Home Forums Hunting & Shooting Elk Hunting 270 for Elk

How many of you use a 270 for Elk what grain bullit are you using

130s work.


150s work.


By extrapolation, 140s work.

150 grain Partition works great.

I've taken lots of elk with a .270, and I use a 130 grain Barnes TTSX. Very effective.

I've shot a bunch with 150's. At 300 yds, they have almost the same POI as 130's and hit harder when they get there.

Shot 2 last year with the 270 - 150 grain Partitions. Works great.

150 grain North Forks here. Got really surprising accuracy during load work up.

I've used 150 gr. Partition's and Ballistic Tips. I'd also be happy with an Accubond or Partition of any weight, and really a 130 Ballistic Tip would do a dandy job without doubt.

I used the 150gr Partitions out of my 270 from 1970 until 1992 on elk. They worked very well.

In 1992, I switched to Barnes, first the 150gr X, then the 140gr X and XLC, and now I'm using 130gr TTSX.

So far, I've not recovered a single Barnes bullet out of any big game animal.

Cookie uses a 270 with 130 grain slugs and has had complete pass throughs. No elk have complained.

Whttail_in_MT,

Is that a 130 gr. Nosler E-Tip?

No, it's three of them.

The two expanded were from a moderate size bull.

Can't let mathman have all the fun.

Do you get good accuracy with the etips? I've got some 150's to load up for my 30/06 but haven't gotten around to it yet.

Yes sir.

Yup, lots.

I like the old round nose Remington 150 gr, the Nosler 150 and 160 grains.

All but 2 I have killed with my 270s have dropped at the shot and those 2 only went about 20 yards.

The 270 is just fine. Like every rifle, it's more about the bullet then the cartridge.

My daughter has killed elk with a 257 Roberts and so has my grand son. My friend Rich killed 8 with a 243. They all use Nosler Partitions and Barnes X bullets

If I wanted to use a .270 on elk I'd find some R26 and load 150gr. Nosler NP to 3000+fps and go hunting.

That looks vaguely familiar. I'll bet 60.5 grains will do that

I used that load to punch my cow tag in January. It was short range and bullet not recovered (obviously), but I would be confident with it out a long ways.

I used 140 sst on the elk I took with my .270..

130 TTSX

My buddy put his bull in the freezer this year with the 150 Fusion factory load.

That's what I did, 'crept with the NF's. Love that 26 with 150 grain bullets.

i've used 150gr partitions in years past and they did fine.

I would go with a 130, or 150 gr partition.
If lead free bullets are a requirement a 130 gr TSX GMX or etip would fit the bill depending on which one shot the best.

I dont really use a 270 now but there was a period of about 10 years when I got one each year in Northern New Mexico with a 270.

I always used 130s and never really felt like I needed or wanted more.

I think you mean by interpolation.

I worked up a load for deer/elk for a girlfriend's .270 Win (Mountain Ascent) using a 130gr TTSX. That rifle/load combination is awesome. Here's a 6-shot group from that rifle/load.

The ICBM 150 BT always shot better in my rifles than the 130s

I'd happily hunt Elk w 140 ABs, 150 BT (ask Brad about his 7-08 ) 150 PT and 150 ABLR. I carried the 150 PT in CO and went end to end thru a Mulie at 275 yds.

Oh. That was just poking along at 2850 via 52/IMR 4350.

270 owners hunt w confidence using good bullets thru vitals.

Can't beat any of those combo's a bit.. The 140 Accubond and 150 Partition have been excellent for me.

Yes, guessing between two known points, in this case 130 and 150 is interpolation. It's more certain than extrapolation, which is guessing beyond a known point, e.g. 130s work, 140s work so 150s should work.

Grammar lesson over, we will now return to your regular programming.

I would like to use a hand load I made for my 270. The load is a Hornady 140gr. Interlock spire point that I have shot less than moa at 100 yards routinely. I have taken this load out to 500 yards and also have shot moa at 500yard. I have heard nothing less than excellent reports on performance with this bullet at these ranges. I have taken a whitetail this past season with successful results, the deer did not go more than 15 yards. I did not have a chance to collect the bullet, it was a neck shot that hit the aorta and I didn't even think to see if it was a pass through. The processor didn't recover any bullet although I did not ask if they did. Yes, I do use the 270 for elk first chance I receive.

I toted a 7/08 Win M70 20" Synthetic carbine loaded with 139s at 2850 over Varget in Colorado. Took a deer, a very killing load. Had an Elk come by under 50 yds, unfortunately it was not legal per brow tine length of 5" in that area, lucky him

Hornady makes good bullets. A few are a tad soft like the SST and Amax for harder targets, but would do great on lungs or at extended ranges. The IL SPs are GTG. I ran the 162s in a 7RM

Obviously neither one of you read all the posts in the thread. Interpolation and extrapolation were covered earlier. Welcome to the Office of Redundancy Office.

AKA the 24 Hour Campfire Forums.

Or any Internet forum.

As George Santayana put it so well: "Those who cannot remember the past are condemned to repeat it." Though on the Internet, substitute "didn't read" for "cannot remember."

Is that an extrapolation or an interpolation?

Whitetail,

I just read through all the posts. Twice. Interpolation or extrapolation were never mentioned.

Read mathman's post (the whole thing, including what he quoted) and my post about not letting mathman have all the fun (the whole thing, including what I quoted). Hope that helps.

I've used a 270 for most of my elk, although I'm now using a 300WM just for the heck of it and because there are a good number of Grizzlies where I hunt. In my younger days I often used Remington Corelokts both 130 and 150, have also used
Partitions. None of the bullets failed to put the elk down.

This year's Idaho elk. 5x6 at 235 yards. Tikka T-3 .270 with 150 Nosler Partition.

Before he died, I used to correspond with the late African PH George Hoffman, inventor of the 416 Hoffman, which eventually became the 416 Remington. He was a real Texas gentleman!

In our correspondence he told me he'd taken a bit over 50 elk, all with the 270, and that he never found it wanting.

Given the man's experience world-wide, I took him at his word and started "de-magumizing" my own elk hunting arsenal. In the many years since his death, I found his advice to be spot-on and I'm glad I listened.

The 270, like the 308, "kicks a little and kills a lot."

And I'd put the 7-08 in that company as well.

Brad, allow me to finish this for you: "... and the 280 rules them all."

Rifle Nut!

BTW, I had one of those abominations many years ago. It's a cartridge for those that can't decide if they want to be a German or an American

I'll sink to any level to justify my own choices while ignoring others

Besides, if Montana had a standing army all would be equipped with 270's!

While the 270 will certainly kill elk -dead, I have moved away from my 6.5-06 elk rifle. Where I hunt the grizzly are in full "get fat on" mode during elk season. A rifle shot is like ringing the dinner bell for a grizzly. I now carry a 358 Norma or a 300 Wby for elk, just to have enough to get a grizzly off of me.
Until the libtards in DC, and the circuit judges in the west, let the states regulate the griz population, this will remain a problem. Hunting elk in CO, NM, AZ or even KY would be fun with a light weight like a 6.5-06 (270 is too gay for me), but within 100 miles of Yellowstone or Glacier, it is risky.

All my elk hunting is in grizzly country. Unless you get a CNC shot, whatever you're shooting short of a 375 H&H is not likely to anchor/stop a charging bear. I'm not going to base my rifle choice out of fear, and a good case can be made for having 5 rounds down in a standard rifle than the typical 3 down of a magnum. Also, the lesser muzzle flip of a lighter round like the 270 makes for faster follow-up.

Besides, if the thinking is that a 150 Partition from a 270 won't kill our middling sized grizzles, there's a certain bridge over the Hudson River that should be considered for acquisition

A buddy of mine once shot a bull elk in the snow. It ran a short distance into the timber and died. So did a second bull that he did not see until he found it dead next to his intended target.

He killed two bull elk with a single bullet. He used a 270 with a 150 grain Partition.

Phil Shoemaker once told me that a 270 with a 150 grain Partition was a very effective brown bear killer. He has seen it used a good bit and recommends it to shooters wanting to avoid heavy recoil.

The oldest/largest bull I've ever taken, a grand old 10.5-11.5 year old 6pt, it took with one shot from a 270 with the 150 Partition. It's a good combo.

Yeah, I've never seen a .270 and a 150 Partition "fail" on an elk--or similar-sized African plains game. Haven't seen vast numbers of moose killed, but the "quickest deadest" was the medium-sized Shiras bull my wife killed in 1989, using Jack O'Connor's old load of 58.5 grains of the original mil-surp H4831 and a 150 Partition.

The bull was standing angling away at about 125 yards, and Eileen aimed for the far shoulder. At the shot there wasn't any of the typical moose reaction of "gee, that felt funny, I'll stand around for a while and see how I feel." Instead the bull took a step-and-a-half and folded up dead. We found the Partition in the far shoulder.

My 14 year old son killed his first bull this fall. He used a 270 with 130 grain Hornady Interlocks. Shot him in the lungs and he went maybe 40 yards.

270 lacking on Grizzly

9mm slays 'em.

Go figure

9mm on the griz...

May have something to do with the trigger man...

DF

Agree 100℅. Prior to finding the Campfire in 2003, I was convinced the 338 WM was THE elk answer. At least until I started seeing what guys on the Fire were actually killing them with. Even some dude in Montana had the cajones to actually use a 270 and later a 308. He's some kind of stunt shooter 😁

Then I started killing a few and going to progressively smaller cartridges. Used the aforementioned 270/150 NPT last year on 2. The elk hated it <G>

I dreamed up a 30-06 over the winter which was supposed to be my elk killer but every time I pick up my 6.5 lb Kimber 270 and think about where I hunt, I'm reminded how well it worked - and carried. And shot. It's likely going to the elk woods this fall in MT. Bet it works.

I work with and know a bunch of elk hunters up here in MT including a buddy who has been a professional guide for almost 30 years (and who has a TV show). None of them hunt with a .270 Win. One individual has moved up from .270 Win to 300 WSM in the past couple of years with good results, and despite his claim that he's taken many elk with a .270 Win. Having an elk go 20 yards after being shot can be a problem up here making the difference between an all day recovery or less than an hour. As many know, elk are tough animals so I choose to shoot the biggest bullet I shoot well and that's the advice I'll give anyone. Mass and velocity buys margin so I shoot a 250gr TTSX from a .375 H&H. Magnums require practice and my experience is that most hunters simply don't practice enough, or don't practice at all.

It's shot placement. A large caliber in wrong place, Elk can go 20 yds
A Elk dropped on the spot can roll down a mountain a long ways

MC you are quite right.. Most hunters don't practice at all..

Killed my first elk in 1952, with a 44-40 lever gun don't remember how many elk and mule deer I killed with the 44-40 it was kinda like hunting with a bow you had to be close.

As I remember I bought a 270 model 721 around 1958 + or -
150 gr. coreloke worked real well on mule deer and elk, and I didn't have to get as close, only reason I bought a 270 was the guy at the hard ware store said it would shoot faster and flatter than a 30=06 and all my friends had 30-06's.

nothing has changed since 1952 when it comes to killing elk,elk have not gotten any tougher, it does not make a hell of a lot of difference what you shoot them with if you can hunt and shoot. Rio7

Well I can't say what others have in experience, but I have 41 years of experience with elk, and of those 41 years I have guided 33 myself. I have seen more shot then I can count, and I have shot several myself with various calibers and bullets.

I have used and owned 30-06s 308s 270s 8mms 338-06 338 mags and 375H&Hs. In fact the top of my personal list of kills is held by my 375H&H.
But up to a 338 Win mag, I will report what I have seen and done myself, and it goes against the grain of the those that are trying to sell new products and guns.
In a nut shell I can say with no hesitation that comparing the 270s to the 7mms (including the magnums,) the 30s (including the magnums) and the 338 magnums, I can't see ANY difference in how fast elk hit the ground, and I mean NONE AT ALL.
I have killed and seen killed probably about 35 elk with the 270 Winchesters and a few with the 270 Short Mag and the 270 Weatherby. Shot for shot, if the placement of the bullet are good, and if the bullets are well made (not the ones that blow up) there is NO difference in the speed of dropping and death between a 270 and a 338 Mag on elk. Moose and bison....yes, but not on elk.

I do see a faster result with my 375, but to be 100% honest, it's not that much faster.

How do I explain this?

I don't!

I just report what I personally have seen and done.

Speaking from my own kills I have used 270s 30-06 300 mag, 338-06, 8X57, 338 mag, 375H&H magnums. In handguns I have seen 41 mag and 44 mags used, and I have killed them myself with 44 mags and 454 Casull. I have seen elk killed with C.F. rifles as small 250 Savage (not impressed) up to 458 Winchester.

The ones I can remember as I write this are
250 Sav.
257 Roberts.
25-06
6.5 Swede
6.5-06
270 Winchester (lots of them.....probably 30-35)
270 Weatherby
270 Short Mag.
7X57
280
7MM R. Mag (lots.. probably 30)
7X61 Sharp and heart
7-08
30-30
300 Savage
30-40 Krag
308 Win (Lots....maybe 20)
30-06 (Lots and lots ....probably over 50)
300 H&H
300 Win Mag (Lots....maybe 20)
7.65 Belgian
8X57
325 Winchester.
338-06
338 mag (quite a few, maybe about 15)
348 Win
35 Whelen.
9.3X74R
375H&H (Quite a few..... about15-18)
416 Taylor
416 Rigby
444 Marlin
45-70
458 Winchester.
50-90 Sharps.
50 cal muzzleloader with round balls
50 cal muzzleloader with bullets
54 cal muzzleloader with balls
58 cal muzzleloader with balls
58 Cal uzzleloader with a bullet
62 cal muzzleloader with balls
41 mag
44 mag
454 Casull.

And I probably missed a few on the list that I just don't remember as I sit here.

This may be a boring post, but the point is that I speak from actual experience, not 2nd hand experience, or from reading a magazine somewhere. In the years of hunting them there were seasons when I killed or saw killed only 2-3, and other years we'd bring in 15-20 in one season. I have seen it enough to know that many "salesmen" are simply telling you what they believe to be so, not what they know to be so.

I can tell you with confidence that the 270 with the right bullets is just fine.

Always remember, guns don't kill
Shells don't kill.
Even bullets don't kill.
Bullet HOLES kill.
If you put a hole of over 3/4" or larger clear through an elk's vitals it doesn't really matter how that hole gets there. That's why I am a believer in good tough bullets that get through. Use a good bullet and shoot what you like, but learn to shoot it WELL and you'll be just fine

How do you get them to roll into the back of your pick up after the shot?....

MY son was hunting be up the canyon behind his house last fall after their first snow, shot a big dry cow at about 60 yrds with his muzzle loader,she started to slide down the mountain,he ran up and kept kickin her down the mountain and she ended up about 10 yrds from his jeep.he called and told all about it said it was the easyist pack out ever. Rio7

Eastern hunters going out west think they need a magnum - just "because them elk are big". They base that off of the size of deer.
Western hunters typically have a more moderate approach and use moderate cartridges. They base that off of walking up to dead elk from a non-magnum rifle.
Eventually the eastern hunters realize the western folks are on to something.

Man, I dream about that happening... can't wait to tell the story someday!

Our own Mule Deer may have written an article in the latest Sports Afield that is similar to your empirical observations.

Good article John.

Shooting elk in timber will usually mean tracking, no matter the cartridge. Blood alone can't be relied on as a tracking guide no matter what it's been shot with, so you've got to be able to read more than that. I've had bulls go equally far shot with the 338 WM, 300 WSM, 30-06, 270, 308 or 7-08. I've had them drop in their tracks with the 308 and 30-06 without CNS hits.

I will agree that it's not unwise to shoot the largest rifle you're comfortable with, on the other hand, it conserves more energy packing a light rifle rather than a heavy one all day in the mountains. For me, the "ultimate" elk rifle would be a 22" bbl'd 338 WM weighing around 7.5 scoped, with sling and rounds. Problem is, I don't want to pack or shoot a 7.5lb 338 WM anymore, so pack a 6.5lb 308 win!

Funny how elk just die when you shoot them right with a good bullet. Bullet placement and bullet quality trump cartridge size.

bwinters,

Thanks!

I must also point out that my experience is similar to Brad's. Still have a 22" barreled .338 Winchester Magnum that weighs about 7-1/2 pounds with scope, but haven't hunted with it (or my .375 H&H) since acquiring my 9.3x63 over 15 years ago. All I apparently use the .338 for anymore is breaking scopes when testing them for articles.

Must also note that the .338, 9.3x62 and .375 do not guarantee quicker kills than "lesser" cartridges, even on deer-sized game.
Might use my .375 if I go back to Africa again, but aside from one bison have never used it in North America, mostly because I found it too heavy for mountain hunting even when I was much younger--the reason I built my light .338.

But these days have several rifles weighing less than 7 pounds that are perfectly capable of taking elk, but probably my favorite is my NULA .30-06, which weighs 6 pounds on the nose with scope. Have taken more elk with the .30-06 than any other cartridge, including my biggest bull, and none have gone more than 45 yards after the shot. But then my wife could say the same thing about the elk she's taken, and all of them have been shot with the .270 Winchester, except one with the .257 Roberts.

Your life - hunt the way you want to.
I wear seat belts too. Not out of fear of my skills, but because the other guy is a drunk texter. I don't call that fear - just prepared.

I agree with both you and Brad on the 338. I've shot a couple sub 8 lb 338 and don't like the recoil they generate. I started hunting elk with 338 but it weighed 9 lbs. So decided 9lb rifles and lightweight 338s weren't my cup of tea.

I guess I met your son with you a couple of years ago at Armijo Springs. Hopefully, you will get him back agin this year.

I have had big plans to bring my wife and kids to Armijo Springs, plus my new diesel pickup and big Cabela tent, this year. However, they are now all talking about hanging out in Japan this summer, in which it might just be me, again. (Got some new guns, though, to show off.)

Bill, when I first came to Montana in 1992 I'd read all the scribblings guys like Boddington had recorded about elk in the various gunrags through the 1980's. I was fairly convinced a small howitzer was necessary for elk. I'll never forget one fall evening I was driving South through Bridger Canyon when I picked up a hitchkiker sporting blaze orange and a rifle. He'd just come out of the mountains and needed a lift to his truck. I asked what he was packing, his reply was "308." I remember thinking to myself, "that seems kinda small" but kept my mouth shut. I'd always been a 308 fan, but just couldn't see its place on elk. Then in the early 2000's I started packing one, and eventually found it worked just fine. And, of course, ditto all the other "lesser" rounds like the 270 and 7-08!

I think a lot of guys are still influenced by those 1980's writers, many of whom had thin resumes with elk. I also think in all American males there's an element of machismo that requires a "big/bad" remedy. Add peer pressure, group think, ego/insecurity and viola, the Remington Ultra Mag!

As someone once said, "experience can be very long but very narrow."

I'd also add, there's a definite "confirmation bias" of many magnum shooters that guides them to only seek out those sources that confirm their pre-existing biases, while ignoring all others in contradiction. I had those same biases, I was just flexible enough to learn something new. There's often a better way.

I'm glad I did listen...

Lots of good info in this thread. The only thing I can add is that some of us can't handle the recoil of big rifles and therefore would use a 270. I hunted elk twice, in 1989 and 1991. The rifle I used in 1989 was a Remington 700 ADL in 300 Winchester Magnum. 8 lbs. with 3-9x scope. In 1991 I brought two rifles, a Weatherby Mark V in 300 Weatherby and a Mauser action 358 Norma. Each rifle weighed nearly 10 lbs. I didn't mind the weight or the recoil. Killed a bull elk with the Weatherby.

Now, at age 70, and on blood thinners after bypass surgery, hard kicking magnums are not for me. I have tried a NULA 30-06 like Mule Deer's, and it kicked the snot out of me.

So, I guess I'll follow Jack O'Connor's advice and use a 270 (or maybe a 6.5x55) if I ever go out west to hunt again. My 270 is not a lightweight at 8-3/4 lbs.

Funny how smart Jack O'Connor has gotten the older I've gotten...

Boddington also got smarter as he got older--partly because of watching his daughter kill a bunch of big game with the 7mm-08.

But Craig also finally used a .270 on a bull elk during a hunt on the Whittington Center in New Mexico, mostly because some people gave him grief about putting down the .270 as an elk cartridge without ever having used one. So he loaded up some 150-grain Partitions with H4831, and his chance came on a good 6-point across canyon, at a little over 400 yards. He aimed just behind the shoulder and that's where the bullet landed. The bull stumbled a little ways and fell over dead.

In fact, at that time it was the quickest kill he'd made on an elk. I know this because I hunted the Whittington myself a few years later, with the guy who guided Craig, Mike Ballew. We ended up at the spot where Craig shot his bull, and Mike pointed out where the elk had been standing, and then told me how Craig mentioned it being his quickest elk kill.

Does anyone here on the campfire feel a difference in recoil between shooting a 270 Winchester loaded with a 150 grain bullet and a .30/06 using the same weight bullet?

No, but yours is an apples/oranges comparison. A 270 150 is in a different class of bullet than a 30 cal 150 of lead core construction.

A more accurate comparison (BC/SD) is the 270/150 vs 30-06/180... I definitely can feel that difference in equal rifles.

I don't know if I would call it apples and oranges.

Tons of bullets on the market, in both calibers, of all sorts of shapes and construction.

We aren't talking big differences in dimensions from .277 and .308.

So a 308 cal 150 Partition with an SD of .226 and a BC of .387 is the same as a 277 cal 150 Partition with an SD of .279 and a BC of .465?

Nope. Just like a Jonathan Gold apple isn't a Golden Delicious.

No reason to start talking oranges.

Fair enough!

But it remains, the better comparison is with a 30 Cal 180…

I don't see how sectional density and ballistic coefficient are going to affect felt recoil. Idahoguy101 asked about recoil.

When you are measuring effectiveness on game comparing SD's is far more accurate than bullet weight. Comparing effectiveness of a 270/150 to a 30-06/150 on game isn't a fair comparison, the 270/150 is a much better choice with similar recoil. Comparing the 270/150 to a 30-06/180 will result in similar results on game, but with slightly more recoil for the 30-06/180.

JMR40,
Nobody mentioned effectiveness on game. Idahoguy asked about felt recoil between a .270/150gr and a .30-06/150gr.
Both you and Brad are totally missing the point in Idahoguy's question.

Didn't miss it at all, I said "NO" I don't find any difference... can't you read?

I went on to explain that I think it's a pointless comparison given that a 270 150 is a superior projectile.

Good grief...

Idahoguy asked what time it was. You told him how to build a clock.
Good grief is right.

It's called conversation, something you apparently don't engage in...

Oh, that's what conversation is? Thanks for the clarification. I feel so foolish. This whole time I've been going around with the assumption that giving simple answers to simple questions was sufficient. My mistake. I apologize.

I'm so embarrassed I think I'll excuse myself from this "conversation." Please carry on without me.

I will carry on.

And BTW, I think the Gestapo is looking for a forum monitor... you may want to apply.

That argument can be used for the anti magnum crowd too. Refer to the last post by Mule Deer which reminds me of a comment my old boss once made. We worked on military funded research projects and he told me that any monkey can collect data, but the real challenge is interpretation. He has a PhD from MIT so I tended to listen a lot.

As for myself, I know confirmation bias isn't problematic. I was a magnum shooter and took elk with various ones as I previously explained. I still own a 300 Mag. If I had such a prejudice I would have been looking for reasons to stay with the magnums I started with.

Data and interpretation, great point! Alas and problematically, killing animals rarely fits into neat little qualification boxes.

However, you seem to have pretty strong ideas on killing elk so you must have a lot of experience on the subject. And since I don't know you it would be great to hear about your personal elk hunting with both magnums and non-magnums.

Also, does your MIT/PhD boss hunt elk? What does he think?

Boys, boys, boys. As far as magnum rifles go, here is a simple little axiom for y'all.

"If bigger was better, Miss America would weigh 400 pounds"

You should learn it and listen to Brad, Mule Deer, et al.

I would use one of these,Nosler Partition 150 or 160 gr or a Swift 150 gr A-Frame.

Dayum, almost spit my coffee out all over the computer!

Just trying to break it down, make easy and understandable for the Phd's, MIT's and all the other initials.

I use both. A .270 150 Grain for Deer and a .30-06 165 grain for Elk. Both from the same rifles, Tikka T-3 Lites. I cannot tell any difference in felt recoil. There may be measurable difference, but it must be very small. I do not have special recoil pads on the rifles, however I use a gel recoil pad in my shirt. Just my humble opinion.

MCMXI,

Gee, so my comment on Craig Boddington wasn't backed by enough "interpretation"?

I was a science major in college, and have gleaned as lot of statistical information from my big game hunting notes, which include not just the animals I've personally taken but those shot by all my hunting companions over 50+ years. I'd hunted quite a bit already before 2000, but between then and 2010 deliberately spent a lot of time going on various "cull hunts" to glean more information on how big game cartridges and bullets work in the field. These took place not only in North America but Africa, Europe and New Zealand, and provided a LOT of information. Occasionally I also find other good sources of data, such as the Swedish hunting survey that analyzed the taking of close to 8000 moose with various cartridges and bullets.

If you want to discuss statistical analysis of cartridge performance, then I've got some numbers. But in the meantime I think Brad has a very good point. How did you come to the conclusion that your choice is the ultimate elk rifle?

Point to the post where I stated that my choice is the "ultimate elk rifle". I've only made the point that my advice to those that ask is to shoot the biggest bullet that you can shoot well. Perhaps I should have added something along the lines of "a bullet of appropriate construction shot from a rifle/scope combination you can handle in terms of weight".




Everyone is free to take away whatever they want from your stories. For me it's a single data point from which nothing can be determined, but the reference to Boddington attempts to give it more significance than it deserves. That's the definition of disingenuous.

I'm just thrilled that I finally understand the complex theory that bullet holes and shot placement kill elk. Now I can enjoy my weekend.

If it could all be somehow jammed into the tits and ass cheeks Jorge would go for it!

And you still haven't answered my questions...

No, and he probably won't--or recognize that though the Boddington story is a "single data point," it does involve the entire point of this thread, where there have been plenty of other single data points cited, by other people who've shot elk with the .270 Winchester.

My favorite Single Data Point with the 270/150 NP... handsome fella ain't I?!

Good Grief Man! Your face!