Home Forums Hunting & Shooting Elk Hunting Is the 6.5 Creedmoor a 600 yard Elk cartridge?

Elkman, people that are unethical are always going to be unethical. They will lob bullets and critters, shoot across roads, spray and pray, then walk away. That is just the reality of it all.

Watching a guy make a long range shot on T.V. isn't going to change the way they think. They would have taken that shot no matter what. Why, because they just don't care and animals are just targets. The hunting fields are full of these people and we have all seen them. They brag about how far they shot at a critter, but never go check to see if they hit it. It's too much work. They would rather brag about shooting at it or "hitting" it, than recovering it. Slob hunters are slob hunters and no T.V. show will ever change that. Flinch

Your question was not about jumping off bridges, it was about the 6.5 and 600yd elk.

You are free to not believe your own lying eyes.

What strikes me as funny is that you seem to doubt what you saw on the video in an effort to cling to old perceptions. You clearly state you have never killed an elk and after watching the video where the 6.5 performs perfectly you still seem to feel it won�t work.

Ego is such a barrier to learning.

If you already know that the 6.5 won�t kill an elk at 600yds and nothing (including a videoed demonstration) will change your mind, then what was the point of the post??

To answer the OP's question, yes. Kind of hard to argue with reality. The real question is, are you a 600yd elk hunter?

I have been hunting big game in Montana since the mid-1960's, and there have always been a bunch of unskilled hunters who figure the purpose of a bolt handle and a bunch of cheap ammo is to fling lead at any visible animal, regardless of range. I have seen this many times over the years, along with the results of such flinging.

The vast majority of these nitwits fling lead not because of any TV show or magazine articles. Probably the major influence is their fathers. I once had a paperboy, all of 13 years old, who told me he shot at a bull elk 700 yards away, with a .257 Roberts and factory round-nosed 117-grain bullets. He had no idea of the range (this was before laser range-finders), and even less idea where to aim. But his father had told him that any time he saw a bull elk to start flinging lead, no matter what the distance.

On another occasion I was walking back to my pickup on a gravel road after a long elk hike, and a pickup pulled up beside me. Inside were a guy in his 50's and his son, maybe 20. The father said they'd "gotten some shooting" that morning, at a bunch of elk 600 yards away. (Again, before rangefinders.) He also said that he used a .300 Winchester Magnum, because "it always knocks them on their ass." And since none of the elk fell on their ass, neither he nor his son bothered to walk over there and look for blood.

Just two examples among many.

Wayne didn't fling lead, he precisely aimed, with a rifle that was capable of putting the bullet in exactly the right place. That's hardly unethical, in fact it might just be a shining example of how to do it right.

As for Wayne normally advocating getting as close as possible, one peculiar thing about being a gun writer is that the general public expects you to have experience in EVERYTHING. Now, if somebody asks a question about long-range hunting, Wayne has some first-hand perspective. Knowing him very well, however, I would guess that he'll now go back to getting closer.

A shining example of doing it right would be to tell the "general public" and sponsors to go to hell and hunt/write how you always have.

John Burns,
Was the elk shot with the 129 gr Hornady? I guess I expected that you would have loaded some VLD's.

John,

Wayne hunted elk with us again this year down at Milligan Brand in Chama. He used a lever gun (uhggg) and the shot was less than 150yds.


Doubletap,

I set the gun up using the 129gr SST factory load as we wanted to see how factory loads in this caliber performed.

Watching the video it cetainly appears getting closer was an option and that a HUNTER could easily have done so. It also seems to me that the story and video were the primary concern, which makes it a stunt IMHO.

I guess you would call me old school, as I was brought up with the idea that hunting an animal was a task and that task was to get as close as possible in order to place your shot into the vitals.

Most people in my hay day would never shoot over 300 yards at an animal, it just was not considered the correct thing to do. Now days we have better rifle scopes and superior rifles, bullets and even powder to some extent. Also nobody back in those days knew how to hit an animal at 700 or 800 yards, unless they had a magic wond. No one went to school and no scopes or range finders either.

Yes, times have changed and their are hunters who have the skills to pull such a task off using their high dollar tech equipment. I guess very similar to our military sniper, who spend a lot of time in class and hours on the range perfecting thier skills. 30 years ago I would have never guessed that someone could make a shot over a mile and half away. Progress is at our front door and it includes hunting big game also.

On the 'too light a caliber'....it's interesting as the topic is a 129gr .264 bullet, likely better bc and sd than the 130gr .277 that many never question for game thru elk. JOC did not, though he did use Partitions alot, as you can in the Creedmoor - 125 or 140s.

The round is 'light' though not 'too light' or that elk would not have died.

That said, I agree with many posters above, alot of hunters have no business shooting that far -

"Monkey see what an expert can do (LR video), Monkey thinks he is an expert!" Not so...the arrow does the killing, but the indian makes the shot - thru vitals....or misses vitals and possibly wounding hit.

I also agree, that a perfect scenario by an expert marksman who undoubtedly spent alot of range time learning that one rifle and load combo, and optic, was his key to success. A lesson in the 'beware of the man w/one gun' quote. Learn your gear and apply that knowledge.

YET, Perfect conditions are not always to be had, and caution has to be used when going long. Often shots may have to be passed up, else 'a risky shot' resulted in wounded animals will be a worst case scenario. Most hunt for sport, not survival, so I'd pass on any shot I am not comfortable with taking, unless my life depends on eating that animal.

EVERY hunter/shooter must know their gear, limits, and whether taking a shot is humane/ethical, and if the odds are in good favor....IMHO.

Here is the facts directly from Wayne. Why speculate.

Larry, thank you for your note. The long shot with the Creedmoor was unusual for me. Had I not fired that rifle extensively at 500-yard steel, and had conditions not been perfect, I'd have declined the shot. Closer is always better, in my view, but closer wasn't an option in this case. I've passed many opportunities well inside 600 yards! As for the .264 Winchester, I share your fondness! As you know, it's a cartridge with much more potential than is evident in factory ballistics tables. I can drive 140-grain bullets 3,300 fps with no pressure signs from my M70 with 26-inch barrel. It's essentially a 7mm
Remington Magnum with bullets of higher ballistic coefficient. The 6.5 Creedmoor (and .260 Remington and 6.5x55) are all much more pleasant to shoot -- but there's no question the .264 Winchester Magnum has more muscle. Given the proper twist for the barrel, it can also deliver fine accuracy. Best..... Wayne

I am a person, hunter who has always believed in using a heavy bullet on large game animals. However, the video to me is more about knowing your rifle and how to use your scope first off, then the next is sheer "marksmanship" and I damn well know that not just anybody with a rifle and scope in that video can pull that kind of a long range shot off to kill a bull elk. One must be a superior rifle shot, not a Johnny come lately with his or her gear. I admire great marksmanship simply put! It makes no difference if it is a coyote or a 7 x 7 Bull Elk.

264wm �

Thank you for the explanation. The video doesn�t show the time you spent practicing with that rifle or your willingness to hold off in less than perfect conditions.

After running the ballistics, I can't say I wouldn't have taken the shot under similar (perfect) circumstances, given adequate practice with the rifle and load. I do think the range was at the max limit at which I'd take the shot under any circumstances.

There was a series of articles a few years ago in one of the magazines (I cannot remember which) that four or five outdoor writers went through a series of tests involving about all sorts of shooting "deer targets" under various hunting conditions. I do remember Wayne Van Zwoll being a particicipant. One of the test was to shoot at a deer target 400 yards away. Each writer could pick his rifle/scope combo. He chose a Winchester M70 (pre-'64 I believe) in 270 WCF and a fixed 2.5x scope. He was the ONLY one that hit the first shot in the vitals and I believe all of his consecutivie shots. This was prone off of a back pack. Now some could argue about what this has to do with shooting and elk 600 yards away with whatever tackle and so on. Others might say, this guy has his stuff wired tight. I have no illusions of trying this as well....I know I just ain't wired as tight.

I guess it was around 15 years ago or so, I was reading an article written my Mr. Carmicheal, who stated that shooting elk at over 400 yards was mostly "Barber Shop BS" in fact. I never gave it much thought as back then I never heard of anyone taking deer or elk at 600,700 or 800 yards.

All I can say is if you have the skills and the proper gear to go along with such a shot, the more power to you. I am not going to hmmmm or haw about hunting ethics or what is or what is not. I am simple amazed at someone who can hit a target at those yardages weather it be steel plate or a big bull elk. My hat is off to those marksmen hunters indeed.

Mr. Carmichael didn't have the equipment/range finders, data, array of bullets or the desire to use them beyond 400 yards. There are many "gun writers" and gun "cranks" that feel that way. Good for them. Just like many people feel that hunting animals with any kind of firearm isn't "challenging". Some only hunt with archery equipment and feel gun hunting is unethical. I know many of them. I also know several others that think ONLY rifle hunting should be legal and bow and muzzle loader hunting should be banned. We all have our likes and dislikes or fee "our way" is the only way or best way.

There are FAR more animals wounded and killed at well under 100 yards each year than at long range. So should we outlaw short range hunting? It is all in how you look at it. Nobody's method is wrong or right. If a guy can get his animal with a bow every year, great, more power to him. If another guy chooses to knock his animals over at 800 yards and has the skills, great, more power to him as well.

There are slob archery hunters, muzzle loader hunters and rifle hunters. That is just the way it is and nobody's opinion is going to change that. We all choose to do things differently, with different weapons and ranges, which is just fine. We shouldn't cut a man down for developing the skills and having the knowledge and equipment to get it done right. Flinch

Couldn't agree with you more. Every hunter has individual skill levels. This year is a good year for me because I am recovered from back surgery and I drew a milti season deer tage here in WA. That means I can hunt archery, muzzle loader and modern fire arm seasons untill I bag my deer. So I can hunt deer from Sept 1 thru the end of Dec. I have never taken anything over 400 yrds or tried even though I am confident that with a little practice I could as I have shot 800 yrd metal targets with a M1 Garand sniper rifle. I have been told buy a forum member that I am reckless and irresponsable for making head shots on coyotes, deer, elk and bear.

Shooting animals at 600+ yards isn't hunting. It takes alot of practice, ammo, and money to hit at those ranges consistantly, but don't call it hunting.

You think you are old school, but evidently you've never heard of Keith....

Ok, what is hunting? 200 yards and less with a scoped deer rifle?