Home Forums Hunting & Shooting Elk Hunting Bullet selection

That makes perfect sense. For me with elk I'd go with a premium vs cup and core because I'd rather prepare for the worst case shot. But if it were a smaller animal and not at a super high impact velocity, doesn't matter so much.

Very underwhelmed with 7mm 162g Hornady BTSP on elk and haven't used them since.

I'd go with the Partition by a mile as long as it shoots half-way decent. If it didn't I'd get an AccuBond, TTSX, Scirocco II, North Fork or Grand Slam long before I'd use a BTSP.

Lots of bullets will work once in awhile.
Shot a Partition, you won't ever regret it!

when I was a kid, I was hunting whitetail with my trusty M70 push feed .243 stoked with cheapo Sierra green box bullets, a combination that had never failed me. this particular day, I stumbled across a 450# black bear at spitting distance that I had to pound to the ground with said combination.

i had to reload in the middle of the rodeo, and I've been constantly looking for the 'best' not the 'cheapest' bullets since.

I can't speak for anyone else but I don't worry about just how accurate a bullet is for particular hunting rifle. You can have a rifle that shoots a premium bullet into .50" all day long from the bench. Guess what? There ain't any benches out in the boonies. nYou'd probably do just as good with a rifle that shoots 1.50" consistently off the bench to at least 300 yards and more. As far as practice goes, find a bullet that shoots as close as possible to your premium hunting bullet and practice with that. AS the .270 is the cartridge in question I'll use that. One of my pet deer and antelope loads shoots the 150 gr. Sierra Game King from a 24" Winchester M70 XTR into .50 to .75" groups. I use it for deer and antelope. I can use the exact same charge of powder, brass and primer and shoot the 150 gr. Nobler Partition into literally the same group. Doing a mix and match, the Sierra vs the Nosler the composite groups was one inch. I did the practice with the Sierras and did the hunt with the Nosler.
Want another? I shoot the 180 gr. Sierra Pro-Hunter spitzer for practice and the 180 gr. Nobler Partition as my hunting load. Shooting three rounds each at the same target gave a group about one inch or a hair larger. (1.10") I do a short practice session with the premium bullet just before the hunt just to be sure everything is working as it should and one test group in the area of the hunt just in case colder temps might make a change.
Paul B.

Quite commendable......

a [bleep] shot is a [bleep] shot not even the best bullets out their are going to make up for a "worse case shot scenarios" I have a buddy that killed a 9 foot bear on Kodiak using ... Drum roll please... 225gr hornady interlocks. For most folks hunting for bears on Kodiak is a life long dream anyhow one shot one dead ass bear... Don't get me wrong I like partitions but I like accubonds even more but if the hornady, speer will shoot better than any of those then I will use regular old hornady's or speers.

and a crap bullet can turn even a perfect shot into a rodeo

HuntnShoot –

Your conclusion is illogical. Choosing a more expensive bullet makes sense only if it provides an advantage. Paying more for an item that provides no advantage is just foolish.

Last Sunday I got back from a 3-day Wyoming antelope hunt. Here is a quick rundown of my costs:
$1.39 Bullets (Barnes 140g TTSX, Qty 2)
$12.50 Conservation Stamp
$39.00 License and application fee
$113.28 Food
$117.66 Fuel
$170.00 Processing
$421.20 Lodging
==============================
$875.03 Total

Granted, I could have reduced the hunt cost by about $0.80 by handloading Hornady 139g SST bullets or Remington Core-Lokt or other cup-and-core bullets, but that cost “saving” would be far more than offset by the added expense of buying a second bullet type and the time and expense of developing a second load.

For a different perspective, I could shoot factory ammo. I was using a .280 Remington with 140g TTSX bullets. By comparison, using today’s midwayusa.com’s standard prices:

$18.54 140g TTSX handloads
$30.40 Hornady 139g SST
$30.49 Federal 140g Spitzer Boat-Tail Fusion
$30.99 Federal 150g Power-Shok
$33.99 Remington 140g Core-Lokt
$43.49 Barnes 140g TTSX VOR-TX

So even if using factory ammo (Barnes VOR-TX vs Hornady SST) the most I could have saved would have been less than $1.31. (Whoopee, break out the champagne!)

OK, I was hunting antelope, and doe antelope at that. Where is the advantage of shooting a bullet like the TTSX (or AB, the other hunting bullet I use in that rifle), when just about any bullet will do for even the largest antelope? Just this – the rifle will be used for elk as well and the bullets I use are selected with that in mind. Using the same load for everything reduces costs and increases my familiarity with those loads.

If I could get the same advantages out of cup-and-core bullets for less money, I would be happy to do so. Those advantages include excellent accuracy, reliable but controlled expansion over a wide range of velocities and high weight retention for deep penetration. TTSX, for example, have been very accurate in every rifle I have tried them in and most animals, including elk, have either dropped straight-down or taken no more than a few steps before dropping. I trust them to reach the vitals from almost any angle, even on elk, as they have proven they can provide exit holes even when shooting lengthwise through mule deer.

The only real downside would be if the premium bullets I select (mostly Barnes TTSX, Nosler AB and North Fork SS) performed worse than cheaper alternatives, but I have seen no evidence of that, even on light animals like antelope and coyotes. My hunting partners and I have yet to recover a TTSX rom any animal and in the years we have been using TTSX we have seen no indications of failure to expand, bullets coming apart or failure to penetrate. By contrast, I have seen multiple instances where standard cup-and-core bullets failed to perform as I want.

While premium bullets will not always provide better results (DRT is DRT regardless of the bullet used), I am also well aware that things do not always go as planned. If an animal takes off after the first shot I want a bullet in the chamber that provides the best chance of reaching the vitals when all I can see is the back end of the animal as it heads away. For that I will gladly pay a little extra for my hunting loads. The $0.80 I could have saved on this trip by shooting the Remington Core-Lokt or Hornady SST handloads instead of Barnes TTSX would have been less than 1/10 of 1% of the overall expenses (0.091%).

Bullets may or may not be the least expensive part of a hunt but their cost is minimal compared to the total cost of my hunts. For myself and many others the little added insurance that premium bullets can provide is worth the slight extra cost.

Even the most expensive ones "fail" sometimes. Most of the "failures" I hear about are largely in people's minds. And there are no guarantees from bullet makers when buying premiums. I like Partitions, and I like "crap" Hornady bullets. When Hornadys shoot better, I hunt them.

Feel free to pay more for less. What I don't understand is guys who buy some smoking magnum and then shoot golf ball BC bullets. Striking velocity is the essential thing. Muzzle velocity is only relevant for bragging.

The only thing better than a "which bullet for elk" thread is a "which cartridge for elk" thread.

I thought that had been settled. A tie between 300 WBY, 223 AI.

HuntnShoot-

The North Fork SS I use in several rifles (.257 Roberts, .280 Rem, 7mm RM, .30-06, .300WM, .45-70) don’t have the greatest B.C. but they perform great, providing exactly what I want in terminal performance. When shot from my magnums they shoot flatter and faster, not much different than inferior bullets with higher B.C. values shot from my non-magnums. Either way, magnum or not, they are reliably consistent performers, which is what I value most in my bullets.

Striking velocity is not the “essential thing”, as you claim, it is “one of the things”. Bullets can fail to expand if velocity is too slow and fail to hold together if it is too high. Both constitute failures to my way of thinking. The premiums I use have worked fine at low velocities yet hold together better than standard cup-and-core bullets at much higher velocities. Case in point were the two antelope we took this last weekend with TTSX, a 100g from my .257 Roberts (310 yards, ~2400fps striking velocity) and a 140g TTSX from my .280 Remington (373 yards, ~2075fps striking velocity). Both shots resulted in exits with signs of good expansion. Although I’ve lost petals from TTSX when shooting into water jugs at over 3,000fps from a range of a few feet, the only time I have had them disintegrate was when shooting steel, and even then they made a big pocket. By contrast, I’ve had cup-and-core bullets come apart in in the water test and barely dent the steel before flying to pieces.

I agree there are no guarantees from bullet makers when buying “premium” bullets. Like cup-and-core bullets, some have proven to reliably meet my performance exportations while I won’t even consider others due to their construction and performance claims by the manufacturer (read “Berger VLD” for one).

I disagree, however, that when using the premiums of my choice, that I’m paying “more for less”. These include Barnes TTSX, Nosler Accubond, North Fork SS, Swift A-Frame and Scirocco II and, while I no longer use them, Speer Grand Slam. While I’ve rarely needed the additional penetration capability that the premiums I use can offer, it has been there when needed.

just because no bullet is guaranteed does not make them all equal.

partition

HuntnShoot -

Most if not all bullet failures " are largely in people's minds" because failure is a qualitative assessment of bullet performance. What one person considers a "failure" would often leave other's scratching their heads and wondering why, when they would consider the same performance quite acceptable.

I have to agree with toad - a lack of a guarantee means exactly nothing. Did your favorite rifle come with a guarantee that it would like a particular load? Do your favorite factory loads (or even handloads) come with a performance guarantee?

Coyote Hunter, you've given me a lot to consider and respond to. I can't really see where you are coming from in some regards, because it seems to me that you approach bullets with the idea that tougher is better. This perspective is not true, and there is much evidence to the contrary, as far as speed of kill.

Tougher bullets, such as those you name, as a group also have poor BC, which matters if your shots get long (>300yds). An experience I had demonstrates this, as well as my point that MV is irrelevant, and that impact velocity is THE thing: I was out shooting and a guy pulled up and watched me wrapping up. I started BS'ing with him about the upcoming elk hunt. He had a 300 RUM and factory ammo that he was going to use. I talked to him of my 30-06 and 185gr Berger handloads. He mentioned the ability to make a 300yd shot with his RUM, scoffing at my 30-06. I told him that my '06 has a 300yd MPBR, and that it catches up to and begins to pass his chosen ammo before 400 yds. He seemed incredulous. I explained the numbers to him. He still didn't see it. We ended the conversation talking about accuracy. Seems he was able to shoot about 3" groups at 100 with the RUM, and was pretty proud of that. He said the recoil was pretty rough.

There is always the chance of bumping elk up close where I have hunted the last 15 years. Most shots, however have been 400+yds. Should I get a RUM then, and shoot A-Frames, so I can get about the same impact velocity as I get with a 30-06 and Bergers? As an aside, I've not ever caught one. Not in deer, not in elk. Not in steeply quartering impacts. Broken bones, broad wound channels, exits. I've also tried other bullets, and been with guys who use still other bullets. Rodeos have always come with poor hits, regardless of the bullet/ammo.

You seem to claim that only certain bullets should be considered hunting bullets, i.e., the tough ones. And that, I guess, all those other bullet makers are what, lying? Committing some kind of fraud? No, bullets aren't all the same; but that doesn't mean that some don't work because they don't fit your criteria.

I will tell you again: impact speed is THE thing when talking bullet performance. For your hunting, your choices obviously work well. There are other factors than the ones you use to judge bullets. I know this because you don't even consider the ones that weigh most for me, including price.

Confidence, a positive attitude, familiarity with all aspects of all our equipment, getting into the elk. An abbreviated list. Bring your 'A' game!

I am in the bullet cost is trivial camp!
I have shot enough SSTs to learn I might not be learning as much by shooting a handful more a year, then the taxing effects on my brass 'cost' .

BTs to ABs here. (They shoot the same, same load 65 grains of H4831-sc seated a tad off the rifling)
They just plain shoot well for me. That's confidence.

Any bullet that can match or beat any Noslers performance is bringing your 'A' game!

I don't use mono copper bullets for reasons not given here, but what has served me well for many years is using heavy for caliber bullets for larger game like elk. 200-220 gr in my .06 for example.

Pure lead bullets in a 50 caliber ML will kill elk and for that matter moose quite well if you realize you have a distance limitation.

Matching the bullet to the parameters it was designed for velocity wise goes along ways in respect to bullet performance, but nothing will fix poor bullet placement

HuntnShoot -

You misinterpret what I think about bullets. Tougher is not always better. If it was I would be shooting only non-expanding, copper-jacketed steel-core spitzer bullets. Instead I like bullets that expand fairly easily but are 'tough' when it comes to holding together. The North Fork SS, Barnes TTSX, Nosler AccuBond and Swift A-Frame all fit into this category and have performed very well at ranges near and far.

"Poor" B.C.? Neither the AccuBond nor the TTSX I use have what I consider "poor" B.C. values, although you can easily find bullets with higher values, including their "Long Range" brethren. The North Fork I use include a 7mm/140g (a pointier design Mike Brady never made generally available), 'standard' .308"/165g and .308"/180g SS and a .458"/350g FP. The B.C. for all of them, and the .257"/120g A-Frame I use, is more than high enough for my purposes which average under 300 yards but has stretched to 487 yards. Several years ago I took my .300WM/180g Barnes MRX (predecessor to the TTSX) and a .30-06/150g Nosler BT to the range for a final scope check. The last thing I did was try for clay pigeons on the 600 yard berm. "Poor" B.C. values or not, I was able to hit two pigeons with a total of five shots, three with one rifle and two with the other.

The "poor" B.C. of the .284"/140g TTSX (.412) was quite good enough for me to take my antelope last weekend with my .280 Remington at 373 lasered yards, my 4th longest shot ever. Calculated impact velocity was only 2078fps. (The others used a Nosler AccuBond at 487 yards and both a Barnes MRX and North Fork SS at 400 yards.)

Nowhere have I ever claimed that "only certain bullets should be considered hunting bullets". While my choices are limited to just a few, based on a variety of factors, I've often stated other people are free to use whatever they choose. If Berger bullets work for you, by all means use them. Some people like A-MAX as hunting bullets but I've seen first-hand the excessive damage these thin-skinned bullets can do at 30-06 velocities. While I use some cup-and-core bullets they only get used at low velocities. None of the premium bullets I use and have recovered have shown any signs of failure to expand or coming apart, regardless of the range used.

Most bullets will work most of the time, something I stated rather often. It is for those times when things go wrong that I'm willing to invest a bit more in my bullets and when I've needed deep penetration the bullets I use have delivered. If you have never had a Berger stop or come apart your experience is very different from what other people have experienced and Berger advertises , to wit:



Is Berger lying? Thanks, but when I've possibly wounded an animal and all I have is a hind quarter shot as it flees, I don't want a bullet that performs as Berger advertises in my chamber.

The Hornady 162g InterLock BTSP I used on my first elk centered a near rib, missed or barely nicked the far ribs and stopped under the hide. The next year I switched to Speer 160g Grand Slam bullets and it was 20 years before I recovered one. That one destroyed both shoulders of a 5x5 bull elk yet still retained about 50% more weight than the Hornady InterLock all those years before. Both shots were broadsides at about the same range, 100-110 yards. Even with a "poor" B.C. of 0.387 the Speer Grand Slam also made my 5th longest shot (350 yards) with ease and the 6x5 bull never took a step.

Velocity is not "THE thing" I consider most important and in fact falls well behind accuracy and bullet performance. The North Fork 350g FP I use in my .45-70 has an estimated B.C. of 0.232 and I launch it at a 2147fps. At 213 yards retained velocity is about 1515fps, but that was enough to drop a 6x6 bull elk in its tracks and I wouldn't hesitate to use them at 300 yards (1313fps, -24"), which would be a much longer shot than my average shot range, even with my bolt rifles. That same .45-70 will drive 350g hardcast (1097fps at the muzzle) through 12 one-gallon water jugs. I wouldn't want to shoot an elk broadside with that load if another elk was standing behind it as I would have some explaining to do to Parks and Wildlife officers.

We obviously disagree on what the important characteristics are for a hunting bullet. Price barely enters into the picture for me as I don't take enough shots while hunting for them to be a major expense, and far from it. Accuracy with reliable and consistent performance over a wide range of impact velocities counts for much more in my book.