Home Forums Hunting & Shooting Elk Hunting effectiveness of smaller calibers on north american game

I've thought about asking this on the gunwriters part, but suspect that a number of you have way more elk shooting experience than any of the gun writers so here goes.

Have we got to the point with all the super bullets we have today, that the really small calibers, i.e. .22 centerfires and 6mms have become legitimate calibers for most any north american big game. I ask this here because it appears that elk are the toughest critters in lower 48. I hear lots of very experienced elk hunters rather make fun of the cannons used by some. So have the .22-250s, .220 Swifts, .243, .250 savage, etc. become fully adequate elk calibers or all-around calibers for most any big game hunting in the lower 48 or even in Alaska (with the right bullet and placement of course) appreciate your input, especially from those with lots of killing experience.

Guy I work with put his 12 year old boy on his first elk, a real big one, and he used one shot from a 6mm to dump him. I asked what he used, and he said some soft points Dale (guy at work he bought it from) loaded up.

He's guided before, and gets his bull every year, either by bow or rifle. I also asked him If he thought the 6mm was a little light for the monster he got his son on, and he just chuckled and looked at me funny.

A lot of times it's the indian, and not the arrow, that does the killing.

I think a lot of game is lost due to too small a weapon.. I know the local stick hunters have kept their mouths shut about the amount of game they cripple each season. People are sick and tire of hearing about the big bull they hit, but never found... Sure I can kill an elk with my .22 Hornet, how far would he run shot though the lungs, would I find him, would the meat be worth a darn?? Of course we know placement is the key to everything..

In Colorado, New Mexico and Wyoming the legal minimum is .24 caliber (6mm) for elk. I have a .243 but would not use it for elk.

This could get good.

Have killed/witnessed enough elk shot with a 243 that I wouldn't hesitate to use one again.

Enough kids in this state have put their first elk into the freezer with a .243, that I wouldn't either..

I think the issue has more to do with the shooter than the cartridge. A larger caliber gives the options not to wait for a perfect vital shot. An old 06 will break shoulders, expand and penatrate violently. After spending 6 days in the woods and seeing nothing, then out of the shadows an elk appears. That wiggle room is vital. If the shooter is willing to stare at the front of an elk and not take a shot just because they wanted to hunt an elk with a 243, then fine. I would carry a 35 Whelen because those critters are just to tasty.

I know 6mm and 25 caliber cartridges kill elk because I've seen it and traced wound channels through them.

Also seen the same things from cartridges and bullets 270,7mm,30,338, to 375. Anything the smaller stuff does they do even better,and the same bullet technology that helps the small stuff helps the larger cartridges as well.

A rancher friend in Wyoming gets to hunt elk every year.He started as a kid killing them with 250 Savage and was still killing them with that when I first met him.He's killed slews of them from small cows to big trophy bulls; and my elk hunting education started on his ranch where lots of other people killed them with everything.

He moved to a 270,liked it better. Over the years he also used a 7mm STW and a 300 Winchester magnum. His view is the 6mm's and 25's kill them; 270 is better,but the 7mm mags and and 300's "hammer" them.I agree.

So my answer to the OP's question would be that you don't have to go over board on the "big" side,but I don't see any point in seeking the lowest denominator in killing effect either. There isn't any virtue in it and seeing how small one can go to kill an animal is something I got over a long time ago.

Who cares, really?

I bought a 300 WSM when they first came out to replace a 270. I had no real reason to move up from the 270 other than midlife crisis and the fact that I'd been using the 270 for 30 years very successfully. After a bunch of elk in the pot from the 300 WSM, I can say that I've never shot one that couldn't have been taken just as well with a 30-06. A few weeks ago, I switched to the 30-06 for my duration. I got a Ruger American for it's light weight and good reputation. It does shoot very well for an economy gun.

Being out elk hunting for more than a few days every year and for many years as a CO resident,I don't see that elk hunters are going to smaller caliber of elk hunting rifles, so it must be else where. The hunters I see are still carrying .270..308. 06 , 7mags or 300mags. I don't see NR hunters traveling 1500 miles and paying$ 600 for a tag or even and then showing up with one of those smaller calibers to hunt elk.

Will those smaller rounds kill elk effectively ?. Yes, I am sure if it because on the internet people are saying they do it and we all know you can't put anything on the internet that is not true.

I think putting a 6mm or 243 or ,257 in the hands of a 12 -13 year old young hunter is about the worst mistake someone can make. It's about like starting a youth off hunting with .410 shotgun which is about the hardest shotgun to shoot accurately.

I can't argue with a single point of view spoken thus far. Certainly bullet placement trumps everything. I think everyone can agree on that. I just think if things go wrong( Murphy's Law, whatever), the "potential" to go wrong will come quicker with a smaller caliber than with a larger caliber. I'm not comparing a 223 vs a 50 caliber. As I get older I tend to become more risk averse, and in this case, tend to lean more towards something heavier within reason, using the best constructed bullets I can find, and taking my time to take the best shot I can, because I will, in all likelyhood only get one shot every year or two, so it has to count. How's that for a run on sentance?

Best of luck to everyone this fall!

Can you kill an elk with a .25 automatic if you " do your part"? It's possible but why would you want to? I have seen elk run to the next county with less than exceptional shots from 300 mag and never recovered. Tougher animal than most give credit for. My son was not allowed to shoot an elk until he could handle the .270, about 12 yrs of age. And 22 caliber is foolish and out of the question.

I killed a bull with a quartering away shot as it was traveling fairly swiftly through the woods. My 7mm bullet(7x57) made it from the last rib on the right side all the way to the heart. Killing the bull. The bullet had enough gas to get through the heart but not enough to do any damage to the front of the rib cage. I did not find it but it must have been in the chest some where. I have switched to a stouter constructed bullet in a .300 for my elk hunting and their should be two nice holes on any reasonable shot.
Smaller calibers will kill , but I would suggest people stick to the largest calibers they can shoot comfortably. Just out of respect for the game.

I don't think the 410 is a good comparison but I get what you are saying. A 243 is easier to shoot accurately than a 300 win mag. Shooting a 410 with a small pattern full of holes is like shooting a 6 moa rifle.

Really novice shooters should only take the best shots, no angles and such, IMHO. Until they get the hang of things.

The biggest thing to me, is what you are willing to accept/pass up.

Limit me to a 223 and I'd happily hunt elk. But I'd also know I'm limited in range, and to shot selection.
Being that any elk I hunt falls into your statement of long travel, costs etc... I dont' go lightly armed. Typically if I were to ever gun hunt, 300 mag woudl be the smallest. MZ I carry a 54 for the extra penetration.

That being said I hunt moose with small calibers.. and I travel to do that but for some reason its not a big deal if we have to pass a shot because I have a 30-30... years ago, I'd have taken a cannon( first elk was shot with a 338/378 wtby, and could have been shot with a 243 for that matter....) just because I didn't want to have to pass up any shot presented.

These days as I age( typical for all of us I believe) its the hunt and not the kill, but I did settle on 338-06 for moose now... kind of an in between round... but still have 54 MZ and bow on the list to tackle them with eventually.

Maybe I'm missing your point but I can't see the logic here.

I'd much rather have a kid that is comfortable and confident in what he/she is shooting over a kid that is over gunned. My 90# 13 year old daughter does not handle recoil well at all.

The worst elk rodeo I've been involved in involved a 14 year old boy, a 7# /06 and a dad with a chip on his shoulder.

Most likely the Dad was most of the trouble... A guy here in town turned all three of his sons off on hunting with his attitude toward their mistakes..

What I meant was that although there are certainly young hunters that great marksman, usually young hunters are more apt to have "buck or bull" fever and more apt to then "blow" the shot, make a mistake. Thee is more of a chance for setting them up for failure if they are using a smaller caliber. I think losing or wounding an elk for youngsters is more than likely going to affect them mentally unless they are really callous than it would a seasoned hunter. The .410 with it's long and small diameter shot string is a lot harder to shoot accurately than say a 20 gauge with choke tubes that you can change out to IC if needed.

Well stated.

So if a youngster has buck fever and is using a 300 mag, they have less of a chance of wounding something? I cannot see how a shotgun shot string relates to centerfire rifles.

This is all true. I use a 30-06 and have killed 33 elk.

However, I know a young (20 something) lady who might weigh 110# who has killed six elk with a 25-06. She readily admits that bigger calibers are too much for her to handle. Maybe she also does that just to make us big caliber guys eat crow.

KC