just wanted to build another rifle I called my gun smith and I am building a "lightweight lapua improved". By light weight I'm hoping to keep it around 11lbs. Now I will take my 300 as well and I may very well carry it and kill an elk with it, depending on what the terrain looks like when I get there. For me larger caliber is about room for error, and I don't mean room for error in shot placement, I mean the larger flatter shooting cartridge allows you more room for error on shot angle, and wind call and still keep the bullet in the vitals. If you plan on keeping your shot inside 300yds that doesn't really matter with a 300, but with say a 308 vs a 300 the 300 is a lot more forgiving of a slight error in distance or wind call than the 308 is. Same with the lapua. It is a lot more forgiving in the 800-900yd range than the 300 win mag is. Most important is to shoot what you are comfortable with and don't shoot any farther than what you are comfortable with.

 

[jibnast]

I like to tell people shoot what you are most accurate with. If I can give someone a 270 or 308 and they can keep it in the vitals out to 400 then I give them a 300 or 338 win and can only hit a car hood at 300 yards I know what they need to carry. Like I posted earlier I use a 280 mountain rifle and my back up is a 270 and I'm 99% out to 600. I have been on a cow hunt with some friends where a 243 dropped the cow in its takes at 650 which brings me back to the point to what you can shoot accurately

 

[JaseinMT]

Thanks, Kudu1, for that in-depth write up of WDM Bell's exploits with a 7 Mauser. My mention of what the 7x57 has done was meant to be a teaser to get people to do some research, and as well to point out that there are other philosophies for hunting than what is currently eschewed by the current crop of ammo and gun manufacturers and big game departments. Those other philosophies have proven just as valid in the hunting fields.

I stand by what I have written. It is my intent simply to point out the ideological box that many have put themselves in, and to remind all that the killing part of hunting is not that difficult, and requires much less power, powder than what is generally posted on these forums. The OP asked about ranges to 300yds, and mentioned ranges 6-800yds in vids showing small cals killing elk decisively. I was responding to him.

Certainly, as others have pointed out, bigger can be much better when you want to minimize certain variables when the ranges get long and when the conditions get iffy. That said, I've run into many elk hunters packing a cannon that have absolutely no idea what it is capable of, and couldn't shoot it into a pie plate at 300yds. It has gotten ridiculous at times. I see more guys packing a 300 RUM that don't have a clue than those that know what it can do. and can utilize it. So it is to the vast majority that I have interacted with that I post my comments: power is far less important than shooting well, certainly at the ranges most kill elk, and the usual deer rifle with the right bullet is effective far beyond most's ability to hit an elk's vitals.

This forum is about long range hunting, but the OP did not direct his question to that end. Certainly, those who have a long range elk rig and have hunted elk at long range know what caliber, cartridge they like and why, and rarely does each's answer have to do solely with killing power. It usually has more to do with variable minimization.

 

[howco]

+1
Jasienmt.
Well said and good read. Finn aagard is another author with great killing knowledge and recorded data to back up all claims with each caliber. I thoroughly enjoy this forum, but long range is new market catch all. There isnt a scope, gun manufacturer, store, etc that doesnt have long range plastered on it somewhere. I totally agree with the 300 rum issues, guys assume they can make up shot placement with a cannon.I have one, never use it.david long was doing the long range thing way before it was the thing to be into. Stick to what you can shoot most accurately, was the advice always given to me growing up and hunting the west exclusively.

 

[HARPERC]

Comparing the killing of a cat species with low velocity non expanding bullets to shooting a hooved animal with high velocity expanding round is a little over the top don't you think!

True, but I had quit following the thread, and came back and found it had got interesting in my absence.