Well, I spoke with a GW from Wyoming for about 30 minutes or so regarding some changes that will start next year...they will now be offering preference points, which I'm sure is old news or has already been posted.

We spoke of a few other things and somehow got on the topic of rifles/calibers/bullets. Who'd a thought? Especially once you get on the phone with me.

He was telling me about his experience with several units for elk, deer, and antelope, and all the ones he's killed.

Currently his new "thang" is the .270 WSM. His "old glory" is a standard .270 Win. In a nut shell, for deer and antelope, he still uses 130 Nosler Ballistic Tips exclusively without fail. For elk or anything else, it's the 130 Nosler Partition. This is in both the WSM and standard 270.

I, having 15 years of experience with the btip also without fail (I know, real lucky huh?) brought up the typical debate with blowup yada yada yada. And the alleged fact that the 270 Win is only a marginal elk caliber.

His response: "HA HA HA HA HAHAHAHAHAH. Yea, I've heard that over the years and you know who says it the most? The ones that have never killed an elk or used a 270 on one."

His claim is 398 measured yards on an elk with a 130 Partition from 270 win. Never lost an animal. He told me of several mulies killed with the btip, one in particular he shot head on and recoverd the bullet that weighed ~ 75 grains (from 130) after he discovered it had traveled almost the entire length of the buck. He said it "wasn't real far" but I don't know how far that is in Wyoming. Not real far to me is about 40 yards. To him it could have meant 175.

I just thought I'd share his experiences.

quote:

Originally posted by Doc:
.......And the alleged fact that the 270 Win is only a marginal elk caliber.

His response: "HA HA HA HA HAHAHAHAHAH. Yea, I've heard that over the years and you know who says it the most? The ones that have never killed an elk or used a 270 on one."

Yup. Sounds about right. I live out here and the locals use the .270 on elk frequently.

If for some unseen, unearthly reason I was down to one gun the .270 would be a top contender. You would be surprised what you can do with an easy recoiling rifle and a well constructed bullet in the right place.

I grew up in Laramie - graduated jr. high, high sch, and UofWy. Hunted every fall with my brother and father - killed a B&C antelope on the Laramie plains. Regards, AIU

This seems to be somewhat of a trend because after I posted this, I thought I was having deja vous. It sparked my memory from a couple of years ago I had with another GW also from WY but he was in Casper. He also said he used a 270 exclusively but with a 160 partition. He was the one telling me that the antelope hunting was real good anywhere in the south central part of the state, like units 57, 58, 60, etc.

quote:

Originally posted by Ackley Improved User:
I grew up in Laramie - graduated jr. high, high sch, and UofWy. Hunted every fall with my brother and father - killed a B&C antelope on the Laramie plains. Regards, AIU

I'm assuming you hunt with 270?

That isn't that unusual even here in Idaho.I have seen alot of Elk fall to the .270 and 130 grain Noslers.Our hunts into the Selway/Bitteroot as a kid consisted of three .270's and two .06's and a 30-40 Krag for many years and now you rarely see anything over a .300 Win Mag from the local yokals.My older neighbor kills em dead every year with a 25-06 and Noslers.

Jayco

For someone like myself, that lives east and spends a wheelbarrel full of money for the opportunity to Elk hunt. I want every advantage I can get one my one shot every 5 years at an Elk. So, in that case the 270 makes very little sense. I usually carry a 338 or 375. Heck, I do not own a centerfire hunting rifle under 30 cal.

I worked with an outfitter in Colorado and we saw a LOT of elk wounded with 270's.

In the hands of a rifleman that is lucky enough or good enough to get a standing broadside shot, a 270 is certainly enough gun.

What a lot of people never seem to understand is that western hunters love to brag that they don't need any more than a 270 for elk.

It's a standard brag and in my experience it's a bunch of bull hocky.

An ought six with heavy bullets or 300WM or even a 7 mag has way more killing power for an elk. Other than bragging rights or panty waist hunters I can't imagine why anyone would limit themselves to using a whitetail cartridge for elk.

Personally I'd use my Model 7 in 300SAUM if I had to do much walking and a 375H&H if I could carry it to the elk without getting winded.

If you hunt public land and spook elk in the black timber where you have to take a running uphill shot with a 270, odds are, you'll wound and loose your elk.

That's where the 375 would have the big advantage.

Wild elk live and travel in remote mountainous areas where just a few steps can put them in a place where you WON'T get them out with blood, sweat, and tears, or someone with horses and that can get expensive in hunting season.

Personally... I like to anchor my elk where he's reasonably easy to retrieve.

All that macho chest beating is just that.

$bob$

Never shot an elk myself but I've seen plenty. They tend to leave a lasting impression on one that spends most of his time down in the bottoms still hunting whitetails at knife fighting distances. I have not a shred of doubt that most any animal can be taken with nearly any cartridge given proper placement, but there's a time for trick shooting and a place for a bit of respect for your quarry. I would not for a second consider going afield after elk with a rifle that would limit me to selected scenarios of aspect that would allow a successful shot. I do not wish to end my days with the memory of the wounded bull that eluded me only to feed scavengers later on. I may try some ultra-light shooting on some things, elk wouldn't be one of them. At least .30 cal, and 180 grains, maybe more, if I ever wind up on such a hunt. It is my considered opinion that with the myriad of variables that arise in the field, maybe the quartering shot is best not taken with light high velocity bullets. Even on things smaller than elk.

Howdy Dan,

I guess you're just around the big bend from me now that I've relocated to my old stomping grounds... <grin>

I'm just west of Tally near Lake Talquin.

I use a 308 with 150gr Nosler Partitions for our Florida whitetail and they always fully penetrate through the vitals from any angle and death is almost always instantaneous.

I have an elderly friend that has a couple of beagles that are good trackers on a leash and we used to get called out a LOT to track wounded bucks.

Inevitably they were shot with 243's. Kinda like using a 270 for elk.

For a child or woman that can't handle the recoil I can understand if they get GOOD instruction and under controlled conditions but I can't understand why people would use a 270 for elk or 243 for whitetail otherwise.

$bob$

I think the difference between a resident and non-resident and the precieved success with a 270 boils down to one thing: Time.

In Montana I have 5 weeks to put my elk in the freezer, I will also kill a cow if she's an easy drag to the road. If you bow hunt you have even more time to hunt. If I see a bull and it's a marginal shot, there's always next week or I can wack a cow in the late season cull hunts. In other words, the pressure is off.

I've "paid" to hunt in Africa, and there is a bit of "My I've spent a lot of money on this and I'd really, really like to get something...." If you are laying out anywhere fro $2500 to $7500 for a one or two week elk hunt one every few years, well, I'll bet you really, really want to get something, preferabily a bull for all that money on the line. This is not intended as a criticsm, I do it, we all do, it's just human nature.
For the once every few years non-resident elk hunter a 270 might not be the best idea since the only shot you get that week might be quartering away at 300 yards, or face on at 100 in some nasty timber near the edge of a black canyon. A 338 is an ideal elk rifle, provided you can actually shot it well. (Jack O'conner once said " a broken leg with a 270 is just as broken a with a 458".

A larger caliber doesn't make up for piss-poor marksmanship, it only allows you a greater variety of killing shot angles. You still have to place the bullet correctly.

quote:

Originally posted by LDHunter:


I have an elderly friend that has a couple of beagles that are good trackers on a leash and we used to get called out a LOT to track wounded bucks.

Inevitably they were shot with 243's. Kinda like using a 270 for elk.

OOPSIE...ya might catch hell for that one....LOL.

Seems like I made a few comments about a 243 on deer not too long ago. 270 would not be my first choice on elk either. That is why I bought my 300 RUM. BUT, and this would certainly depend on where the hunt would take place, I would use a 270 if it was the only rifle I had.

I also have 2 yellow labs and they are trained to track wounded deer as well. I've had my share of that for other hunters too.

Doc,

I've been catching hell for being outspoken all my life and my skin is pretty thick.

People forget that Jack O'Conner was an excellent rifleman and he made it look easy.

Also in his time hunting pressure wan't anything like it is now.

HunterMontana,

Very well summarized!

$bob$

Elmer Keith's comment was that the most common shot on elk was a quartering away shot. That's why he preferred things like 35 Whelan or 338.

And it's why I like my 300 RUM.

I guess it is whatever floats your boat. I have had great success killing elk with my .270, however I know my limits with this rifle, and refrain from making shots that I'm not comfortable with (throwing lead at running elk, especially if it is in timber). I doubt an elk hit in the leg with a .375 is any different than one hit in the leg with a .270.

I have also killed over a dozen elk with my .243, one of which was a 350 class bull and the bullet (a Barnes X) passed completely through him. Again, I was know the limits of this firearm and wasn't trying to poke him at 500 yards. Some would argue my .243 is way too small, however, when I take it and have an opportunity at an elk I hunt more like an archery hunter and prefer to get within 100 yards or closer. If they are 200+, I don't even try. I would rather go home empty handed than know that I crippled an elk and he/she got away.

I guess it all comes down to personal preference...it doens't matter what you shoot, if you hit them in the right spot you'll have elk on the table.

MG

quote:

Originally posted by LDHunter:
Doc,

I've been catching hell for being outspoken all my life and my skin is pretty thick.

People forget that Jack O'Conner was an excellent rifleman and he made it look easy.

Also in his time hunting pressure wan't anything like it is now.

HunterMontana,

Very well summarized!

$bob$

I think you're only partly right. Sure, Jack was a good shot. However, many of his big game hunts were guided, and most of his elk hunts were out in fairly open areas.
Elmer Keith, on the other hand, did his hunting in a black thick forest setting where getting the preferred broadside lung shot was nearly impossible. That's why he preferred cartridges of .33 caliber or bigger.
Jack hunted for fun and magazine article with most of his later hunts paid for by Outdoor Life. Just Like Craig Boddington getting all those freebie (?) hunts to Africa paid for by the gun companies to tout their latest wonder big bang rifles or cartridges.
Elmer hunted as a guide and for sustenace. During a great deal of his life, that elk meant he had his winter meat.
Like apples and oranges, we're comparing two different styles of hunting for two different reasons. Taking the differences into consideration, both are correct in their thinking.
Paul B.

quote:

I doubt an elk hit in the leg with a .375 is any different than one hit in the leg with a .270.

MG,

I don't have a problem with where I hit 'em. I prefer the heart on a standing shot and the lungs when I can't be as precise.

If you're having a problem hitting elk in the leg then you should practice more and get in shape.

Also... Now that you've bragged that you regularly bag elk with a 243 I'll ask you this? Why? Are you showing off or is recoil a problem with you?

$bob$

quote:

Originally posted by LDHunter:

quote:

I doubt an elk hit in the leg with a .375 is any different than one hit in the leg with a .270.

MG,

I don't have a problem with where I hit 'em. I prefer the heart on a standing shot and the lungs when I can't be as precise.

If you're having a problem hitting elk in the leg then you should practice more and get in shape.

Also... Now that you've bragged that you regularly bag elk with a 243 I'll ask you this? Why? Are you showing off or is recoil a problem with you?

$bob$

Well for one, I guess I can say I have never shot at an elk while it has been running because every time I have shot at one they didn't even know that I was around. I guess that is why I have been able to pick my shots carefully. I have never had one get away, but if you hunt long enough sooner or later it is going to happen, regardless of how hard you try doing everything right.
Judging by the chubby little guy in your avatar photo, I'm in a hell of a lot better shape than you and would walk your flat land Florida ass into the dirt!
To answer your final question, I just like my .243. I regularly use it to hunt deer, and if I end up getting into elk deer hunting (which happens frequently) I'm not afraid to try and pull a sneak to get close enough to let one have it. I do not believe that I have to shoot a cannon to hunt elk...most guys do because they are little dicked self concious losers. I'm sure you have a few scars above your dominant eye from trying to be a "big shot". No pun intended...

MG

I agree with Montanahunter... More time equals more elk and experience. In my years of elk hunting and being around the guiding business, I found that most of the elk that were wounded and lost was due to piss poor shooting, not what size hole in the end of their barrel...

Sure you could toss out the raking shots, but I really don't want to take those shots... If it was the biggest bull of my life I still wouldnt' take that shot... I've I was packing my 375 with solids I WOULDN'T TAKE THE SHOT!!! Its a fuggn elk and it isn't life or death... and I'm more than content with going home with out one. I guess it may be because I've killed quite a few of em... I don't know.

These arguements are just plain stupid. Every time no matter what... on one hand you have the guy that thinks you need a 338 and bigger to kill an oversized deer and then you have the guys that say that they can use thier lil deer gun. And both are correct IMO... They aren't bullet proof and really not that hard to kill. And every time I hear that argument I know right off they don't have much "elk hunting experience"...

I believe that every time it comes down to the actual hunting situation... Like someone else mentioned. Thick timber vs long range shooting... Everyones experiences are diffrent and some have very limited experience.

IMO if was going to tell a first time elk hunter to bring a rifle to camp. I'd tell him to get a light weight easily packable '06, 280 or 270 and load up some premium bullets and have at it.

Big guns equal more recoil... most shooters really don't like recoil and can't handle it. IMO the ones that profess "needing" a monster rifle like some one else said, generally don't have much elk hunting experience... Or better yet the jack ass that says if you hit em in the leg you need more practice... These are field conditions and chit happens... If you say get more practice... I say get more experince, because its shining through that you don't have much of it...

I've yet to see an elk walk off after taking one in the slats from a bullet ranging form 6mm to 375... They may run aways but generally all die in short fashion. I say to each his own and take the best shot you can...

The elk running off and having another tag it is kind of funny too... You ain't hunting the over run whitetail woods of the east, and if you find yourself hutning elk in that type of situation all I have to ask is why??? There are millions of acres to hunt and most have very few hunters in them.

Just this last fall my buddy shot a cow from about 250 yards with a 340 Roy (the double ultimate elk rifle right???) She ran over 300 yards before falling over dead... My elk on the other hand droped on the spot with one shot from a loely 280 shot from the same spot... both were hit in almost the exact same spot in the rib cage. Its been our experience on the countless elk we've killed over the years, that for the most part the elk that "run off" after the shot be it 10 yards or 100 generally occoured with stout constructed heavy bullets that punched a hole clean through, while most all the light calibers generally resulted in bang flops because the bullets generlly don't exit and turn the lungs and heart to mush therefore reducing the blood flow to nearly nothing...

Out of the 25+ some odd elk I've killed most all of them were taken with calibers ranging from 6mm to 7mm and a hand full with an 06... I can only think of a couple that ran off after being shot with an "infieror" caliber bullet... And at that they only ran about 75 yards. Out of all the kills I've been on the ones I've seen run the farthest were taken with "real elk guns" like a 338 and 340 Roy's too much gun not enough elk...

$bob$

Ivan you're right on...



MG

I realize that I'm new here, so my opinion won't hold as much as others, but that's to be expected so soon. But I'm also born and raised in Montana and see more dead critters in a year than most people will see in their lives. Until about 10 years ago, I'd never heard of anybody elk hunting with anything other than an 06, 7mm or .270. That's what everyone had and used. I'd only heard of one other person that owned a 300 mag, and we all thought he was nuts. Bottom line is know your equipment and know hunting grounds. Make the shot and and any rifle will do the job.

Madgoat, just out of curiosity how about taking a walk on the beach with me someday. Right about water line. Say, Indialantic, FL to Sebastian Inlet. We'll see who walks who into the mud, loser buys a round. It's pretty flat, your feet will stay cool, lots of babes layin' on the beach all 0iled up. Whaddya say?

PS: Bring money.

Hey DD,

Nobody could possibly lose in that contest.

The babes would make up for any otherwise unimportant issues...

Over here in Tally we check out the college girls... HooooAhhhh...

$bob$

For the 22 years we lived in Montana the only guns we had were two 270s, a mod 94 30-30 and a few shotguns. The 270s killed everything from dogs to bear with over the counter 150s.. YMMV

I wont get into the animals a 30-30 will and has killed... there are enough hatefull threads on AR already..

Sure Dan, as soon as we finish our stroll on the beach, we can head into the South Fork of the Shoshone and have a little hike from the Bobcat trailhead to the top of Citadel mountain...double or nothing on who buys the drinks. No babes in bikini's to drool over, just a few elk, and some sheep to keep you company.

MG

When I was a youngster we never had a rifle
over a .30-06' in the house.We had .30-30's
.257 roberts a couple of .270's and 3006's and in in later
years a 7mm rem mag which turned out not a real improvement over the 06'.I had 7 brothers and we all hunted and everyone of those rifles killed lots of elk and deer bear and antelope.

We were all good shots and most of the time we had bb guns before we had pedal bikes!
Hunting pressure was less in those days and you could hunt on your terms.
Different time for sure,but we lost very few animals due to keeping in practice.
When I got older I went to the mags as did most of my brothers and we did not kill any animal any deader than we did in the earlier years.I do some verry long shots at rocks and such with my .340. But I hunt, shoot and kill
elk and deer every year with a .270 or .3006'
The bone and muscle structure of these animals has not changed and they do not have anymore will to live than they did a 100 years
ago.

I can relate to the killing power of the
bigger magnums ,but if you are loosing animals
shooting the old standbys chances are you are going to loose them with the magnums everybody seems to need these days.
Hell we started with bows and arrows then
graduated to black powder,and at one time the .30-30 was thee elk cartridgeof the day.

Here's the bottom line. MOST ordinary hunters (and I'm sure many of the guys who post on this thread are not ordinary) do NOT handle the recoil of .300 magnum and up very well. These are the guys who might sight it in......one shot hit the cardboard box off the hood....yep, she's still on......before going hunting. Many of the hunters in the group who shoot heavier recoiling rifles DO NOT shoot them well.

They and the game would be better served if they shot something in the .270/'06 class of rifle and could accurately place their shots with it.

OTOH, there can be little arguing that heavier calibers give you a SLIGHTLY larger margin of error. After all, they can't be too dead.

The bottom line: You should shoot what you can hit with and practice with it enough to be able to hit with it. Many can't or won't do this with larger or hotter cartridges. Bullet placement trumps size everytime.

quote:

Bullet placement trumps size everytime.

quote:

Originally posted by MontMike:
I realize that I'm new here, so my opinion won't hold as much as others, but that's to be expected so soon. But I'm also born and raised in Montana and see more dead critters in a year than most people will see in their lives. Until about 10 years ago, I'd never heard of anybody elk hunting with anything other than an 06, 7mm or .270. That's what everyone had and used. I'd only heard of one other person that owned a 300 mag, and we all thought he was nuts. Bottom line is know your equipment and know hunting grounds. Make the shot and and any rifle will do the job.

Ditto MontMike..That goes for Idaho also and it is still that way here.40 years of logging Idaho and I have never seen anyone use anything bigger than the .300 Win mag on Elk or Deer and that was and is rare.The 270/06 and a few 7 MM's is what most of the local yokals use to fill there freezers with the 30-30 and 25-06's doing a fine job also.But ofcourse this is people whom rely on there weapons to fill the freezer on a budget to feed the family through the winter when they can't work..What would they No about calibers for Big Game?

Jayco

quote:

Nobody could possibly lose in that contest.

HA! It's 18 miles to Sebastian from the Indialantic Boardwald, and the sand is soft. Somebody would yell "Mother of Pearl" after about 3 miles. Your calves most likely. You never felt pain like that, but the good news is that you won't be winded.

Madgoat, you're on, lemme know when you might be headed this way. Can we do your end of it in the fall? Should I bring a rifle?