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

BobinNH,

A guide in an elk camp a couple years ago said he'd rather have a hunter show up with a .270 Win he can shoot than with a .300 magnum he can't. That outfitter hunted trophy elk. It routinely killed 400+ bulls every year.

I've one-shot killed a massive bull that went better than 900 pounds (guide's estimate) with a 160 grain 7MM Rem Mag Partition. The bullet took out his oxygenated blood pumping mechanism. He had seconds to live. The truth of the matter is a .30-30 Win, assuming the identical shot placement, would have produced the identical outcome. Elk don't know what cartridge launched a bullet that permanently interrupted its topside oxygenated blood flow. He knows only that he's dead.

I have a friend who's killed just about everything than can be killed in North America except polar bear. He began his hunting career with an '06, then switched to a .300 Wby Mag. After some years of killing a lot of stuff with his Mark V .300 Wby Mag, he no longer liked its recoil. He bought a Mark V in .270 Wby Mag, and hunted everything with it until he retired from killing big game.

He had at least 140 animals in his trophy room. He's probably killed somewhere around 500 head of big game during his hunting career, many during the 60's when hunters could kill two bucks in many Rocky Mountain states. He also has a grand slam in his trophy room.

Many years ago, my friend gave me what might be the best hunting advice anyone has given me. He told me that when 90% of hunters see a head of big game at 400 yards away, they try to figure out how they're gonna make the shot. Even though he's hunted with a .300 Wby Mag, when he saw a head of big game at 400 yards away, his first thought was how he was gonna close distance. He said that every single time, he'd rather shoot at 100 yards than farther.

From here on out, I'm hunting everything with a .270 Win, including moose if I'm drawn. Add bison to that list. If Yukon moose are killed every year with arrows at 300 FPS, a 150 grain Partition from a .270 Win outgta kill 'em just as dead. After all, no animal can get more dead than dead. There's only one degree of dead, and that's dead. Nothing living remains in that condition without topside oxygenated blood flow. Put an end to that, and you've got dead. Then get your gutting knife or quartering equipment out.

BobinNH,

A guide in an elk camp a couple years ago said he'd rather have a hunter show up with a .270 Win he can shoot than with a .300 magnum he can't. That outfitter hunted trophy elk. It routinely killed 400+ bulls every year.

I've one-shot killed a massive bull that went better than 900 pounds (guide's estimate) with a 160 grain 7MM Rem Mag Partition. The bullet took out his oxygenated blood pumping mechanism. He had seconds to live. The truth of the matter is a .30-30 Win, assuming the identical shot placement, would have produced the identical outcome. Elk don't know what cartridge launched a bullet that permanently interrupted its topside oxygenated blood flow. He knows only that he's dead.

I have a friend who's killed just about everything than can be killed in North America except polar bear. He began his hunting career with an '06, then switched to a .300 Wby Mag. After some years of killing a lot of stuff with his Mark V .300 Wby Mag, he no longer liked its recoil. He bought a Mark V in .270 Wby Mag, and hunted everything with it until he retired from killing big game.

He had at least 140 animals in his trophy room. He's probably killed somewhere around 500 head of big game during his hunting career, many during the 60's when hunters could kill two bucks in many Rocky Mountain states. He also has a grand slam in his trophy room.

Many years ago, my friend gave me what might be the best hunting advice anyone has given me. He told me that when 90% of hunters see a head of big game at 400 yards away, they try to figure out how they're gonna make the shot. Even though he's hunted with a .300 Wby Mag, when he saw a head of big game at 400 yards away, his first thought was how he was gonna close distance. He said that every single time, he'd rather shoot at 100 yards than farther.

From here on out, I'm hunting everything with a .270 Win, including moose if I'm drawn. Add bison to that list. If Yukon moose are killed every year with arrows at 300 FPS, a 150 grain Partition from a .270 Win outgta kill 'em just as dead. After all, no animal can get more dead than dead. There's only one degree of dead, and that's dead. Nothing living remains in that condition without topside oxygenated blood flow. Put an end to that, and you've got dead. Then get your gutting knife or quartering equipment out.

I'm curious how many who have posted on this thread have actually killed elk with the 300 Weatherby?

Hi Bobin,

Yeah, most of us who've been up-and-down high Rocky Mountain ridges have seen and heard it all.

Might just be due to injuries and getting older: I'm not likely to reach for a heavy rifle. An extra slice of roast beef on a sandwich is heavy after miles and hours of trekking the Rockies at altitude.

All I gotta do is put a bullet where it's supposed to go & let biology do the rest.

have you noted a difference moving from a 300 to a 338 mag with a 250 Partition?

I have! Kills 'em dead!

Hi Bobin,

Yeah, most of us who've been up-and-down high Rocky Mountain ridges have seen and heard it all.

Might just be due to injuries and getting older: I'm not likely to reach for a heavy rifle. An extra slice of roast beef on a sandwich is heavy after miles and hours of trekking the Rockies at altitude.

All I gotta do is put a bullet where it's supposed to go & let biology do the rest.

Hi Bobin, Yeah, most of us who've been up-and-down high Rocky Mountain ridges have seen and heard it all.

I'm using a 300 Weatherby pushing a 180 TTSX these days for elk not because my 7mm with 150 TTSX didn't kill them, but because the 300 stops them much quicker. Hunting within 200 yards of the private ranch border sometimes means I want them anchored right now. A chest shot from 550 yards lasts year produced a back flip down the hill from a large cow. So far a sample of 3 elk shot at 375 yards avèrage haven't covered 50 yards combined after the shot.

They averaged traveling over 50 yards each using a 7 RM and 30-06 with 9 other elk taken at about a 250 yard average. Three of them covered over 200 yards before expiring from one or more bullets in the lungs. Hunting near the edge of a very unfriendly ranch - that means a lost animal that would have a ranch hand's tag on it instead of mine. Dead is dead but I prefer them dead in my freezer. I still have to pass on some that are too close to the property line but if they are 200 clear and under 600 with minimal wind they are about to be steaks. That is another 100 yards beyond my comfort zone with the 06 or the 7. I'm a 300 B fan because I know it stops them quickly and hits hard a long way out ther..

Good Morning, Bobin,

There is no doubt that the .300 magnums are more gun than the .270 Win. However, at what point do we begin to confront diminishing returns, when the next grain of powder produce 10% velocity increase above the previous grain? How much velocity will we need to get a bullet into necessary life-sustain apparatus?

The new world record Yukon moose, the largest deer species in North America, was killed a couple years ago with a .303 British.

What my older friend taught me was that there's hunting and there's shooting. While there are times when closing distance is impossible, in which case hunters have to make crucial decisions, I'd prefer to close distance if possible.

I own a Belgian Browning .338 Win Mag. I've owned it for at least 3 decades. I've never hunted with it. It's a beautiful gun, but it's far too powerful for everything in North America. Now were I to hunt brown bear exclusively, it'd be an obvious first choice...maybe. The 175 grain .284 caliber bullet is legendary for penetration. There no doubt in my mind that one would break the largest bear's shoulders.

So, the rhetorical or possibly philosophical question would be whether more gun necessarily means better gun. Well, what's a better gun? It becomes subjective pretty darn quickly.

Hunting is supposed to be fun, and it's often a display of a hunter's personality. I've never cared what cartridge a hunter uses. I would never suppose to know what's right for him. My synapses misfire, though, when a hunter tries to tell me that an '06 won't kill a species of big game, that I'd need at minimum a .300 RUM. Nope. I'm good with a lightweight rifle chambered for .270 Win.

Why not a .300 RUM then? You get to lose the belt, the radiused shoulder, and you get more fps. Seems like a win, win.

...
The new world record Yukon moose, the largest deer species in North America, was killed a couple years ago with a .303 British.

What my older friend taught me was that there's hunting and there's shooting. While there are times when closing distance is impossible, in which case hunters have to make crucial decisions, I'd prefer to close distance if possible.

I own a Belgian Browning .338 Win Mag. I've owned it for at least 3 decades. I've never hunted with it. It's a beautiful gun, but it's far too powerful for everything in North America.

...
So, the rhetorical or possibly philosophical question would be whether more gun necessarily means better gun. Well, what's a better gun? It becomes subjective pretty darn quickly.

Hunting is supposed to be fun, and it's often a display of a hunter's personality. I've never cared what cartridge a hunter uses. I would never suppose to know what's right for him. My synapses misfire, though, when a hunter tries to tell me that an '06 won't kill a species of big game, that I'd need at minimum a .300 RUM. Nope. I'm good with a lightweight rifle chambered for .270 Win.

Agreed, if a hunter can't shoot a gun well because of the recoil and blast, a gun with less of both is probably a better choice.

This is a fallacy. I have a 300 Weatherby, it shoots bugholes and of course if I couldn't shoot it, it wouldn't be shooting bugholes. I can shoot it just fine, same as my .375 Ruger, .358 WSM (that one recoils fast) and a .338 I sold not too long ago.

I just don't enjoy shooting those rifles as much as rifles chambered in milder rounds or toting them in the mountains for that matter. Especially during the kind of range sessions where you shoot enough to improve your skills.

So I shoot rifles I enjoy shooting. They kill just fine.

And while it's true that I could practice with the milder rounds and switch to the magnums for the hunt, I see no need to so I don't. It's not rocket science.