Home Forums Hunting & Shooting Elk Hunting Enough energy for elk?

You're spot on Bob. That load was over 3 grains under max. We'd been using those loads for about 5 years at the time and they accounted for quite a few deer. Funny thing is we couldn't tell the difference, we had great results, but it was a little eye opening (and learning experience) once I broke down and got a chrony and ran them through.

M1Garand,

Actually, I suspect you are thinking about a moose kill. The quickest I've ever seen a bull moose dropped was with a .270, in the hands of my wife Eileen. She shot it in the short ribs as it angled away at about 125 yards with a 150-grain Nosler Partition, and the moose barely took one step before piling up dead. We found the bullet in the far shoulder, under the skin.

Admittedly, it wasn't a giant moose, just an average Shiras bull. But it was still a bull moose!

Sweet Baby Jeebus... NOOOO!!

Grin...

Bob, my 7-08 has, for want of a better term, a " slow" barrel. That said it will crack 2800 fps w/140's if I twist it's tail with... You got it... Good ol' H4350.

I actually prefer to run 2700-2900 fps, so it works for me, as they say... But our deers are small, especially the ones I kill.

M1: Well, I always figured, if you're gonna carry a 270,might as well get 270 velocities I know it might not matter from the standpoint of the killing,and I'm not suggesting you redline your loads,but I have noticed many 270's group better operated at or near max,especially with todays powders and good rifles.

Plus if you are old fashioned like me,and want flat trajectory,no question 3100 fps shoots flatter than 2750,past 300 yards

Jeff: It has been awhile since I loaded the 7/08 and 7x57,but think I used RL 19 in each.H4350 works well,too......RL17 today???

I'm skeered of that RL17! Might make me re-work some perfectly good loads.

To answer your question; Yes, the round is perfectly capible of doing it.

I think you're right. It was in Handloader a few years ago in a great article about the 7mm Mauser.

That's exactly how I felt and worked up a load with RL22 more in line with 270 velocities. I'm always tweaking and have been getting great results with Ramshots Hunter as well.

When it comes to Elk I run out of energy way before my rifle does.

Could somebody please explain to this non hand loading hunter...

1) When the guy loads to the max grains of powder then finds the load is 200 FPS under max can he continue, one step at a time to increase powder while watching for signs of overpressure?

I'll tell you what, when that static shock hits me after reaching for the door handle of my truck in cold weather, it sure gets me to moving awfully fast.

I suspect no one wants to touch this one

...as JB has said numerous times, the answer is a very firm "maybe".....I will say that I have done it,and suspect most handloaders have a one time or another.

You can and I have. However, if you have a slow barrel you will always hit high pressure before you get decent velocity if you ever do. I have a 280 Rem & a 7 Wby with a slow barrel. It is very disappointing to discover such, most especially if you were counting on this round to deliver some laser beam loads.

The 280 is a 24" barrel and it will not even push a 140 beyond 2850 safely. The 7 Wby is also a 24" barrel and it runs, in some loads, 250 fps behind my 7 Rem Mag with identical powder charges. I realize the combustion process is different 'twixt the two 7's but it was a big heartbreaker when I finally realized these rifles had slow barrels.

In fact, the 7 Rem Mag actually has a fast barrel and defies logic with its speed.

In the end, it is all nothing but a roll of the dice.

Sorry to take so long to get back on this. Tests were performed by a British military analyst in search of the perfect man stopper. Animals, because their anatomic density is near that of man, were used to determine adaquate penetration and interior cavity dimension was used, subjectively, to determine fatal damage projections. Generally speaking, I have heard the 1000 Ft/Lbs rule used on more than one occasion to offer ballistic solutions. Much argument is also based on momentum vs kinetic energy as to which causes more damage relative to fatality. I have not studied the 2 effects side by side but a glance through one of the many books on Gunshot Ballistics should help to sway one to a particular side.

Foot Pounds Of Energy wil not rank terminal effectiveness and is useless to try

Foot-pounds of energy is but one tool that can be used, but like any tool it can be abused.

There are several truths here:
1. Energy MUST be transferred from the bullet to the target to have any effect on the target.
2. A bullet with ZERO energy will not kill anything.
3. A bullet with INFINITE energy will destroy the target, the earth and the universe.

To suggest, as many do, that energy is unimportant is to ignore physics. To predict a bullet�s effect based solely on its energy at impact is also to ignore physics � there are many other factors involved.

That said, I can hit targets equally well at 500 yards with my .30-30 and my .300 Win Mag. I will not, however, hunt game at 500 yards with the .30-30 and would not do so even if it used the same bullet. Energy DOES matter, it is simply not the sole determinant.

Somebody may have already posted this but, A few years ago Craig Boddington Killed a Bull Elk at 410 yards with a .270 and 150 grain partition. He said it died faster than any elk he had ever shot with any caliber.

Ron

No it does not ignore physics. The basis of this is Newtons 3 Laws of motion which sealk with forces, momentum transfers, and acceleration (velocity) they do not deal with energy relationships.




My 338 Lapua shooting a 300 grain bullet at 2791 FPS has 5188 FPE a 458 win mag at 2100 FPS with a 500 grain bullet has 4896 FPE is the 338 a beter choice for Elepahants because it has more FE? Of course not. That is only one example of the folly of use Energy as way to rate terminal performance.

The only things that matter are the amount of direct applied force and the amount of hydraulic pressure that is created. Those are the forces that create the wound channel, not Energy

Would you not argue that shooting a soft target of your choice in the head with a .22 may prove just as fatal as shooting him with a .44? Consider that the energy of a .44 would easily penetrate the skull but when pressed upon soft tissue may penetrate much like a pencil would through soft paper, a piercing not a blunt penetration while a .22 against the skull may have little to no effect on bone matter but through a soft entrance point will mushroom much quicker thereby increasing the potential effect on gray matter, relative to a kill. Directly applied force is therefore counter-acted in this case and cannot be used as primary measurement data.