Elk cartridges research
04-27-2004, 01:41 PM
#1
Typical Buck
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location:
Posts: 549
Elk cartridges research
Here you go read a logical explantion of elk calibers and practical common sense.
Elk Cartridges
By Chuck Hawks
Elk rifles and/or cartridges is a controversial subject that I should probably avoid like the plague. Everyone seems to have an opinion, and most of them are contradictory. For a writer, it is likely to be a lose/lose situation. However, I will give it a shot (so to speak).
Just how big is an elk? Of course, individual animals vary in weight. According to the information compiled by Edward A. Matunas, an average mature male Rocky Mountain elk weighs about 500 pounds. A very large male might weigh 800 pounds, and a very large female about 600 pounds. In extreme cases elk can weigh as much as 1100 pounds. The Roosevelt elk of the Pacific Northwest's rain forests are larger. An average male probably weighs about 700 pounds on the hoof, and an extreme example might scale 1200 pounds. For the purposes of this article I am assuming an animal weighing about 600 pounds.
Please bear in mind that in all cases and for all calibers I am assuming that the hunter uses a bullet of adequate weight, sectional density, and expansion characteristics for the cartridge recommended, and gets it into a vital spot (usually the heart/lung area) of the elk. It doesn't have to be a perfect shot that slips between two ribs and blows up the heart, but I am assuming a good shot with an adequate bullet.
One of the real problems with cartridge recommendations is the vitality and state of mind of the individual animal when shot. Most hunters have noticed how relatively easy it is to kill a relaxed animal that is just standing around, and how difficult it can be to stop an animal fleeing for its life. These are variables that are hard to account for in any list. For the record, all of the cartridge suggestions below assume a reasonably undisturbed animal, not one high on adrenalin.
It would be too cumbersome to list every adequate elk cartridge, and I would inadvertently leave out someone's favorite in any case. So the cartridges mentioned below are just examples of typical satisfactory elk cartridges. If a cartridge is not listed it does not mean it is no good. Look for a cartridge with similar ballistics. If you find one, then the cartridge in question is also probably adequate.
I think it might be wise to divide elk cartridges into three categories as follows:
1. Cartridges primarily intended for shooting antelope, deer and black bear (CXP2 class game) that are also adequate for elk at short range (say to about 100 yards and in some cases more). These cartridges are at the lower end of the power scale as recommended elk cartridges. Their advantage is that most hunters can usually shoot them more accurately than the more powerful elk cartridges. Included in this group are the .257 Weatherby Magnum, 6.5x55, .260 Remington, 6.5mm Remington Magnum, 7x57, 7mm-08 Remington, .300 Savage and similar cartridges.
2. Combination antelope, deer, black bear, and elk cartridges that are more powerful than strictly necessary for medium size big game. These are somewhat more powerful than the cartridges in Category 1. They are nearly ideal all-around cartridges, and adequate for shooting elk at medium range (approximately 100-200+ yards); but they are not necessarily perfect for game at either end of the size spectrum. Many hunters find the muzzle blast and recoil of these cartridges intimidating, particularly when shooting the heavier weight bullets, but few will admit it. This category includes such cartridges as the 6.5x68, .264 Winchester Magnum, .270 Winchester, 7x64 Brenneke, .280 Remington, .308 Winchester, .30-06 Springfield, 8x57JS, .338-57 O'Connor, .356 Winchester and similar cartridges.
3. Ideal elk cartridges. These are good cartridges to consider if you are buying a rifle specifically for elk hunting and don't mind substantial recoil and muzzle blast. Their principle drawback is that most shooters do mind the recoil and muzzle blast, particularly of the magnums, and simply cannot do their best shooting with these cartridges. For long range elk shooting (200-300+ yards) the list is limited to cartridges such as the .270 WSM, .270 Weatherby Magnum, the 7mm Magnums, .338-06 A-Square, the .300 Magnums, 8x68S, 8mm Remington Magnum, and the .338 Magnums. At short to medium range (200 yards or less) the list expands to include the .358 Winchester, .35 Whelen, .350 Remington Magnum, 9.3x74R, .444 Marlin, .450 Marlin, .45-70 and similar cartridges.
Bullet placement is the most important factor in killing power. (Memorize that sentence!) I suspect that is why we hear such divergent views about many of the cartridges commonly used for elk hunting. The .270 Winchester, or any of the Category 2 cartridges, would be examples of this. Some hunters report that the .270 is a nearly ideal elk cartridge. Others consider it adequate, but not ideal. Still others consider the .270 worthless for elk hunting, and recommend nothing less than a .300 Magnum as the absolute minimum elk cartridge.
The truth is that most hunters simply have not shot enough elk, or observed enough elk killed, to be able to draw valid conclusions from their personal experience. It is very instructive to hang around the check out station for a controlled hunt--I have done this. There you can benefit from the experiences of lots of successful (and some not so successful) hunters.
Based on a fair amount of research, I regard the .270 as an adequate elk cartridge. If a hunter puts a decent 150 grain .277" bullet into a vital spot, the result is a dead elk. But the .270 will not bowl over even a relaxed elk. Neither, for that matter, will most other calibers. An elk is a big animal!
A lot of hunters are not particularly good shots, and a great many shooters flinch regularly with high intensity calibers like the .270 Winchester. So they think they placed the shot well, when actually they only wounded the animal. A .270 bullet will not bag an elk if it does not hit in an immediately vital spot. The elk may die later, but by that time it will probably be far away, and most hunters could not track an elk through the forest if their lives depended on it. These hunters are very apt to blame the rifle for their bad shooting.
The result is that guys who can shoot and who put their first bullet into an elk's vitals think the .270 is a perfectly adequate elk cartridge; those who can't and don't think it is lousy. They often conclude that nothing less than a .338 Magnum will stop an elk.
Of course, if you put a bullet in the paunch, a .338 Winchester Magnum probably does have a better chance of slowing down an elk than a .270--but you are not supposed to shoot any animal in the paunch in the first place! And even with a .338 a paunch hit can not be relied on to anchor an elk.
Most of these guys who can't shoot don't recover the animals they wound, but some do. It makes me wonder when a guy at a check out station tells me how lousy the .270 (or .308, .30-06, whatever) is at killing elk, and that next year he is going to replace his wimpy .270 with a .300 Magnum. Then I examine his trophy and find a .270 bullet hole in the muscle of the neck that missed the vertebrae, two .270 bullets in the guts, another in the ham, and finally one .300 Magnum bullet in the lungs--put there by his hunting partner. I am no forensic wizard, but I can pretty much figure out what happened. But this guy is going to tell 50 people that the .270 is no good for elk. And I mean that literally, as market research has shown that the typical bum story reaches about 50 people.
All of this makes it difficult and even risky to suggest calibers for specific purposes. I have tried to be conservative, but not excessivley so, in my recommendations.
As you can see from Category 2 above, I consider the popular all-around cartridges like the .270, .308, and .30-06 adequate, but maybe not "ideal," for elk. Perhaps the .300 Magnums, 8mm Magnums, and .338 Magnums are the perfect elk cartridges--if the hunter can shoot them well.
Choose a cartridge much more powerful than a .338 Magnum and you are getting into the over-gunned area. A .375, .416, or .458 Magnum will certainly kill elk reliably, but they are simply not necessary. And the weight of such guns, plus their outsized recoil, is a handicap to most hunters. In fact, everyone can shoot more accurately with a less powerful rifle, so why would anyone handicap themselves by using a Big Bertha caliber when it is neither necessary nor desirable?
On the other hand, I realize that the .30-30 Winchester, .32 Winchester Special, .35 Remington, .38-55 Winchester and similar cartridges will give consistent one shot elk kills in the hands of a good shot who waits for the right angle at short range. They have done so thousands of times. But I don't recommend that a modern hunter purchase any of them as primary elk cartridges. The energy of these cartridges is marginal, and there are better choices.
I would much rather see an elk hunter carrying a .308 that he can shoot well rather than a .300 Magnum that causes him to flinch. Elk are big, vital animals, but they are not indestructible. Use a reasonably adequate caliber within its energy and trajectory limits, an appropriate bullet, and most of all get that bullet into a vital spot!
Elk Cartridges
By Chuck Hawks
Elk rifles and/or cartridges is a controversial subject that I should probably avoid like the plague. Everyone seems to have an opinion, and most of them are contradictory. For a writer, it is likely to be a lose/lose situation. However, I will give it a shot (so to speak).
Just how big is an elk? Of course, individual animals vary in weight. According to the information compiled by Edward A. Matunas, an average mature male Rocky Mountain elk weighs about 500 pounds. A very large male might weigh 800 pounds, and a very large female about 600 pounds. In extreme cases elk can weigh as much as 1100 pounds. The Roosevelt elk of the Pacific Northwest's rain forests are larger. An average male probably weighs about 700 pounds on the hoof, and an extreme example might scale 1200 pounds. For the purposes of this article I am assuming an animal weighing about 600 pounds.
Please bear in mind that in all cases and for all calibers I am assuming that the hunter uses a bullet of adequate weight, sectional density, and expansion characteristics for the cartridge recommended, and gets it into a vital spot (usually the heart/lung area) of the elk. It doesn't have to be a perfect shot that slips between two ribs and blows up the heart, but I am assuming a good shot with an adequate bullet.
One of the real problems with cartridge recommendations is the vitality and state of mind of the individual animal when shot. Most hunters have noticed how relatively easy it is to kill a relaxed animal that is just standing around, and how difficult it can be to stop an animal fleeing for its life. These are variables that are hard to account for in any list. For the record, all of the cartridge suggestions below assume a reasonably undisturbed animal, not one high on adrenalin.
It would be too cumbersome to list every adequate elk cartridge, and I would inadvertently leave out someone's favorite in any case. So the cartridges mentioned below are just examples of typical satisfactory elk cartridges. If a cartridge is not listed it does not mean it is no good. Look for a cartridge with similar ballistics. If you find one, then the cartridge in question is also probably adequate.
I think it might be wise to divide elk cartridges into three categories as follows:
1. Cartridges primarily intended for shooting antelope, deer and black bear (CXP2 class game) that are also adequate for elk at short range (say to about 100 yards and in some cases more). These cartridges are at the lower end of the power scale as recommended elk cartridges. Their advantage is that most hunters can usually shoot them more accurately than the more powerful elk cartridges. Included in this group are the .257 Weatherby Magnum, 6.5x55, .260 Remington, 6.5mm Remington Magnum, 7x57, 7mm-08 Remington, .300 Savage and similar cartridges.
2. Combination antelope, deer, black bear, and elk cartridges that are more powerful than strictly necessary for medium size big game. These are somewhat more powerful than the cartridges in Category 1. They are nearly ideal all-around cartridges, and adequate for shooting elk at medium range (approximately 100-200+ yards); but they are not necessarily perfect for game at either end of the size spectrum. Many hunters find the muzzle blast and recoil of these cartridges intimidating, particularly when shooting the heavier weight bullets, but few will admit it. This category includes such cartridges as the 6.5x68, .264 Winchester Magnum, .270 Winchester, 7x64 Brenneke, .280 Remington, .308 Winchester, .30-06 Springfield, 8x57JS, .338-57 O'Connor, .356 Winchester and similar cartridges.
3. Ideal elk cartridges. These are good cartridges to consider if you are buying a rifle specifically for elk hunting and don't mind substantial recoil and muzzle blast. Their principle drawback is that most shooters do mind the recoil and muzzle blast, particularly of the magnums, and simply cannot do their best shooting with these cartridges. For long range elk shooting (200-300+ yards) the list is limited to cartridges such as the .270 WSM, .270 Weatherby Magnum, the 7mm Magnums, .338-06 A-Square, the .300 Magnums, 8x68S, 8mm Remington Magnum, and the .338 Magnums. At short to medium range (200 yards or less) the list expands to include the .358 Winchester, .35 Whelen, .350 Remington Magnum, 9.3x74R, .444 Marlin, .450 Marlin, .45-70 and similar cartridges.
Bullet placement is the most important factor in killing power. (Memorize that sentence!) I suspect that is why we hear such divergent views about many of the cartridges commonly used for elk hunting. The .270 Winchester, or any of the Category 2 cartridges, would be examples of this. Some hunters report that the .270 is a nearly ideal elk cartridge. Others consider it adequate, but not ideal. Still others consider the .270 worthless for elk hunting, and recommend nothing less than a .300 Magnum as the absolute minimum elk cartridge.
The truth is that most hunters simply have not shot enough elk, or observed enough elk killed, to be able to draw valid conclusions from their personal experience. It is very instructive to hang around the check out station for a controlled hunt--I have done this. There you can benefit from the experiences of lots of successful (and some not so successful) hunters.
Based on a fair amount of research, I regard the .270 as an adequate elk cartridge. If a hunter puts a decent 150 grain .277" bullet into a vital spot, the result is a dead elk. But the .270 will not bowl over even a relaxed elk. Neither, for that matter, will most other calibers. An elk is a big animal!
A lot of hunters are not particularly good shots, and a great many shooters flinch regularly with high intensity calibers like the .270 Winchester. So they think they placed the shot well, when actually they only wounded the animal. A .270 bullet will not bag an elk if it does not hit in an immediately vital spot. The elk may die later, but by that time it will probably be far away, and most hunters could not track an elk through the forest if their lives depended on it. These hunters are very apt to blame the rifle for their bad shooting.
The result is that guys who can shoot and who put their first bullet into an elk's vitals think the .270 is a perfectly adequate elk cartridge; those who can't and don't think it is lousy. They often conclude that nothing less than a .338 Magnum will stop an elk.
Of course, if you put a bullet in the paunch, a .338 Winchester Magnum probably does have a better chance of slowing down an elk than a .270--but you are not supposed to shoot any animal in the paunch in the first place! And even with a .338 a paunch hit can not be relied on to anchor an elk.
Most of these guys who can't shoot don't recover the animals they wound, but some do. It makes me wonder when a guy at a check out station tells me how lousy the .270 (or .308, .30-06, whatever) is at killing elk, and that next year he is going to replace his wimpy .270 with a .300 Magnum. Then I examine his trophy and find a .270 bullet hole in the muscle of the neck that missed the vertebrae, two .270 bullets in the guts, another in the ham, and finally one .300 Magnum bullet in the lungs--put there by his hunting partner. I am no forensic wizard, but I can pretty much figure out what happened. But this guy is going to tell 50 people that the .270 is no good for elk. And I mean that literally, as market research has shown that the typical bum story reaches about 50 people.
All of this makes it difficult and even risky to suggest calibers for specific purposes. I have tried to be conservative, but not excessivley so, in my recommendations.
As you can see from Category 2 above, I consider the popular all-around cartridges like the .270, .308, and .30-06 adequate, but maybe not "ideal," for elk. Perhaps the .300 Magnums, 8mm Magnums, and .338 Magnums are the perfect elk cartridges--if the hunter can shoot them well.
Choose a cartridge much more powerful than a .338 Magnum and you are getting into the over-gunned area. A .375, .416, or .458 Magnum will certainly kill elk reliably, but they are simply not necessary. And the weight of such guns, plus their outsized recoil, is a handicap to most hunters. In fact, everyone can shoot more accurately with a less powerful rifle, so why would anyone handicap themselves by using a Big Bertha caliber when it is neither necessary nor desirable?
On the other hand, I realize that the .30-30 Winchester, .32 Winchester Special, .35 Remington, .38-55 Winchester and similar cartridges will give consistent one shot elk kills in the hands of a good shot who waits for the right angle at short range. They have done so thousands of times. But I don't recommend that a modern hunter purchase any of them as primary elk cartridges. The energy of these cartridges is marginal, and there are better choices.
I would much rather see an elk hunter carrying a .308 that he can shoot well rather than a .300 Magnum that causes him to flinch. Elk are big, vital animals, but they are not indestructible. Use a reasonably adequate caliber within its energy and trajectory limits, an appropriate bullet, and most of all get that bullet into a vital spot!
04-27-2004, 05:52 PM
#2
Boone & Crockett
Join Date: Feb 2003
Posts: 10,679
RE: Elk cartridges research
The result is that guys who can shoot and who put their first bullet into an elk's vitals think the .270 is a perfectly adequate elk cartridge; those who can't and don't think it is lousy. They often conclude that nothing less than a .338 Magnum will stop an elk.
Of course, if you put a bullet in the paunch, a .338 Winchester Magnum probably does have a better chance of slowing down an elk than a .270--but you are not supposed to shoot any animal in the paunch in the first place! And even with a .338 a paunch hit can not be relied on to anchor an elk.
Most of these guys who can't shoot don't recover the animals they wound, but some do. It makes me wonder when a guy at a check out station tells me how lousy the .270 (or .308, .30-06, whatever) is at killing elk, and that next year he is going to replace his wimpy .270 with a .300 Magnum. Then I examine his trophy and find a .270 bullet hole in the muscle of the neck that missed the vertebrae, two .270 bullets in the guts, another in the ham, and finally one .300 Magnum bullet in the lungs--put there by his hunting partner. I am no forensic wizard, but I can pretty much figure out what happened. But this guy is going to tell 50 people that the .270 is no good for elk. And I mean that literally, as market research has shown that the typical bum story reaches about 50 people.
Of course, if you put a bullet in the paunch, a .338 Winchester Magnum probably does have a better chance of slowing down an elk than a .270--but you are not supposed to shoot any animal in the paunch in the first place! And even with a .338 a paunch hit can not be relied on to anchor an elk.
Most of these guys who can't shoot don't recover the animals they wound, but some do. It makes me wonder when a guy at a check out station tells me how lousy the .270 (or .308, .30-06, whatever) is at killing elk, and that next year he is going to replace his wimpy .270 with a .300 Magnum. Then I examine his trophy and find a .270 bullet hole in the muscle of the neck that missed the vertebrae, two .270 bullets in the guts, another in the ham, and finally one .300 Magnum bullet in the lungs--put there by his hunting partner. I am no forensic wizard, but I can pretty much figure out what happened. But this guy is going to tell 50 people that the .270 is no good for elk. And I mean that literally, as market research has shown that the typical bum story reaches about 50 people.
Not saying that those here can't shoot but many people can't.
05-03-2004, 11:36 PM
#3
Boone & Crockett
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Wall SD USA & Jamestown ND
Posts: 11,474
RE: Elk cartridges research
I think you are right about that. I trust the 30-06 to do a great job on Elk size game. I would however sure not complain if I had to use a 270. I am not the worlds best shot but I am very very good at the kinds of shots that I choose to take. There is no game animal that I must shoot and I will take only the shots that I know I can make. I know where that 06 will hit out to 300 yards. I have never stretched that range on any animal unless it was already hit by someone else. The reason for this is that I feel that on a animal, 300 yards is the limit on my ability to place a good shot under field shooting conditions. On targets? hell yes blaze away all you want. A guy isn't going to wound a target with a poor shot.
