Well, how do you Elk Hunters think this round would perform on Elk?

Just fine with the right bullets, etc.

I admittedly have a bias towards .30 cal on up for elk and bears. If you don't break them down with the shot, I REALLY like big obvious blood trails to follow and that is really the ONLY beef I have with smaller calibers on elk or bear where the thick hide and/or fat under it can plug a smaller hole.

If you place your shots in the shoulders or CNS with anything reasonable, there isn't going to be much difference between a 270 WSM and a .460 Wby Mag.

Granted they aren't going to go too far on a double lung shot either, but again a little extra blood on the trail gives me the warm and fuzzys.

FWIW:

I never shot an Elk with a 270, but one heck of a lot of 'em fall to it every year here in Oregon. I think that the 270 WSM with 150 grain premium bullets shoould be just fine if the shooter does his part.

That being said, 270 Win is the lightest I would go for Elk if you are not a local. The locals can decide to pass on a tough shot and come back tomorrow. Out of towers may want the capacity to take a quartering away shot at 250 yards. The 270 WSM gives you a little more ooomph and is probably going to penetrate well under such circumstances.

Just my 2 cents . . . .

BMT

I would certainly not buy that cartridge if I were planning to make it my "elk" rifle. I'm with Muley Stalker on this 100% Elk are big powerful animals that can run a long way dead on their feet. It would be a shame to lose one because it left no blood even after a vital shot was made.

In my opinion Elk rifles begin at .308 diameter and get better and better as diameter increases. I would also say that bullet weight of 150 grains is awefully light for animals of 600-800 pounds. It becomes unlikely you will get exits with bullets that light unless perfect broadside shots are taken and no bones hit. Quartering away shots are also very difficult for lighter bullets and near impossible for an exit hole to add blood to the tracking job.

If it were all I had and the personal dicipline was there to take only the right shot I would use it. However for general elk hunting I would much prefer a heavier bullet and a bigger bore. That's just my opinon though.

I have to agree with MuleyStalker and JJHACK.

A lot of elk are killed with 270s. Those that are (that I know about) are shot by very experienced hunters who have the luxury to wait until the perfect shot presents its self or as was said earlier, to come back tomorrow. But a 270 would not be my first choice of elk rifle calibers.

Remember, every 100 yards of tracking a wounded elk can add hours to the job of getting one out! Better to use a bigger caliber. The older I get the smarter ol' Elmer Keith becomes. User big heavy bullets which plow through muscle and bone.

I, for one, would choose a 30-06, 338-06, or a 35 Whelen over a 270.

While I'm sure the .270WSM will kill a lot of elk, as did its predecessor, I wouldn't pick it as a designated elk rifle. While Elmer's ".33 and 250 grains" rule may be obsolete with modern bullet technology, you can't go wrong following it. And you help avoid those tiresome gunfights over an elk carcasse with two different sizes of bullet hole in it. I prefer to do all my hunting prior to the shot.

I'm in the experimenting stage on elk with this gun. I've used the 270 WSM for the past two years. Last year I used the factory 150g bullets. This year I worked up a load with the 140g Barnes TSX. The 140g @ 3300+fps out of the 270 WSM has more ft/lbs energy than a 168g out of my 30-06 and is flatter shooting. I think it will be a good gun with the standard caveat of careful shot placement.



I'm a local. I can wait for tomorrow for a better shot. I take pride in taking good solid shots. I use premium bullets that go all the way through. Last year's elk dropped in it's tracks when hit with the 150grain.



Rarely have I had to track an elk. They usually drop very close to where they are shot. But if I think there is a risk of finding them, (i.e. real heavy timber) I'll take the shoulder out instead of a behind the shoulder shot.

The plain jane 270 kills alot of elk every year, so the new version with its reported faster velocity will do it to.
Bigbore's and heavy bullets are nice , but a poorly place shot is still a poorly placed shot.
If you have confidence in the gun and load the shot will most likely be on the mark, no matter how far you are from home.

No doubt it will work--that 140 at 3300+ ought to melt the lungs on a behind the shoulder shot. My pal in Idaho uses the .25-06 with partitions and gets his every year--he nearly cracked up when I brought a .338. The difference is for him, there's always next weekend. For me, there ain't. <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/mad.gif" alt="" />

A 338 of some sort will give more dramatic results and generally mean less tracking. The truth is however, any decent cartridge from the 260 Rem up will kill elk with a good bullet in the right spot. A mature bull is quite a different critter than the average cow/raghead so it's wise to stack a bit more power in your corner for those boys. I'd not feel one bit handicapped with a 270 WSM however. I was up at our ranch the other day banging away with my 338 WM on targets. A neighbor rancher was moving cows down the road and stopped to talk. He asked what I was shooting and I told him... he shook his head and laughed and wondered out loud why anyone would use such a cannon for elk rather than a vanilla-grade 270! He's an old timer in his 70's and has been outifitting on elk for fifty years and has never seen the need for more than a 270.

If you've got your heart set on the 270 WSM don't let anyone talk you out of it!

Sometimes I think people get to involved in filling their tag, and take shots that shouldn't be taken with any caliber. I like most calibers and the big magnums are alot of fun, but too many times I've seen them turn good shooters into excellent flinchers.

I think Muley Stalker's initial reply was a good one, though my personal bias is toward the 7mm's. It seems the topic of elk cartridges spawns heated discussion matched only by optics!

In this thread https://www.24hourcampfire.com/ubbt...p;amp;sb=5&o=365&fpart=1 the post by Silver Bullet sums up the local vs. visitor issue as well as anything I've seen...

jjhack,

Well stated.

I don't have anywhere near the experience that you have. But in my limited experience being on hand while elk were taken, the bigger guns definately drop them faster, even with the same vital hit.

There are exceptions to every circumstance, however, as I have stated on prior posts on this subject, the east coast dude that has 5 - 7 days to get it done needs every advantage they can get. I would LOVE to be able to hunt an entire season for elk, moose, or even any of the African game animals that you hunt with a lighter rifle, looking for a perfect shot. But that just ain't in the cards right now. So with limited time and money, I'll stick to the boomers (as long as I can shoot them well).

I'll tell you that the most impressive performance my buddy and I have seen on moose, elk and sheep has been with the 300 RUM shooting 180's and 200's. I have not shot any game with my 338 RUM yet, but I am willing to bet that it also is a big hammer.

Tony.

I have a good freind that has used the 338 rum on 2 elk and 1 muley buck. It definetyly works.
I was surprised at how easy that thing is to shoot even with the plastic stock. Gotta have good scope rings the weavers would shake loose after about 6 rounds when we did the initial sighing in.

dam,

The recoil on the 338 RUM is not too much different than the 300 RUM. While not a pleasure to shoot, it is managable.

I have Leupold rings and bases on it and they have been rock solid.

Tony.

Dam,

Really funny, I just got the latest Peterson's Hunting. Craig Boddington wrote a great article on all the new mag. rounds.

He stated of all of the mags. he has tried, he stated that sees the 270WSM as the ultimate sheep/goat/antelope cartridge and the 338 RUM as a fabulous elk/moose/bear round.

He also stated that of them all (7mm and 30 cal mags), the only one that really caught his eye was the Laz Warbird (30 cal). Said something about it was kinda fun having the fastest 30 cal !! He also said that it was not a joy to carry on a sheep hunt either.

Tony.

I would use the 270wsm for elk if it was all I had but I personally prefer a larger caliber.

stubble,

No doubt, with good stout 150 grain bullets like a Partition in the 270 WSM, I certainly would not fret if that was my only choice of rifles.

There just are better choices that create a larger margin of error for someone who is time constrained.

So far I have taken elk with a 300 WIN and a 300 RUM and have been present when other elk have been taken with a 300 RUM, and a .270 (regular). My observations are that the bigger guns were more effective. My son killed a large cow with his 270. While the first shot was right behind the shoulder, the cow wasn't impressed. While the elk taken with the other rounds dropped in their tracks with similar hits. His shot did the job but it made for an exciting few minutes !!

Tony.

I'm not a fan of Boddington so if he says something good about something I usually head the other way, but that's just me.
I can't stress enough, it don't matter the time constraints of a hunt or the caliber of choice, if the shot presented is a bad angle or excessive range its just best to be satisfied to go home with a pocket full of memories and the hope of trying it again.
Elk have and will be killed with all types and sizes of weapons. Pick the biggest baddest caliber you can shoot well, and head for the hills. If it happens to be a 243 enjoy your hunt and the winters meat.
One thing you very seldom see is the fact that on average 60 percent of the elk hunters every year go home without filling a tag. So if you're unsuccessful you are in good company.

The 270 WSM is probably the short mag I will eventually purchase. Mainly because for me, it does something the standard doesnt. As much as I like to question the short mags, the 270 and 300 WSM are interesting to me. The others, I havent made up my mind. I would think with a good Barnes X bullet coming out of that 270 WSM, and a decent shot, and you should be ok. I read Craig Boddington's article also, one must remember, Craig is a 30 cal fan. Nothing wrong with that, just understand he is. A key consideration I would have is, if the bigger boomers you find uncomfortable to shoot, then dont, but just make sure you are using a premium bullet that retains a high percentage of it's weight.

aggie,

Well, I just bought a 270WSM (700 SPS) and am in the process of bedding the TI stock that I bought for it. I might actually get to shoot it by this weekend.

As far as the boomers go, all mine digest nothing but premiums when I use them for hunting. Usually Partitions. Although I killed my bull with a 180 Scirroco and it performed great. And, I do enjoy shooting them and do so often.

Tony.

dam,

Well, I'll have to respectfully disagree with one point.

I killed my bull at 450 yards, using my 300 RUM. Was on a hunt, shot presented itself, I had confidence in my gun and shooting ability as I had practiced at long range prior to going on that hunt.

I can't say that I would have considered that shot with a 243 or possibly even a 270 or 30/06.

5 day hunt, cake on the line, I want all of the gun that I can shoot well. For me it is a 300 RUM, 300 Win or even a 338 RUM which I now have.

Where I will agree with you is that might not be the case for everyone. You said it well, "take as much gun that you can shoot and head for the hills". Agree.

However I will add a caveat, also know what the gun and your shooting ability is capable of.

Tony.

Two things.

One. Shooting a bullet faster does not necessarily make it more powerful. In fact, it usually makes it expand more which may not be desirable with a 150 grain bullet on an 800 lb animal.

Two. Given the 338 Win Mag is so easy to load for, shoot, and performs so well on elk, why would someone even consider using a 270 unless that's all they have?

Did you ever wonder why you never hear any "cripped elk that got away" storys from the guys who hunt them with .270s ,and smaller, rounds?...........HNY............10

High country we really don't have a disagreement here. If a person is thoroughly familiar with the gun and load those long shots are a snap. But when you're talking shooting over a quarter of a mile things can get ugly real quick with the wind , angle of shot etc. I've done it ,and try not to make a habit of it.
I just get really disgusted with the so called experts that make their living writing big whoppers for the gun rags calling for these big magnums when in fact they just aren't necessary. Nice to have yes necessary no.

Dam,

I agree with what you've stated.

Believe me, it wasn't exactly what I wanted for a shot oppertunity. It is also about my self imposed limit on shots at game. The circumstances were in my favor : we topped a mountain and accross the valley on the next mountian was the bull. So the bull was unaware of our presence. Unfortunately, there was no way to get any closer. The other thing that I had in my favor was that it was dead calm and I could go prone on my bipod, which I did.

I will agree with you that the big boomers are not necessary.

To me, they are just alittle more insurance in case the shot presentation is less than ideal (but not unethical).

BTW, were in Wy are you located ? I have hunted mule deer and antelope around Saratoga with Jim Schell @ Rough Country Outfitters.

Tony.

HiCountry, I used a 150 grain Scirocco in my 7 mag on a mule deer, and I liked it's performance, but I dont have much experience with it other than that. I do believe it to be a good mule deer on down round, but I dont have Elk experience with it. I may get an opportunity to Elk hunt in Montana this year, and if I do, I will probably develop some loads for my 300 Win or the 7 mag. But I would go with a partition or X bullet if it shoots ok. I'm jealous of your 270 WSM, as a muley hunter, that just sounds like a sweet setup.

Aggie,

It is sitting on my loading bench right now, awaiting the Marine-Tex to finish curing.

It is turning out better than I anticipated. The TI stock I bought is really light. It is going to turn out to be a real sweet mtn rifle.

BTW, here is a pic of the 180 Scirroco I dug out of my bull. Out of my 300 RUM, MV is 3300. I hit him 1/4 toward me at 450 yards, impact velocity was about 2500. Hit behind the right front shoulder, dug the bullet out under the hide in front of the left rear ham. Took out one lung, the liver, went through the paunch and was bulging under the hide where I found it.



Tony.

Aggie,

One last point, out of a 300 WIN, the 180 Scirroco would be an awesome long range thumper. I could not get the Scir to shoot out of my 300 WIN, but my buddie got good results with his 300 WIN.

But, you can never go wrong with the 180 Partition.

Good luck,

Tony.

HighCountry I'm south of Lusk. I do my elk hunting for the last 28 years over the the Sierra Madre's. Hunted the Upper Green before that. We've got elk here I could get a landowner license for this area, but it just wouldn't be the same. Sides all that I'ld have to find something else to do for a vacation. Tried golf, but swinging those clubs just can't hold a candle to smackin them balls with a handgun.

The Upper Green is a beautiful area. I usually ride into the Wind Rivers each summer. Green River Lakes, Elk Heart, New Fork, or up the Old Sweeny Pack trail. It's what I bought horses for.

I've seen Elk asorb two 180g bullets through the lungs out of 300WM another elk took bullets from a 30-06 and just stand and look at us. I've also watched them fold on the spot when hit with 120g partitions from my 25-06. Why one works better than another, I don't know. But they are all dead.

I watched a group of friends in Alaska shoot 7 bull moose over a 10 day period all with 140g Failsafe bullets out a 270 WSM. Not one moose was lost.

I may go back to a larger caliber gun if I find the 270WSM won't do the job. But for the time being, I'm going to try it. So far it's worked fine.

Aggiedog, one of the guys in our crew has taken a bull each of the past two years shooting generic rem core locks out of his 7MM mag. Any premium bullet would only be a plus. I've always luged my 13lb .338ultra, the idea is to get my bull first, then switch over to a lighter rifle for mullies. Doesn't always happen as planned though. So I picked up a .270WSM this year for future use. Great deer caliber, plus shedding 5lbs is sweet when it's your turn to do all the walking.

The "Out Of State Vs. In State Hunter" is a complete crock fabricated by a bored gunwriter and repeated ad-nauseum. I'm an in-state elk hunter... I'm not passing on a good bull if I can make the shot... good bulls on public ground are tough to get on and the average guided out-of-stater has as good (or better) chance (depending on his outfitter) than an in-state hunter. Point being, use enough gun and know it intimately.

I don't think the entire concept is necessarily in error at all and surely don't see where "out of state" and "in state" enter into the argument. I've seen some real looloos from "in state" in lots of different states and some real skookum sumbitches from both "out of state" and "out of country" for that matter.

The issue of if a guy who is less experienced in the game, less knowledgeable of the local surrounds, has a limited timeframe and harried schedule, has plunked down 5 grand or more, and has probably dreamt of his trip for a long while, certainly through a year or more of planning/booking etc., the entire time building anticipation and priming all of his buddies about the monster he's gonna take feels more "pressure" to try and drop something is a no brainer. Sure he does. And, this is the guy the articles are written for. Like you I don't agree with the conclusions reached by all of the scribes, but generally that's ok because next month they'll write the same article with the opposite conclusion anyway. <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/smile.gif" alt="" />

The serious hunter, whether a local or a come-from-away knows what he's doing 'cause he's been there and done that before, maybe done lots of "thats" in lots of "theres"...

I agree with Journeyman. The hunter who has big money on the table or who has never got his bull is more inclined to take a so so shot, because he doesn't want to go home tomorrow empty handed. They don't have to be out of staters. Granted there are very ethical hunters from both. And there are slobs from both. Your residence doesn't make you one or the other. But rather your own personal skills. If you know how to find and hunt elk, your confidence tells you that you can find the animals again tomorrow or next year.

I've shot enough elk, that it doesn't hurt my feelings to not tag out on a given year. I'll get one next year. I've let a lot really nice bulls walk away because they were 500+ yards out. Or because they were ghosting through trees and I couldn't really assess how big they were, or I didn't want to take a running shot through timber, or numerous other reasons. I'd rather not try a shot and spook them. It's just easier to try and find them tomorrow and get closer.
That's why it's called Hunting not Killing.

I sat at the range this past summer working on my 270 WSM load. A fellow came in with his 300 RUM and popped off a couple of rounds. In convresation he told me that he shot at a monster bull last year. Pointing to a spot on the hill behind the range, stating "It was about that far out and all my bullets missed,"( it was 600+ yards) So he bought a cannon, saying " I bought a gun that will reach out and get em this year".

I just don't get that logic. Spend the time required hunting to get close enough and a 270 or the 270WSM will do the job.

I had a fellow tell me about several elk that were shot by hunters in his camp using .270s and how the elk got away wounded by good hits through the vitals. My thoughts are "If they got away, how do you know they were hit solidly through the vitals?"



Anyway, I have shot only one Elk, and it was only a spike, so an Elk expert I am not...... But for what it's worth, I hit the Elk broadside high through both lungs with a 140gr Hornady at about 3076fps, and he was DRT. I would not hesitate to take the .270 Elk hunting again, but might stuff it with partitions or X bullets to add a little safety margin.



John

Hondo, in fact you hear plenty of such stories, just not from the guys who made the shot. Talk to guides and outfitters--and of course Elmer made a career out of .270 (and .30-06) horror stories about lost elk. He famously referred to the .270 as a good pest rifle! Of course, lots of the problems in his era were the result of bad bullets. I wouldn't hesitate to hunt elk with the .270 and good bullets, but it would be way down on my list if I had a choice. When you stand next to a 900 pound animal, even the .338 looks pretty dang small.

As much as I fall on the Elmer side of the fence rather then the Oconner side I lost a tremedous amount of respect for Elmer after reading a few of his books which had bogus information. As an example he wrote many times about Bullet failure. Phrases like bullets "bouncing off" of sheep and elk( I strongly doubt that). This was my favorite: The elk was shot perfectly through the heart but the bullet failed and we lost it as it ran off without a blood trail to follow.

If it was lost how was it known the bullet was perfectly through the heart? If it was perfectly through the heart how did the bullet fail in a way that the elk lived? How did the elk remain alive with a hole through it's heart?

I believe in the Elmer throry of big diameter and heaveir bullets. Actually it's not a theory it's a proven fact. I have seen well in excess of 1000 big game killed in my work and the bigger the bore the better the crumple effect. This is VERY consistant. Anyone can see a few animals fold in thier tracks with a very high velocity rifle bullet and assume it will happen to all of them. However if you see 100 animals shot will all react the same? I know they won't becasue I have seen those high velocity bullets allow game to run plenty of times.

I think the big difference here is resolution of events. So many people base their entire ballistic belief system on only a few personally witnessed kills and a few stories from others. Who can blame that? It's human nature to believe what you see, I have done the same thing.

When the numbers go from a few stories and personal events to 100's of personal witnessed events I would bet that those feelings would change. I would also bet that if you shot an animal with that laser flat lightweight bullet and arrived on the site to see one tiny drop of blood you would also have a different opion when that animal cost 1000-1250 bucks and you will spend the next day and a half tracking those tiny specks of blood every hundred yards.

When you shoot that same animal with a bullet of bigger diameter and proportional weight the exit will show you blood and then an expired animal, after a short tracking job. This opinion was not formed by anyone forcing it on me. This opinion was formed after seeing many hundreds of big animals shot and the level of work to locate them afterwords.

I owned and shot a 300 weatherby for ten years. I have seen animals killed with it as if hit with a bolt of lightening from heaven. However I have also seen animals like a coyote shot behind the last rib quartering away run 200 yards dragging it's intestines behind it. That High velocity bullet blew bits of coyote to high heaven and that coyote still ran a very long way. Had it been an 800 pound elk I would have never seen it again! I have also seen antelope in Wyoming shot broadside run 500 yards before falling in plain sight. If that animal was in a forest or mountain situation it too would have been lost for good. Not a drop of blood was on the ground the entire way walking to fetch the dead antelope. Who would think an antelope of 130 pounds could travel that far with a 180 grain 300 weatherby bullet through the chest, with an exit hole? When we opend up that antelope it was a mass of jello and one shoulder was completely bone pulp and purple goo. But not a drop on the ground!

I saw a Zebra shot with that rifle run straight away with a group of a dozen others as we waited for it to fall. They all made it to the bush and vanished. We could hear them but could not see them anylonger. Then they appeared again about 250 yards to our left and moving but no way of knowing which was the wounded one for a follow up. Then they began running towards us again in a big circle. That Wounded zebra was falling behind and the others put a big gap between it and them. As we were still standing by the truck we waited for that lagging zebra to give us another shot and we saw it fall only 100 yards or so from the truck. When we arrived there was no blood on that zebra at all. No exit and what seemed to be a zebra that died of a heart attack! It took quite while to locate the bullet hole too! I tracked back to see where this zebra had fallen looking for blood just to see for myself that it was not bleeding. As our tracking began we all searched for blood and found nothing but specks here and there. Most looked like red grains of sand. After about 200 yards we saw where the group of zebra split from this single zebra. Had we tracked it the correct way from the beginning as if it were lost, rather then backtracking would we have followed this set of tracks going right back to the beginning? or would we have stayed with the group running off away from us? No blood to point the way.

It was many events like this that caused the sale of that rifle and get a bigger bore gun. Yeah I saw the 300 weatherby crumple game many times, but it was not the norm it was the exception. Had I seen only those few exceptions I too would be posting here about the fantastic performance of those ultra fast 30 and under calibers. Fortunately for me I have had enough experience to see through that. I understand reality now based on high resolution of animals shot, not the limited success of only a few events.

JJ, no doubt Elmer served up some heaping helpings of BS at times, and seemed to have some pretty bizarre anecdotal "evidence" of bullet failures. I love the ones where he tells you EXACTLY where an animal was hit which was ultimately lost because the "pest rifle" bullet failed--information that would be well nigh impossible to obtain without an autopsy. (Like the heart example you gave.)
As a general principal, you can't argue with "bigger is better"--modern premium bullets may narrow the gap some, but if a 150 grain .270 partition or Trophy Bonded is good, how much better must be a .338 250 grain bullet of the same construction?

Since we're on the topic of Elmerisms, I found an old magazine the other day w/ an article from the old master. Here is a quote on why I take some of his work with a grain of salt:

"Next let us turn to African big game. In three safaris I have found the African game much tougher than American game, in spite of what some writers claim. THe first two oryx I shot in the lungs with 300-grain Kynoch soft-nose from my .333 O.K.H. both got clean away. I was so certain of my bullet placement that I opened the bolt slowly and pocketed my empty cartridge and watched them run and wring their tails, but they just kept on going. We trailed one until dark and lost him, and trailed the other bull some seven miles after a broadside hit in the lungs behind the shoulder. I finally killed one that was running all-out at 200 yards by aiming way ahead with the horisontal wire of my scope in line with the spine. -Elmer Keith in Guns for Big Game"

If he did actually hit them where he thought, maybe he should have been using a .270, so they would have dropped
<img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/grin.gif" alt="" />

Experience is a great teacher, but it is subject to our prejudices, even for the best of us. Somebody once wrote, we tend to remember things that prove our points and forget those that contradict them. This is evident in a lot of Elmers writing (and just about every elk gun post). He killed way way more game than I ever will, but when something went wrong with a small caliber, it was always the fault of the small caliber no matter what. When something went wrong with a large caliber, it was "tough game" or poor shooting, but never the fault of the caliber. If a crtitter ran 300 yards after being hit with one of his .33 cals, it was normal, if it ran 300 yards after being hit with a .30-06, it was because the hunter used a pest rifle....

-Lou

Dang, I had no idea what a can of worms I was opening.

Here is my situation. If I elk hunted enough and had the $ I would no doubt buy a 30+ caliber. But the way it is, I have never been, but now I have been invited for next year. Though I am not sure that I will even be able to go, I would feel underarmed if I went with my 270 win. I know people kill em with it all the time, but having never hunted them, I would like as much advantage as I can. But here is the deal, I hunt a lot of deer, mostly just whitetails up to 180 pounds, and I may not do any elk hunting for awhile. So changing to a 300 doesn't really appeal to me at this point.

The 270 wsm appears to be an awesome round and I am thinking of switching from my 270 win to the wsm. If I made the switch and got to elk hunt next year I would feel better prepared weapon wise, but I though I would post here and see what yall thought of how much better I should feel....

What I have read is about what I expected. With that weapon I would have to use premium bullets and take very ethical shots.....which I would do anyway. I like the long range possibilities for deer with the wsm, but would not feel real good about it will elk unless told different by someone w/ much more experience.

Yall have done what I was looking for when I made this post, and I greatly appreciate it. Please keep it coming. I just wanted to make it known where I was in this.

JJHack, you use a 30-06 mostly don't you? If so, why is that better than the 300 weatherby? If I were to guess, the slower velocity allows the bullet to do more damage....but I really don't know.

I think it would work out just fine for you. I have shot a few elk with a 270 but have more or less, made the 338 Winchester my cartridge of choice. This season has been a little different for me, I been hunting with a 300 WSM. Now since 270 WSM ammo can be had with 140 gr Fail Safes, I would not even give it a second though. I don't own a 270 WSM yet, I plan on having one made up if a Move to Wyoming comes about.

Woodrow,

I have shot a bunch of deer and hogs, and one elk. I have hunted a bit from stands in Texas and a bit in the mountains in SW Oregon. My elk came from Oregon. I typically spend a lot of time at the range and obssess over fine details of accuracy and ballistics. I say that so you know what level of credence to attach to my remarks. Let me give you some stuff to add to the growing pile of things for you to consider.

My deer rifle progess has gone from 7mm Rem Mag to 300 Win to a 28" barreled custom 300 Win to a custom 30-06. Yeah, I did get one specialty deer rifle--a 280 Ack in a trade that I may use. My elk rifles went from a custom 340 Wby to a custom 338 RUM to custom 338 Win. I achieved excellent accuray with all these, and the hardest kicking one--the 338 RUM (50 ft lbs of recoil) I shot the best of all. I have downsized so to speak because even in long range country, most shots are close, and out to 500 yds, any of the above chamberings are flat enough. The slower velocity also means much longer barrel life.

My 338 Win Shoots a 225 grain bullet at about 2800 fps, where the 338 RUM shot a 250 grain bullet at 2950 fps. This is not a significant difference when it comes to taking animals out to 500 yds. I shot last year's elk at 40 yds with my 10 lb (w/scope) 338 RUM. The elk was being pushed hard and moving when I shot it through a 3" gap in the trees--yeah I know, a bit of luck there. He went 20 yds straight uphill and fell. His lungs were pretty much gone.

After shooting that elk, I realized the 338 RUM was no advantage. The RUM needs heavier/tougher bullets so they'll hold together. Because a 338 Win doeasn't shoot as fast, I can use a lighter bullet and get similar penetration and expansion. Another advantage is the 338 Win could come in at 2 lbs lighter and still be very shootable, so I had Celt build me one. (An 8 lb w/scope 338 RUM would be a monster, and I am not recoil shy.) I didn't get an elk this year with the 338 Win, but it cleanly took out a Texas hog, and hogs are very tough.

A 270 WSM is not really a step up in killing power--especially on larger game--over a 270. However, a 30-06, 300 Win, or 300 WSM is an excellent deer rifle as well as a very good elk rifle. The 30-06 is capable of making clean kills at way farther than you'd probably care to shoot it. The faster 300s are a bit flatter shooting, but that is just not the advantage many think it is unless you are setting up shoot at 600-1200 yds like the long range boys do. Reagrdless, the difference in flatness out of a 300 mag vs a 270 WSM is not significant. Also, the barrel life of a 300 Win/Wby mag will be better than the barrel life of a 270 WSM.

I think your best choice would be to keep the 270 you have and then get a 338 Win. If you have to sell the 270 to finance the new rifle, then strongly consdider one of the 300 Mags as your one all around gun. A 300 mag will do everything a 270 WSM will and more.

Good luck with whatever you choose.

Blaine

I've pondered the "control group size" issue quite a bit and for myself at least honestly admit that personal bias and selective memory weigh as heavilly as cold hard data. To give a for instance...I've been extremely privileged through circumstance of my work to be able to hunt literally around the world. My favored firearm when I'm away from home and packing just one to use for whatever I may encounter wherever I may be is the 7mm Rem Mag. I have my reasons for arriving at this choice and plan on starting a thread on it one day, but for now let's just go with it as my choice, right or wrong. A while back I took a contract in Cameroon and was immediately contacted by a fellow I knew in oilfield services over there to be sure and bring a rifle (like who wouldn't? <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/smile.gif" alt="" />) with primary quarry being 4 different variety of duiker. I naturally packed my 7 mag stoked with 140 partitions. As circumstance would have it I was presented the opportunity to take a giant eland and with no fuss, no bother popped him at 120 or so yards and he simply sat down on his haunches and flopped over dead as a rock. Now you can imagine I've selectively "cherry picked" and used this story many times to extoll the virtues of the 7 mag. The fact that this is the one and only eland I've ever shot and only 50% of the sum total I've even seen shot has rarely interfered with my learned argument! Now deer, I've well over 100 of many types including the "North American Deer Slam" plus red, roe, fallow, sika and sambar. I can promise you I've NEVER used the 90 lb Alabama doe that traveled over 150 yards after being shot with the very same rifle and load as the eland as the typical whitetail performance of my favorite round!



Specific to elk, as I've written before we have property that has granted hundreds of depredation tags in my lifetime, allowing the opportunity to witness one bigazzed pile of elk get shot. Funny thing is, depending on how I'd care to spin it I could say I've seen more elk run off after being hit with the 30-06 than with any other round - just like I could say I've seen more knocked to the dirt by the '06, all simply because I've seen more in TOTAL shot with this round. I really honestly believe that on any elk I've seen shot that at that exact time, on that exact critter with the exact shot with the exact bullet type there would've been no real difference in the result between any number of cartridges.



(edited to correct several spelling errors I'll blame on the aftereffect of sparkling wine gone flat...)

woodrow. your reasoning is very sound. Using that 270 wsm like you're talking about you won't be under gunned with it if and when you do get to hunt elk. The caliber is more than adequate plus the fact you will have shot it a bunch by the time you get to try for elk makes it just that much more suitable.
I've shot and seen shot lots of elk. Most elk in mountain habitat will be lucky to weigh over 700 lbs. The occasional bull in complete prime before the rut would be the exception, and those guys are pretty seldom seen during hunting season or there wouldn't be many to be seen at all. I'ld guess there are way more spikes,cows and 5 pts killed everyyear than the giant 6x's the magazines and TV shows portray.

Woodrow--

I got in this late, but have a few observations to make, from the perspective of someone who has actually shot some relatively big animals with the .270 WSM, and shot a whole lot with the regular .270. I also have a lot of experience with the .338 Winchester Magnum, both in North America and Africa, as well as various other "medium bores," and middle or the road rounds like the .30-06 and various .300 magnums.

With the 140 Fail Safe factory load it is very rare to recover a bullet from any animal shot with the .270 WSM. Generally it has to be a angling or full-length shot to recover the expanded bullet, even on elk. The 140 Barnes X acts very similarly. About the only way you'll recover either on a broadside shot is if you hit the heaviest part of both shoulders, in which case the elk (or whatever) is dead anyway. I have seen a 140 X break both shoulders of a medium-sized bull and zing off across the countryside.

My experience with the Fail Safe, X and the very similar-acting Trophy Bonded Bear Claw has resulted in far more good blood trails with .25-7mm caliber bullets than with heavier, fatter Nosler Partitions. You have to go up to the 200-grain .30 Nosler to get consistent pass-through, and even then the blood trails doesn't generally match that from a .270 or 7mm Fail Safe or X.

I have lived in Montana all my life and done quite a bit of elk hunting and some elk guiding. While a .338 can indeed give you a few extra angles to shoot from, I have seen an awful lot of elk and moose dropped very quickly with .270's. In fact, I have yet to see one go more than 75 yards, and have never seen one lost. There was some good shooting involved, obviously, and good bullets, but both those factors are necessary for elk hunting, at least in the long run.

The conclusion I've come to over the years is that the .270 bore's bad rep on elk is mostly the result of bad bullets and bad shooting. There have been a lot of marginal .270 bullets shot into elk, by a lot of excited shooters. There have also been a lot of marginal .30 and .338 bullets put into elk, many in the wrong places. In the first case the .270 gets the blame, in the second case elk are regarded as extremely tough.

I wouldn't hesitate to go elk hunting with a .270 WSM using Fail Safe or Barnes X or Trophy Bonded bullets, whether as a native meat hunter or "outstate" trophy hunter. In fact, it wouldn't matter if the cartridge was the plain old .270 Winchester. As my friend Layne Simpson once put it, "If you can shoot, the .270 is an elk cartridge. If you can't, it ain't." Wish I had said that!

MD

MD,

I just read an article that Layne wrote in the latest Petersons Hunting, where he was on a Dall sheep hunt.

He was using a 280 with an unspecified "140 grain softpoint". After busting his ass climbing mtns. for SEVEN days he gets a shot at a trophy ram, which subsequently needed a followup. Evidently, his first shot never penetrated past the front shoulder bone. Your classic non-premium bullet failure.

He kicked himself in the backside for not choosing the right bullet for the job.

It really drives home the point, which you just made, that besides shot placement, bullet construction can make or break any given cartridges performance.

BTW, by the tone of the article, I don't think ole Layne enjoyed his stroll into the mountains for seven straight days !!!

Tony.

Absolutly...for me the 270 Win has been a solid performer.Coyotes, Deer, Antelope, Big Horn Sheep, Black Bear, Elk...all one shot kills, except the Antelope where operator error was the problem... not the caliber! With premium bullets the 270 WSM is to the 270Win what the 300 Win Mag is to the 30-06...extra insurance. It may not be necessary but if it will put your mind at ease, go for it. Remember that a 375H&H will work for hunting Trophy Mice, but only if you place your shots in the right place. <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/smile.gif" alt="" /> Personally, I would just stay with the 270 Win...use the money you would spend on the new rifle to finance your Elk hunt. Just my 2 coppers worth.

John,

I think you may have just made the closing argument on my decision between the '06 and the .270 for my 721 project. .270 it is.


John

Thank you all for the entertainment. This has been an amusing and enlightening thread, not quite hilarious and more a study in human nature than ballistics.

<img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/grin.gif" alt="" /> <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/grin.gif" alt="" />

Hicountry--

Layne confided to me about a month ago, while we were deer hunting in Iowa, that the bullet was a 140 Ballistic Tip. He estimated he's shot about 60 animals with Ballistic Tips before with no problem, but this one barely broke the skin before going kerblooey. Range wasn't very far or very close, and muzzle velocity was about what you'd expect from a .280, about 3000. That has been my experience with the "deer weight" Ballistic Tips, that while they work most of the time, sooner or later one will do something weird.

Layne is now 62, but he stays in shape and got in very good shape for the sheep hunt. But he did mention steep and rough countryt ain't as much fun as it used to be!

I have to agree about the wacky nature of Ballistic tips. I used them for years with great success. Complete failure on the shoulder of a Mule Deer has changed my mind however.

An outfitter and good friend of mine discussed this a few days ago. He had a client shoot a dandy Grizzly last spring with the 30-378 and 180 gr ballistic tips. The bear was shot head on and that ballistic tip came right apart (30-378 is another abomination IMO). Fortunately his lungs were damaged and he died. But... he is sure that if this Grizzly was shot in the shoulder or slightly angling toward or away he would have had a nasty situation on his hands. I just keep wondering what is so wrong with the partition that people don't reach for that nosler instead of his annoying little brother.

Chuck

Chuck, I wonder if it's an accuracy issue. Generaly speaking, the BT is a very accurate bullet, easy to fine tune loads. If shooting anything under .338, I'd take a serious look at the Accubonds. For Elk, Moose, Bear, the partition has a proven track record, though I personaly like the partition golds for elk. The .338 BT's are supposed to be designed for big game (elk, moose),but in my case my .338 ultra shoots the PG's so well, I'll stick with em.

Al

I have used 140gr ballistic tips out of my 7mmstw's for over 20 head of deer antelope and sheep.I have taken 5 elk and 2 moose with 180gr ballistic tips out of my 300ultramags.I have never had a bullet failure to date and not one animal has covered 50 yards after being hit.

Why do I choose the ballistic tip over the partition?The simple answer is that partitions do not shoot well in my rifles.

In spite of the good performance that ballistic tips have given me I would not use them on a grizzly hunt.When hunting deer,moose or elk I can pick and choose my shots and the chance of being attacked is remote.Grizzly hunting however is a different situation and since I won't be shooting grizzly at long distance I will choose my bullet based on performance and not accuracy.At this point my choice would probably be the failsafe as they easily out penetrate even the partition and seem to expand very reliably at high velocity.

Now that nosler is releasing the new accubond in 140gr-7mm and 180gr-.308" I will be trying those bullets as soon as they become available as the idea of ballistic tip accuracy with partition performance is certainly worth trying.

regarding ballistic tips on grizzly: the worst combination I could imagine. lucky the bear is not writing about the nice dinner he had, albeit with a sore shoulder.

AJ300Mag--

Just out of curiousity, could you describe your experiences with Partition Gold vs. Partition? I have no axe to grind, just collecting information, since I've shot some of each myself.

Mule Deer

Chuck,

I think I would have to question an outfitters sanity for letting a client shoot a grizzly bear with a BT, especially out of a screamer like the 30/378.

I am serious, if I were the guide, I think that I would have told the hunter under no uncertain terms that I WOULD be shooting right after he did, no matter where he hit him.

That is a disaster waiting to happen.

Tony.

MD,

Well I guessed right as that was what I was thinking.

BTW, you wrote a post about this very kind of incident on the topic of BT's. You stated something like you use them long enough, sooner or later one will fail.

Fortunately for Layne, he got a follow up shot. What a way to end a seven day hunt that would have been had he not been able to finish the sheep off. <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/frown.gif" alt="" />

Tony.

hicountry, having done that work I was thinking the same thing. The bigger question in my mind was did the hunter and outfitter never speak before the day he pitched up in camp?

I ask everyone of my hunters what guns they bring and what ammo, if they don't offer it or ask first. On the whole I think 99% of the hunters I take ask advise about ammo to me directly first.

There are ways for non-residents to hunt without a "real" guide in Alaska. You can hunt on native lands with a native guide. I know several folks who bought hunts like this over the years and the horror stories of the ability and hidious equipment was like a Saturday night Live show!

I don't think I ever laughed so hard in my life as I did hearing about these hunts from one of the hunters himself. It was a real comedy..........after it was over, not during the hunt.

It would not surprise me one bit that some of these guides would not even know what a 30/378 is or a ballistic tip. Just as an example I can't hold this back. They arrived at a fly in camp where they had small tents set up to hunt Griz as a base camp. As they flew in the hunter saw big orange and blue sheets blowing in the wind. He assumed they were for the pilot to see the camp. They landed the plane and were dropped off with their gear. NOBODY WAS THERE!

The pilot said the guides were probably around and would be coming now that they heard the plane. It was late Morning. The hunters decide to take a walk and look around. The big sheets they saw were the tents blowing in the wind ripped to shreds. They were only still there because they were hung up on some bushes. Many hours go by and they have no food or water. Still no guides and they are really beginning to worry. It's above freezing but it's now raining and cold.

Then finally a native guide walks into camp with a rolled up tent under his arm. He says he ran out of fuel in the 4 wheeler on the way back so he had to walk. The guy is soaking wet and has no rain gear. He hands them the tent to put up because he is shivering and worthless to do any work from being near dead from hypothermia. The other tents were worthless and one of the guys says where are the tent poles for this tent? The guide replies I could not find them we have to use the ones from the tents that blew away. The Hunters say they are different kinds of tents! Oh and by the way where are the sleeping bags and food. The reply was they will be coming tommorow the ATV which was to bring them today is stuck in a bog and they had to return for help to di it out. All this time there is a dog in the camp barking non-stop

The hunter Who set the trip up said he wanted to be flown out back to Anchorage call the plane on your radio. You guessed it "what radio". They have to spend the night without a tent or sleeping bags and no food in a 35 deg rain. The up side was the hunters had their stuff but that poor native guys had to sleep in one of those raggedy tents rolled around him all night with his wet dog.

The help actually showed up early in the morning with the remaining gear but still had no tent poles. That took another day. One guy actually shot a bear 7' he was happy. He shot it as it was walking towards the tent one day. The other fellow came home with a sore back, poor sleep, sick of canned beans, and a cold!

There were more detials that are just too long to go into and some comments not fit for a public forum like this. Anyhow I laughed so hard at this fellas story I nearly wet myself. Only Chevy Chase in Christmas Vacation was as funny as this guys story!

I won't question the Outfitters sanity because I know him well enough. He probably intended to do just that (blast away) but that bullet acted like a grenade and said bear dropped and didn't twitch.

Stubblejumper, don't take offense to this, but this is my opinion. A hunting rifle intended for game larger than a whitetail, especially a custom job, that does not shoot bullets that are suitable for hunting is not worth the powder to blow it up. I have personally experienced this and I won't tolerate it anymore. It really isn't necessary. On top of it all, it isn't that hard to do, as I have seen some bonified hack jobs that shot suprisingly well with "inaccurate premium" bullets.

Chuck

P.S. Is Winchester going to offer their component failsafes with Lubolox again.

My experience has been extreemly limited. I've seen the partition shed it's front end and have the back half continue through an animal at awkward angles. On one elk, the bull was hit with a .338 Win Mag, 200 yards broadside, the bullet hit squarely on the shoulder, breaking the leg but failing to continue on thru into the vitals. We did recover that bull the next morning, he was still very much alive when we found him laying in the oakbrush. I've seen a few rump shot bulls that headed for the next county.

I may be all wet, but what I'm looking for is something more in line with Barnes bullets. The idea of the back half of the bullet penciling its way thru the rest of the animal isn't the best in my view. Yes, all these critters ended up being recovered, but where we hunt if the animals travel 300 yards they can get to the rim trying to escape. From there it's one heck of a steep drop, straight down, one hell of a waste of meat. Need to break em down, and with them already on the move it makes for an interesting proposition. So my line of thinking is that with the thicker jacket the bullet will hold togeather longer, creating more hydrostatic shock with the larger frontal area, v/s the base traveling thru at bullet diameter.

What has been your experience with the golds? Do you think it's an improvment on a good bullet, or just a marketing ploy for Nosler to keep pace with other bullet manufactures?

Thanks,
Al

jj,

Great story, I LMAO on that one !!! <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/grin.gif" alt="" /> <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/grin.gif" alt="" />

Appreciate the good laugh, being back at work SUCKS !!! <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/frown.gif" alt="" />

Tony.

Folks, this has been interesting reading and I'm sure I can't add anything that has not already been said. However, I have hunted Elk for more than fifty years, using several calibers, and have to agree with the folks who believe in accuracy / bullet placement rather than energy on paper.
I have killed Elk with the .270, and about everything between up to the .338 and 35 Whelen. If there was ever any difference in "killing power", assuming like shots, between any of them I was never astute enough to see that difference.
On one particular hunt, back around 1985, I ran into a old gentleman on the North Fork of the Clearwater in Idaho who had a very nice 5x6 hanging. After introductions and a cup of joe the conversation turned to guns. He showed me his "Elk Rifle", it was a 25-06, and he was proud as a Peacock. I asked him how many Elk he taken with this gun and he replied, " I reckon I got 11, or maybe 12, out of that first box of shells...then the darn kids got into em' and shot em' up".
Everytime I hear this discussion on what makes a Elk rifle I think of this story. Is there anything magic about the 25-06? I doubt it. I own one and although it is a fine little rifle, it would be my last choice for an Elk rifle. The .270 is not my first choice either. Although I have killed more Elk with a 7x57 than any other caliber, it would not be my first choice. My .338 has only taken two Elk, and I didn't see any magic there.
The .300's were OK, but they lacked that certain magic also. My 30-06 comes to mind as posessing something that borders on magic due to its "shootability" with a heavier bullet, but if I were to choose it that would leave my 35 Whelen completely out in the cold, and I don't want to do that.
So, Is the .270 WSM a good Elk cartridge? Yep, I would say it just might work about as well as anthing else, but I do believe...it would not be anything magic. These are just my thoughts.
Respectfully, Russ