Nebraska - In Brad's defense (although I'm sure he's perfectly capable of defending himself) - Finn Aagaard, in an article on the 338-06, "American Rifleman," Dec. 1986, has a penetration test comparing several calibre bullets on pg. 24.

Results:

30-06, 200gr. NP, 2634fps, penetration 21.0"

300 WM, 200gr. NP, 2843fps, " 21.0"

338-06, 210gr. NP, 2780fps, " 16.8"

338-06, 225gr. Hn, 2660fps, " 16.0"

.340 Wby,250gr. NP, 2934fps " 21.5"

Medium was two dry phone books followed by a stack of wet ones, fired at 25 ft. Although test medium not claimed to closely resemble a big game animal. (the 225gr. Hornady retained 67% wt, the 200gr. NP, 65%)

I guess one could rightly assume that considering the recoil, rifle weight and a few esoteric factors one could throw into the mix that the old '06 just might be the rifle of choice for deep penetration on big game.

Have had two one shot kills on bigger game - one on an elk, base of the neck, dropped like a stone, about a hundred yds., 210gr NP, 338-06: the other a moose, frontal angling shot, entered right of the sternum angled through the lungs, broke rib came to rest under the skin, two steps and dropped, about a hundred fifty yards, 150gr Hn, .270Win. Go figure.

Sold the Custom, .338-06 Imp. last year, still have the .270 I bought in 1958, for reasons maybe unclear to me. But you know, as I sit here mulling this over, I'm reminded of the the killing reputation of the old, 6.5X55 Swede, with its long, lumbering bullet - it could also lend some credability to this discussion on penetration.

Now, go have a good day!

Gamecock, thanks for sharing that. I've not seen that particular test before. My own tests in wet phone books nearly mirror's the above though all bullets tend to go deeper as I don't use the dry phonebooks Aagaard uses.

Fred, I've only had three "drop in the tracks" kills on bull elk. Two were neck shots where the spine was broken (30-06 / 180) and one was with the 338 WM and the 210 Partition. This was a spike bull I shot standing in his bed at about 70 yards. I hit him behind the shoulder, through the lungs. The only bones hit were ribs. Down he went! That 210 Partition at 3,000 fps is wicked! I tend to think the greater frontal area of the 33's generate more of a reaction to the hit than the smaller bores. I shot a cow elk last year with the 300 WSM at 300 yards. I punched her lungs with a 180 FS... she took about ten steps and stopped. I let her have it again. No reaction. She just stod there... then crumpled and rolled down a steep slope dead. The hits were six inches apart and had both punched her lungs. Was she any deader than if hit by the 33's? Nope, though from my past experiences I tend to think she'd have reacted a bit more to the shot if hit with the 33.. then again maybe not like your story illustrates.

Elk are funny creatures. Their state of mind and individual disposition's probably play a greater role than we know. Too, they're just so darn big all bets are off as to how any one of them will react. As a guide, my elk hunting buddy has been in on the killing of more big 300+ class bulls than anyone I know. Though he uses a 270 he swears the 33's put the big boys down faster and more often than not create a reaction to the hit. I'll always have a soft spot for the 338 WM. I took by biggest six point with it. However, as many have pointed out, placement is the game.

Best Regards,

Brad

[ 11-12-2003, 19:03: Message edited by: Brad ]

Thanks for all the feedback. This thread developed into a wonderful discussion as I hoped it would.

I appreciate the comments about the other bullets out there. I know that the Barnes/Swifts and FailSafes have a pretty good rep. However, Noslers have never let me down. Maybe I'm doing myself a disservice by not trying the others, but as long as the 160 NP's shoot well, that'll be my bullet.

I picked up some Nosler 160's and a pound of RL 22 today. First time I've used anything other than IMR4350 or H4831 in the old girl.

Thanks again,

Tim

I test all of my hunting bullets in wet phone books prior to hunting w/ them. It isn't going to tell me exactly how the bullet will perform on a game animal, but it will give me a repeatable measureing stick for one bullet to the next. If it blows up on the phone book, it probably won't do well in the tough frontal chest muscle of a deer/elk, or penetrate from an extreme 1/4ing shot. The only 210grNP I have ever recovered traveled alot more than the 17-18' I get in phone books.

NE, knowing you I didn't take your question as a challenge. I'm glad the Swaro's are working well for you... once you've used good glass you're ruined to the middle of the road stuff, eh?!

Fred, your post says it all... the wet phonebooks can never duplicate flesh and bone (I think the books can be a tougher test) but give a controlled, consistant and repeatable method of comparing various bullets year in and year out...

NETim

Per your original post, I would highly recommend the 160 gr. Noslers if you must hunt elk with a 270. What is needed is penetration through the elk�s shoulder should a perfect �sniper� shot not be available or if heaven forbid your shot is off by a bit! Using 160gr Partitions in your 270 will go a long ways towards removing it's weaknesses in the event of a shoulder shot, though I'd encourage you to pony up to an "nail them from any angle" elk rifle.

[ 11-15-2003, 02:35: Message edited by: ELKampMaster ]

Last tues. I killed a 5x5 bull at 225 yards with one shot from my 7mm-08 and 140 gr. Partition. At the same time my friend killed his with one shot from a 300 Savage and 180 gr. round nose bullets. Both bulls dropped dead in their tracks.

Shooting an elk in the ass is like snagging trout with a treble hook in the back. You'll never catch me doing either.

[ 11-15-2003, 01:59: Message edited by: Steve Hunts ]

Steve Hunts:

I love your comment about "ass" shots. My sentiments exactly. Hell I wouldn't even take that shot with my 375 H&H, it just goes against my grain.

Whats all this malarky about the 270 not being enough gun for elk? The past 5 years my 2 sons and I have killed 8 elk, 2 with the 270, and never had a chase on our hands. Maybe we just know how to hunt. The longest shot we took was 225 yds. Of course we are freakin or sneakin indians, originally from California.

Jerry

I have never seen any sign of weakness on the part of the 270 as an elk rifle. I have noticed weakness in the minds of those who think you need a magnum to kill elk though.

[ 11-15-2003, 18:17: Message edited by: rickt300 ]

Out of the 12 elk taken by my small group in the last 4 years, none of them were taken with less than a 7mmRemMag. We have had one wounded animal get away 5 years ago after a shoulder shot � the rifle? You guessed it a 270 � the hunter (19yrs old and 160 lbs) was totally disgusted and switched to a 338WinMag and has been �slapping down� elk since. Just goes to show that a small group of hunters strutting their score card (in either direction) a Bible does not make.

Do people kill elk with 270�s and under? Yes! However, in the circles I operate, the 270 is considered to be at the lowest rung on the cartridge ladder for elk, especially with the lower weight/poorer quality bullets. For our elk camp, we now don�t allow rifles chambered for cartridges under the 7mmRemMag/30-06 threshold and those we have loaded to the heavy side with premium bullets (Partitions Minimum).

The idea of �if I do my part, then the rifle will do its part� is a fine concept, but is far from being a certainty out in the field where it is the elk and not hunter who ends up paying the price for miscalculation. While no guarantee, larger cartridges loaded �heavy for caliber� provide more reliable killing power with room for error and room for human frailties, such as �It�s the fifth day of the season, I haven�t fired a shot the whole time I�ve been here, there they are, it�s not a real good angle, but by God they are mine! Bang!�

It is easy to pass on such a shot when you are hunting deer while living at home and going to the local deer patch with other days available and in pursuit of game that stays centered in a small geographic area their whole life (deer) or if you live in elk country and have a month long season to �work it�. That is not such an easy shot to pass on when a newbie is doing an �away from home�/remote elk hunt in huge elk country with hundreds or thousands of dollars at play.

The hunter on a �away from home�/remote elk hunt wants to be able to take his animal whether it is large bull (750#) or small (450#) � [major difference in bone/muscle mass], his time is limited, he knows he cannot control or predict the nature of the shot that may present itself, he knows he must not be undergunned at that unpredictable key moment and hence there is a fair chance he will be �overgunned� in other circumstances (If he is smart and wants to cover his bases.)

There are no absolutes, even though folks like to talk that way. Regarding �Texas Heart Shots�, since I am a meat hunter that is not my kind of a shot; HOWEVER, only on the internet does everyone�s hunting go so perfectly that all elk fall on the first shot! If one makes a poor connecting first shot, then keep shooting until it goes down, if the last shot before that animal disappears into the woods is �up the pipe� I WOULD take it in an attempt to salvage the situation --- at that point with 4 feet of flesh between you and the vitals, a feather weight won�t get it done. My $.02.

[BTW, for observers other than NETim, assuming you are an adult male and not dealing with physical injuries that may limit you, please spare the American fascination with fashionably succumbing to �recoil sensitivity� and the associated myth that magnums can�t be shot accurately � in the grand scheme of things even a 338WinMag is a mere �light medium.�]

Never Go Undergunned, Always Check The Sight In, Perform At Showtime,
EKM

[ 11-15-2003, 08:46: Message edited by: ELKampMaster ]

Certain gunwriters also like to use the small caliber for the biggest of game, yet they never ever have a problem with kocking the game down. Perhaps there is a bit of gunwriter typewriter going on here. I know of occasions where the 270 has been a failure on elk - such as a 50 yard frontal shot.

Guess I'm a lucky guy.....I have a .300 Mag, a .338 Mag and a .375 mag if I want something more than a .270 for elk hunting.....

That said I'd not hesitate to take my ultralite .270 elk hunting.....but here's the rub...I'd hand load 150 grain Swift A-Frames.....

Guess we all have our quirks don't we?

Hell, I quit using a 7mm Rem. Mag. on elk after 3 unspectular kills. One took three shots in the chest, broadside, in about a 3.5 in circle pattern on his chest. I ran down to where he was last seen in the timber and he was just standing there looking at me blood running out of both nostrills. The bull saw me, took off running and I fired the last round out the 7 mag. and hit him in the chest again. He ran over the hill out of sight.That elk covered another 150yds. before dieing all 4 shots in the chest.That was 4 Nosler 175 gr. partitons through his chest.Shot placement was good the elk died, but far to slowly for my taste. I shot 3 bulls with that 7 mag. all good clasic broadside hits, all under 100 yds., not one dropped at the shot infact all ran off at the shot, showing no reaction to being hit in the chest,and one 5 point bull was shot at 35 yards! I needed a bigger gun!! So I traded the 7 mag for a .338 mag and I'm here to tell ya the is a definate difference in killing power between the two! The animal definately suffers less with the .338,as I have had 11 instant drop dead kills and one run about 20 yds. because of the shot presented. I don't think the 7mag is a good elk round, so I believe the .270 is not an elk round at all. Good Elk cartridges start at .300 win. mag.and 180 gr. bullet and go up.The .270 is where the good deer hunting cartridges begin. I personally use the .338 for deer hunting too works better than the smaller cartridges. I get amused at all the excuses, why all these hunters are bothered by the recoil of the .300 or .338 mag cartridges,and have to use weeny cartridges so the can make a accurate shot, dead is dead, and all that B.S. Make it easier an the animal not yourself. Get the bigger calibers and practice for pete's sake! Coni Brooks of Barns Bullets shoots the .338 mag. for deer, the .375 on big bear, and the .500 Nitro double with a 570 gr. bullet for cape buffalo in Africa. And she's only 5'3" and 110 lbs....So cowboy up!! Practice and you too can shoot the big guns!! And give the animals a break instead of your shoulder!

See how they are! In our elk hunting group four use 25-06's, there is one 7MM Rem. mag, a 308 and I use either a 30-06 or a 270. We are all good shots and have been hunting together since 1980 and each have tried different rifles. The longest trailing job was caused by a bullet from a 338 that did not expand on a broadside lung shot (250 grain Sierra BT at 400 yards) and some of the quickest kills were from the 25-06 rifles. I have tried partitions and find them slower killers than Hornady or Speer bullets unless bone is hit(the shoulder bone is a stupid aiming point anyway) and in over a hundred elk taken we have never lost an elk. Question Elkampmaster how do you know that elk was hit in the shoulder if you did not recover It?

[ 11-15-2003, 18:14: Message edited by: rickt300 ]

???
"See how they are...." Sounds irrational, hope we're not going over the edge here! Almost afraid to ask .... what does that mean?

Regarding how we "knew" it was a shoulder hit on the cow, two things: (1) per the shooter, at the instant of the shot the shoulder was the last "frozen image" in the scope crosshairs (had checked the sight in myself a week earlier), (2) as we tracked her the hoof print of the right front was not "running true" to the other three, was not a low hit in the leg, that would have left a "floppy" random mark, no the arc was still long (meaning a hit higher up) but not cutting the earth the way it normally would.

Sorry, I (and others) like the "stupid shoulder shot" --- take out the front axle, stir the boiler room a little, you'll own them right there, big target, room for error (whoops, forgot, everyone is perfect on the internet). For sure though, if ones cartridge does not have the necessary testicular fortitude, then shoulder shots are not a good idea (planned or accident or otherwise).

I hope you can see that neither "side" is going to "prove" themselves right over the arguments of the other side on this deal --- regardless how much jumping up and down they do. NETim, gets to watch both sides and cast his ballot next fall when he shows up in elk camp according to the rifle he brings. Others lurking on the sidelines unseen, will do the same thing.

Just for grins....

You are standing on the 50 yard line in your street clothes --- you have a choice --- one of two linebackers is going to lay a hit on you before you can make it to the side line --- one is the star of the local high school team and the other is a All Pro NFL linebacker --- you can't escape, one or the other is going to nail you --- your choice. (If you hope to get up and walk away after the tackle, then choose wisely).

Never Go Undergunned, Always Check The Sight In, Perform At Showtime,
EKM

[ 11-15-2003, 19:34: Message edited by: ELKampMaster ]

elkampmaster:

As to the 7mm mag being your "minimum" caliber allowed in camp. I think that if that is what you guys agree to thats great. But, the only elk I have ever seen run after being hit, and hit well, was with a 7MM Rem Mag. The shot was behind the shoulder, went thru the lungs clipped the heart, and went down the left leg bone. This was a Hornady 154 Grain Spire point at 3100 fps, range of shot, about 80-90yds. The elk ran UP a hill about 100yds and then dropped. That was on the same hunt I dropped the big 6X6 with my little 270, and he went down in a heap. Is this a knock on the 7 mag or Hornady bullets? Nope! Its just one of those things. What I do find interesting, is the comparison of the 7mag with a 154 grain bullet @ 3100 fps, to a 277, 150 grain bullet @ 2950 fps. The down range ballistics are so close its hard to choose between the two. Also I don't think elk are that hard to kill, and like others, I never shoot for the shoulder. I just don't want to ruin a front quarter or 2, and I think a shot thru the ribs gets to the boiler room in better fashion.

Jerry

Jerry,

Yeah, hyperspeed bullets are a bit tough on meat as they tend to splatter a "bloodshot" pattern through the meat quite a ways from the point of impact, thus making avoiding shooting any parts you want to eat a good idea.

Our two 7mmRemMag boys didn't make the trip this year, so 30-06/338WinMag/375HH/45-70 boys did the work along with the pack horses.

I personally favor big, heavy, and medium speed cartridges which allows a little more discretion on several fronts. We butcher our meat right in camp and I'd say the wastage from one of my typical shoulder shots is in ounces not pounds -- mostly roasts, jerky, and burger out of the shoulder anyway so no big deal to me, but I'll admit I am no purist, just go for putting them down with the highest probability possible (as I see it) while still allowing for the very real "human" factor.

BTW, personally, the one I DON'T want to get hit by is the NFL Linebacker; I think getting up would be quite difficult.

Never Go Undergunned, Always Check The Sight In, Perform At Showtime,
EKM

[ 11-16-2003, 05:54: Message edited by: ELKampMaster ]

Predictably enough, there have been many good, persuasive arguments made on both sides of the equation. (Maybe there's more than two?)

Anyway, what's driving my debate about the 270 is that I have a nice ol' Pre-64 Model 70 that has always shot extremely well for me. I have a lot of confidence in the ol' girl.

But it is heavy by today's standards and I'm not gettin' any younger.

And then with what I hear about the quality of today's factory rifles and the customer service, I'm not sure I want to buy a new rifle.

I guess I do have an old Mark X Mauser 243 that doesn't get used much, maybe it should become a .338/06? Scrap the walnut and get a good synthetic stock on it. Hmmm...

Tim

Why would anyone want to waste their bullets energy on bone? On elk especially you are unlikely to break both shoulders and an elk can go very far with a broken shoulder. Why not let your bullet expend it's energy on the heart and lungs of the elk? Even the best premium bullets will lose some of their destructive power negotiating a three inch thick piece of bone and generally will not have as large a frontal area after going through it or be going as fast as one that enters the rib cage expanding and dumping energy where it counts. If you must hit bone go for the spine in front of or behind the shoulder blade. We are trying to kill the elk humanely not test fancy bullets or prove magnums are supposedly better.

In answer to your questions/points:

Q/P: Why would anyone want to waste their bullets energy on bone?
A: It is frequently difficult to convince elk to hesitate and strike the classic whitetail "turn broadside and look back at you" pose that most deer hunters take for granted to gain bone free access to the vitals, hence bones frequently get in the way of the business of getting it done in a timely, uninhibited, aggressive and opportunistic fashion.

Q/P: On elk especially you are unlikely to break both shoulders and an elk can go very far with a broken shoulder.
A: With 338Win Mag we usually find the bullet under the off side hide with both shoulders broken. Elk go a MUCH shorter distance with one or two broken shoulders than what they go with two good shoulders. A bullet through two shoulders DOES scramble the boiler room.

Q/P: Why not let your bullet expend it's energy on the heart and lungs of the elk?
A: IF you have enough energy in the first place, then there is plenty to go around, hence the case for cartridges which are proportionate to the size of the animal being hunted. I have found that elk are not as cooperative as deer. There they are, no, wait, don't quarter, no, now turn broadside -- that's it, now step forward, now stop, crap now there are two of them - can't shoot, they are moving again, oh oh they are gone - timber, damn. Versus, yes, stop, good, quartering? okay, center, bang, plop. Elk hunting on high pressure, public land? Excepting the best of circumstances, TIME will be your enemy.

Q/P: Even the best premium bullets will lose some of their destructive power negotiating a three inch thick piece of bone and generally will not have as large a frontal area after going through it or be going as fast as one that enters the rib cage expanding and dumping energy where it counts.
A: In quartering and butchering our own elk I have yet to find a 3 inch thick shoulder blade going straight through it into the boilerroom, sorry. Maybe they are out there, I just haven't personally deboned one. I have found plenty either broken or with a hole in them though.

Q/P: If you must hit bone go for the spine in front of or behind the shoulder blade.
A: The spine is available behind, directly above, or in front of the shoulder should one decide to go for such a reduced area/reduced probability shot -- the opposite of our philosophy. A right fine theory though, IF you are a superb marksman under field (not benchrest) conditions and can magically guide your bullet to such a small (elevation wise) target.

Q/P: We are trying to kill the elk humanely not test fancy bullets or prove magnums are supposedly better.
A: "We" are trying to kill elk as humanely as "we" know how by taking on BIG and TOUGH animals like elk with cartridges proportionate to the quarry's size, thus allowing a large target/kill area to the hunter to center onto with room for some deviation (whoops, forgot - no errors on the internet) and blow away anything that gets in the way and go on to complete the mission should the elk decide not to give "us" that classic "photo shoot" stance deer hunters so take for granted. If it is the "magnum" cartridges that are better suited for this type of mission, then so be it.

Here is a raghorn 6x6 bull taken by our group this fall, shot from the ridge above, note the shoulder shot - the "boy" hit him just the way I taught him. Impact wasn't exactly where he wanted it; however,with the large friendly target area, it made for rapid acquisition, and a rapid shot before cows got in the way or things changed, he staggered him and then owned him right there.





Note: Mark, Here I am, include pictures, write very specific (I try anyway) to try to help explain what I mean and some folks still are just not going to be happy with the other side of the discussion.

Note: The one I STILL don't want to get nailed by is the NFL Linebacker, getting up would be quite difficult. (See tail of earlier post [6 posts above] -- small bore enthusiasts don't seem interested in this very intuitive parallel.)

Never Go Undergunned, Always Check The Sight In, Perform At Showtime,
EKM

[ 11-19-2003, 11:34: Message edited by: ELKampMaster ]

The shoulder blade is not the bone I am talking about though the 270 has no problem penetrating it. Our group also hunts on public land in Wyoming and yes the elk are generally moving when we shoot at them. We don't seem to have any trouble hitting them where we want to either, this being the reason our standard rifles kill just fine. Behind the shoulder hit work just fine for the larger cartridges too don't they.

Guys:

We Arizona Elk hunters must be real lucky. Of course if we get an elk tag we are lucky. In the unit I usally hunt in, it is crawling with other hunters, yet I set up and always get the shot I want. Hell most of the 8 elk I have killed here, could have been killed with a 243, the closest being about 40 yds and the longest being about 225 yds. I know the area in which I hunt, and I know where to set up for a shot. A couple of years ago, I walked into a restaurant in Alpine Arizona. There were a couple of other elk hunters waiting for a table, and we struck up a conversation, the usual pleasantries were exchanged and we started to talk about our hunts. I was the first to talk of my kill with the 270, one of the other guys said he was upset with his 270/bullet combination. He lamented that he had shot this great big 6X7 with a Nosler Partition, and he had to trail it over the ridge 200 or so yards. His buddy said "yeah, at least you got yours". I shot mine square in the left shoulder with my 375 H&H, he ran off and we still haven't found him. Moral of this story, who knows the moral, shit happens. Lets all get down on our knees and thank god he gave us the love of hunting, and life in a country that allows us to do as we wish..

Jerry

PS:

Oh I forgot, if you happen to be one of those seperation of church and state people, and my reference to our creator creates problems for you. GO POUND SALT!!! LOL

Jerry

It always amazes me the arguments that people put up over the " Ideal" elk caliber. It still boils down to shot placement.

If you have never taken an Elk, but live back East where they have a Cabelas or similar store that has an Elk that has been stuffed in their store, look at its size closely. NOT head to feet, but, from side to side in its chest.

A decent rifle, with a decent bullet ( anything above 25 caliber in my book and I don't care for 25/06s but they still work, regardless of my like or dislike for them), is there anyone who thinks that a round can not penetrate a good percentage of that animal??

The last Elk I saw taken, was with a nephew in Montana. I was walking with him, and he was carrying the rifle. The Elk was shot with a 165 grain Ballistic Tip, behind the shoulder at a distance of 175 yds, when the animal was at a dead broadside run with about a dozen other elk.

Muzzle velocity of the 165 grainer was 2250fps. Basically 30/30 speed.
Any 'experienced' Elk guy can tell you that there was no way that this load would kill an Elk. Before this happened, I was concerned also, basically believing what "everyone" always tells you.

The only reason we were using that load, is that in typical KID fashion, after being asked does he have his ammo at least 50 times, he still leaves it at home. ( 200 grain Speer, at 2800 fps plus, 61.5 grains of H 4831 SC)

This slow 165 grain load was still in his back pack from 3 yrs before when he first went deer hunting at 13.

The ballistic tip, went thru both lungs, and was under the hide on the oft side. A whole was in the right lung where it entered, it cut the esophagus, and the left lung and upper part of the liver, were turned into a bowl of spaghetti.
Animal went 40 yrds.

Brute force will not guarantee a quick kill on any big animal. The bullet has to be able to open up to do its job, shot placement has to be in the right spot.

A 160 grain Partition in 270 I think would be a fine load for Elk. It is flat shooting, the bullet is well matched to the game, has a high sectional density for penetration, and in a lighter kicking caliber than a lot of magnums, the average guy can be a lot more exact about his shot placement.

Every year someone comes out with a Bigger Caliber, so the Elk must be getting more bullet proof every year. Maybe Fish and Game are getting them high on PCP and they are too doped up to know that they were just killed? It is the only logical reason I can think of that negates what worked on Elk 75 and 80 yrs ago, won't kill a flea nowadays.

To quote the Village People " Macho Macho Man, I want to be a Macho Man...."

When the 25-06's starting invading our elk hunting group I also made derisive remarks about their ability to down elk and admittedly they are definitly not good for some shot angles. "But" after shooting my mouth off I had to put up with a lot of this elk ain't dead crap while helping butcher and wrap elk killed with them. At the time I thought the smallest elk rifle was supposed to be a 30-06 loaded with 180 grain bullets. I still think the 270 is a better elk rifle than the 25-06 especially with the heavier bullets.

[ 11-18-2003, 06:29: Message edited by: rickt300 ]

Rickt300,
Been away a while, sorry I didn't get back to you.

Question/Point: The shoulder blade is not the bone I am talking about though the 270 has no problem penetrating it.

A: Ah, so you mean the head of the humerus which lies well far forward and pretty much out of the way (see diagram) of either a broadside shoulder shot or a broadside �behind the shoulder� shot,



One would likely encounter that 3� knob on a quartering frontal though. See Diagram (above) and Elk Bones (below)



Of course when you�re shooting a "bone cruncher" cartridge proportionate to the size of the animal you are hunting, it just doesn�t much matter. The bone that potentially lies in the way of a broadside shoulder shot is about 1.25� in diameter, again no big deal if you are shooting a �bone cruncher� � it IS a bigger deal if you are shooting a lightweight cartridge. No big deal, it just means you have to pass on more shots than with a 338 or so.

Q/P: Our group also hunts on public land in Wyoming and yes the elk are generally moving when we shoot at them. We don't seem to have any trouble hitting them where we want to either, this being the reason our standard rifles kill just fine.

A: Wow, you folks must be some fine marksmen. Our group�s shooting skills pale in comparison to yours. In an attempt to kill humanely, as you mentioned earlier, we are loath to shoot at a moving elk except on a follow up shot, if it is needed. Always try to stop them before shooting. We use Sceery�s �pint size� little cow call � easy to hang it out of one side of your mouth while the other side of your face is snugged up to the stock scoping the elk. Unless you�ve spooked them, they will almost always stop for ever so short a moment that I call �showtime.�

Q/P: Behind the shoulder hit work just fine for the larger cartridges too don't they?

A1: Yes, if the elk is quartering away, then it is the direct path to the vitals; whereas a �shoulder shot� would not get you into the boiler room and may only make a �crease�, figure 30 degrees on the left quartering away and 30 degrees on the right quartering away and so for 60 degrees of the 360 we take the same approach. Front quartering � no; Direct Frontal � no; raking quartering away - no. All problematic angles for cartridges/bullet combinations that lack �major bone crunching ability� while lighterweights are waiting for the doable broadside to come around, I (we) are likely pulling the trigger and ripping right through what ever was in the way.

A2: Broadside:
The light weight shooter has one choice � tucked in tight behind the shoulder. If you pull it off, then bingo � boiler room � done. Now lets look when things don�t go so "internet pretty" -- If your shot drifts high, but is still tight in behind the shoulder, then no significant problem as long as you can track a bit. Don�t let your shot (running?) drift to the rear or you are on the wrong side of the diaphragm. Don�t let your shot drift forward or you are into the �bulwark� of the �head of the humerus. Don�t let your shot drop (especially if you are going low behind the shoulder to get the heart) or you�ll crease his chest. Net, Net 2 out of 5 = Good things happen.

The heavy weight (bone cruncher) shooter (dare I say magnum) has two choices. He can imitate the lightweight shooter above, especially if the animal is static and settled and the rest is good and he is confident (hasn�t just hiked up a ridge and breathing hard or isn�t taking a freehand shot over 60 yards).

OR

The heavy weight shooter can take dead center on the shoulder with a cartridge that has �major bone crunching ability� and just plain shoot it. Now lets look at what happens when things don�t go so "internet pretty". Drift high, you break both shoulders and rip the top of the lungs, won�t go far. Drift low, you break the shoulder/leg and rip right into the heart/lower lungs - done. Drift front, you more or less �cut his throat� � horrendous blood trail, seen it. Drift back, you catch the back of his lungs but are still ahead of the diaphragm, bad dog --- you have some tracking to do similar to the lightweight shooters scenario for drifting high when shooting for close in to the back of the shoulder. Net, Net 4 out of 5 = Good things happen.

Details, man, details. Elk may seem easy to kill for folks that have been hunting them a while; however, for the newbie who is sharpened up on deer (can knock them over with a stick) it is typically a rude awaking with a lightweight rifle on elk � �He didn�t even flinch nor limp when I shot him, he just ran off, that shot would have put down any deer � I don�t understand it � maybe I missed him!� Nooo, you did not miss, go look!

Never Go Undergunned, Always Check The Sight In, Perform At Showtime,
EKM

[ 11-18-2003, 06:54: Message edited by: ELKampMaster ]

Jerry, been away for a while, sorry didn't get back to you.

Sure enough don�t have any problem giving thanks to God Almighty, including elk country, hunting, and the harvest. Hadn�t noticed anyone with a problem with it. Am I missing something?

I�m glad to know you�re speaking for the Arizona elk hunters down there.

It IS great to know an area real well, increases the odds a lot. Of course, someone like NETim, even if hunting in a helpful group will be at a bit of a disadvantage that first year (haven�t forgot who my audience is here).

Hunters in a restaurant? As we saw earlier, different groups strutting out their score cards, pro or con, a Bible did not make, one way or the other, and now second hand war stories?

Regarding 375HH shoulder shots, below is a 375HH, 300gr, Nosler Partition, recovered from one of our elk. Broke both shoulders, stirred the boiler room and came to rest under the far side hide where we found it when we skinned the quarter. The elk did not run away � cannot speak for the resturant story teller.



For sure unexpected caca does tend to happen when one is elk hunting. To the extent possible, I DO like stacking the odds in my favor as much as possible! All things equal I�m hoping NETim will see from this little discussion WHY his brother holds the opinions he does and appears to be trying to get his visiting brother the same advantages he has, �When in Rome....�

Never Go Undergunned, Always Check The Sight In, Perform At Showtime,
EKM

[ 11-18-2003, 07:03: Message edited by: ELKampMaster ]

Dear Mr. Seafire,

Q/P: It always amazes me the arguments that people put up over the " Ideal" elk caliber.
A: Check the origin, this is 270 vs 338 upgrade discussion.

Q/P: It still boils down to shot placement.
A: Oversimplification, It boils down to �just� shot placement only on a shot placement poster and a bench rest. Other factors which affect that �shot placement�, the �fix all� assumption, are real life in the field factors.

Q/P: If you have never taken an Elk, but live back East where they have a Cabelas or similar store that has an Elk that has been stuffed in their store, look at its size closely. NOT head to feet, but, from side to side in its chest. A decent rifle, with a decent bullet ( anything above 25 caliber in my book and I don't care for 25/06s but they still work, regardless of my like or dislike for them), is there anyone who thinks that a round can not penetrate a good percentage of that animal??

A: Depends, meat only or meat AND bone. What if the angle is not straight sideways on through? Do bone obstructions and thickness of flesh to be penetrated change? I think so. What if the animal won�t pose for you to match that shot placement poster?

Q/P: The last Elk I saw taken, was with a nephew in Montana. I was walking with him, and he was carrying the rifle. The Elk was shot with a 165 grain Ballistic Tip, behind the shoulder at a distance of 175 yds, when the animal was at a dead broadside run with about a dozen other elk.
A: Have you shot any elk? No big deal I guess, just the difference between theory and experience.

Q/P: A 160 grain Partition in 270 I think would be a fine load for Elk. It is flat shooting, the bullet is well matched to the game, has a high sectional density for penetration, and in a lighter kicking caliber than a lot of magnums, the average guy can be a lot more exact about his shot placement.

A: As I alluded to in my very first post, so long ago, the 160gr noslers in the 270 will go a long way towards removing the 270�s limitations as long as the shooter stays within his limitations and is willing to watch that 6x6 walk away into the timber without taking a shot if �it ain�t just right (LOL)� Ah, the American fascination towards fashionably succumbing to �recoil sensitivity� and the related myth that magnums can�t be shot accurately by a diligent hunter.

Q/P: Every year someone comes out with a Bigger Caliber, so the Elk must be getting more bullet proof every year. Maybe Fish and Game are getting them high on PCP and they are too doped up to know that they were just killed? It is the only logical reason I can think of that negates what worked on Elk 75 and 80 yrs ago, won't kill a flea nowadays.

A: I know most of that is in jest. What is happening is history is repeating itself. Around the turn of the last century there was a paradigm shift: Smokeless powder and necked cartridges started crowding out the old stuff (flintlocks, percussion cap, and straight case rifle cartridges which doubled as pistol ammo like the 44-40. �What the hell is wrong with these folks!� Nothing wrong with the good ole 44-40 for elk, smokeless powder, pencil necked cartridges, copper jackets, bah! Nonsense� Sound familiar!? Sales statistics tell the tale, like it or not the 270 has been on a steady down hill slide since Good Old Jack departed and there was no one to keep waving the flag. A paradigm shift is occuring again and people are gravitating towards cartridges with more power not less. More and more people are opting American military strategy: �overwhelming lethal force� --- hooah! --- (sorry, I just couldn�t resist).

Q/P: To quote the Village People " Macho Macho Man, I want to be a Macho Man...."

A: Very cute, but out of tune.

When hunters have a rack of rifles with a bit of width and depth to them (like 223 to 416 or 458) with the gaps pretty well filled in, then they are pretty unbiased and reach into the gun safe and grab what is best for the job � after all, essentially got them all, don�t have to defend anything, just want things to work. In these scenarios, I've noticed the bigger stuff is what shows up in the elk camps and the little stuff stays at home. Exceptions could include: going smaller to increase the challenge (Just what a newbie needs!) or they have some spiritual attachment to old guns handed down through the family and they feel like �ole dad is right there with me hunting because I�m using ole dad�s gun." In either case they are making a conscious decision out of a wide array of rifles.

On the other hand, hunters who max out at 25-06 or 270 what can they say? They tend not to objectively assess what is best but rather �what they got IS the best, and, and, and, that is just the way it is! Running short on specifics or experience across a wide array of cartridges they tend (some, not all) to resort to wild generalizations, use wild adjectives, 3rd hand quotes, and question the opposition�s mental faculties (maybe accurate in my case), and oh yes, even catchy little tunes.

NETim, use the 160�s in the 270 if you just gotta [it's better than the 130's or 150's], but I�m telling ya --- your brother isn't trying to steer you wrong, get one, you won�t turn your nose up at it, I promise, and when that 5x5 steps out you won't have to wait for him to do a centerfold pin up spread before you can "just plain shoot him" -- bones, no bones, non-perfect angle, don't matter much.

Never Go Undergunned, Always Check The Sight In, Perform At Showtime,
EKM

[ 11-18-2003, 08:06: Message edited by: ELKampMaster ]

ELKampMaster,

"Sales statistics tell the tale, like it or not the 270 has been on a steady down hill slide since Good Old Jack departed and there was not one to keep waving the flag"

Interesting...the .270 has been the #2 selling "big game (not counting 30-30)" round behind the .30-06 in every single ammo survey I've ever seen except for a few where it was edged by the .308 and has been in the top 5, mostly 2, chamberings from the major manufacturers in centerfire "big game" rifles.

You can say what you want about the .270 for Elk, that's an old argument that won't get settled now, but saying the statistics show it on a down slide is simply not true. The .270 is as alive and well as ever despite just about every other new round developed since 1925 was designed to offer or better .270 ballistics in some form or another and become it's replacment. I think it's remarkable that a 80 year old round still sells so well without the magnum moniker or as you said ... "no one to keep waiving the flag". As long as we are still using brass, copper, & lead to hunt big game, I'm pretty certain the .270 will remain to be the bain of the big bore guys .

-Lou

Lou,
The sales statistics I was talking about was the trend in the sale of new 270 rifles, not the trend/record in ammunition sales. Lord knows there are a ton of 270's out there and a ton of deer that need shot, so I'm betting you are right on the ammo part.

The decrease in rifle sales, I saw somewhere but do not recall specifically if it was someone else's post or and industry article, but tucked it away in my head as it went by. I am researching that now. If I am in error then I will gladly retract/edit out that statement as misinformation is not my gig.

Don't get the wrong idea, my first rifle (22LR excepted) was a 270 at age 14 my longest shots were with that rifle (combined with rash youth) used it on everything Nebraska had to offer: prairie dogs, coyotes, antelope, and deer.

At 23 I was invited elk hunting in Montana. Knowing the difference in size between deer and elk, I immediately (without prompting) went down and picked up a 338WinMag for the elk hunt and have never looked back.
NO Comparison!

Little tools for little jobs
and
Big tools for big jobs

Not too hard,
EKM

[ 11-18-2003, 08:54: Message edited by: ELKampMaster ]

ELKampMaster,

I could be wrong, but I think Rick Jamison did an article in Shooting Times not too long ago and listed the top 5 selling calibers by rifle manufacturer (Rem, Win, Savage, Ruger, etc..). They were always .30-06, .270, .243, .308, 7mm Rem Mag and occassionally the .300 Win (not in that order). The .223 was in there as well I think. .30-06 was always #1 or #2, and the .270 was normally #2, in at least 1 case #1, but always in the top 5. The only reason I remember it was it surprised me how these rounds hold on to the top 5 despite all of the hooplah with the new rounds these days. I wouldn't doubt if total rifle sales are down for the .270 due to dilution of the market, but it's ranking in overall sales is still pretty high.

I'll look for the article if I think about it tomorrow.

-Lou

When I lived in Wyoming we shot almost every day at jackrabbits and ground vermin like prairie dogs and gophers with our big game rifles. I'd say as a group the Superior Wyoming elk posse posseses a greater level of skill than the average city boy. Generally we hunted elk, antelope and deer every year and the meat of these animals was very important to our diet therefore we would not hunt with rifles that don't do the job. As to bone crunching thru the humerous it's not necessary, shoot for the neck which just in front of the shoulder blade is at least as big a target as the shoulder itself. Then again my 30-06 and 270 have slammed bullets thru the shoulder of elk using Speer Hot cor bullet in 180 and 150 grain bullets respectivly though I think the practise does not give kills as quick as bullets delivered directly into the Heart/lung area. I have seen the 25-06 break bone and fail to penetrate well after the solid shoulder hit using Winchester 120 grain PEP bullet but this same bullet kills quickly with solid chest hits thru the rib cage, and spine hits always bring em down. Most of us went thru the bigger gun for elk phase, I went to the 300 Win Mag and the 338 for a while finding the latter not as good for really long shots as the former both killed well "if" the shots were placed properly and the bullets expanded. I also found that kills were no faster with the larger cartridges if the bullets were properly placed than my 30-06 or 270. Elk have a relatively large vital area. I have a 45-70 1895 Marlin lever gun that I plan on using as a timber gun when we do drives as I feel it will do better on shots I won't take with the lighter guns (excepting the 220 grain bullet in my 30-06) due to it's outstanding penetration with the right loads. It also tends to destroy less meat on those quartering shots.

Elkampmaster:

How do you get your photos loaded into hunt101? Every picture I try to post comes back with the message file to large.

Jerry

Rickt300,
No arguments out of me whatsoever regarding 30-06 with heavier quality bullets 180gr and up.

Jerry Eden,
I have run into that problem at various sites and usually the problem is that I failed to put the photo into a .jpeg format which is very efficient on space.

I either use a digital camera or a flat bed scanner, pull the image into PhotoShop, lighten and brighten, adjust contrast and then save over to the JPEG. When you go to save it gives you options as too how much "quality" you want. I leave it at 30% (default setting and kind of low) otherwise the file size gets bigger and it "chews up" more space off of my alottment at Hunt101.com.

I think I have had cases where I missed the .jpeg and stored it as some other type of format (.bmg) (bigger) and Hunt101.com took it, but then the forum I was trying to post to refused it from Hunt101.com because it too big. Anyway check the "save as .jpeg" thing.

Good Luck,
EKM

[ 11-19-2003, 06:11: Message edited by: ELKampMaster ]