Home Forums Hunting & Shooting Elk Hunting The 300 Wby Mag for elk- is there anything better?

And wonderfully backpedaled... The puny 270 Win worked for me on a big bodied 5x5 at only 250 yards with the 140 gr TSX.

God thing that bull wasn't standing another 10 yards out or you would have discovered what a poor choice the .270 Win is!

Yup,it's the "Energizer Bunny" of threads.

Despite all this excruciating nit picking, if someone gave me an elk hunt and said I had to use a 300 Weatherby I'd be on the plane pronto.

I've shot them with a 300 Weatherby and 300 Winchester mag and I'll be damned if I could tell the difference.You can lump the 300 Weatherby, 300 Win, 338, 340 Weatherby,8 Rem mag all in a pile as far as I'm concerned. Seen elk killed with all of them.

Trying to distinguish the effects on game from such closely matched cartridges is a waste of time.

This oughta liven things up....

I have a number of rifles from 17 to 338 but if i had to pick just one rifle cal to hunt all big game with including Elk it would be the 30-06

There's one in every crowd.....

Smart man.

Hammerdown....laffin!

Not so much smart, but at my age just gimme a rifle and let me go hunting....I'll get it worked out!

Bingo!

I've hunted elk with a .44 Mag revolver and carbine. Marlin lever guns .30-30, .375 Winchester and .45-70, and bolts in .257 Roberts, .280 Rem, 7mm Rem Meg, .308 Win, .30-06, .300 Win Mag and .338 Win Mag. The only time I felt a significant range restriction was with the .44 Mags, the .30-30 and the .375 Winchester.

Give me 2000fps and 1500fpe at 300 yards and the ergos of the launch platform matter more than the cartridge.

The best all-around elk cartridge for the majority of hunters is likely the 270 Win. shooting 130 gr TTSX, 140 TSX, 140 gr TBBCs or 140 or 150 gr Partitions. With any of these bullets, at close to long range -you can get it done!

For any more power, step up to a 300 Win Mag with 180 gr (same type of bullets) and you can shoot them up the butt if you prefer (unethical for me) but they'll still go down or be shocked long enough for a second shot.

If you want more power after this, you'd have to go all the way up to a 416 Rem. mag. to see any difference in effect. Then, with 400 gr bullets you can watch them die but maybe die slower than with the previous two cartridges but at least you can feel like you're pounding them.

John Burns, I respect your talent but I do not respect your practice of long-range "SHOOTING" of game animals as it flies in the face of "Fair Chase Hunting" that our former President Roosevelt was so proud in establishing. If you have a good conscious you'd sleep better at night if your legacy was teaching the next generation of hunters the ethical practice of stalking in closer rather than be known as someone who can "shoot" versus "HUNT" animals.

A lot of talking out your azz in this post. You say the 270 can "get it done" "close to long range", then you criticize one of the best long range shooters here. If he can make clean ethical kills with 1 shot, it's not up to you to tell him he can't or it's "unethical". In your post about the 270 Winchester, what is your idea of "long range"? You say it can get it done. How far have you shot a big game animal with the 270 Winchester and made a nice clean 1 shot kill if it works so nicely at long range? On one had you say something works great at long range and on the other you criticize another member for making long range shots? Are you going to criticize scenarshooter (Pat) or GSSP or any of the other long range shooters here as well? There are guys out there that can easily make 600+ yard shots on game day in and day out here. I'd suggest you re-think what the word ethical means... . About time you broaden your fu cking horizons, because if you ever had to shoot with guys like John Burns or scenarshooter, it would be all about getting a better education...

I can shoot and hit a 10"x 10" steel plate at the 700 yard range (the max distance at my range) 100% of the time unless the wind is truly gusty. Will I ever shoot an animal at that range? NO. If I did, I'd barely have to get out of my truck (or at least just enough to meet the legal requirements) in some locations of CA, AZ, CO and WY that I hunt in to get my deer, elk, Pronghorn, even bear.

I will say this: with a properly tuned rifle, almost anyone with coaching can place a shot on target at 700 yards, even 1000 yards or more. Shooting at a target and hunting big game animals to me and many other hunters is quite different. Each person has their own ethics.

I ask: At what range does it cross over from the actual action of hunting to just being able to shoot animals from so far away that it impedes the fairness of the 'chase'and violates the spirit of the hunter and the game and crosses the line of fair chase hunting?

Only you, maybe God and I can answer this for ourselves. This said, the implication is self-evident: The more mainstream 'long range shooting' becomes, the more people rationalize distance "shooting" as "hunting" (which it is not) and as an acceptable action of "the hunt" and most either do not have the capability (and therefore wound game or endanger others) or lose the values and skills of a great outdoors-person and of the 'chase' as in fair chase hunting.

Edited to add that while John Burns may possess both the skill and the hunting prowess to get closer to game animals; he has chosen to carve out a public niche for himself and mainly shoot at extreme ranges where neither hunting prowess nor woodsman skill are required and where there is no 'fair chase' in the hunting...hunting looses it's action verb "to hunt" and the only thing he needs most of the time is the ability to squeeze the trigger of his finely tuned sophisticated bullet propellant to a target. While many of us have this ability to shoot long range, I cannot say it is hunting for the reasons mentioned above.

You take your .270 Win with a 150g and I'll take my 7mm RM with a 160g and I guess we'll both be happy.

To my way of thinking taking a THS is not at all unethical if you are trying to stop a wounded or possibly wounded animal - in which case I'll take my .300 and 180g bullets, thank you very much. I've driven them lengthwise through mule deer and never captured one in elk.

You've skipped a lot of middle ground between a .300 and a .416. My .338WM definitely makes bigger holes and, like my .300WM, has always made two.

While I think we can agree that a lot of long range hunters are in it to see just how far they can do it, and thus make little effort to get closer, there are some that are skilled enough that what constitutes long range for them is equivalent to less than 100 yards for others. A few years back I listened as a guy shot the better part of a box of ammo trying to bring down an elk at ranges from 100 to about 300 yards. Another person watching said he thought two were wounded but none dropped. It is people like that "hunter" that I get angry with. If John Burns and others with his skills can take animals at ranges beyond my capabilities - or yours - I say good for them, even if I would prefer they try to get closer when possible. Shooting skill is just one of the skills a hunter needs.

I agree with you on most; shooting is an essential skill.

I've noticed no real difference between a 300 Win Mag with 180-200 gr bullets and a 338 win mag with 225-250 gr. bullets on Elk. This said, I've not seen a statistically valid sample to compare. I have shot bear and moose with the 375 H&H and noticed no difference in their demise versus my 300 win mag. This is the only reason why I skipped it and jumped to the .416; albeit someone would have to be crazy to purposefully use a 416 Rem Mag to hunt Elk I'm sure it would do very well.

John Burns, I respect your talent and certainly do respect your practice of long-range "SHOOTING" of game animals as it definitely is a good example of "Fair Chase Hunting" that our former President Roosevelt was so proud in establishing. If you have a good conscious you'd sleep better at night if your legacy was teaching the next generation of hunters the ethical practice of doping the wind and teaching them to "HUNT" animals.

I know one thing for sure if you are off a wee bit or if the elk is not in good position a lot of meat is wasted with the heavy hitters. Trust me I know. I agree with using a 270 with the better bullets now available nowaday. Long ago many considered the 270 light for big game but we never had the better quality bullets now available. The only real advantage for heavy hitters is that they can shoot through a lot of brush or trees and still get the job done. Depends on where you hunt also has to be entered
in the equation.

I'd rather lose "a lot of meat" than an entire animal.

Guys, it is settled. There's nothing better than a 300 Bee.

......and it only took 4 years and two months, 378 replies, and 73,753 views to get there!

No, because there isn't any consensus that the .300 WBY is the best. While the .300 WBY is a fine choice for elk for some there are many other options that are just as good or even much better for individual hunters.

The OP's original post was full of false, judgmental assumptions and non-sequiturs in order to bolster his position.




There are many cartridges that provide flat trajectory, massive downrange energy and sub MOA accuracy. Many do it with less recoil and similar bullet and ammo selection. "Widely universal availability of factory ammo" is a sophomoric self-contradiction and there are cartridges with even better availability.

If I was going on a trophy bull hunt, yes, I could come up with a choice that is better for me. My 7mm RM, .300WM or .338WM or even one of my .30-06 rifles would do just fine and if I was going to buy a new rifle for the purpose it wouldn't be a .300 WBY.

Nor do I like the Op's choice of a Barnes TSX as the bullet of choice. A Barnes TTSX, North Fork SS, Swift A-Frame or Nosler AccuBond or Partition would be my preference.

Choosing something less than a .300 WBY doesn't mean a person is "undergunned" but the opposite is often true - many hunters can't shoot a .300 WBY well and would be better off with something else. My hunting buddy has a diabetes related shoulder issues and has a problem with the recoil of his 7mm RM. We got a .308 Win for Daughter #1 because of recoil issues. Neither would do well wiht a .300 WBY. In a similar vein, choosing something more (a .300 RUM for example) doesn't mean the hunter is "overrun" by the higher recoil.

I don't have any idea what Roy would endorse as "perfection" on elk but, in any case, his personal choice is irrelevant to millions of hunters with their own individual requirements and capabilities.