Home Forums Hunting & Shooting Elk Hunting Backup elk rifle input

Going to use CTR .260 as primary arm because I'm told shots may be longish but pondering which of several other rifles I should take. Also getting a black bear tag.

Should it be something for longer shots also, or more compact and lighter for close cover in case of poor shooting by our group or that's where the elk are?

Got following for longer: .308 LTR, .270 MR, Tropical .375, Tang .300 WM.

Short/light: .358 Frontier, .45/70 GG, 50s 760 '06 w/19-in. Bbl.

Know the MR could straddle both duties, but kinda like idea of 200+ grains
in close cover or for wounded critters.

The elk are likely to be in the thick stuff after opening morning. But the thick stuff often opens up to broad expanses and you may well find elk along the edges or even trotting across the open space.

Point is, elk are where you find them and they often surprise you.

Take whichever rifle you like. Your .45-70GG would, to my way of thinking, be the most fun. But it is also the most range limited.

The tanger .300WM would be my choice.

I own a .260, a 7x57 and a .300 wm , any will work , but the .300 wm is the first choice. If I were you I would start with it and take the CTR as a Backup.

Tang 300wm for open country
760 '06 for brush

These two have you covered. But if you a WANT another rifle, you can find a niche in there somewhere that needs to be filled.

My primary is a .338 WM. My backup is a 375 H&H. Ended up using the secondary for the entire season two years ago after dropping it twice on opening morning.


I'd carry the one that shot the best of those listed.

Doesn't get much better than that CTR for packing around the elk woods. Love the steel mag that hangs down. I'm sure it doesn't affect balance and carries well... NO need for a backup when you have a rifle like this one..

With 200's the .300 can do an outstanding job near or far.. You don't even need to go that heavy bullet wise..

Oh and my .300 wm is a Tikka T3 and my 7x57 is an old tanger 77. So we are on the same page there.

Any of the rifles mentioned should should within 1 1/2 MOA, so picking the one that shoots the best might not be the best way to choose.
There are other factors, like which one is most reliable in a blizzard, which one holds zero best, is the weight conducive to carrying up and down a mountain all day, and what scope do you have mounted on it.
I think a rugged scope is one of the top priorities. Also, I want a generous eye box, and the thing sitting in as rugged a mount as I can find.
If you plan on shooting at distance, I would take each rifle out and see how close your first cold barrel shot comes to point of aim at 300 and 400 yards. A half minute of angle group doesn't mean much if is a foot away from point of aim.

Can't beat a 300 wm for a versatile western deer elk bear rifle.

300 WM is the classic elk cartridge and depending on your marksmanship & wind conditions gives you an elk stopper out past 400 yards. I'm partial to 180 grain TTSX bullets going as fast as they shoot well for elk.

Having a back up rifle on a rough country hunt is a smart thing to bring ready to go. I missed the biggest buck I have ever seen through s rifle scope when I knocked my scope around on an elk hunt in Colorado.

A 300 Magnum in a rifle that is too heavy to haul up a mountain, or that won't put it's first, cold barrel shot on point of aim, or that has some imitation of the Hubble telescope doesn't make an elk hunting package. Elk hunting is not a game of marksmanship, it's a hell of a lot more like an endurance contest. And you can kill elk quite easily past 400 yards with a 270.
More elk are missed by over gunned hunters, than are lost to under gunned hunters-.

You can make a nice .300 of suitable wt. with a 3x9 scope or 6x if you prefer that weights no more than a .270.. My .300's have always put the first shot from a cold bore right to the point of aim.. They pack a lot more punch than a .270.. I have shot elk with both, the .270 kills, but the 30's put elk down with authority.. At times like this I would like to know how many elk people have put one the ground and with what calibers..


the old .270 fan John Jobson said the perfect elk rifle would be a .300 with 180 gr. Part. If you can shoot it.. You may not be able to handle that combo, then you have to be satisfied with something less.

.300 Win mag ( 180 or 200 gr Nosler Partition) and the .270 (150 or 160 gr Nosler Partition) as back-up.

.300 is the way to go.

The original poster is not making a rifle for the hunt . He is taking a set up that he already has- Very important point.
Another point that I would have thought a coyote hunter would know, is that whether a rifle puts it's first shot dead on or not is not dependent on the cartridge, it has to do with bedding, barrel characteristics, etc.
Profession guides have said on here that about one out of ten hunters that show up with Magnums can handle them.- Another bear guide has had to follow up more bears that were wounded with magnums than with 270 class cartridges.
And I have shot elk with the 270, 300 magnum, 35 Whelen and been around a few more shot with other calibers.
Just so we are getting a fair comparison here, how many elk have you seen killed with each, the 270 and the 300 magnum, and with what kind of bullets.

50+ with my old 270 and 130gr partitions. 2 with a 260 and 130 tsx.

Id take the 270 mountain rifle.

They'll all kill elk. I've killed elk with 30-06, 30-30, 300 wm and 270 wsm.

It's really about what you can shoot with confidence and that you can stand to pack in a couple of miles.

[quote=Royce...
Another point that I would have thought a coyote hunter would know, is that whether a rifle puts it's first shot dead on or not is not dependent on the cartridge, it has to do with bedding, barrel characteristics, etc.
Profession guides have said on here that about one out of ten hunters that show up with Magnums can handle them.- Another bear guide has had to follow up more bears that were wounded with magnums than with 270 class cartridges.
And I have shot elk with the 270, 300 magnum, 35 Whelen and been around a few more shot with other calibers.
Just so we are getting a fair comparison here, how many elk have you seen killed with each, the 270 and the 300 magnum, and with what kind of bullets. [/quote]

Everyone knows that NO ONE can shoot a .300WM with any accuracy. Just look at my .300WM target below for proof. The first shot was from an oiled bore so while its placement is understandable. There is, however, no excuse for #3 except poor marksmanship.



In 2010 I took more or less identical Ruger rifles to the range for a last check before my elk hunt. One was a .30-06 and the other my .300WM. I set clay pigeons up on the 600 yard berm and took a total of 5 shots, two with one rifle and three with the other. I don't recall which was which, but it is irrelevant - what is important is that while I got a pigeon with both guns, I MISSED with three of the five shots. Probably should have just sold both rifles right then. Like a fool I kept them but had the good sense to hunt with the .30-06, which dropped my elk so fast it was on the ground before I recovered from the recoil. In 2012,though, I reverted to stupid and hunted with the .300WM. I shot my elk at 399-400 yards (measured via GPS coordinates and Google Earth) and, as anyone with any brains would expect, it failed to go down at the shot. Instead it went about 5 yards total before piling up just as I was getting ready to fire a second shot. Got lucky on that one...

Here is a pic of the elk and the Ruger MKII .300WM, exit side:


The cow was down inside the circle:


Sure wish I'd used a non-magnum...

The OP doesn't say whether or not he can shoot all of the rifles with the same accuracy. In fact, one would expect that not all of the rifles are equally accurate, regardless of the shooter's skills. In lieu of information to the contrary, though, I'll take it on faith that the OP shoots each of the rifles mentioned well enough to have confidence in considering them for an elk hunt. While you rant about magnums, you know nothing about how the OP shoots each of his rifles or about their individual capabilities with regard to first round shot placement. One would think you would know that "whether a rifle puts it's first shot dead on or not is not dependent on the cartridge".

How many elk have I seen killed with a .270 Win? None - no one I hunt with uses one. That said, over the years I've seen multiple elk that were killed with a .270, I just didn't witness the killing personally. From 1982 until 2002 the only bolt gun I used for elk was my 7mm RM. Since 2000 I've taken 13 elk using a variety of rifles, including my 7mm RM, multiple .30-06s, a .300WM and a .45-70. In addition I've hunted them with .257 Roberts, .30-30, .375 Win and .44 Mag rifle and pistol, but with no shots taken. My hunting buddies have used .30-30, 7mm RM, .30-06 and .300WM rifles. This year Daughter #1 will be going on her first elk hunt and will use her .308 Win. If her by-then hubby buys a non-resident OTC tag it will be his first elk hunt as well and he will use a .30-06. My current plan is to use a .280 Rem.

Funny thing, the .280 Rem doesn't shoot any better than my 7mm RM, .300WM or even my .338WM. Here's a group from said .338WM. First two shots were cold bore, after which I marked the target while allowing the barrel to cool before taking the 3rd, unmarked shot. Pretty crappy repeatability - the 3rd shot missed both of the previous holes.


I don't know what possessed me to think it was accurate enough for hunting elk, but in 2013 I did just that and used the .338WM to take my elk at 487 lasered yards, the longest shot I've ever taken on big game. The elk continued on for 58 yards before going down. Sure wish I'd used a non-magnum...

Double post, too late to just delete so changing the text to this.

Hallelujah!!! Royce likes to jump on the small cartridge bandwagon and toot his horn, saying guys can't shoot magnums...Bunch of f cuking bs... To the OP, use the 30-06 or 270...

My 375 H&H is one rifle I have that puts the first bullet dead center of the bull damn near every time... My 9.3x62mm is another one that does the same thing. I've had quite a few 338 win mags that were just as trust worthy. To me, shooting a magnum is no different than any other rifle. You still need to foucus on what you are doing. Breathe right, aim right and pull the damn trigger at the right time. The bullet is going to go where you place it. Some guys just don't have a fu cking clue..

I've never noticed that my Ruger .300WM was" too heavy to haul up a mountain" (it is about a half-pound heavier than a .30-06) and it sports the same 3-9x Burris scope that I have on most of my rifles. Since the OP is considering a "Tropical .375" I'm going to guess that neither weight nor recoil are his primary concern. And unless you know something the OP hasn't posted, there is no more reason to suspect his .300WM has " some imitation of the Hubble" in the rings than does his .270.

You espouse the importance of first round accuracy yet claim elk hunting is " not a game of marksmanship". You can't have it both ways. IMHO, once you have found elk and are starting to press the trigger, and until the bullet has left the barrel, it is all about marksmanship.

The CTR is the most accurate and actually carries quite well in my left hand, with hand in front of magazine. I have the urge to crumple an elk with a suppressed rifle and it's the only one that is threaded. It will be the primary.

The .300 Tang is the least accurate (though it used to shoot in the .5s before my brother dropped it in a Mickey) and only slightly less portly than the 1-inch Tropical.

I love my old MR and it's lively in my hand w an M8 6x42, fine for the longer shots but perhaps not super fast in close cover. If it's not the lightest Id be surprised.

The LTR is nearly accurate as the CTR, and fairly wieldy. It's dropped several whitetails like lightning w 165 TTB Fed loads.

The .358, .45-70 and '06 are the Stopper/Close Cover choices but could drop a 1.5-5x variable, 2.5x UL HD or Aimpoint Micro on any of them and be confident 0-200.

I've killed one elk w a .338 in '87, and this is only my second hunt for them.

A double post from coyote hunter and BSA acting like someone pissed in his cherrios....

This doesn't really pertain to OP question more to other posters talking about what to take for a back up rifle.
I remember at the Sportsmans warehouse in Wasilla hanging on the picture board was a 12 yr old kid with a nice brown bear not a elk not a deer but a pretty nice brn bear. This kid used wait for it wait for it a Remington model 7 in a wait for it again 260 Remington using??? 140gr Partition... What's the point it doesn't really matter what you take for a back up rifle....

So BSA turn that frown upside down and stop being a grumpy guss.

79S -

Thanks for pointing out the double post. It has been corrected as best I could (too much time had elapsed for me to just delete it but I was able to edit it to one line).

The OP asked for opinions on what rifle he should take as his backup. Royce, as he has done before, immediately jumped on his anti-magnum bandwagon. It gets tiring, especially when his points are generalities, or non-sequitors, etc. The "one out of ten hunters that show up with Magnums can handle them" statement ignores the fact that many hunters can't handle their non-magnums either, that many hunters CAN handle their magnums and was made in total ignorance of the OP's capabilities in that regard. He correctly stated that "whether a rifle puts it's first shot dead on or not is not dependent on the cartridge" and then ignores that fact and berates magnums without any knowledge of how well the OP's can shoot his various rifles. For all he knew at the time, the .260 could have been the least accurate POS ever built.

Although he doesn't directly state that the OP has an "imitation of the Hubble telescope" on his .300, he brings up the subject of large scopes in his rant against magnums. I don't know about the OP but my large scopes are on my non-magnum rifles with small (.22, .25 and .26) caliber bores. The .257 Roberts had hunted elk several times and the larger scope has not been an issue.

Royce's comments would have been a lot more useful, informative and to the point if he had actually said something that was useful, informative and to the point.

My secondary rifle will be just another version of my primary unless there is heavy snow, in which case my iron sighted Marlin 45-70 gets to come out

Funny sh!!t, two people that are always jumping on their soapboxes complaining about somebody else.

Classic.

To the OP, take what ever makes you happy. I'd take the 270.

This isn't useful and to the point?
"Any of the rifles mentioned should should within 1 1/2 MOA, so picking the one that shoots the best might not be the best way to choose.
There are other factors, like which one is most reliable in a blizzard, which one holds zero best, is the weight conducive to carrying up and down a mountain all day, and what scope do you have mounted on it.
I think a rugged scope is one of the top priorities. Also, I want a generous eye box, and the thing sitting in as rugged a mount as I can find.
If you plan on shooting at distance, I would take each rifle out and see how close your first cold barrel shot comes to point of aim at 300 and 400 yards. A half minute of angle group doesn't mean much if is a foot away from point of aim."

Coyote hunter
You are good are making up things I didn't say and then arguing against that. Not so good at logic and contradicting what I actually said. I never said 300 Magnums didn't shoot, and never said none could shoot them.
And the rest of your bafflegab is just getting farther and farther from the point-

Everything I said you wrote was enclosed in quotes and copy/pasted directly from your own posts. How is that making things up on my part? Did you even read your own posts?

Talk about making stuff up and arguing against it, you stated “Another point that I would have thought a coyote hunter would know, is that whether a rifle puts it's first shot dead on or not is not dependent on the cartridge…”. Of course it isn’t, nor have I ever suggested otherwise. In fact, my only comments regarding rifle choice prior to your post were directed to the OP and read “Your .45-70GG would, to my way of thinking, be the most fun. But it is also the most range limited” and “The tanger .300WM would be my choice.” Nothing whatsoever about first shots. When you want to see who is making stuff up, look in the mirror.

No, you didn’t specifically say “300 Magnums didn't shoot, and never said none could shoot them”. Nevertheless you argued against the .300 Mag on the basis that only “… one out of ten hunters that show up with Magnums can handle them.- Another bear guide has had to follow up more bears that were wounded with magnums than with 270 class cartridges.” Both of those statements may be true (or not) but there is nothing magic about .270 class cartridges – or other non-magnums - and neither statement would be true unless in comparison shooter marksmanship sucked with the magnums. You then go on to argue “Elk hunting is not a game of marksmanship”. To summarize your argument, a) the problem with magnums is most hunters can’t shoot them well and b) marksmanship is not important. Yup, poor marksmanship is the problem with magnums but marksmanship is not important. Your argument, not mine.

Shot placement is far more important than cartridge. What “most hunters” are capable of is unimportant and irrelevant - what matters is how the OP shoots his .300, yet you argue against the .300 without any knowledge of the OP’s marksmanship with that rifle. And you think there is logic in that?

I'd go with the .270, if you have confidence with it.

My primary and backup elk rifles are both 270s, a CLR and a Remington 760, both shooting 130 grain Winchester/Olin Power Max Bonded factory ammo.

I usually take a pair of identical rifles, most of my rifles are in matched pairs for this reason and my first choice in typical BC elk hunting is the superb .338WM.

I would take the spare rifle that YOU shoot best, loaded with premium CE bullets and not worry about it.

I bought an identical rifle and scope so that I would have the same backup.
What I found was that it was NOT identical. Each rifle preferred the ammunition it liked and the newer one never could quite match the accuracy of the older one.

I'd go 06 myself, hard to beat for near and far. My load is 180 Nosler BT at 2900fps. My 300 RUM can beat it but at a cost even though the recoil is less with the brake but weighs more too.

Everybody goes on and on about accuracy but no one mentions nerves. Yes I admit to having had buck fever before and learning a lot from it, almost cost me the deer in my avatar. To me being familiar and comfortable with the rifle counts for a lot.

Whatever one you feel most comfortable with. If you have one tied to a tree the the Guide gun makes sense. The 270 MR seems to be the closest to your 260 and will dispatch near and far.. That'd be my choice

W

It's all about confidence. Most any rifle will work, but the one that works best is the one you are absolutely sure will kill at whatever range you decide to take the shot.

With the right loads .45-70's are not all that range limited.

MPBR zeroed for a 6" diameter target, my Marlin 1895 prints 22" low at 300 yards with my 350g hunting load. At 213 lasered yards that load obliterated sections of near-side leg and rib bones and shattered a far-side rib before coming to rest under the hide. The 6x6 bull didn't go down immediately, but it never took a step, either, tipping over just before I let go with a second shot.

Given that most of my elk (all but three IIRC) have been killed within 300 yards, I consider my .45-70 a very viable elk rifle.

And who knows - if I run across a rampaging dinosaur it would be my preferred rifle for self defense.

Good post. Familiarity with your rifle is a must. Everything should happen as naturally as possible. Your rifle should function without flaw and act as an extension of your body. The more days, out in the field, under the belt helps with this. In fact, this is where I really learn which rifle works best for me and which one doesn't.

Lots of recommendations for the .270 and .300WM. Both are good choices. The only rifle listed by the OP that I wouldn’t give much consideration to would be the Tropical .375 due to the weight. All the rest would be fine either as a primary or back-up rifle. As noted in a previous post, the .45-70 GG would be the most range limited, at least in terms of trajectory.

I’ve already stated my preference would be the Ruger tang-safety .300WM as backup for the .260. I agree with others that whatever the OP’s choice, it should be a rifle that functions flawlessly and that the OP shoots well. (Why anyone would choose a rifle that didn’t function well or that they couldn’t shoot well is beyond me. Think about it – the primary rifle goes down so now – by choice -- you are left with a back-up that doesn’t work well either???)

I'd take whatever rifle you were comfortable having stolen from your vehicle or camp while you are out hunting. Otherwise if extremely concerned about "backup" capabilities, I'd have iron sights or another scope setup in good repeatable take off scope mounts in my pack.

Another scope in QR mounts is one way to go for back-up but that doesn't help much if you took a bad fall or had a horse roll on your rifle and shattered the stock.

I have had my truck broken into and a bow stolen but that was parked in an urban area after dark not out in the woods. We have had nothing but positive experiences camped out in CO sorry to hear that isn't the general rule. Clueless noisy hunters and guys who ride their ATV all day, along with unfriendly land owners have been my main complaints but those are very rare compared to the large number of positives.

Good point. That's why my truck pistol is a Glock.

Off topic a bit, but a note to anyone that might consider stealing from my camp.
I might be ten miles away, or I might be 150 yards out and watching you.
Either way, you can be assured I have a good rifle.
Your choice.

LOL, no need for all that.

Just booby trap it with a shotgun in a tree, Jeremiah Johnson style.

I was thinking it, but you actually said it

I have gone that route.. Nothing beats another rifle sighted in and ready to go.

Jeeze louise... While all you guys are fn around booby trapping chit back at camp, I'm out shooting elk.... . I might add, with my 1 elk rifle while all my "back-ups" are at home..

As I get older I realize the perfect back-up rifle is one a hunting partner is carrying...

Took two of my nephews on their first antelope hunt. Loaned them a couple of my rifles, didn't bother to take one for myself, filled my tag anyway and didn't carry a rifle more than 10 minutes the whole hunt. Perfect.

No doubt skinnin' griz too.

Yeah,lions and tigers too.

You forgot bears. Oh my!

One thing's for sure, I wouldn't want tracks up in the woods shootin' at me.

I once had someone siphon a full tank of gas out of my truck at a trailhead. This was in a rural county in SW CO, so I called the sheriff's office to report it. The first question out of the woman's mouth was "where are you from?" When I said "Denver," she copped an attitude and said "what do you want us to do about it, it's not like we can get your gas back."

So I copped an attitude right back and said, "I just thought you all would want to know what's going on in your county. I was hunting, with a rifle in my hands. If I'd have come back to the truck when this was happening, you may have lost one of your upstanding local citizens."

I've taken a "spare" a few times but usually only one person out of the party actually needs a loaner rifle around.

I'd bring whatever I shoot well and am confident with out to at least 300 yards. For me it's usually my .308 with a 2.5x scope. It's worthy, shoots well enough, and is easy to loan out. I'd miss it if it was stolen, and would probably replace it quickly with a another similar rifle.

Been there

never say 'Denver'........

My back up elk rifle is usually on my wife's shoulder. If one our guns goes out of order the other is there as needed. problem solved. She carries my ruger tanger 7x57 most of the time. Only real problem is in super steep terrain I get to carry both guns!

Actually I said Deer Trail.

To the OP, have you been elk hunting before ? And where are you going.
I'd take the 270, I like to carry lighter guns and 270 Is just fine for elk..
Back up or brush gun the 760 in 06 is hard to beat.

Checked w LGS today about suppressor and told NFA trust stamps now running 4-8 mos. v. 3 when I dropped dough in April.

So getting MR .270 outta mothballs for primary and may put new 6x36 or 6x42 LRD on it. Be bit more usable than ol' M8 6x42HD.

Down to '06 or .358 for BUG.

I have to say I really like my 760 which is a .308 sporting a 20" barrel and a FXII 2.5 fixed power scope. It carries very nicely in my hand, comes to the shoulder naturally and I can snap shoot game at powder burn distances or stretch its legs out a little past 200 meters(my limit with the 2.5 scope) if I have to. For that reason I would choose the 760 best case scenario it stays in camp, worst case scenario I have to stalk a bit closer to take a shot in open country I'm comfortable with. I guess I'd consider switching the scope to an ultralight 2-7 to give me a little more confidence in my placement at longer ranges.
I don't know what rifle is like that for you but that would be my criteria for a back up/heavy timber rifle.

I would take a 300 WSM as a primary weapon. And, I'd pack another 300 WSM for a back up.

This always made a huge amount of sense to me.

Me, not so much.. BTDT..

I would take something that can you can have good shot placement at longer range. Remember you can always take shorter shots with something that is accurate at long range...not necessarily the same the other way around.

My choice would be the 300 wm