Home Forums Hunting & Shooting Long Range Hunting Less is More - Part II

Reading "Part 1" thread got me to thinking about cartridge selection for big game like elk and/or moose-sized critters. Even some of the larger Whitetail and Mule Deer out there could be thrown in. So, here goes...
Due to a shoulder injury, my days of shooting the various 300's and 338's and larger are over.
This past fall I elk hunted with the smallest caliber I'd hunted with since I started chasing them back in 1983 - a 264 WM. Though the range on my elk wasn't all that great - just 137 yards - I got to remembering some of the stories told by my uncles of some of the elk they'd taken over their years living in Idaho and Montana.
One uncle only used an old 256 Newton rifle he had. Another nothing but an old Enfield 30-06 with peep sights. Dad hunted them with his 270 and before that, a 30-06. My Grandfather hunted with his '30 Winchester' (that's a 30-30 to us).
In short, there were (and probably still are) a LOT of elk, mule deer etc that fall every year to hunters using smaller cartridges than the magnums and more so, taking them out at longer ranges - 400 - 1000 yards(maybe?).
When push comes to shove, why go for the larger cartridges when the smaller stuff will still reach out there to put your meat in the freezer and a head on the wall? All the tales of BC or SD or velocity aside, are today's boomers really all that much better than the 'good ol' cartridges' that are out there? Heck, a 6.5 Creedmore will take an elk out at longer ranges than the majority of hunters would be willing to even try!
Thoughts? Comments?

Use enough gun to get to the offside of the critter at distances you are willing to shoot. Under 400 yards BC and SD arguments, in my opinion, is ballistic gak meant for people like us with nothing else to do. Accuracy with good bullets trumps all.

I like the .270 and never had a failure that wasn't my fault.

People must use what they have confidence in. Often with more experience and knowledge one learns that 9 times out of 10, or more - it really does boil down to shot placement with a good bullet.

That said, when hunting dangerous game the consequences for anything less than a very quick kill - might get one badly hurt or worse. Those applications warrant any surplus in power, for lack of better words.

I have never failed to kill game because my chosen weapon "lacked power"

Ballistics offers a great study and discussion.

Range time is the great equalizer

Amen!

So much lies with the inexperience of people killing chit. Many guys think elk are huge and bulletproof simply because they have never killed one, let alone dozens. Many people believe that smaller bullets just don't get to the good stuff on big critters, which we can prove false.

What smaller bullets do less well is leave blood trails and make less than perfect shots work out.

high_country_,

Years ago I asked a question on a different sight. I think maybe it was Hunt America before it went down. The question was something like this: "Of the guys who have hunted more than one continent with more than one cartridge over two or more decades have you noticed any difference in killing power?" The general consensus said there was no noticeable killing difference from about the 7 Rem Mag up to .375 H&H. Above that things were quite noticeable. Below that it seemed like performance fell off a little.

I remember one in particular who was a cull shooter in Africa. He used a .30-06 and his com padre used a .375 H&H on cape buffalo. The buffalo traveled about the same distance with either round through the chest, but the .375 exit wound left a better blood trail.

Having taken only two elk with the 375h&h, both within 100 feet I can say that the 375 was no more impressive than the 257roy on elk. It did leave a great blood trail, but the 257 just left it in a lump where it stood....much like the various 6.5's have for me.

I've shown this one before, but the 256 Newton still works!

Less is more for me. I switched from a 7-.300 Weatherby 28" barrel eleven pound rifle to to a 6.5SLR with 26" barrel (duplicates a .264 Win Mag) and a .270 Win 24" barrel. Both are 7 pounds plus or minus two ounces.

OH Boy, Another thread about what it takes to kill the Fabled Bullet Proof Elk, some one get the popcorn. Rio7

I've taken elk with the 270 WSM, 7mm Mashburn, 300 Win Mag, 338 Win, and 35 Whelen. They've all worked great for me. I've seen smaller work well and would use my 6.5x55 or similar without to much worry. I just like rifles so it's probably more about the rifle than the cartridge for me.

I do have a lot of confidence in my 7mm Mashburn Super and my 338 Win. Both have just been with me when I've had to make a couple tougher shots but I'm sure a 270 would've worked about the same.

.

I hunt with a 7mm-08. No problems on deer, antelope, or elk. Never had to shoot more than once. Farthest kill on elk was 346 yards on a spike bull. Through and through, DRT. Farthest kill on a buck, 541 yards. Through and through, DRT.




P

As for the 'Manglehams'......my theory is that it doesn't do much good to 'blow air' by something if it can't be hit!! A lot of folks shooting them don't know schitt from shineola about hunting or shooting!

After the 1st day hunting with a moose guide in Alberta he loosened up a bunch. He was happy to have guys who's rifles were sighted in and could be shot from more than just a bench. He was even happier to find that we didn't slam doors and make a bunch of racket when we got to the 1st hunting spot. Broken in boots, honest hunting wear on our rifles, and sharp knives sealed the deal for him and it became a lot more like hunting with a buddy you'd hunted with forever rather than a hand-holding session.

The guide had a theory which pertains to what I quoted from Sharpsman. Essentially, his enjoyment and likelihood for a client successfully killing a moose went down proportionally as the rifle got newer and of a larger powder capacity and bore diameter. Also to be factored into the fun/success factor was the longer and newer the knife pretty much was a direct correlation and just as good of a measure as the rifle test. In short, when someone shows up in camp with a shiny new magnum and a 1'-2' long knife, he was in for a long week of handholding and more than likely blown opportunities.

Regarding the OP, on 3 occasions I've killed elk with my 300Win while partners killed elk with 270Win out of the same group of elk at the same time and the same distance from 150-425yds. In all 3 cases I'd done the workup and loaded the ammo for both the 300 and 270. In all 3 cases there was essentially no difference in how quickly the elk died or how far they traveled after the shot. None of them made it more than 25yds or more than about 15sec from initial hit to no longer wiggling.

While I certainly have my preferences within the rifles I own and loads I've developed, I've killed enough critters with enough different rifles/bullets/chamberings that so long as I'm confident that the rifle is well zero'd and I have an accurate chart for come-ups, within reason, it really doesn't make much difference what cartridge the rifle is chambered for.

horse1,

Fun post.

I dont think a larger caliber magnum necessarily kills better. But i will say that i have noticed elk show a more immediate visable response to a hard hit from a 375 rum with 260 accubonds at 3k vs 7rum with 140 accubonds at 3400+. They dont just stand there and soak up lead from the 375. I had one just stand there and take 3 right thru the boiler with the seven. Dead but didnt know it and showed no obviius sign of hit till it just fell over.