Long range HUNTING cartridges limitations

[greatwhitehntr]

Hard to beat 300 RUM with a 230 Berger coming out at 3135fps & 300grain Berger coming out at 2965fps out of my lapua. Turns a bad shot into a good shoot quick. (Miss read the wind)
Don't get me wrong love my 6.5x284 & my little old 308 but I think I will love my new custom 28 Nosler pushing 195 Berger @ 3100fps +. I love nowing I have better B.C. and heavier bullets going fast for DRT animals. Just me. oh and I am lazy you have to be on your game to do all of that with a 308 win.

 

[WildRose]

I agree with Jim Borden, if you want to drop them in their tracks use a 300 RUM and a 180 Barnes TSX. Ballistic coefficient does not kill mammals, sectional density does.

Sectional density only equates to penetration.

Massive, rapid blood loss and/or interrupting the CNS is what gives you the quickest and most humane kills.

That requires a bullet that penetrates through the vitals, expands enough to cause blood pressure to hit zero within seconds and/or interrupts the flow of signals from the brain to the rest of the body.

Larger diameter expanding bullets at high velocity achieve this best.

It matters little if your entry hole is a half inch if all you have is a half inch exit and pass through vs a .22 caliber bullet that gives the same exit wound.

Hydrostatic shock is also a very real thing, thus impact energy and velocity indeed do matter. You don't actually have to penetrate a vessel or the spinal cord to interrupt it's ability to function.

If one has the ability to always put the bullet exactly where intended and you have a perfect understanding of the target animal's anatomy your choice of bullet matters little beyond choosing one that penetrates adequately. For the rest of us we have to rely on bullets and calibers that give us an increased margin of error.

 

[Rich Coyle]

s. Why waste my time with anything lighter than a 160-class bullet in a 7mm, when I have a .25-06 AI pushing 115 VLD's at over 3,350 FPS...

It's not a waste of time. It's effective use of your tool. My fastest kill on elk not shot in the head was with the Barnes TSX 130 from a 7 mag. That includes using .375 260 grain, 7mm 175 grain and 7mm 160 grain. The last three were Nosler partitions.

 

[bigngreen]

It's not a waste of time. It's effective use of your tool. My fastest kill on elk not shot in the head was with the Barnes TSX 130 from a 7 mag. That includes using .375 260 grain, 7mm 175 grain and 7mm 160 grain. The last three were Nosler partitions.

The theory of light and fast with a Barnes is workable on deer but on elk it has no consistency, one you may flatten then the next one you don't even know you hit or you hit a bone and the bullet lacks the mass to stay on course and deflects and just wounds them, it's a flawed theory on larger game!!

 

[Canhunter35]

I agree with wildrose, I've used gmx bullets which are a monolithic bullet similar to a Barnes, but now I much prefer a bullet that sheds material and creates a wide wound channel.

 

[Rich Coyle]

bigngreen,

I don't if a 236 pound and 212 pound pig is as tough as an elk or not. But I killed two pigs that large with two shots from a .270 Win with Barnes TTSX 110 @ 3,475 feet per second. Both exited. On the 212 pounder the bullet hit the off side shoulder.

With my limited experience I would not hesitate to shoot an elk with this load.

 

[bigngreen]

bigngreen,

I don't if a 236 pound and 212 pound pig is as tough as an elk or not. But I killed two pigs that large with two shots from a .270 Win with Barnes TTSX 110 @ 3,475 feet per second. Both exited. On the 212 pounder the bullet hit the off side shoulder.

With my limited experience I would not hesitate to shoot an elk with this load.

I've shot two elk in the shoulder with a 300 WBY with 168 gr TSX that I got no penetration past the shoulder because the front of the bullet expands beyond what the weight can push it though. I shoot a 270 110 TTSX at 3600 fps and there is no way in hell I'd shoot an elk in the shoulder with it, they are good antelope and deer.
I've seen so many elk wounded with light fast copper bullets that if someone shows up to shoot elk with them they shoot my rifle or go home.

 

[Pdvdh]

Looking forward to some good stuff now...

 

[dirthead1]

bigngreen,

Question for you. I'll be hunting in Arizona unit 6a late bull this year. After doing some scouting of the area, shot distance will be 200 yards or less (probably closer to 100). It's just extremely dense forest. I had originally put together a 7mm Remington mag shooting 180 Hybrids. That was going to be my elk rifle, but since the shot distance is going to be very short, I'm reconsidering going to a lighter rifle. I'll be hiking a lot.

I have 2 alternatives. First is a 308 that shoots 165 Accubonds very well. It's a 20" rifle, very light and easy to pack. Second is a 6.5 Creedmoor shooting 140 Berger Elite Hunters. It's even lighter than the 308. Both are extremely accurate with those particular bullets. With my shot distances in mind, which would you recommend? I wouldn't shoot at the shoulder with either, but am leaning toward the 6.5 with Berger bullet. Thoughts?

 

[bigngreen]

I have not shot elk with the 6.5 140 elite hunter's but a semi load with the 140 VLD and I have max confidence in it. Up close the Accubonds in the 308 will perform it's just that they get near that 2200 fps impact Mark and they will struggle to open sometimes.

 

[dirthead1]

I have not shot elk with the 6.5 140 elite hunter's but a semi load with the 140 VLD and I have max confidence in it. Up close the Accubonds in the 308 will perform it's just that they get near that 2200 fps impact Mark and they will struggle to open sometimes.

Thanks! That confirms what I was thinking. I appreciate your insight.

 

[Rich Coyle]

bigngreen,

Like dirthead1 posted, I would not aim at a shoulder. There is too much good food there. When I had a friend going elk hunting, who used a .243 and was going to use factory ammo, I asked if I could load some ammo for him. He used 100 grain Nosler Partitions at 3,100 feet per second and killed two elk with them. I recovered the first in the hide of the far side. The elk traveled at most fifty yards. I wasn't with him the next year.

 

[Bowfishn]

Never could understand why someone would purposely shoot into thick heavy meat and bone of an animal in the deer family. Behind the shoulder heart lung shot, just rib cage to penetrate, destroy what gives it oxygen and pumps it around and it won't be long for this world. Think like a bow hunter.
My son and his friend last year took an 800 lb Bull Moose here in Vermont with a 30-06 shooting a Hornady 165 gr Interlock Bullet traveling only 2800 fps. Slightly angling away, hit a Rib going in angled through lungs and arteries above the heart stopped under the skin on the opposite shoulder. Didn't go 25 yards was heaped up dead. Now an Elk may be a harder animal to put down but it is in no way a tougher animal as far as hide, bone and muscle than a Moose.

 

[Bravo 4]

Two examples of why I shoot for shoulder, preferably both:
1. Several years back I was hunting on public land in the Ozark Mountains with my best friend. Shot what is probably the largest whitetail buck I will ever kill. 7mm RemMag w/140 grain Ballistic Tips, broadside @ 75 yards behind the shoulder. Seen the rose of death behind shoulder after trigger pull, buck ran right past me toward the old dirt road where we parked (I was 200 yards in). Waited maybe 20 minutes and started to trail him, great blood trail. He ran up and died next to the road across from the truck/camper. My friend saw a truck pull up and the guy couldn't get it in the truck because it was so big, so he unknowingly helped him steal my giant buck!
2. Shot a good buck with the same rifle and 162 grain SST behind the shoulder, broadside @ 200 yards (at the most). Seen the impact from the prone/bipod position. Buck ran about 75 yards and jumped into a heavily running-flooded creek, never to emerge or be seen again.
So that was two good deer I lost with a more than adequate cartridge firing projectiles appropriate for the task, and because they ran somewhat distance, lost them. So now I want to smash them and anchor them on the spot. Some meat loss is acceptable to me, considering the other alternative is none at all.
Also, where I hunt elk I don't want them to go somewhere even harder to pack out. From what I've seen an injured elk has a tendency to run down, that means I have to pack them up.
This is just me going off my own experiences. Your mileage may vary.