Home Forums Hunting & Shooting General Big Game 300 WBY for Moose

200 Partitions and 7828 in my sons 300 Wby..

It works great for everything.

Because the only reason heavy for caliber bullets were pioneered is because the shorter bullets fell apart and lost weight, momentum and penetration so the theory adopted, was to make bullets longer and heavier to allow for this and still maintain enough bullet weight to achieve penetration.

Mono bullets proved this method of bullet selection obsolete by maintaining bullet weight and penetration and gaining trajectory and recoil reduction.

It's a trade off, accepted by most today, particularly handloaders who tend to experiment more. Most readers here already know all this.

Roy Weatherby used 150gn Partitions in a .300 Weatherby when hunting polar bear. He chose 87gn Hornady's in the .257 Weatherby for smaller game. Most Weatherby users have never tried these light weight cup and core bullets in the Weatherby case at 3800fps. I have and they world very well on deer sized game. Work very well in the .25/06 at 3600fps too.

Moose are not deer. Moose are more than twice the size and five times the mass. There is no downside to choosing a proper 180-200 gr. bullet in a .300 Weatherby for moose. There is a distinct possibility of a 150 grain bullet failing to penetrate enough. Don't use a deer bullet for hunting moose.

Actually they are deer. So are elk. We may not call them deer, but really they are the largest of the deer family. But I agree in using a bullet with a high SD.

Before I knew any better as a young man in Alaska I used a 308 in God forbid a semiauto Remington. 150 cup and core bullets on three moose. Two of which went straight down and one made it maybe 20 yards. Two broadside and one frontal. Sure glad nobody told me they wouldn’t work. Into the heart lungs and they are table fare. Edk

Anybody else can do that too if they want to limit their shot choices to broadside and behind the shoulder

When an opinion is overruled by experience and fact that counters the opinion, the opinion is to edit and invent parameters to weaken the experience and fact and steer it back towards the opinion. Lol.

1st, to all who have recommended IMR 7828 powder...I agree, I've loaded it for several cartridges with great seccess, but when was the last time you could buy it?

2nd, to the negativity of 150 grain bullets for moose...That wouldn't be my first choice for a moose bullet from my .300 Wby, but if that's all I had, I wouldn't hesitate to shoot a moose with one. Many years ago, before the internet was even invented, I made one shot kills on several bull elk with 150 gr Hornady cup and core bullets and never gave it a second thought.

Ive killed 3 bull moose, 2 Montana Shiras bulls 35-40 years ago and last September the Alberta bull that I pictured above. My 2 Shiras bulls were one shot kills with 180 gr Nosler Partitions from my .30 Gibbs. If I remember right the back half of both of those bullets were just under the skin on the off side of those bulls.

My moose hunt in Alberta was for 7 days. That was my 3rd guided moose hunt. My two previous ones in Newfoundland and Alaska resulted with me coming home with tag soup. On the 3rd day of this hunt, I sliped in some downfall and heard something snap in my left knee which made walking difficult. (I'm still limping on that knee.)

By the 4th morning that bull pictured was the first moose that I had seen on that hunt. So with the thoughts of the tag soup from previous moose hunts and my injured knee, when this bull came out of the timber at a fast walk I shot. He didn't immediately fall and my guide said "shoot again", so I did and the bull fell, kicked a couple of times and was dead. When we got to him there were 2 bullet holes into one side of his chest, and 2 holes out of the other.

How much of the energy of those two 180 grain Barnes TTSX bullets flew off into the forest on the other side of my moose. Would 150 gr bullets have stayed inside that bull and all of their energy been expended in him?

I would prefer something other than a 150 gr out of the Bee for moose.

But with that said if it was all I had I bet I'd be eating moose all winter..

IME guys shoot 150s in 300 Weatherbys to try and reduce recoil because they can't handle the 300 Weatherby in the first place.
Solution: drop down to a gun the shooter is capable of handling, or if one feels the 300 Weatherby is necessary, use reduced loads to 308 specs.

I concur. It’s always important to use enough gun, especially on moose, doubly so if you only have a 2 day season and need to take any shot presented and break both his shoulders.

Not trying to be combative but which is better a 200grn accubond that, if recovered, weighs 150grns or a TTSX that starts out at higher velocity, with less drop and less recoil and will weigh close to the same 150grns it started at?

Genuinely curious as to your opinion.

Clifford

I would argue the Accubond is better because it had an extra 50 grains of mass doing damage, and it had extra weight for much of its path within the animal to give a better SD and better penetration, the Accubond probably had a smaller mushroom for better penetration, the 150gn Barnes' higher velocity was reduced by its low bc resulting in a reduced impact velocity. But perhaps someone's actually tested them side by side.

I think you'd have to shoot alot of moose to see the difference between a 150 TTSX and 200 AB out to normal ranges.

OK, I'll volunteer! Just give me the tags, and I'll supply my own ammo.

Get in line.. I was silently volunteering for the experiment

Obviously it would be much better if I did it. Both of you have too much bias either way for it not to be incorporated in the "results".

I'd tend toward a heavy and slow slug. I used a hopped up 30-378 and a 180 gr Nosler on a moose. I have no idea what happened to the slug, but the moose never complained.

I'd tend toward a heavy and slow slug. I used a hopped up 30-378 and a 180 gr Nosler on a moose. I have no idea what happened to the slug, but the moose never complained. It was a spinal tap as I wanted him down on the spot.

A 180 out of a 30-378 isn't exactly what I'd consider slow.