I'll second what M1 said about the .308 and 165 Partitions for elk.
Sako

Speaking for myself, I would not be compfortable with a 308 on elk. I have been in on over 85 kills and am speaking from experiance. Our hunting is done in a near proximety to a National Park and the animals have to be down before they hit the boundry line. Sure an elk can be killed with a 308 if conditions are right. But given a large elk with adrenaline flowwing and the right conditions can go wrong very quickly.

I would hunt the largest brown bear in the world with a .308 but be picky about my shots. For guiding and backing up my minimum would be 250grs at 2500fps in any caliber.

Is it adequate? Yes, given short range and a broadside shot. Would I be comfortable with it? No. I am not a magnum fanatic but I do believe in matching the cartridge to the game. In my opinion, a little more gun would be a good investment. Whether or not it's necessary is a question you'll have to answer for yourself.

I have seen elk shot with everything from a .243 Win to a 340 Weatherby. Some of the smaller rifles did well, some did not. No amount of gun will compensate for poor shooting. I do believe that good shot placement is required. My advice would be to shoot as much gun as you can accuarately shoot at hunting ranges.

It's a lot like choosing a hammer. Don't use a 4 oz hammer to pound nails, and don't try a ten pound sledge. Somewhere in the middle is the right tool for the job. You'll have to pick your "tool" based on your knowledge of your shooting ability, your ability to handle recoil, your hunting area, the specific range that you'll be shooting, etc....

As an addendum to my previous post, I usually take a .30-06 when going after elk, but my experience (which isn't as extensive as some others here) is that there isn't much difference in results on game between the two. If one of them is okay, then the other is, too.

quote:

Originally posted by elkhunter:
Is it adequate? Yes, given short range and a broadside shot.

My question is, how did you arrive at your parameters? Was it by shooting elk with the 308? Were they shot close up or at long range?

When people make blanket statements I'm always curious how they arrrive at their opinion.

I agree with an earlier poster who said, "If it was all I had I wouldn't stay home during Elk season." That said, its not all I've got. I would much prefer a .338. I just don't always (read rarely) get those picture book broadside shots under 200 yards that everyone else talks about. Nor do I always place the bullet with the surgical precision most others seem to. A .338 hits amimals Elk size and bigger noticably harder than smaller calibers. Sometimes that can be a very good thing.

Sorry to all, this is off topic..

pioneeroutfitters......saw your location and had complete 'good memories flashback' ...I did an exchange tour down at CFB Shilo back in 96 ...used to ski up at riding mountain- downhill skiing at -30degC certainly toughened my wife's (and my) attitude to recreation in Canada!! ....great location! (also did some dog sledding at Deadwood Dog Ranch - all that stuff still around?)

I don't have any experience with a 308, but I've shot several elk with a 30-06. I always wait for broadside double lung shot. I never had any problem with it at 200 yards or less. I shot a yearling cow at 300 yards and did not have good results. I hit her about 5" behind the shoulder. The bullet only pentrated about 6" and stopped.

She was shot through one lung and ran a long way before she laid down. I had to wait for her to lay down and then stalk in close to finish her. The terrain was open sage and I didn't have much cover. If I had been hunting thicker cover I probably wouldn't have been able to find her. The blood trail was thin and inconsistant.

I didn't reload at that time and was shooting factory Remington Core lokt ammo (of the six brands I tried it shot the best in my rilfe). My rifle wouldn't shoot the heavier bullets very well. It routinely shot 3/4" to 1.5" groups with 150 gr bullets, but opened up to around four inches with 165's or 180's. If I had a better ammo maybe it wouldn't have been a problem.

I also prefer an exit wound for tracking. I did not get an exit wound with my 30-06 very often. My hunting partner shoots a 270 and I've seen similar results with it. Sometimes the results were great, sometimes they were marginal. I would not want to take a quatering shot with an '06 or a 308. The shoulders of an elk are large and difficult to break. With my 300 WM and quality bullets (sometimes magnums with standard bullets are worse than an '06) I have not had a problem with penetration.

I my opinion, elk are in a different class than deer. A deer is not that difficult to kill. Elk are tougher and bigger. Based on my experience I like a little more gun. It may only be necessary 5% of the time, but I like the insurance. I don't claim to be an elk expert, this is just my opinion based on my observatins and experience. I'm sure others will disagree. A 308 is probably adequate in most situations, but I wouldn't want to use it at long range (300 yards for me) or take quatering shots. That is my personal criteria and yours may differ. I want to state again that I don't think bigger guns make up for poor shooting. Nothing will work well if you shoot an animal in the guts. However, with the right bullet, they do seem to break bone better than smaller rounds.

Elk, after reading your post I'd say your opinion is based on poor bullet selection, not poor cartridge selection. A 168 TSX would give all the penetration needed from a 308 to at least 300 yars. My personal limit with that combo woud be 400 yards.

Frankly, the high velocity of rounds like the 300 WM can inhibit penetration up close. On a large bull quartering at fifty yards I'd just as soon have a 30-06 with a 180 NP than a 300 WM with the same bullet. At 500 yards I'd always rather have the 300 WM.

Brad I agrre that my opinion is biased due to my experience with less than optimal bullets. The 168 grain TSX makes huge difference. If I had started handloading before I bought my 300, I might have stuck with the '06.

I also agree that up close magnum rounds with conventional bullets don't penetrate that well. I've been through that myself. I now shoot the Accubond. Two years ago I shot a big bull in the base of the neck at 33 yards in the timber (his lower body/chest cavity was not visible). He dropped immediately and I got complete penetration.

I agrre that the calibre AND bullet must be matched to the game in question. With your load I'd be confident with the '06.

Comfortable? No
Would I use it? Yes with the right combination of bullet.

I chose a .338WM quite a while ago as my "Elk" rifle and have not been disapointed. My experience isn't vast but the results I've seen so far would indicate that the .338WM is a very good choice.
If I had to use my .308 on an Elk, I'd be using a standard 180gr or a premium 165gr so I could get the penetration. And I personally would limit my range to no more than 250 yards.

I think there are better choices for Elk than the .308W, but I don't think the .270W is one of them. Nate

Nate how many elk have you taken with the 270 and or been in and around their demise?

Thx

Mark D

The .308 is more than adequate for Elk it all comes down to your skill level and patients any ways. No matter what your are shooting unless you plan on shooting them in the a$$ and hope to reach vitals. I have killed six Elk with the little 6mm Remington and 100 grain Partitions one was at 290 Yards. It all comes down to bullet placement.

That said I like my .300 Weatherby the best I even like using it over my .338 and 340.

quote:

Originally posted by Mark Dobrenski:
Nate how many elk have you taken with the 270 and or been in and around their demise?

Thx

Mark D

Hey Mark, Congrats on you sheep hunt, sounds like you had a great time.

To answer your question, I've been standing beside the .270 user three times when the shots were fired. Then there have been about eight that I didn't witness directly but have been told about / seen the after math of directly so none of this is hear-say. My best friend has been using the same .270W since he was 14. So at 24 years of experience with it I'd say he's pretty capable of using it. Shot placement has not been stellar every time, but he hasn't taken an elk with a single shot ever that I can remember. Of the elk I witnessed, the wound channel, and effectiveness of the shot's were less than impressive. I realize that bullet selection, and shot placement have more to do with this controversy than the cartridge. I'm not trying to bag on the .270, and I'm quite aware that it is very popular and has been used on many elk. I just am not impressed with it. In fact I don't think it's impressed me as a deer rifle either really. It's a fine deer rifle but fits in with many other fine deer rifles. It doesn't stand out.

Now just to give you an idea of how I approach these things, I would use it for elk if I needed to without hesitation. If it's what I owned I'd have picked a bullet that shoots well and performs well on game and I'd go use it. I have even put the stalk on elk while deer hunting with my .25-06 and would have taken a shot if it had presented itself. But in that situation, I was using Barnes XLC's and would not have risked a shot I thought might have a chance of going bad. I won't ever tell someone that a such&such won't work, but I may try to get them to consider something bigger.

I admit my experience is limited. But given my experience would you have a different opinion of the .270W? Would you recommend the .270W for Elk if you'd had the same experience? I try to recommend based on what I have seen and done myself. I don't think there's a lot of value in repeating things that I've heard. Many people will talk a lot about things that are not a direct experience. My friends hunting with this one rifle is what I base my dislike of the .270 on.
Believe me, it's started a few heated debates between us over the years!

I was just a curious, Jacks round has always been good for some conversation..

Thx

Mark D

quote:

Originally posted by PATRIOT76:
I am wondering who has had or heard of good/bad experiences with the .308 on elk at what ranges?

I'd not hesitate to take a .308 Winchester elk hunting.....but I'd take the .30-06 a lot sooner. If one wants to shoot the heavier bullets I prefer the old .30-06 is a better bet.....but the .308 will work as well.

Vapodog summed up the point I was trying to make. The 308 is adequate, but in a lot of cases I'd be comfortable with something a bit larger.

Hi Brown Dog
Mount Agassiz Ski Hill has been closed for years. Had a lot of winters with not much snow and poor management. As for the dog sled rides I am not sure. I have lived in the area most of my life as my Dad was a Park Warden for 35 years and retired in 1980. His last 8 years as a warden were spent just inside the Park at Mt. Agassiz.I have lived in most of the Western Provences including B.C., in the Chetwynd area and I like this area best.

I shot my cow elk this year with my .308 using 165 grain Sierra Game Kings.

She didn't take one step after I shot...granted I was very close to her when I let her have it.

Would I say I am comfortable to use it again to hunt an elk...well, the answer is in my freezer.

MG

I have only shot one elk and it was with a 375 h-h.

I did shoot a moose with 165 barnes x in a 308 win. I thought it had plenty of penetration and worked fine.

If you can pass on anything but perfect shots, go ahead. A well placed 30 caliber bullet will certainley take an elk. Where folks get into trouble are with less than perfect shots and distances to far to accurately place the bullet. As for the guy who claims that wild pigs are as tough as 900 pound rocky mountain bull elk, think again.

I would not be afraid to hunt elk with a 308. The 308 is my favorite general purpose round. I have several rifles in 308.
However when I go to hunt elk it is an out of state hunt, many times a draw tag. I have killed elk with 300 Wby, 340 Wby, and my last kill was with a 300 Win Mag this year in WY.
I prefer a little more power and trajectory for longer range shots.

quote:

Originally posted by Leanwolff:

He doesn't take 400/500 yard shots, as he's a very good hunter who gets closer than that.

L.W.

Just reading this thread and was wondering about this. Does this mean that a person that takes a shot at 400 is less of a hunter than one that takes a shot at 200-350?

quote:

Originally posted by Doc:

quote:

Originally posted by Leanwolff:

He doesn't take 400/500 yard shots, as he's a very good hunter who gets closer than that.

L.W.

Just reading this thread and was wondering about this. Does this mean that a person that takes a shot at 400 is less of a hunter than one that takes a shot at 200-350?

Often times yes.

Dean

quote:

Originally posted by maki:

quote:

Originally posted by Doc:

quote:

Originally posted by Leanwolff:

He doesn't take 400/500 yard shots, as he's a very good hunter who gets closer than that.

L.W.

Just reading this thread and was wondering about this. Does this mean that a person that takes a shot at 400 is less of a hunter than one that takes a shot at 200-350?

Often times yes.

Dean

Really? That last 50 yards or so will make that much of a difference. Huh. Guess you learn something daily.

The .308, and the short version, .308 X 39, have probably killed more African animals then everything else combined.

Take the .308, put it in a 20 round clip, and fire a three round burst, or rapid fire, and, that's usually adequate to kill an elephant, using even ball mil ammo. Just grab your FNFAL, or M1A, and go hunting. Sometimes quantity is better then quality.

By the way, with a SuperMatch M1A you could brain the darn elk, at serious distances.

GS

*** AGREEMENT ***

I pretty much agree with " PIONEEROUTFITTERS " , --- That is, you have to consider , what if the Animal is Large , and full of adrenaline , -- in which case I think the .308 in a heavy-for-caliber Maximum loading with a partitioned premium bullet is still not " IDEAL " for the purpose .

However , having said that ; I think the above type loading is perfectly O.K. , --- if the hunter wants to exercise a lot of discression , -- and is prepared to give up any iffy shot / presentation . --- Stalk up for close , sure-thing shots , -- and preferrably stick to heart-lung shots , --- and stays away from heavy bones .

The .308 Win. , with well constructed 180 , or 200 Gr. bullets IS capable of KILLING just about anything ; --- but in those rare cases where a large critter Charges , --- the old .308 ain't too good .

Overall , I think .308 is a great hunting Cartridge .

JMHO , ----------- MMCOUGAR .

I've personally killed two elk with a 308 and have seen a BUNCH of elk killed with 270, 30-06, 7mm Mag, and 338. (Used to work for an outfitter)

My elk I killed with the 308 (180gr Partition) were basically bang flop kills but I took some serious time and care with bullet placement and if I'd had to take raking and/or running shot's I would have passed.

From what I've seen (not read) my minimum choice for anything less ideal than broadside on elk would be a 350 Rem Mag or 338 Winny and my personal choice(s) is/are a 350 Rem Mag or a 375H&H.

I like to absolutely ANCHOR my animals where I want them to fall. I don't want to have to count on a small bullet performing perfectly and hope I don't hit bone.

I'm also too getting to dang old to extract them from the bottom of ravines... Kinda ruins my enjoyment of the hunt...

$bob$

From what I've read on this thread hunters tend to use on average 165gr+ (and even 180gr +) bullets when using a .308 on Elk.
Still some of them don't feel comfortable in using a .308 on Elk.

Being in RSA I've obviously no experience of Elk hunting, but I picked up on the Internet that a mature Elk male can weigh from 800 to 1000lbs.
An Eland bull can weigh 700kgs + (± 1543lbs.)

A friend farming in the Kalahari area in RSA owns only one rifle. Game from Springbuck, Kudu, Bluewildebeest, Gemsbuck and Eland are hunted with this gun - .243 with ordinary lead jacketed 100gr factory loaded rounds.
One shot kills on the spot is his everyday life - nothing out of the extraordinary.

Must add, he practically grew up with that old .243 in his hand in that part of the world.

Só, if he can do that, then I'll feel comfortable with my .308 and 130gr GSC HV's on any of the above species, including Elk.

Very interesting thread!

My best friend and I have been dreaming of a elk hunt for years. One topic of conversation that keeps coming up in our musings is if we really "need" a new rifle if/when the hunt actualy takes place.

I have a trusty .308 that I am comfortable with. While I would use it on an elk, I would prefer something with a bit more power. But don't tell my wife that! Otherwise I might not ever convince her to let me get that "elk gun" someday.

Lots of people use the only gun they have. I would too if I were limited to that one gun. Most guys I know use a gun that will anchor their prey so they won't have a long track to follow after the shot. Try tracking a bull elk two miles through the Northwest mountains where the underbrush is so thick that you are sometimes on your hands and knees trying to get through it. Make your own choice. A .308 will certainly kill an elk and could even drop it with one well placed shot. For that matter so can a .243. Range needs to be considered and so does the stalk. Some ares are so thick that the elk will just move around you instead of running off. You could be so close that you can smell them but never see them.Then sometimes they will bust and the next time you see them is going in s straight line over the next mountain ridge a mile off. Use enough gun. Know your range and make a good shot. Then the fun will be over and the work will begin. Either way. Do it and enjoy the hunt. Don't let the gun choice stop you. Just be ready for what you may have to go through. Don't make the weather then stand out in the rain and say; "Shit, it's raining!"

I have seen only 1 elk kill with a 308. The guy used a 150 grain factory bullet but I have no idea what kind. I was about 10 yards behind the guy when he shot. The bull, about 900 pounds, was hit tight behind the shoulder. The distance was around 80 yards and the bull was mildy quartering away, MILDLY.

He buckled and jumped up like a cat at the hit. Ran about 40 yards and did a horse stomp maneuver with all 4 legs, fell over, then sat up as if he was bedded. It took another 5 minutes before the hunter gathered his stuff and got to the elk which was still laying there alive (filled out his tag and such-me personally, I would have approached the downed animal first).

The elk was still very much alive but a second shot to the back of the head finished it. The first bullet (I really want to say was a Hornady due to the cannelure), only penetrated one lung and lodged in thick muscle of the ventricle of the heart. Nice mushroom though.

Regardless, the elk would have died. But this guy admittedly used his "deer" round and would rather have taken a bigger better bullet. My fear would be: what if the elk decided to keep on running? I would be guessing but I'd assume it could go quite the distance on 1 lung. I know whitetails can.

Pegleg:

I can assure you the .243 hunter's marksmanship is of such a high standard that he doesn't need to track game he shot over long distances.
For people like him working in the wild on a daily basis amongst his cattle and wild animals on the same property, shooting game is as easy as taking a sip of coffee would be for you and many of us.
If there really was a need for a bigger bore rifle he would certainly have bought himself several bigger rifles many years ago.

Added in edit after Pegleg's post hereafter:

quote:

One shot kills on the spot is his everyday life - nothing out of the extraordinary.

I thought that said everything there is to say!

Jagter
Not trying to start anything about the ability of your pal who shoots everything with his 243 but I would bet that he would never anchor an elk with a single shot from a 243 unless it was a head shot. Just won't convince me of that. I've seen too many elk take killing shots and go down but only to get back up and head for the hills. More times than not you only get one shot so you had better make that a good one. But, to each his own. Hunt with a 243 or a 308 or a 105 recoiless, I don't care. If you ever get a chance to hunt elk in North America and your choice of gun is chambered for the 308 and you don't get the perfect shot then bring lots of coffee cause you might have plenty of time to drink it after that bull is last seen going over the next mountain ridge.

All the dribble about the 308's inadequacy makes me want to pick one up and give it a ten year trial on wapiti...

I didn't read the thread, but if you can't kill an elk with a .308 win at reasonable ranges, with a super premium 165-200gr. bullet, you've got a problem with your shooting skill. Period.

*** A MATTER OF PERSPECTIVE ***

The substance of many debates like this one , see-saws back and forth between shifting variables in the CIRCUMSTANCES surrounding the ( theoretical ) , -- shot .

The variables include those of the Hunter and his technique , as well as of the Shot itself
( distance , angle , etc. , etc. ) ; -- and , not to forget the Animal's variables ,
( adrenaline up ? ) .

With so many variables , it is hard to give or recieve a sum answer to the efficacy of the .308 against Elk . ---- Maybe the best that can be hoped for is to input a bit . A fragment , or example , -- here and there , for what it's worth , -- and then let it go .

I'm sure that the .308 is not IDEAL for Elk , but if I was trying to survive , or subsist in Elk country , and all I had was a .308 to work with , -- I'd feel pretty damn secure about it .

I'd sure feel a sight better than if I had a .243 , a .30-30 , or a 12 Ga. with Slugs .

I agree strongly with the Gent , above who said , -- when HUNTING , he likes to really ANCHOR , his Animals ! -- Me too , I'm a fanatic about that , -- I feel bad if the Critter runs ten yards , let alone 50 . It kills me to loose an animal , to die in pain somewhere , -- maybe slowly .

I'm an Elmer Keith Fan .

I like Cartridges with enough power to take the Game WITH AUTHORITY , -- from any angle . Break both Shoulders , -- jelly the heart and lungs -- POLE AXE !

the .308 is not such , for Elk .

------------- MMCOUGAR .

Doc-where on earth did you find an 900 lb elk?

thx

Mark D

Mark, the elk was FAT, old, long in body, huge neck, and that was the "estimate" that the hunter and his guide used. Same with the butcher who scaled it field dressed. It was a resident elk hunt in Kansas. I didn't even know they had elk til I visited my father in law and we hooked up with some of his friends from church. That is how I met the hunter and his cohorts.

I've been with friends that have killed elk in AZ, CO, WY, and NM. I've not seen near as many dead elk as (probably) most of you. I killed a decent 6x6 myself and it was around 700+. But that Kansas elk was bigger than any I'd ever seen, and by a substantial margin.

The only other bull elk I've seen close to 800-900 pounds was taken in unit 10 AZ. It was a TOAD, and scored just over 400.

I can not SWEAR that the elk taken in KS was indeed 900, but I would have guessed it at 1000.