What's the opinion ? I know a shot thru the lungs would do the job at 400 yards...... but..... with a stout bullet do you think you could anchor a bull if you drifted the shot into the shoulder ? I know that the 270 in 150 grain Partitions at 400 yards has plenty of energy to punch thru elk shoulder.... but I keep hearing over and over that in real life it won't. Your take ? Like to hear some first hand experience both good and bad.
BTW, I shoot a 300 Winchester. Changing my mind every 5 seconds about a new rifle for my honey to be. Thanks !

I knew a number of experienced elk hunters who used nothing but a .270 Win. on elk for their entire hunting careers. Mostly, they'd shoot 'em through the lungs with 130 gr. or 150 gr. bullets, and that was pretty much the end of the game. Most of their shots were under 200 yds. My retired outfitter friend Eldon Deardorf of Halfway, OR, once showed me a box full of original-style 130 gr. Winchester Silvertips that he pulled out of elk over the years. He must have had forty bullets in that box, and he never whined about performance.

If you read enough O'Connor and Jobson, you'll see plenty of references to some 200-400 yd. kills on big elk with a .270 Win. with both 130 gr. and 150 gr. Nosler Partitions.

I've also seen a couple of big bulls dropped instantly to spine shots (neck) with 130 gr. Nosler Partitions out of a .270 Win.

On the downside, know of bulls that took 130 gr. and 150 gr. premium bullets to the shoulder (under 200 yds.), and said bullets didn't get through, and the elk ran off, needing finishing shots. All in all, I think that lungs shots are best on elk if you're going to hunt with a .270 Win., and I don't care what make or weight of bullet you use, and I also think that 400 yds. is father than I'd like to shoot at an elk with a .270 Win.

I'm a Bob Hagle-type rifleman. I'd rather hunt elk with more bullet and more cartridge than the .270 Win. As long as I have a .300 Win. and .338 Win. to hunt elk with, the .270 Win. stays home.

I see the .270 as pretty much the long-range mule deer, sheep, and pronghorn cartridge Winchester had in mind when they designed it. For elk, I simply want more gun..........

AD

I have taken an elk at over 300 yards with a 257wby,and the elk was cleanly killed,but I no longer hunt elk with cartridges smaller than the 7mmmagnums.I am most comfortable hunting elk with the 300 magnums and currently use the 300ultramags.Under ideal circumstances the smaller calibers will work,but the larger bores do add a little insurance when circumstances aren't perfect.

Just keep your 300 and buy a 270 or don’t... or do... or hide in the closet... or whatever. Quit scaring yourself shitless over "what if" questions.

I think any 400 yard in the field shot is iffy on elk regardless of caliber. Not much room for error at 400 yards. Certainly it has been done, but an average guy hiking up a hill, heart pounding and having to drop to one knee and touch off a shot is not going to be very accurate. Now if you are on a private ranch and shooting at elk 400 yards away standing in a hay field while resting over the hood of a truck, then no problem.

I have shot mulies at 400 yards with a 30'06 and none of them dropped. Usually they would stumble and take off, then i would open fire. There just isn't a lot of energy left at that range to knock them over with medium sized guns. I never had a problem with penetration, it would usually stop on the hide of the far side.

I haven't hunted elk w/ a .270. The smallest I have used is a 7mmRM. Like Allen said, plenty of elk have been taken w/ the .270 but I don't think it's a 400yd elk gun . Neither is my .280, which I have had in hand when after elk, just never gotten a shot. I think if you are planning or think your chances of shooting that far are great, then this is where the magnums come in to play. Despite a lot of the "stuff" about shooting big game @ extreme range, bad things happen to good bullets when you have very high impact vel. & very low impact vel.
A friend of mine used to guide for elk in Montana & I have heard too many stories about the .270. He even gets nervous when I have my .280/160gr. "What if you have to take ashot across the canyon"? I just tell him I won't. Just have your "honey to be" get closer when she launches that 150grNP @ her bull.

THe question is not so much can yu kill an elk with a 270 at 400 as can you ACTUALLY hit one at that distance. Does your range have a 400 yard target? What groups do you shoot at that range with your 300? Would you be better off with a lighter recoiling rifle if you could say shoot MOA groups with a 270 compared to 3 to 5 MOA groups with a 300. I hunt on public land and rarely get shots over 200 let alone near 400. Butt on or facing shots are common in bush and a 270 is not going to cut it. If you truely get shots at that distance you must be shooting on wheat fields or you are looking at the infamous cross canyon shot. The question really is are you actually able to make a 400 yard shot under field conditions? Answer that first and then talk about caliber selection.

Hello. Thanks for the responses so far. Yes I have taken an elk with a 7mm Remington at 397 yards ( lasered ) before. It was under ideal conditions though and I had time to relax and get off a good shot. He dropped as soon as the gun went off, and I could not get any closer, there was a nasty oak jungle canyon between us. I think I worded my question wrong. There is no way in hell my fiance is shooting 400 yards. Maybe 200.... maybe ! I was just trying to get some input as to how well a smaller caliber would penetrate on an elk sized animal at distances further than 200 yards. Thanks again.

P.S. ..... where we hunt there is no black timber/ blowdown jungles. Pretty open country, lots of glassing and most of the time you can get closer without being noticed. No wheat fields !

This same topic comes back time after time. I read of guys that loose elk with a 270's all the way up to 375's. The point is, can the shooter MAKE the shot. I have never seen a elk that could not be killed with a 270. My daughter killed a big bull at 200 yards with a 270. Her load was a 130 hornady @ 2800 FPS. That is a light load for a big bull but where you shoot them counts more than power in my mind.

I have shot dozens of elk bulls and cows with a 270 they work. Ron

I shot my first elk at 312 (lasered) yards. I hit him right in the shoulder. My bullet went through one shoulder an the top part of one lung before it stoppped. I nearly lost my bull. There was no exit wound and a very small blood trail. If there had been more cover I'm not sure I would have been able to track him; but then if there was more cover I could have gotten closer. This was before I was loading my own ammo and I was using a 150 grain core lokt bullet. I would not attempt this again. Maybe with a heavy for claiber bonded boat tail bullet (for more retained energy). If you get a good lung shot you're probably ok, but I wont use anything less than a 7mm magnum or 30 claiber magnum if the range gets long.

I see the usual, "oh my god no one can shoot that far" BS that appears when ever someone suggests a shot over 200 yards. If one can't shoot that far, how can one offer meaningful commentary on the subject? I have shot that far, and will offer my opinion. I see the '06 based rounds, using heavy bullets, as 300 yard elk rounds, but I have also shot, and seen others as well, out closer to 500 yards with .270 and '06. It's stretching things, but with a good hit, its' a done deal. The magnums really come into their own, on elk, for shooting beyond 300 yards. I should think that someone capable of making such shots has practiced enough to know when human and environmental factors are favorable or unfavorable in deciding whether to shoot. Would any ethical and knowledgeable long range marksman really try a shot that was less than an ideal broadside, I'm not shaking, good rest and no wind shot at extended ranges? Remember, this is just one guys' opinion, so take it for what it's worth.

COBRAD, you nailed it perfectly

Yes a .270 will kill an elk, but 400 yards is pushing it. One of my best friends is an AZ guide and has killed several elk with a .270, however, even he will tell you to keep shooting !!! Elk die hard. It's not uncommon to put 3-4 shots with a .270 into one to knock it down for keeps. I much prefer the way my .338 handles big bull elk.

Good grief...a 270 is FINE. You are just as likely to hit the right spot with it as with a 338 or 300 mag (probably more so)and a partition will give plenty of penetration.

Doesn't a lot depend on issues that are not directly related to the calibre? Given:-

Hunting area in own backyard
Few hunters
Long season
A good few bulls shot over previous years
A dog to trail

Then no doubt the hunter would have the skill to hit a bull or pass if required without too much angst. When the bull is hit and runs off he can wait 30minutes because there aren't other hunters around to steal his bull. The dog will find a well hit bull regardless of exit.

This would describe my own hunting in the UK (albeit deer) which I why despite the fact I have a 7x57 I find myself using my 243 virtualy all the time.

Given short seasons, long travel, high hunter pressure and no dog I would not be using a minimum.

If the .270 Win. was all anyone ever needed for elk, no one would be shooting anything bigger.

The .270 is fine when everything goes according to script, and that ol' bull is standing patiently -- just the way you want him to -- for that perfect, straight-on lung shot, right behind the shoulder. Sounds great, doesn't it?

The trouble is, elk are really uncooperative, and you can't count on anything but the unexpected. Because of that reality, I want more rifle. Period.

AD

Cobrad
The number of guys who think they can make a 400 yard shot,and the number of guys who can make a 400 yard shot are not even close to the same.

I'm with Allen...338WM for me

AMEN ALLEN!

I have been in on over 75 elk kills. Im our area they ussually have to be down within .5 of a mile before they hit the federal national park line. In our area I would not suggest anything under 300 Win Mag. Preferrably 338 or bigger. Yes, they will go down with other calibers, but not with the same authority . We have lost wounded elk from being under gunned at long ranges. The only time I would suggest shooting something smaller is if you can't handle the recoil of a magnum,or shooting at closer ranges.

I killed my first elk with a 30-30 and several others, then with a 25-35 and others with a 250 Savage...then as I got older I went to the 270 and 06, as I got older than that I went to the 300 H&H and 338 Win.

Elk hunting changed as so did I...I chased a lot of elk that were shot with the 270 at long range and a few that were shot at short range, a couple of them hit right BTW, bad bullets? probably....but I am convienced their is no such thing as 300 grs. of Woodleigh bullet failure from my .338...

Would I still hunt elk with a .270, yes I would, but I don't take 400 yard shots with it.

Problem is a good shot will never miss an elk at 400 yards, but chances are pretty good he will shoot him shallow and wound him..A lousy shot will just miss and go on...its the experts that scare me.

I have shot some elk with my .270 while hunting specifically for deer, then the opportunity arose to fill my elk tag.
I never had an opportunity to shoot an elk at 400 yards. Maximum distance was around 250 yards at the time. I was using 150 Nosler partitions. Animals ran for a short distance 40-75 yards before falling.
When I go out with elk/moose specifically in mind, I usually switch to my .338.
However the .270 is adequate on decent broadside shots.

You said the rifle was for your lady friend or wife (honey).
The .270 would be a good choice for her, since it is shooter friendly.
400 yards is a very long shot under often uncomfortable field conditions( sitting in wet or cold snow, rain, being a bit winded, cold, uncomfortable shooting position, may be a touch of buck fever, etc.). Is your "honey" capable and experienced enough of pulling that of consistently and faultless at 400 yards???????

Limit her shots well within her confidence limits. The .270 with 150 Nosler partitions is a good elk rifle with well placed shots. Place the bullets within in the triangle area delineated by the shoulder bones. This way you get closer to the heart area with the bigger blood vessels. Elk shot in the back of the lungs can go further then you think.

I used a 270 with 150 grain Hornady Spire points last year and it did just fine, couldn't ask for a quicker kill. On the other hand I am also one that believes 400 hundred yards shots should be shortened or passed up with any rifle. I am focusing on a trophy whitetail this coming fall so the 270 will work perfectly in this pursuit. My next elk hunt will have me carrying my 300 Win mag pushing 200 grain bullets.

I shot a bull at a lasered 420yds with my 270Win. using a 130gr Barnes XLC at about 3150fps. Bull was standing, and perfectly broadside. At the shot, he stumbled for about 10 yards and died. The bullet went in the right side, behind the shoulder, and pulverized 2-3inches of upper left leg bone on the way out. Bullet was not recovered.

I don't think I would have attempted that shot with a lesser bullet. I've taken 4 elk with this combination, ranging from 20feet to 420yards, and bullet performance has been outstanding in each event.

I will add that I am selective on my shots, but I would be no matter what caliber I am shooting. Shot placement is critical.