MountainDevil54

Well it just looks like 4 of us this year will just have to get all our elk and prove the Nay sayer wrong as usual.

txhunter58

My comments are not for you. You have made up your mind and that is fine. I am sure you will do fine and lots of bull elk have fallen to the 250 thor. Maybe the extra 50 gr is an overkill. My comments are simply giving my opinion for those who still are trying to decide

Everyone has their own comfort level, and in most cases mine for elk starts at 300 gr. However:

250 thor or 350 gr powerbelt: Thor hands down.

But, accuracy being equal:

250 gr thor or 350 gr FPB: FPB

250 gr thor or 300 gr thor: 300 gr thor

Since they are the same price, if the 300 shoots as accurately, I can't think of a reason I would not use the 300. And the difference in drop out to 150 yards is not significant.

But that what my comfort level tells ME. Your results may vary.

Muley Hunter

Shot placement is always most important. A 300gr Thor won't make up for a bad shot.

So, why use a bullet heavier than needed? So you can be less careful with the shot?

sabotloader

Ah never mind

MountainDevil54

FPB blows up on heavy bone, so thats not a better bullet.

Thor is the ultimate when it comes to conicals.

Far from a yearling!

txhunter58

Ah, and there we have a difference of opinion. What is the minimum weight needed: 150 gr? 200? 250? 300? 350?

A 100 gr bullet out of a 243 with the right "shot placement" is more than enough gun for any elk! Slip it through the ribs and through the heart: dead elk 100% of the time.

However, I shot a big cow on a steep up hill angle with my muzzy several years ago. My "sweet spot best shot placement" is 1/2 way up the body straight above the elbow. Due to the steep angle I held low and probably held too low on the 120 yard shot. Anyway the bullet went right through the bottom knuckle of the elbow. Now maybe I shouldn't have taken that shot, but my 350 gr FPB went right through the bone split into several chunks. A couple when through the lungs and one took out the heart. I was glad I was using the 350 gr FPB instead of the 300.

Now maybe the 250 gr thor would have been just as or more effective, I really don't know. But all things being equal and knowing in spite of my best efforts, shot placement is not always "ideal" I prefer to err on the side of caution. You probably wouldn't use a 200 gr thor (if there was one) on a big bull elk. Why not? Because your minimum comfort level is with the 250. Mine happens to be with the 300.

Can you conceive on any situations where the 300 might be superior? If so and they shoot just the same, why not? Of couse you can keep going: if 300 is good, 400 is better! I realize there is a point of no return, but I see no down side to using the 300 with an open sight muzzleloader (Colorado hunt) when my max range is 150 yards. Using with a scope is a different matter.

Use what is comfortable for you

MountainDevil54

the minimum weight needed to kill elk in colorado would be 170 :P thats what the law makers say anyways LOL.

I'd use a 200gr thor on an elk, its still produces more energy that that 223gr round ball i used previously.

This never does get anywhere, the you should use this because never wears out even after proving them wrong.

As i've said before, its impossible to say the 300gr bullet will kill it faster.

txhunter58

And it is impossible to say the 250 will kill faster than the 100 gr 243 bullet.

Thanks for letting us know you proved us wrong.

There is no right or wrong in this discussion. Use what feels right for you

MountainDevil54

you know whats odd? We can't use a 45 to hunt elk in this state YET its legal to use a 10mm pistol and 100 some odd grain bullet?

txhunter58

On that we agree!! LOL

And with that I bid you good night!