.270 on Elk, No Way! There I said it!
03-27-2005, 07:25 PM
#11
Fork Horn
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Alabama
Posts: 369
RE: .270 on Elk, No Way! There I said it!
ORIGINAL: KonaBoy
This is coming for a guy that said a .243 is a "perfect elk cartridge"???
This is coming for a guy that said a .243 is a "perfect elk cartridge"???
My thoughts exactly
here is the thread
03-27-2005, 08:09 PM
#12
Nontypical Buck
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Back in good ole mormonville...
Posts: 2,431
RE: .270 on Elk, No Way! There I said it!
It doesn't matter if you use a .270 or a .410 nitro, if you shoot it poorly it won't go down easily. When placed correctly a .270 is perfect for elk.
03-27-2005, 08:37 PM
#13
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Colorado
Posts: 4,127
RE: .270 on Elk, No Way! There I said it!
I have hunted elk with the .270 for almost 30 years. Got away from it back in the early 90's and went to the .300 Winchester. The past four years, have gone back to the .270. We all know that bullet placement is critical - maybe less critical with the .300 Magnums. The past few years I have used the 130 grain Swift Scirocco in my .270 Ackley Improved. Five elk have fallen - each with one shot - all in the ribs - the furthest any have gone is 20 yards. The longest any have stayed on their feet is three seconds. The wound channel this load puts through an elk is bigger than my .300 Magnum does with a 180 grain Nosler Partition. I'm not selling the .300 Magnum - and if I live long enough to draw one of those Ranching for Wildlife trophy tags here in Colorado, I will probably use the .300 - but in the meantime, the .270 is more than adequate with this load.
03-27-2005, 08:56 PM
#14
Nontypical Buck
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location:
Posts: 2,555
RE: .270 on Elk, No Way! There I said it!
Maybe Gadd Zooks just likes stirring the bee's nest? I did wonder why he wanted to promote the .243 for elk but will curse the .270. Unless ofcourse he is trying to redeem himself?
03-28-2005, 01:12 AM
#15
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Arcadia Ca USA
Posts: 210
RE: .270 on Elk, No Way! There I said it!
ORIGINAL: Montana Bob
And yes you can hunt Elk with a 270, but with better selections out there, why would you with the inexperiance want to. If you have to ask advise go with a larger caliber instead of a bordering caliber.
And yes you can hunt Elk with a 270, but with better selections out there, why would you with the inexperiance want to. If you have to ask advise go with a larger caliber instead of a bordering caliber.
I don't know anybody, that when asked "what would you recommend for an elk rifle?", that would say the 270 Win.
It is just easier to tell a guy to get a 30-06, 300 Mag or 338 Mag.
03-28-2005, 06:49 AM
#16
Fork Horn
Join Date: Jan 2005
Posts: 111
RE: .270 on Elk, No Way! There I said it!
Now I am a huge 270 fan, however I do realize its limitations.
I've hunted elk for well over 10 years and have taken numerous bulls with it, however ALL of my kills have been within 200 yards. The 270 with a premium bullet will drop an elk in its tracks on occasion. The way I see it, only more experienced elk hunters or experty marksmen should use the caliber. I use it out of necessity, but shot placement and margin for error is more critical when using the 270.
Having said this, If I had a .338 mag I would still hold out for the same broadside shot as I do with the 270, therefore there's really minimal difference unless long range shooting is brought into the equation.
I've hunted elk for well over 10 years and have taken numerous bulls with it, however ALL of my kills have been within 200 yards. The 270 with a premium bullet will drop an elk in its tracks on occasion. The way I see it, only more experienced elk hunters or experty marksmen should use the caliber. I use it out of necessity, but shot placement and margin for error is more critical when using the 270.
Having said this, If I had a .338 mag I would still hold out for the same broadside shot as I do with the 270, therefore there's really minimal difference unless long range shooting is brought into the equation.
03-28-2005, 05:52 PM
#18
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location:
Posts: 426
RE: .270 on Elk, No Way! There I said it!
More animals were lost/wounded do to the .270s failure to preform and to its less than adaquate preformances.
Why cant people get it in their heads that its the shooters fault if game is lost? If they cant hit something the size of a car then they dont need to have a gun within 20 miles of them. Any caliber will kill ANY game as long as the hunter does his part in putting the bullet into the animal's vitals and not in the leg or ear or foot.
Why cant people get it in their heads that its the shooters fault if game is lost? If they cant hit something the size of a car then they dont need to have a gun within 20 miles of them. Any caliber will kill ANY game as long as the hunter does his part in putting the bullet into the animal's vitals and not in the leg or ear or foot.
03-28-2005, 07:04 PM
#19
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Arcadia Ca USA
Posts: 210
RE: .270 on Elk, No Way! There I said it!
ORIGINAL: James B
A shot through the vitals with a 270 or a 30-378 will have the exact same effective. ELK STEAK. YUM YUM.
A shot through the vitals with a 270 or a 30-378 will have the exact same effective. ELK STEAK. YUM YUM.