The Accurate Reloading Forums THE ACCURATE RELOADING.COM FORUMS Rifles Medium Bore Rifles Elmer on ElkGo | New | Find | Notify | Tools | Reply | |
| Elmer on Elk | Login/Join |
| One of Us |
The relationship is that frequently the animals are there even when the Dept. of Conservation denies their presence. Since the Dr. put me on a very low cholesterol diet I've been doing a cow elk meat hunt in N.M. with a 7 mag, I haven't said that a 270 or a 7 mag would not kill an elk. What I am saying is that, " when things don't go as planned a hunter is better off with a larger caliber rifle that shoots a heavier bullet." velocity is like a new car, always losing value. BC is like diamonds, holding value forever. | |||
|
| One of Us |
I'm with Elmer :-) | |||
|
| One of Us |
I have not said that a 270 or a 7 mag were not useable, suitable elk rifles. I didn't really want to write an entire chapter to explain this. As a hunter I expected that most understood the importance of penetration, breaking heavy bones and occasionally the desirability of a good blood trail. Most experts believe that good blood trails normally start at 30 cal. and the ability to break heavy bones and keep on penetrating starts at 175 or 200 grains. This is also my opinion and I also have considerable experience. As long as you are aware of the limitations of your smallbore rifle it can be used very successfully. But if the hunter encounters a mud drenched, 900 pound bull at 350 yds. that presents only a quartering shoulder shot then a smallbore is probably not up to the task. The experienced elk hunter knows this, the first time eastern hunter looking for a trophy elk might not. I've seen hunters banging away at running elk at 600-700 yds. with smallbore rifles. Not good, probably not good with any rifle. As long as the hunter respects the limitations of his weapon then elk can be cleanly harvested with very small calibers. Elk are not bullet proof, but they do have heavy, almost unbelievably hard bones. I would not hesitate to elk hunt with a 25-35 and would expect to be successful, but I might have to pass up a shot or two. Those that don't want to have to pass up an occasional shot should shoot a rifle that's up to the task and practice enough to get good with it. A 270 will kill elk, but it will not kill elk under all circumstances. velocity is like a new car, always losing value. BC is like diamonds, holding value forever. | |||
|
One of Us |
I have been hunting elk in western Colorado since 1992, and have never seen a black bear let alone a Griz. C'mon folks, get real. Elmer's writing bit me in the ass real hard, but a gut shot or leg shot elk is just that and it does not really matter if it was done with a .222 or a .458. Bullet selection/bullet placement and working within the limitations of both the equipment and the person using it. From personal experience and preference, I feel that a hunter should use the biggest gun, That THEY Can Comfortably AND COMPETENTLY Shoot ACCURATELY. I don't personally like the .243, but quite a few elk have been killed with .243's over the years. Over the years I have been elk hunting, I have been using a .35 Whelen/.300 Weatherby/.340 Weatherby and .375 H&H. I like using the bigger calibers, but have seen elk killed with .270's/.30-06's and similar calibers and quite handily I might say, simply because it was the gun the shooter was most comfortable shooting. Even the rocks don't last forever. | |||
|
| One of Us |
"Gut shot with a 222 or 458, makes no difference". That sir, Is most definitely wrong. It makes a world of difference, except maybe on an elephant. I've hit a few large animals too far back with rifles of 338 mag and 375 H&H. In all cases they went less than 50 yds. and laid down. I'm speaking of elk, wildebeest, kudu, zebra and waterbuck. Your statement is what all proponents of shooting small bores claim, but it is not true. Those that claim that it is are just making a misleading statement because they have heard others say so and have no experience of their own regarding the subject. velocity is like a new car, always losing value. BC is like diamonds, holding value forever. | |||
|
One of Us |
I personally don't think the man was a liar. Bullets in his time weren't always good enough to get the job done. Compound that with a smaller caliber and you have some wounded elk running over hill and dale. You could kill any elk alive with a Barnes X in 22-250 today, as long as you didn't shoot them in the ass. Vital shots kill all animals not the caliber or weight of bullet. That was true in Elmer and Jack's time and its true today. I personally am a Elmer Keith kind of shooter, I like big bullets in larger calibers. I wish you could get a 300 round nose in the 358 and 338 diameters. | |||
|
| One of Us |
Let me see, I have been doing what most folks consider hunting since 1967. There is gut shot and then there is Gut Shot. There is a hell of a lot of difference, and Sir, I have been killing stuff with rifles ranging from .22 Hornet thru .458 Win. Mag. A true gut/paunch shot where the liver is not hit, and even a white tail deer shot with a .7mm Rem Mag can and will get away from the hunter. I am not a small bore fan by any means. I have been in on enough tracking jobs over the years and from Personal experience, when all that can be found in gut contents, no blood, that animal will not be recovered unless a tracking dog is brought in and even then on a true gut shot it is iffy. Bullet diameter/sectional density/ballistic coefficient/shape/velocity or weight, is immaterial if the shot is not placed properly into the target, I don't care who you are. I shot a north Texas buck a few years back at slightly over 40 yards with my .375 H&H using a 250 grain Barnes "X" and that sucker cover over 60 yards before going down. When I cut the chest cavity open, the whole top third of the heart was gone and the heart was hanging loose in the peritoneal sack, was not connected to NOTHING and the chest cavity was full of blood. That buck weighed only about 130 pounds live weight. At the range and the size of gun I was using it should have slapped that deer flat, but it didn't. This   match can go on till hell freezes over, and as big a fan as I am of Elmer Keith's, something tells me that there are more elk killed in North America annually with .30-06 and smaller than with larger calibers.Even the rocks don't last forever. | |||
|
| One of Us |
I've been hunting since 1957, or maybe '56. I don't remember for sure, and for sure I don't remember every head of game that I have taken. Hit through the heart or both lungs and any animal is going to expire in very short order. If they get hit around the fringes and a tracking job is required it makes a big difference what they are hit with. That is true for everything from rabbits and tree squirrels up to moose. When speaking of elk rifles I consider the 30/06 as preferable to anything smaller, including the 7 mag. In projected stopping power, properly loaded, the 30/06 is right on the heels of the 338. I'm building a new elk rifle now. It's a 30/06 AI, but a regular 30/06 would be fine also. IMHO placing the 30/06 down with the 270. would be a mistake. I'll not post anymore on this subject, it's pointless to do so. velocity is like a new car, always losing value. BC is like diamonds, holding value forever. | |||
|
| One of Us |
Yes it is since you just admitted to everyone that the .30-06 is just fine. I don't personally like the .30-06/.308 or the .270, but I have witnessed plenty of times what they are capable of, and I have yet to see my .35 Whelen/.300 Weatherby/.340 Weatherby or .375 H&H kill an elk any deader/any quicker than any of those 3 calibers. Each of us are the sum of our OWN PERSONAL experiences, and from MY experiences, a properly placed bullet, regardless of size will do the job it was sent to do, and an improperly placed bullet, regardless of size, is NOT going to do the job it was sent to do. Even the rocks don't last forever. | |||
|
| One of Us |
[QUOTE]Originally posted by 416Tanzan: Jason, both of those rounds will work, though if you have a 338 so much the better. If the person is learning to shoot, then the 280. Basically, the 280 just requires a tighter accuracy spread when estimating a doable shot. Instead of a 10" limit, think 8", or instead of a 8" far cicle think 6" as the limiting factor. What Elmer said rings true to me, though his attitude on the 270 needs a grain of salt.[/QUOT My comment was sarcastic. However, I do appreciate the advice. My point was/is that is up to the shooter. The assumption from the OP original article, that states the "lost" elk was due to the weapon and not the shooters is beyond ridiculous. My preference is a 300 win mag. And I realize a bigger calibers can be a bit better. However, if given a few guns, and I could shoot them the same, I would shoot a 30 Cal. Having said this, for you to say 338 is "so much better" than the 300 is laughable. | |||
|
| One of Us |
Ha ha.... Isn't that the truth!! | |||
|
One of Us |
Jason, forgive me, you missed a nuance of my English: "so much the better" means that that would be "better still". No degree or scale is explicit. Both the 300 and 338 are better [than the 7mm/270], the 338 better still. "Better still" implies "more than" but not necessarily "alot". (Consider the energy tables: 2800ftlbs, 3200ftlbs, 3600ftlbs, 3900ftlbs.) +-+-+-+-+-+-+ "A well-rounded hunting battery might include: 500 AccRel Nyati, 416 Rigby or 416 Ruger, 375Ruger or 338WM, 308 or 270, 243, 223" -- Conserving creation, hunting the harvest. | |||
|
One of Us |
Jason, I'm not sure about the "so much better" but - using the exact same case capacity, depending upon one's perception, the .338 caliber offers the same advantage or disadvantage over the .308 caliber as the .308 caliber compared to the .277 caliber. Nothing more, nothing less. Personally I believe the .338-06 would better have been served by using the 30-03 case length, just as was done with the 270 WCF and 280 Remington, but it wasn't my decision to make. I also believe the "one rifle person" is likely better served with the .308 caliber chambering whereas the "two rifle person" would do beter with the .277 and .338 caliber chamberings. Jim  "Life's hard; it's harder if you're stupid" John Wayne | |||
|
| One of Us |
No problem at all! I agree with you 100%! | |||
|
| One of Us |
"I also believe the "one rifle person" is likely better served with the .308 caliber chambering whereas the "two rifle person" would do beter with the .277 and .338 caliber chamberings" Although I have 0 experience with that caliber, it is hard to argue with that point! | |||
|
| one of us |
Velocity and penetration isn't the issue, nor is the problem with the bullet going in sideways. The problem is that you have no idea where the bullet is going to hit. Trust me, I'm speaking from experience. I took a shot at a little whitetail buck that was standing just in the edge of some light brush. The 180 grain bullet out of my '06 clipped a 1" sapling on the way in. The tree was about a foot in front of the deer. The bullet went all the way through the deer alright. Trouble is, it entered just above the knee on his back leg. I did kill the deer with a follow up shot, but the experience left a really sour taste in my mouth about shooting through brush. I'm sure lots of others have taken a similar shot and got lucky and had the bullet go where they wanted it to, but the chance of getting enough deflection is WAY too high for me to make that mistake again. | |||
|
| one of us |
Most of my shots here are within 100 yds .Some of my rifles are scoped but not for distance but to find an opening in the brush. Unfortunately the term "brush busting cartridge " is used far too often.I've had a 45-70 and a 44 mag deflect --anything can deflect ! I like Elmer ,how can he be bad if he developed the 44 mag !  I thought one of the reasons for using big bore was that you could see where the bullet went if you missed ,by the trees falling . Biebs , is that true ??  | |||
|
| One of Us |
Jack O'Connor had been dead 4 years by the time Elmer wrote that section in 1982. From what I heard, they did not like each other, and it is funny to find out, they had to share booths at some Gun Conventions because they both worked for the same magazine. My take, is this is Elmer Keith, standing on the cemetery wall, shaking his fist at O'Connor's headstone, yelling " I was right! | |||
|
| One of Us |
They definitely did not like each other. From what I remember, Elmer felt that .30 caliber cartridges were minimal for deer sized game. There was only about 3 years difference in their age, Elmer was born in 1899 and O'Connor was born in 1902. Elmer embraced and devoutly believed in large bore rifles for hunting and O'Connor jumped on the band wagon of the .270. Both were active during a time when people developed very strong opinions on subjects and had no trouble standing by those opinions, and normally only wanted to associate with people that shared the same or very similar opinions, that was something those two gentlemen were never going to do. Even the rocks don't last forever. | |||
|
One of Us |
"bear in mind, Elmer also claimed to have killed mule deer at 600yd with his .44mag revolver... Big Grin" No sir, Elmer did kill a mule deer at or about 600 yards with his .44 mag. Provided a witness to the event and wrote both in a book. Until someone proves him wrong, he did is the way I was raised to think. I saw a fellow test the premise in a magazine a while back and he did hit the target about the same rate as Elmer did. I never met Elmer, but I have met people like him. People who simply have more ability and gift with a gun that I do. If you have read Elmer's books, you will see he learned long range Pistol shooting herding sheep with a 45 LC. Shot many, many rounds learning and understanding trajectory. I guess I feel the same way about Elmer doubters as I do WDM Bell doubters. Most doubt because they can neither "do" or conceive that others can thus it must not be true. Neither trait is to be admired. Many men of great ability have lived before us and will after us, breaking ground, creating a new level of "impossible." It is doubtful that any of us responding here, will be among them. "The liberty enjoyed by the people of these states of worshiping Almighty God agreeably to their conscience, is not only among the choicest of their blessings, but also of their rights." ~George Washington - 1789 | |||
|
| One of Us |
Todd you'll have to read Elmer's books, he actually used several 7mm Magnum cartridges from the 1940's that are now extinct. I want to say 280 Ross, but that may not be the one. | |||
|
| One of Us |
such shots are at times appropriate, like when a PH needs to anchor & secure a clients fleeing & wounded animal. since that rear-end view might just be the best one on offer. There are hunting cartridges & bullets quite capable of giving the penetration one needs for such, as long as the rifle operator has the appropriate knowledge & skills to place the bullet(s) to best effect. I recall R.Atkinson saying several times, that his .338win/300gn Woodliegh is very effective for raking/rear-end shots on Idaho black timber elk. | |||
|
| One of Us |
What's missing from Elmers story is where were those ten elk hit, if hit at all? None recovered so we'll never know. On this thread it has been stated somewhat otherwise, but in my books a bad shot is a bad shot no matter how big the gun and conversely a well placed shot even from a smaller cal causes a need for a sharp knife. Fun's over. Another missing point is what range were the shots made from and what range were the guns sighted in for, if sighted in at all? I've seen more than a few that don't know how to sight in a rifle. I've also seen some take to the field and not have a clue where their gun is hitting. I even knew a guy that was a pretty good shot and people paid him to sight in their rifle. To me that would be like saying he is well built so I'll send him to the tailor for measurements on my new suit. | |||
|
| One of Us |
you two know Elmer Keith made that up because... I find it interesting: since he died in 1982 a few detractors now feel he has been dead, along with all of his contemporaries (those who actually knew him and witnessed some of these things) long enough that it is safe to belittle him. It is interesting to note, that very few here actually made the pilgrimage to Salmon to meet him as I was lucky enough to do on a regular the past ten years of his life. you must be proud of your extensive background research. regards, Rich | |||
|
| One of Us |
Yes shooting at a wounded animal is a complete different thing. Then all kind of shots is accepable to stop the animals pain. I once shot a wounded moose calf with my 6,5*55 i only saw the nose and ass behind a small spruce i shot right through it hit it in back part of the lungs did a finish shot just to kill it quicker.(Is was wounded with a low chest shot by a .358norma mag) | |||
|
| One of Us |
Just a hunter, you have taken what I did post totally out of context, twisted what I said, and falsely reported other facts to suit your own agenda. I did not say a 270 or 7 mag would not kill elk as you are claiming. Success rates for public land hunts are very low. Many public land hunters have little or no experience which makes things even worse. The femur is not anywhere near the largest bone in an elks body as you posted and you can't make a conclusion about calibers and bullets based on heavy super premium bullet performance because only a very, very small percentage of elk hunters will go to that expense. velocity is like a new car, always losing value. BC is like diamonds, holding value forever. | |||
|
| One of Us |
So arming them with a gun that they are afraid to shoot because of the recoil is the answer? Even the rocks don't last forever. | |||
|
| one of us |
I can't help but think the same thing. A guy who hunts deer every year with a .308, .270, .30-06, etc is probably going to be way better off if he sticks with a rifle he's used to when he gets a chance to go on an elk hunt. I've probably seen more hunters lose game because they're shooting more gun than they can handle than I've seen lose an animal because their rifle wasn't powerful enough. | |||
|
| One of Us |
I don't recollect anyone on this thread recommending that any hunter use a rifle/cartridge/bullet combination that they cannot accurately shoot. It is neither ethical on the part of the hunter nor humane way to dispatch the game animal. Jim "Life's hard; it's harder if you're stupid" John Wayne | |||
|
One of Us |
I shoot a 30-06.....150 grain Accubonds......2900 fps This combination may be considered marginal by some Not by me ________________________________________________ Maker of The Frankenstud Sling Keeper Proudly made in the USA Acepting all forms of payment | |||
|
| One of Us |
Originally posted by Nordic2: Ethical?? What's not ethical about killing an animal by shooting them through the heart, Lungs, liver, and that animal dropping on the spot or very near the spot?? What's the bullet Entry point got to do with it?? I can't imagine hunting Elk in the timber, without a bullet and a Bullet delivery system capable of driving through the vitals from any angle needed. I walked too far, saved too much, and the chance to hunt and cleanly harvest too precious to pass up a clean shot into and through the vitals. But I guess that is why I lugged the .338 and the 275 Speer up the mountain back when that was what was available. I Knew it would do the job. Elmer said so and I proved it a couple of times. Now the Barnes 180 X and the 30-06 is lighter and easier to shoot quickly. I would trust that combo to work on the south end of a north bound Elk as well though I have never done it. "The liberty enjoyed by the people of these states of worshiping Almighty God agreeably to their conscience, is not only among the choicest of their blessings, but also of their rights." ~George Washington - 1789 | |||
|
| One of Us |
What started this whole mess? Someone posting that Elmer Keith's opinion on what is or is not an adequate elk cartridge, was the ONLY REALISTIC approach. It was Elmer's opinion, and it did not matter to him how many folks were killing elk with .270's/.308's/.30-06's and other calibers, he thought that the .33 and larger calibers were the ONLY ones capable of killing elk. I am a firm believer in Elmer's Philosophy, For MY OWN use, but I do not believe that the larger calibers are the "Be All-End All" for every hunter after elk. Too many folks want to throw the "Ethical" quotient into the mix, and Ethics are Personal concepts, Not Law. Colorado Law clearly states that the .243 is legal for elk hunting, and there are probably a lot of elk killed annually in Colorado with .243's. Do I think it is a good choice, No. I would rather see .257 or above, but, there is not enough difference between a .257 Robert's and a .243 to really matter to an elk shot with either. Here is the OP, tell me what you think it is saying.
Even the rocks don't last forever. | |||
|
| One of Us |
I've been around here for about 9 years These elk rifle threads never disappoint ________________________________________________ Maker of The Frankenstud Sling Keeper Proudly made in the USA Acepting all forms of payment | |||
|
| One of Us |
Like I said, they are just another of the "Dead Horse Issues" that resurrect themselves on a regular basis. Both Elmer Keith and Jack O'Connor along with Warren Page/John Wooters/Jeff Cooper/Charles Askins/Col. Townsend Whelen et al were the folks many or most of us grew up reading. It was a time when gun writers wrote about actual experiences and stated real opinions and were not just shills trying to sell the latest/greatest. Their kind is gone and most of us are slowly following them. Time moves along and folks like Elmer and O'Connor will never arise again in my opinion our world and the place hunting fits into it have changed. Even the rocks don't last forever. | |||
|
| One of Us |
I think you have to take Elmer with a cattle salt block. He was a Sharps and double rifle lover. I distinctly remember one of his Guns and Ammo articles in which he said that he thought the 7mm Rem Mag was a good coyote rifle. | |||
|
| One of Us |
Yes Sir, I remember that article and a .7mm Rem Mag does do a number on a coyote. Maybe some folks find it unethical to blow a foot ball sized hole thru a coyote? Even the rocks don't last forever. | |||
|
| One of Us |
I don't know about unethical, but back in the late seventies and early eighties here in Idaho a prime pelt was bringing between seventy and a hundred dollars it would have been painful... I was not the best skinner, but I had unlimited access to a lot of range maggot (sheep) herds here. The two places where you got the best money for coyotes both told me to just stretch them out lengthwise, and fold the legs against the body. They would rather skin them than repair my handiwork. I spent enough time around Elmer Keith to know not to doubt anything he said. He was such a good shooter, BG guide, hunter and pistolero nobody who was around him very long doubted his word. Here and now, we have people who have not even seen a tenth of the game Keith shot setting themselves up as know-it-alls. If you cannot stand your accomplishments anywhere near his, you should probably just keep quiet lest you be thought of as a complete fool. The "if I can't do it, it couldn't have been done..." attitude is just crap. Remember, Keith shot on the Idaho NG HiPower team for many years. regards, Rich | |||
|
One of Us |
Elmer VS OConnor and armor plated Elk.. Classic stuff.. I agree that a bit more punch with a bigger beast is a definite plus, if the guy shooting it is up to the task. But do you guys really believe that the same group of guys lost TEN Elk without bagging a single one on the same day?? Either they were HORRIBLE shots or they were flaming idiots. And if this was a guided hunt then it doesnt say much about the guide either. But leave it to Elmer to blame it all on the rifle.. These are the kind of hunting tales that require fishing waders..  Elmer and Jack disliked each other intensely, I am pretty sure that story had an ulterior motive.. AK-47 The only Communist Idea that Liberals don't like. | |||
|
| One of Us |
Yes, and it is specifically Elmer's views that are the focal point of this thread. They do give a person a chance to reflect on options. for example, if someone chooses a 375Ruger or 416Rigby for their elk rifle, what would they require their daughter or son to carry? for me, the thread has helped me to articulate for myself that lesser rounds like 308, 270, 243 may be excellent elk rounds as long as inherent limitations are also accepted and thought through. Yes, Elmer blamed the rifle on the lost, wounded elk in the story. Others question if perhaps more elk have been lost by people shooting calibres that they do not shoot well through lack of practice and flinching. Statistics would be very hard to obtain because lost elk means that no wound channel is available for examination. Confidence in a rifle and its loads is paramount to good shooting. Almost invariably I have run into trouble when taking a shot where my brain is saying 'should-I, or shouldn't I?'. For a new hunter they need lots of practice and some real limits. The smaller the cartridge the more defined and restricted those limits need to be. For a 243, a premium, deep penetrating bullet needs to be matched to a situation where an 'easy' shot is presented. I don't have enough experience with the little 243 to know if a quartering shoulder-knuckle shot is ethical. What do people think? I'd probably OK my wife on a 270 with a monometal, but is a 243 much different? How much. My personal indecision just leads me to grab a 338 or 375 and be done with it. +-+-+-+-+-+-+ "A well-rounded hunting battery might include: 500 AccRel Nyati, 416 Rigby or 416 Ruger, 375Ruger or 338WM, 308 or 270, 243, 223" -- Conserving creation, hunting the harvest. | |||
|
| One of Us |
________________________________________________ Maker of The Frankenstud Sling Keeper Proudly made in the USA Acepting all forms of payment | |||
|
| Powered by Social Strata | Page 1 2 3 4 5 |
 | Please Wait. Your request is being processed... |
|
Visit our on-line store for AR Memorabilia
