Is a 270 WSM an adequate elk round?

Micrometer on the base of the bullets recovered.

I've done the same. Of the two measured…..one was a .277 and one was a .243.

These were back before the mono bullets became available, both bullets showed full expansion, appeared to have substantial weight loss (a guestimate on my part), both had minimal penetration, both were encased in what appeared mass of gristle.

It helped confirm my desire for larger caliber, and better constructed bullets. memtb
 
The 270 WSM every so often tempts me lol, the big thing for me is I want to launch the 170 bergers so it would need to be custom.
 
I don't see any problem with the 7WSM. It's far more importance to place the shot in the right place, I have read here with people are taking Elk with 22/250. That's them not me.
Interesting on the Nosler B.T. did that. I have used them for years without ever having that problem. Using 165 gr @ 3300fps, and 200 gr @ 3320fps. Punch them from one end to the other. If I remember correctly I have only come up with 3 bullets that have stayed in the animal. Those were front on or rearend shoots. None have really produced much in blood shot meat.
 
I'd add that the boring old .270 is a more than adequate elk gun as well, not as in it can kill if everything is perfect but as in many guides and outfitters cite it as their suggested starting caliber for serious elk hunting. The wsm is the same thing with just a little more horsepower.
At about 11, I was in a deer camp with Dad. Some guys came buy, stopped to jaw, then ferried their motorcycles over the river. One of them was cussin' up a storm over how useless the 270 Win was for elk, describing his experience of emptying his magazine into the poor animal without result. He'd gone out and bought a .30-06! Even at 11, I knew the fault lay not in his rifle, but in himself!
 
I've done the same. Of the two measured…..one was a .277 and one was a .243.

These were back before the mono bullets became available, both bullets showed full expansion, appeared to have substantial weight loss (a guestimate on my part), both had minimal penetration, both were encased in what appeared mass of gristle.

It helped confirm my desire for larger caliber, and better constructed bullets. memtb
Mem, you and I are "up there". John Nosler developed the Partition a year after I was born. If bullet technology had stopped there the hunting world would be in a better place. Just MHO, of course.
 
I've done the same. Of the two measured…..one was a .277 and one was a .243.

These were back before the mono bullets became available, both bullets showed full expansion, appeared to have substantial weight loss (a guestimate on my part), both had minimal penetration, both were encased in what appeared mass of gristle.

It helped confirm my desire for larger caliber, and better constructed bullets. memtb
Gotta wonder if these bullets were pass-throughs on other elk that hit an elk behind the original target. Or, bad shots. Where did you find them in the elk? Was there any evidence of a bullet path... scarring, etc... to give you an idea of the actual shot placement?

I believe what you're saying, but it's hard to understand how a full penetration with expansion with one of these bullets that passed through heart/lung area would not result in a death from blood loss... even if it took a minute or two.

As an aside, I was watching the Hornady podcast with the two fellows who came up with the 6 GT. George Gardner, the "G" in GT, who owns GA Precision and makes custom rifles was talking about how everyone who wants a custom hunting rifle and picks a caliber asks, "Will it kill an elk?" He's thinking of getting t-shirts made up with "Will it kill an elk?" on the front. His point was, any reasonable big game cartridge, when used within its effective range, will kill an elk. Not excepting the .223 cartridges with fast twist barrels shooting 77 gr bullets.
 
Top