Home Forums Hunting & Shooting Elk Hunting The 300 Wby Mag for elk- is there anything better?

The .300 WBY may be the best for some but it is definitely sub-par for others. Daughter #1 is rather petite and hates recoil. When it came time to choose a big game rifle for her we went with a .308 Win. For antelope she will be shooting 130g TTSX this year and may use those for elk, as she did last year. While 'd like to see her get up into the 150-168g range with AccuBonds or TTSX respectively I don't know if that is going to happen. Guess we'll find out when we get to the range this summer. In any case, getting her up to a .300 WBY is a non-starter - the best we would do is get her up to a downloaded .300 WBY and what's the point of that when a maxed-out .308 Win is above her comfort level?

There are also a lot of people who shoot factory ammunition and for whom ammunition cost is a big factor. For many of them a .30-06 is a better choice just due to ammunition costs. When I purchased a rifle as a wedding present for my first son-in-law the first thing Daughter #2 asked me was whether he would be able to afford to shoot it. She was much relieved when I told her it was a .30-06. When Daughter #1` got married, guess what her husband got? Yup, a .30-06. I am hoping Daughter #3 will get married late this year or early next year, in which case her intended will also get a .30-06 rifle as a wedding present. None of my daughters or their men reload, nor do I expect them to take it up as their interests lie elsewhere. Relatively inexpensive factory ammo, whether for practice or hunting, is more important to them than extra range they are not prepared to use - and more so if that extra range comes with additional recoil that isn't necessary or is above their comfort level.

In my case, while a .300 WBY would be a fine choice for elk, would it be the "best"? Would it mean an otherwise unnecessary purchase of a new set of dies and brass? Yes. Would it mean dealing with increased recoil? In most cases, yes. Would it most likely mean carrying around a heavier, longer rifle? Yes. Would it actually do something that my other rifles can't do? Probably not. If hard hitting and flatter trajectory were my primary concerns I'd probably jump to a .26, .28 or .30 Nosler instead.

Arguments about what is "best" tend to ignore that "best" is a qualitative measure based on a specific set of criteria - and that the criteria against which "best" is judged varies from person to person. There is no universal "best".

The problem with these ridiculous cartridge comparison threads is.......

You and Donald Rumsfeld must be related

Is "serious" elk hunting done with a big frown?

When you feel lucky, introduce yourself at the next gun show and if you can be decent, I may shake your hand, but act like you do here on the campfire and I may just slap you more senseless than you already are...

Lighten up Francis, it's all in good fun. No need to take yourself so seriously!

The offer stands...

Nice red herring. The question is what is best for elk, not what is best for women hunters or men too cheap to buy new reloading dies.

Playing to the lowest common denominator does not answer the question.

Apparently you don't even know what a red herring is. "Best" is a very subjective, qualitative judgment of an item's ability to meet certain criteria. In this case the item is a .300 Weatherby rifle and the task is killing elk. Just because one person might consider the .300 Weatherby the "best" choice for that task does not mean that others will concur. Nor does this disagreement imply that anyone is wrong. If you take the hunter (and the person that determines what is "best" for themselves) out of the picture all you have is an unused rifle. There is no universal "best" - a concept, it seems, that you fail to grasp.

What I did was provide a few common criteria that someone might apply when choosing what is "best" for themselves. These are not red herrings but rather the real life concerns and criteria of real life people - concerns that apply to millions of hunters.

Yeah I guess it was more of a strawman. In any event, the criteria is not women and cheap men, it's elk.

Keep pluggin along though. You're daily word count has fallen way off!

BTW the BC on those light Barnes you load for your daughter are really sucky. Not good for hunting elk AT ALL!

You should re-read your sniper books!

Once again, a 'Fire thread has followed the laws of physics and moved from a state of order (forced) to one of disorder or released energy. If physical laws do apply here then re the Second Law of Thermodynamics, the first post reflects a state of instability and the resultant thread then seeks a point of stability or equilibrium.

Pertinent to the original question, this means that there is no answer that would name another specific cartridge. Naming one would introduce another state of in instability; however, the laws of physics would accept the answer, ✍ "both yes and no."

It wasn't a straw man argument either. This is the "Elk Hunting" forum, not the "Elk Killing" forum. Every .300 Weatherby rifle I've ever seen was designed to be wielded and fired by a single individual - the hunter. If you remove the hunter element, including their unique capabilities, limitations, needs, wants and cost considerations, you are no longer talking about hunting but simply whether or not the .300 Weatherby is the best tool ever devised for killing elk at a distance. The answer to that question is an obvious and resounding "NO" to anyone with a modicum of imagination. A nuke detonated a few miles up in the atmosphere would wipe out not only one elk or one herd but potentially many herds and thousands of elk. Try that with a .300 Weatherby and a box of ammo.

The OP claimed " High but manageable recoil" for the .300 Weatherby. For him or her, maybe - for others it is way too high. The OP also asked " If you were on a trophy hunt for big bulls, could you really come up with a better choice?" If a hunter can't handle the recoil, as many cannot, there are many choices that would be better for those individuals.

My hunting buddy of nearly a couple of decades is so crippled up from diabetes, even after shoulder surgery, he can barely lift his arms to shoulder height and recoil is a significant problem due to the pain it causes. Moreover he has limited physical stamina so minimizing weight is important. If he was choosing a rifle for " a trophy hunt for big bulls", a .300 Weatherby would be a poor choice for him.

The B.C. for the 130g TTSX .308 bullets (.350) is more than adequate for the ranges at which my daughter should be shooting and she shoots them well. If she proves over the summer that she can handle she can handle a 150g BT or AccuBond load we'll move her up to that. If not, I'm not worried about her using the 130g TTSX.

As to the sniper book, the stores in Meeker don't have much of a selection and it seemed (and was) much better than the alternatives. The author was a British sniper in Iraq and the book dealt his experiences there including a lot of stuff I found interesting that had nothing whatsoever to do with snipers or sniping. I'm sure you would have picked one of the many romance novels available on the store racks instead.

So nukes are the preferred weapon for girls and disabled hunters?

What is the BC of a nuke?

Have the men in white coats come yet?

Real snipers don't use nukes!

No wonder you gut [bleep] that elk!

Hmm I wonder if North Fork makes a crappy BC bullet for a 50 cal?

CH, I'm not the one living in fantasy land, as I own and can shoot a 300 WBY. I know you're jealous.

My suggestion to you is YOLO

If someone gave me a .300 Weatherby I’d probably just trade it for something I want. A 20” .300 RCM in a lightweight synthetic stock would be nice.