I've had a 270 Winchester Model 70 featherweight for over 25 years and have shot a pile of whitetail deer, hogs and coyotes that I couldn't see over. I've also taken 2 mule deer and 2 small bull moose with it. I also have a 7 MM mag but it isn't very reliable and doesn't shoot especially well. I have a 338 that I've taken lots of caribou with but my favorite rifle is my 270. I have a good 150 grain Hornady handload for it. What do you feel is the max range I can use this load?

I know this is going to cause a crap storm but I have always shot a .270 and have killed 10 bulls and 4 cows with it and I use 130gr sierra spitzer boattails.The farthest has been 330 yds,Iam a believer that if you can't close the distance to 300 yds you are not much of a hunter.

130g Nosler partitions from my .270 always seemed to kill elk pretty dead for me. I know many others who would say the same.

Were I starting from scratch, would it be my first choice as an elk-only rifle? No. But it kills elk dead, especially if you're confident with it. As always, shot placement and knowing your limits matters much, much more than choice of .277 vs. .308 (or bigger) caliber.

BTW, if you search a bit, you'll find pages and pages of debate on what will or won't work for elk. Or, it might just get repeated here in the days to come...

Dave

A friend that I have hunted with, off and on, for over 40 years still shoots a Remington 721 in .270. He has taken at least 18 bull elk that I know of--all but two with 150 grain Partitions. The other two were taken with 150 grain Sierra hollow points (before I insisted that he try the Partitions). I have never seen him shoot at a deer or an elk beyond 300 yards with this rifle, and most of his shots were this side of 150.

If you can place your shots accurately, either the 130 or 150 Partitions will do the job for you. Since it sounds like you have a great deal of confidence in your .270, I would suggest that you use it. I don't believe that you will be disappointed.

As an aside, I have been disappointed with the terminal performance of Hornady Interlocks on large elk in one of my 7mm Rem Mags, and have seen similar problems with the same bullet in at least one .270 Wby Mag. But I haven't had any recent experience and they may have solved the problems.

Put it in the correct place and it will work.

Question - What do you feel is the max range I can use this load?

My answer - I'd say try to get within 300 yards, but I'm sure the round will kill elk at 400 if you put the bullet tight behind the shoulder.

What's the range that you took this pile of other stuff at?? Where are you going to hunt? If you go into the black timber after elk, you could see a shot under a 100 yards. If you feel confident in the shot a 270 will put the lights out on an elk as well as a whitetail at 300 yards.

JohnDog

82, I too own a 338, but carry my old 270 for elk. I use 150gr Partitions, and I and a 5 X 6 bull know it will kill elk at 450 yards. And a cow at 430 yds. And others at lesser distance.

I would encourage you to seek out a "premium" bullet, IMHO it really ups the performance of a 270. If all I had was cup and core bullets, maybe I'd carry my 338 for elk. Maybe.

Why did I buy the 338? Barely used, it had a VX-III scope and it was too cheap. And I was dreaming of Alaska and big bears. I've never felt undergunned with a 270.

Regarding elk hunting I think "failures" of rifle bullets 25 caliber or larger are usually failure of the shooter, not the instrument.

one of the guys in our ELK camp (arthor) has frequently used a HORNADY 150 grain loaded over 55 grains of IMR 4831 and a 215 fed primer in his ruger #1 rifle
It kills ELK just fine and hes killed more than just a couple, Ive dressed out several hes shot, and if you do the bullet placement correctly the bullet will work fine.
it won,t knock them nearly instantly senceless in most cases but its 100% fatal.
he says he has rarely seen an ELK fail to run with a heart/lung shot but they seldom go more than 40-60 yards

Most hunters are limited more by their range than that of their rifles. The first question to ask is what is the maximum range you can put a bullet into an elk's lungs, from a field position such as using an aspen tree for a rest, after running after a bull?

I have shot over 20 elk with my 270 and I use 130 grain factory loads that are the cheapest. The longest shot I ever made was on a raghead 3 feet over the back on Decker Flats in 1985 the day before Thankgiving. Three shots 3 bullets into the ribs. Had to put him down before he went back into Yellowstone Park. I would never think that the 270 is not an elk gun. And if you do think it's not an elk gun then you have not hunted elk much.

Howdy.

It IS a bit odd how the poor old .270 Winchester has taken a ton of "not an elk rifle" abuse only after the belted mags of various bore sizes became so plentiful. Of course the .270 is an elk killer of high efficency. Many Joe Average shooters can shoot it well with minimal annual practice due to it's mild manners. It may not be as thumpin' as bigger bores, but it's got decent penetration with adequate expansion when coupled with even fairly mundane old fashioned bullets of 150 grains. The sheer number of elk killed cleanly in the US and Canada with a .270 and Remington CoreLokt bullets would probably be hard to comprehend if it was actually known. Partitions and other hi-tech projectiles only improve the potential terminal results. Shoot that .270 and be not dismayed.AW

I like the caliber; if it were me I'd use the best elk bullet I could and I don't think the Hornady is that bullet.

Not saying it won't work. Just that since it's April, and you handload, there's plenty of time to work up a load with a bullet that you KNOW is going to penetrate.

Just my opinion, and I'm no expert at elk killing.

-jeff

No doubt about it, the 270 kills elk.

But if you have killed lots of caribou with a 338 why wouldn't you use it on elk???

Elk are bigger than caribou and undoubtedly harder to kill.

Of course a 270 will work.

Been mostly packing a 270W and 150 grainers for almost 40 years. Out of 40 some elk with rilfe and bow, 25+ have been with the 270 and 150gr bullets. Most with Partitions, some with Sierras and others.

A premium bullet really helps the 270............

Lot's of bullets will generally work, but picking the right elk bullet is probably more important than picking an elk cartridge.




Casey

'course a lot die with the wrong bullet, too.

My elk guide in Colorado tells his clients to bring the largest caliber they can shoot accurately and without fear of recoil. He tells them to upgrade to a premium bullet. Many bring their .270's, 308's and 30-06's.

The 270 with 150 Partitions has been my elk rifle for 25 years; works just fine.

I'd really prefer the Partition (or TSX) over the Hornady, though.

MM

Sure a 270 with 150 Partitions will kill elk. So will a flat nosed 150 out of a 30-30. I've only taken 3 cows and a spike with the 270 with 150 Partitions and they all went down hard and fast. Course it's had to run very far with no heart.

For a dedicated elk rifle I'd recommend a bigger bore and heavier bullets, but what do I know?

Wayne

Why?

For a going away shot at that patch of yellow fur at 300 yards and a big bull, I'll take bigger, heavier, faster, and Partitions every time. A 375 isn't too big for that kind work.

Wayne

I have used a number of rifles on elk, the 270, 30-06, 300 Win mag, 338 Win mag. The last elk hunt I went on I used the load you are talking about a full power load using the 150 grain Hornady. Neither bullet exited and the second was unnecessary. I built my 35 Whelen for hunting in the Timber as shooting is fast and I might want the edge in penetration it gives. In moderately open country where you can get a good shot angle the 270 works fine but if I use mine aqain I will load 150 grain Partitions for the job and to make me feel better if I have to take it in the timber. I have yet to use the Whelen on elk and of all my rifles the 30-06 has killed the most elk and it is my favorite rifle for elk hunting.

You can't use a 270 on elk.. Its not enough gun.. At least thats what some people try to tell me... However, the pre-64 270 in my closet may just disagree with those people. I think its taken somewhere between 20-30 Rosevelt elk out of WA state. However, everyone knows Rosevelts are just small easy to kill elk..... ;-)

We just kinda', sorta' had this discussion with Mule Deer on another thread........and he'll probably just throw down on us with the 200gr, 30 cal Partition

I've done the Texas Heart Shots with the 270 and 150gr Partition at longish range--successfully I might add. Indeed, that's my load for that worst case scenario. But if I wasn't prepared for that worst case scenario shot (and only on very rare occasion will I go for it), my 243W and 100gr Partitions has done very well on heavily quartering elk from 40 yards out to 300 yds.........


Casey

Plenty of bullet weight and energy behind it. I killed my first elk with a 117 grain bullet from a .257 Bob!

I don't shoot elk in the butt. But then again, I don't shoot antelope or deer in the butt, either.

Dammit all folks, if J.B. "throws down on you with a 200 gr Partition" for those tough, going away timber shots on big bulls, when there isn't and won't be any other shot offered besides that yellow rump, maybe we ought to start paying attention to him.

Wayne

My wife uses a 270 on elk and goes with 130's. If one hears her shoot, get the knife out, because there is an elk down. We've only recovered one slug, and that one was a headon shot straight through the brisket. The bullet was in the rear surface of the liver.

If one can deliver it accurately, I'd be fine with 4 or 500 yds. The wife's longest reach was about 425, and the shortest was about 12 yards in a mahogany thicket.

There will always be a difference in preference in size of cartridges for certain animals and I'm definately a supporter of use enough gun. Some have valid points for larger calibers while others imply because you can kill something with a small cartridge, you can hunt with it. IMO, the 270 on elk is not one of these. It not only has the horsepower but the bullet weight to take on elk handily. In fact, I've seen many instances of those claiming the fastest they've had an elk go down was with a 270, Craig Boddington being one of them. Now he did try to rationalize why that was with one point being the animal wasn't alerted, but it doesn't change the fact it was still his fastest. A recent Handloader article about the 7 x 57 Mauser had that author recount the same story with the 270 and elk. I've also seen it from quite a few other hunters. Bottom line, the 270 is a dandy of a cartridge that's been around for over 80 years simply because it works. With modern powders and bullets it's only gotten better.

I feel the max range is how ever far you can keep all your shots in a 10" paper plate, while shooting from field positions.

Getting the bullet where it needs to go is 95% of the deal. That Hornady bullet can fail horribly on you (very doubtfull), but as long as it "fails" in the lungs of that Elk; your still going to be eating Elk steaks.

So the answer is: Go somewhere where you can shoot a LONG ways out, and find out.

Wow, thanks for all the great information! As a kid I had a suscription to Outdoor Life and Jack O'Connor had a monthly column (forgot what it was called). I used to cut out and save his articles; what an outdoor writer he was. He was probably, maybe still is, the greatest proponent of the 270. Back around 1982, shortly before we married, my wife asked my hunting partner what rifle she should get me for Christmas. Of course he told her to get a Model 70 in 270 caliber. BTW, this is the same hunting partner who drew a WY elk tag with me this year.

That load should work to 250 yards, maybe 300just fine.

If I had a 338 I liked I would take it instead.

I gotta know, but what on earth are you talking about here?

Thx
Dober

Now that right there is funny... Dober, what was the range you took your last bull at with the 270? As I recall it was right at 500-ish, no?

496 to be prezact, one 130 TSX on the front right, it went back and exited the opposite hams and said volunteer pitched over on his nose.

Not quite a electrocution but darn close!

Dober

hi all. hey dober, i have thought about using the very same 130 tsx of which you speak of. other than that 1 bull, what else positive or negative have you heard of the 130's?-keith

Lots of positives and no negs, I'll let you know that more than a few other bulls have bounced via 130's for me and my hunt buds.

Dober

thanks dober. let me ask you this, have you noticed any appreciable difference in the killing potential of the tsx's with the other weights for the 270? i know they make a 130, 140, and 150 grainer. i know you would lose a little ballistic advantage, but i have always been taught to shoot the heaviest weight for your particular bullet. maybe with the tsx's that no longer hold's true?-keith

Dang, I thought they'd bounce-off at 301 yards!

They probably do--but it's the ricochet that kill's 'em










Well...at least I thought it was funny........



Casey

I have never in my life owned a .270. I have never hunted with one, either, not a single living thing. But this load of crap that suddenly the .270 isn't adequate for elk is annoying. People have been killing elk with the .270 since it was introduced in 19-freakin-25. That's a long, long time. Countless elk have fallen to it. Countless! Why do you think the .270, along with the .30-06, has endured so long as a versatile do-anything caliber? The newer cartridges are great inventions, and they work great, but their mere creation has not debilitated the .270, not rendered a 130 or 150 gr. bullet from one any less effective. If anything, the .270 is more effective than it ever was due to great strides in bullet construction and design. The same people that think a .270 can't kill an elk also think a .30-30 can't kill an elk. I guess all these folks killiing elk with bows and arrows aren't really killing them, either. Sheeesh!!! This ain't rocket science or nuclear physics.

amen brother!-keith

"496 to be prezact, one 130 TSX on the front right, it went back and exited the opposite hams and said volunteer pitched over on his nose.

Not quite a electrocution but darn close!

Dober"

Ah come on Dober, we all know you gotta have 2000 foot pounds of energy to dimple an elks hide. You ran low on that figure at about 210 yards! Maybe the resulting ricochet broke an insulator and dropped a power line on that bull. He really was electrocuted!

Darn it, I bet that was it, should of been more observant.....<g>

Dober

Then again there was the one we shot right @ 650 with a 130 Sierra BT that went 3 steps and did an Olga Korbit down the mtn....must of been by the power line on that one to?

I agree with that statement whole heartedly, granted I don't have nearly the elk (5 cows) some of the other guys out here have. All my elk have fallen to the .270 Win and the 150 grain Partition except one and that was to an old .30-06 and Win 180 grain ammunition. Farthest shot on elk to date is 250 yards.

I miss ole Need One on threads like this


Mike

I've taken two elk (one bull, one cow) and a large muley buck with the 130gr. tsx in the last year. All three were in the 170 to 180 yard range. All three dead. The deer was a quartering towards shot, and it knocked him on his azz, complete penetration. The cow was broadside, broke the near side upper leg bone, through rib #4, top of the heart, lungs, out rib #3 and the far side shoulder area, bullet exited and not recovered. She went 60 yards on 3 legs and a lot of will to live, but she was dead on her feet. A couple of real impressive performances with that bullet.

I'd say the 130 tsx's do just fine. I wouldn't hesitate with it out to 500 yards, which is as far as I care to take a poke at a critter.

I have not hunted elk with a 270, but I would feel very comfortable using a 150gr Swift Aframe if I had to.

If I knew then what I know now I would have never rebarrelled a .270 to .35 Whelen for an elk hunt. I love my Whelen and will always reach for it for game over 400 pounds but its more emotional then practical. Im gonna bet the 130TSX will out penetrate a typical cup and core from a .35, shoot a whole lot flatter and be much easier on the shoulder in the process.

Well I'm going on my first elk hunt this year and I was sure my Savage in 270 was just marginal over 200 yards. So a quartering shot @ 300yards with a premium bullet is going to get the job done?

I made the important part bold there.

Personally, I think the premium bullet is more important at SHORT ranges, though.

But either way, use the best dang bullet money can buy, whatever THAT is, for hunting elk.

-jeff

Fully concurr.....I have a .30-06 that I'd use first but if I only had a .270 Winchester, I'd go elk hunting and never think twice about a different gun and the A-Frames are a good kick along for that old cartridge!

Oh well, I've been the main entree at a barby before so here goes. First, we all need to realize that even semi-cannons aren't effective on big bulls if the shot is missplaced. Second, even pipsqueak cartridges, in the hands of a calm and well versed hunter can be plumb lethal on big bulls, and I have been there to actually see both events.

So, as a sort of guideline to start the argument, use only premium, well proven bullets for the big bulls. Then with your ballistics tables in hand, find the maximum range at which your load delivers 1400 to 1500 ft-pounds of energy and confine your shooting at God's favorite creatures to within that distance.

Now, before you fire up your flamethrower, read paragraph one again.

Wayne

I don't care what bullet you use in your 270, for thick timber a bigger bullet is better and thats why I also rebarrelled my 270 to 35 Whelen. I also don't believe any premium bullet makes the 270 a good quartering away elk rifle.

Can you explain to me why a "bigger" bullet is better in thick timber. I have seen a lot of studies, and none have shown that a bigger bullet bucks brush any better than a smaller one. In fact I have seen studies that show the opposite effect. A bigger bullet is more likely to hit a branch due to it's larger diameter. and once a branch is hit, they all deflect.
Is there a dynamic here that I'm not aware of?

The absolute wrong concept is that a timber rifle is designed to "buck brush". A good timber rifle is short and easily penetrates the animal from bad angles, breaking bone, making wide wound channels and exiting. The trick to timber hunting is being able to shoot quickly, accurately and avoiding as much intervening shrubbery as possible. However if your main pursuit is shooting brush a 12 gauge loaded with buckshot will tear up as much brush as anything out there.

There is some controversy, here on the 'Fire, as to whether a "Timber Elk Rifle" is even a valid concept. Plenty of guys think that your regular rifle is your timber rifle.

I am in rikt300's camp... a short, easy handling rifle with plenty of oomph is a good thing in the woods. If it is a fast repeater, so much the better. This is not a necessity, just a nicety.

-jeff

I hunted with some guys several years ago that used the 270 and 280 with 140 partitions and they had no problems getting their bulls.

I would however use a better bullet, I've seen a couple bulls soak up lead and the 150 HDYs are rather soft. I load that bullet for a few 270s for deer and they often fail to exit on small whitetails. Usually mushroomed on the off side. I would be learly of shooting a bull with them unless it was a perfect rib/lung/rib presentation, but those just don't always happen. I can see the HDy failing on a shoulder impact very easily. Go with a Aframe, Partition, NAB, or Scir and be done with the worry.

Good Luck

Reloader

The 270 and a good 150 gr. bullet will work if you do your part and take broadside shots at reashonalbe ranges up to 300 yards. I used it for years when elk came out on the open slopes in Colorado in the evening and it worked with both 130 and 150 gr. bullets equally well.

Where I hunt elk today in the black timber swamp holes of Idaho I have seen a lot of elk wounded with the lighter rifles as all shots are going away from the hunter in very thick growth, so I went to the .338 and 300 gr. bullets or the .375 and 350 gr. Woodlieghs and that puts the elks nose in the dirt with a going South shot..Another benifit to this is my elk don't go to the bottom of the drainage where getting them out is pure hell....

I never reallized the 270 had so many fans. This is good to see. I have been using a 270 for nearly 15 years and have killed tons of deer with it. I wondered about it for elk because I do plan on a trip in the next 2-3 years. I have developed 2 awesome loads for it just for that reason using the 130 and 150 grain np's that group extremely well!

I just purchased my first .270W on the recommendation of a friend. He has hunted elk with them for years. He told me that he never had any problems with this caliber and loved the accruacy that it has. He only shoots 130gr for elk with many success stories!

Will you share your 150 gr NP load?

Thanks
dt

I see no reason to ever go above a 130 grain bullet, unless you rifle won't shoot them, which is highly unlikely.

For elk, just use premium bullets.

Well I hate to say it because they are both over Nosler max. So if you try these be sure to start LOWER. I kept adding more powder and the groups kept getting better until I got to these points. Nothing real exotic...Id say a lot of folks have used these exact loads and gotten great accuracy out of them. The 130 gr NP load was Fed brass...WLR primers...59.7 gr of H4831sc. The 150 NP load used the same components and 57.5 gr of the same H4831SC. Id say that half the handloaders out there use these same loads as 4831 shoots like it was made for a 270.

I havent chronied these so I dunno the velocity but I would think its below the book speeds quite a bit as this particular gun seems to have a slightly loose chamber. Both loads will go slightly less than an inch. Running around .7-.9 depending on how the loose nut behind the trigger performs..lol.

It's pretty hard to get enough H4831 into a .270 Win case to get in trouble with 130 or 150 gr.
YMMV, but I doubt it.

Thanks!! I am still a newbie for the most part to reloading and thats kind of what i was thinking cause that case is getting pretty full when you get close to 60 grains. That RL-19 with the 7-08 is sort of the same way...you cant seem to get enough in the case to hurt anything...lol. I dont have any pressure signs with either one of those loads and the next step up the groups started to open slightly so I called it good.

I've killed 25+ elk with a 270. Frontwards, backwards, sideways, longerange, and up close and personal.

I would recommend a stouter bullet than the Hornady--although I've killed a fair number with conventional bullets, a Partition, TSX or other premium bullets makes a difference in a cartridge like the 270........


Casey

The 270 has always been a good elk caliber. With todays bullets its better than ever. Any good stoutly constructed bullet from 130 grain on up will git er done.

Like O'Connor said, you dont need a cannon to kill elk, you need hunting skill and shooting ability. Just like with every other rifle.

That is "PERFECT" for elk, I have mostly used the my .270 with 150gr partitions, it has about 20 notches on it for elk.

The .270 has put more Elk in our families freezer than any other caliber.I and we used the 130 grain Nosler and the longest shot was 425 yards on a large Bull trotting and he dropped and rolled and rolled down the mountain to the hit.

We chose the 130 over the 150 because we hunt everythig at once and the 150 seemed not to drop Deer nearly as quick as the 130,but that it what we saw and chose.The only bad experience on Elk with the .270 was with the new(at the time)140 grain Fail Safe.It just penciled through causing little damage and after a nice buck,like in the rodeo,he took off for a long and miserable,packout.The next day a nice 4X4 Mulie did the same thing.Hair flew and he ran to the bottom of the canyon and who said Deer are an easy packout?

In answer to your question..Yes for Elk but for all species on one hunt,the 130 grain is better,in my opinion only.

Jayco

82dodge: I have killed two Bull Elk with the 270 Winchester caliber.
I have not had the time to read the other 7 pages of this posting and I am sure it probably has been emphasized by other 270 users, but bullet placement is critical with this (and any other caliber for that matter!) when Hunting Elk.
A Bull Elk shot in the heart/lungs area (avoiding the shoulders) IS a dead Elk!
I have three friends (who are long time and excellent Elk Hunters) who use the 25/06 Remington to kill Bull Elk with!
Again a shot to the heart/lungs (avoiding shoulder bones!) and said Elk is in the bag!
On occasion these Hunters (those who use the 270 Winchester or the 25/06 Remington) will have to pass on a shot or be patient for the proper shot to be offered - this is part of smart Hunting though.
I killed a fine 6x6 Bull Elk, year before last, with my 270 Winchester (Remington 700 Sendero) using Nosler 130 gr. Ballistic Tips. I was mainly Hunting Mule Deer at the time (on public lands) and the situation came about where I harvested the Bull with my go to Mulie rig.
I now have two Rifles to choose from when I am Hunting Elk exclusively - the first is a Remington 700 Classic in 7mm Remington Magnum and my newest Rifle is a Tikka T-3 Lite in caliber 338 Federal!
Elk can rumble off carrying a lot of "lead" - I have seen this happen to other Hunters on several occasions, unfortunately.
With careful bullet placement the 270 Winchester with 130 gr., 140 gr. or 150 gr. bullets will bring home an Elk for you - no if's, and's or but's about it!
I personally would limit my 270 Winchester use on Bull Elk to under 400 yards and the closer one could stalk to said Bull Elk the better!
Best of luck with your new Rifle!
Hold into the wind
VarmintGuy

If thats the case than I guess its safe to say: If you have to close the distance to 300 yds. your not much of a rifleman.

Now that I likey!

Dober

Big difference between hunting and shooting. Many people get the two mixed up.
Some do one or the other, some do both, some do neither!
(fire suit on!)

I'm trying to get within the standard deviation around the 300 yard mark so that I can be both....

I'm quite certain its safe to say:
If you dont close the distance to as close as possible before shooting, thereby making as sure a shot as possible, you need to rethink your hunter ethics.

Mmmm... maybe not so safe to say. :-)

I mean, think about it. Did you get "as close as possible" for each of your shots on deer? What if it's 75 yards away, but you could MAYBE close it to 70 yards? Etc. There's a point at which it's a gimmee; take the shot, kill the deer, no need to get closer. Point being- the "gimmee" point will be different for different people.

If the shot is within the capabilities of the shooter, and the caliber will carry the necessary... "stuff" to kill cleanly at the range at which the shot is taken... then it's an ethical shot.

Let's remember, we are using a HUGE crutch, in a high-powered, scoped rifle, to kill animals here! There's nothing "fair" about it. It must seem like some sort of evil black magic to the critters, to have humans be able to kill them from hundreds of yards away and all.

Anyway, lodgepole, i'm not picking on you, just pointing out that it is VERY possible to take a perfectly ethical shot without closing the distance to as close as possible.

-jeff

Fair enough Jeff.

Its just that for me a big part of the experience is getting as close as I can before the critter gets the bad news. My grandpa drilled it in to me that it was wrong to shoot from far when you could get close and that lesson stuck with me.

I'd much rather have the satisfaction of knowing I was good enough to get close than the satisfaction of making a long shot with a scoped rifle.

To each his own I guess.

So Pat, tell us about your kind of hunting what parts of the world do you hunt and whay types of critters?

Thx
Dober

FWIW moose, black bear, deer (3 species) in BC (hunted close to all 4 corners of it). That enough to have an opinion?

Thx Pat, what parts of the US or Canada?

Guided or unguided?

Baited for bears, and how do you hunt the deer, from stands or stalking?

Thx
Dober

Why the tenth degree?

MtnHtr

I think I know where he is going with it. I was thinking the same thing.

Dober, deer hunting has been stand(no treestands)/stalk/stillhunting, moose hunting either calling, stillhunting or stalking (more of a stalk on a nice piece of swamp that a classic stalk), bearhunting a combo of spot and stalk and stillhunting ( no baiting in BC). No experience outside the province, though in the province we have most everything from rainforest to alpine to boreal forest to semi-desert. ( no prairies, that's on the other side of the Rockies)
I have a total of about 60 big game animals, from as close as 10 yards to about 400 yards. Average distance last time I calculated was about 140 yards. Decent shot (nothing particularly special), I've competed in a couple service rifle matches and held my own (actually won one). I've done most of my hunting with standard calibers (270, 30-06, 280) and a couple mags (7 Rem mag and a 300 Win Mag that was a lucky moose gun).
Thanks for asking. Not looking to stir the pot, more like putting a viewpoint forward for discussion. (no right or wrong on this topic, just individual preferences)

Also Stacy, he stated that there was a big difference between hunting and shooting, I am just trying to sort out where the fella is coming from.

So seriously Stacy what's it to you, why on earth do you care so much about what I am curious about...?

What's it to you........?

Good to see you're still up to your old cow dog tricks of following me around and trying to start it with me. Well amigo, you've been wanting a war with me for some time, I've been trying to be nice but no mas, you wanted it so you have now got it.

The gloves have hit the ice so to speak.

Mark

Hey thx for the nice response pat, I appreciate it. I am always intrigued by what makes people tick and I thank you for your nice response.

Dober

Of course the other option here Stacey is to do as I mentioned b4 and pm me your phone number and I'll call you and we can sort this out over the phone.

If I could find the number that I had around here from when you called asking about elk hunting I'd call, but I can't find it so the ball is in your court.

I'd say you should pm me your number and we'll sort this out away from the public. Either way the choice is yours for the making.

Mark

Mark,

Let's keep the facts straight here, I was calling for my friend Martin who wanted to hunt one of the ranches up in your area. He was willing to spend some $$ on hunting a big bull so I thought of you as I've never hunted a private ranch for elk - my only experience hunting elk is on public DIY hunts. And you called him after I gave you his phone #.

You and I go back a long ways on this forum but the in the last year or so you have displayed quite a bit of condescending behavior towards others on here.

Other folks on here have noticed it too going by the PMs I've received.

MtnHtr

I can't know all the history (and don't really care), just what's popped up here and there lately. A year ago I didn't know Mark from Adam (or Eve for that matter). Last fall a hunting pard had a problem last minute with a stock and as we left for MT, his rifle wasn't sighted in, I had one for him to borrow but like most of us he'd as soon use his own. I PM'd Mark regarding somewhere near Boze to stop and sight in a rifle. He took time out of a Sat during Elk/Deer season to meet us at a private range, let my buddy in as a guest, helped get the rifle sorted and we parted ways. He offered us a room in his home on our return trip should we have needed it.

This spring a different pard and I got a wild hair to go spring bear hunting. I know a little bit of country around Dillon but I've never seen a bear there and know even less of their habits. So I PM Mark again and ask him what he thinks I should set as a date to hunt bears. He replies and also tries his darnest to get together with us a couple times before the hunt but scheduling just didn't work out. So, the day we're to start bear hunting he meets us for breakfast, fairly early on a day when he's got a ton of projects and gives us pointers for better than an hour.

The man has gone way out of his way for 3 all but total strangers who shared nothing with him save a love for hunting and an affliction of rifle loonyism. I can't honestly say that I'd have always been as helpful as he has to complete strangers. Condescending.....I've surely not seen it.

I've only spoken with Mark a few times on the phone, but he has been quite helpful with this big game(elk) hunting noob!

He has not seemed even slightly condescending with me.

I don't know you from Adam but the gentleman you refer to is about as good as it gets on this forum for as long as I've been here.

The deal with these forums is that it can be tough to get a read on people(how they come across) and easy to take things the wrong way.

I'll bet 99% of the internet spats wouldn't happen in the first place if folks were talkin' face to face.

I'm quite certain its safe to say:
If you dont close the distance to as close as possible before shooting, thereby making as sure a shot as possible, you need to rethink your hunter ethics.

[/qu I think Clint Eastwood coined this phrase: A man gots to know his limitations. 300 yds might be a long shot for you but it might be a chip shot for some one else. you can't put a yardage on hunter ethics.

Gents,

I could post the links and paste the quotes refering to Dober's past remarks but what good would that do??? Dober darn well knows what I'm talking about. And other posters have seen it that way too.

And I'm not pissed either, just disappointed in ole Dober. I did not think he was like that.

MtnHtr

True.



But there IS a difference between a shooter and a hunter....



Casey

Sometimes(as we all know)conditions of terrain make getting closer impossible; or you may have too many other herd animals to deal with, or maybe you've already been "made" by your intended quarry. There are a million variations on this theme, but the end result is the same: you may have to take your "best shot"from where you are...

This is where you come to grips with your own limitations and that of your gear.Not to mention prevailing conditions of wind, weather terrain,position of animal(in the open, edge of cover, etc.)Modern scopes,accurate rifles,and better bullets all help but in the end, it is still within the discretion, knowledge, and experience of the nut behind the trigger...the more experienced he is, the greater the liklihood he will turn down a shot if everything is not "just so"...just because you CAN take a long shot, does not mean you should.There is no disgrace in walking away and waiting for another day.

Question � why did you shoot at 330 instead of closing to 300? Are you not much of a hunter?

The fact is that it is not always possible to close to �X� yards and sometimes you either have to take the shot as presented or take a pass. Sometimes the reality is that animal movement, the presence or movement of other hunters, the weather, terrain, property boundaries, game management unit boundaries, season dates, season dates, legal shooting hours, time sensitive commitments or other factors prevent the hunter from closing.

To define a hunter�s skills by the range at which he shoots a particular animal makes no sense whatsoever. Some of the easiest hunts I have had involved the closest range shots while some of the elk I worked hardest for involved the longest shots. In my opinion a �hunter� is one that knows where to find game, how to find it and is willing to limit their shots a maximum range dictated by their ability with the firearm in hand. For some people 100 yards is too far, for others 300 yards is a chip shot. I have more respect for the hunter that prepares for the long shot and works hard to close but nevertheless ends up with and takes a 600 yard (or pick your range) shot than I do a hunter that can get close but can�t shoot worth a darn and is generally unprepared to skillfully use the firearm in hand.

Someone's signature line used to read: "Get as close as you can, but be prepared to use your skills as required". That sorta sums it up for me. Wind, especially swirling wind is a much bigger limiting factor for me than pure distance.

My goal with my hunting rifles is to be able to shoot them to the limit of their utility. Seems silly to be carrying a rifle capable of 500+ yards, and only know how to shoot it to 200+ yards (as was the case for me a couple years ago).

That said my longest shot on game is about 125 yards <g>...

SO MUCH of the "how long is too long" debate could be individually settled with some trigger time, shooting at longer ranges. The shooter and their gear set the outer limit of what's possible, then the conditions of the moment (wind, light, inability to get "sandbag solid", etc) chip away at that.

A huge side bonus of longer-range practicing is that suddenly, 300 yards isn't so far anymore! Plus, it's big-time fun.

Just my ramblings as the coffee kicks in. Be nice to me if you don't like this post... it's my birthday and I'm immersed in Advanced Contract Law right now (Bob- that's "advanced" for Realtors, which I'm sure is NOT really advanced! :-) ) which is like being immersed in... poo.

-jeff

I also think long distance shots are dictated more by terrian than any thing. If your hunting in the timber you probably not going to be shooting more than a 100 yards but if your hunting sage flats or along canyons you might have to shoot a long ways.

I am hunter first and a shooter second but that doesn't mean that I don't respect some one who is capable of making a long shot I just have different skill set and will have to close the distance because I am not as skilled as some who practices a lot of long distance. I can respect them for having those skills. All it means to me is I might have to pass on the shot but they can make it.

Sure I can. If you have a 300 yard shot from where you sit but could easliy slip down a finger of timber and have a 150 yard shot you owe it to the animal to get off your butt and get close.

Anyone who thinks he can place a shot as precisely at 300 yards as he can at half that is bragging to himself. I know its fun to blast hot air on these forums about the long shots you are capable of and those you have made. I have made my share too, but only when it was my only choice and when I was sure of a solid hit.

A real hunter will not shoot from long range when he could stalk closer just because he thinks its cool to kill from long range.

Dont take any of this to mean I dont advocate mucho practice at long range to develop the skill just in case its the only shot you get.

But... 300 yards is not long range, not hardly! Plus, so you slip down that finger of timber and blow a couple does out that you didn't know where there... who run off the elk... and you just missed out on your once-every-five-years bull tag because you passed on a 300-yard shot?

Now, to be clear, for THIS lug nut, no way in heaven I'm shooting offhand at 300 yards... that's a shot that requires some setup. But at 300 yards, with a half-decent rest... even the wind is hardly a factor at 300!

Now change that number to say 450 or 500 yards, and we have a more viable debate here...

-jeff

Agreed.

The 300 figure I just pulled out of the air. For some its more and others less.

Also, I dont feel the need to take iffy shots because I can hunt every day of the season if I want to, and if I have to let one go today theres always tomorrow.

Lucky dog <g>.

I'm that way with blacktails- usually- but elk and this year, mule deer, are big-time expeditions... elk is a 5-day season, which is usually a 4-day season for us because of the reality of when people need to get back vs. the reality of what would happen if someone was actually dumb enough to SHOOT one of the things on that last day. We hunt wilderness, so when an elk is down, it's usually a couple days to get it all out of there.

Anyway... enjoying the debate, and I'm certainly not advocating that everyone go out and fling lead.

-jeff

I very much understand how it is when you have limited hunting time. I used to travel from GA to WY every year to do most of my big game hunting, and with constraints on how much time I could be away from work I had to make every day count.

Retirement changed all that.

I will take 50-75 yard shot any day if I can get it. I went on this little rant because of the cheap shots guys are taking at the guys who can take them at long range. I seen people pass up 450 yard shots because they thought they were to far and I respect them for that, But don't get a long face if you don't see another elk for the rest of the hunt. All I know is were I hunt closing the gap sometimes isn't a option, so I train, practice, and use the right equipment so if I have to take him at 500 I can do it

More power to you.

My shot was directed at the guy who could easily stalk much closer but chooses to run his fingers through his chest hair and take the long shot with his super whizbang magnum. This kind of guy does not have my respect. The guy that sneaks as close as its possible to get then settles into a good rest and puts one right in the boiler room is my idea of a hunter. I think we are singing the same tune, just a little differently.

I got to meet Dober at the NRA Convention here in Louisville a couple of weeks ago. We didn't get to visit much, but from what I saw there, he's a heckuva nice guy. Period.

Jeff: The three essential elements of a contract are......

Happy Birthday!!!!

Thank you sir.

The guy who wrote the section on contracts was fun to read, as fun as that stuff can be. He made fun of lawyers. That's ALWAYS in good taste <g>! Also made fun of Realtors- also always a good idea.

He had some interesting insights into the fundamental differences between lawyer-think (fundamentally adversarial, winner and a loser, scorched earth, etc) and brokerage-think (let's get along, win-win, etc). Tied it into how that plays out at the legislative level. Smart guy.

-jeff

Back to the topic of the thread............the cartridge has been around since 1927,and it has been toppling elk since it came out; by now the number of elk taken with it must surely be into 7 figures.With that volume of empirical data, I have to wonder why we still have these conversations(except for internet entertainment value).... (?!)

If anything, given such wonderful things as TSX,Swift Aframes and Nosler Partitions to shoot from the 270,the cartridge is even better than when guys like O'Connor and Jobson were rolling elk out to 600 yards with standard cup/cores, and old-style Barnes bullets.Reports of the 270's inadequacies as an elk rifle should, like campaign promises,be ignored.

One of the first articles I ever read about the .270 Winchester, was about 30 years ago.
Best I remember the author said if a 270 wouldn't git 'er dun, he'd need a .458. True then, even more true now.

The 270 will definitely work, in december of 2009 I took a cow elk with the 270 150gr Nosler Partions. It was a one shot kill and the elk dropped about 35 yards from where I shot it.

One of my buds guides and his clients bring in all kind of cannons to hunt elk. He ussualy take his clients and sets a 1 gallon water jug at 200 yards. He has them use his truck hood as a rest and sees if they can hit the jugs. In some cases they cant, and then he has them try out and use either his old 270 or 308. When it comes to elk, it shot placement that is the most important thing.

There is no way a .270 Win with 150g bullets is adequate for elk. Never was, never will be.

Your 7mm Rem Mag with 160's however, is just the ticket. Mine has been slaying elk since 1982 with boring reliability, even though the bullets were fired at .270 Win/150g velocities.

The difference of 0.007" in diameter and 6.7% in weight makes all the difference in the world in terms of effectiveness. While the .270 Win/150g combination is woefully inadequate, the 7mm Rem Mag/160g is more than adequate. Man up and use a real elk cartidge! [laughing]

my 270 with 140 grain hornady interlocks brought home the 6 point bacon two seasons ago

What he said.

Dave

Three words: 150 grain Partition.......









Of the 40+ elk I have killed, somewhere around 25 of them have been killed with a 270...........


Casey

Well, not really... one number and TWO words is more like it... but most 270 users are a bit slow that way

Aside, I seriously question the sanity of someone that doesn't think the 270/150 combo isn't serious elk medicine.

A Partition only makes it more so...

I have never heard of anyone trying to kill an elk with a 270

"There is no try. Only do."

-Yoda

THis is true. Had the high-tech projectiles come along prior to the belted magnums maybe the mags would have had a lesser following.

Been taking elk with a Tikka T3 LS 270WSM with 140gr Accubonds since 2004 at various distances - one shot kills. My elk this past season pretty much flipped over backwards after being hit and never got up again - double lung. Great caliber. I'm very impressed with it and the performance of the Accubonds - so I would say 150gr Partitions would do the job. Shot placement.

I'm torn between 160 Accubonds and 150 Partitions in my 284 win next fall for my first ever elk hunt. Both are shooting under an inch.

I'm not familiar with .284, but if the MV is 3000 fps or less, I'd go Accubond. I guess every weight/caliber has the potential to be a little different- jacket thickness and so on- but I've seen several versions of the AB perform beautifully on deer and elk...

The 270 Winchester is a fine elk rifle in hilly country and mountains. I shot my first bull in Southwest Washington with a Ruger 77 in .270 caliber. It was a 500-pound bull and he ended up on my dinner table. The key to hunting and self-defense is this: Do your job of placing your shots and the bullet will do the rest.

Were I hunting in a flatter area where greater range is needed, I would probably use a .300 WSM or .270 WSM.

gentlemen... just wanted to drop a note (and I will have to find the info again to back myself up here), but I seem to recall a professional african hunter that swore by the 7x57Mauser As I recall, this individual put down something on the order of 160 elephants in his time, with that cartridge.Not much difference between that and a .270. My single argument, gentlemen, is the case is not the cartridge... it is the placement. My favorite rifle is a savage model 99, which I have been told is no good for even deer, and kills without fail. A killing shot is not one that is made using the latest Uber-magnum, that flattens the animal into the ground. Many hunters forget that in most cases,a Magnum impairs shots, based solely on they are flinch developers, and a man can only shoot as good as his rifle does. If you are waiting for the bone to crunch in your shoulder every time you pull the trigger, it does not matter how accurate the rifle is, YOU won't be accurate with it.
P.S.- for all the 7mm magnum followers,... I have one too... and the ballistic gain over a .270 is practically none- 200-300 FPS? Do you guys really think an animal can tell the difference if you put the bullet in the right place?

My favorite 270 cal Federal 140 grain Trophy Bonded Bearclaw

If you can not kill elk with a 270 win you still will not be able to with any other cal. Why, because it's all shot placement. There are almost 21,000 members on the camp fire, I'll bet less than 10% 2,100 of them have ever shot at a target at 300 yrds let alone have any right to shoot at a game animal at 300 yrds or more.
I have no problems with long range shooters that put the time, money and pratice in to it.
I have a real problem when I read post were people say you need at least a XYZ cal because you may only see 1 animal at long range and you must be able to shoot 500 yrds.
What you must know what is your limitations.

Gut shoot a animal at 20 yrds is just as bad as at 500 yrds or more.
Next time you go to the range.
run 100 yrds
sit down at the bench at shoot 4 rounds in 1 minute while your still winded.
That will give you a quick lesen in just how good of a shooter you really are.

By the way I've kill no less than 9 elk with a 270 win most with 130 factory rounds. They die the same as the ones I've shot with the 375H&H and the 358 norma mag.

2 words
SHOT PLACEMENT

Mine too, those things are awesome! I've seen 4 or 5 bulls killed with that ammo and it's 100% lethal. Good stuff, good stuff.

I hear people recommend such things but looking back on my 27 years of hunting Colorado big game, such antics bear no similarity to the hunting I have done. There is not a single instance that comes to mind where running even a short distance would have yielded a shot I couldn�t get with a more sedate approach.

The other side of the coin is that when shots are long you often have much more time to set up. These days my favorite targets are 400 yard clay pigeons and the steel gongs at 500 and 600 yards. 500 yards just isn�t very long any more, although I have still not taken game (or attempted it) past 350 yards.



+1

I would agree that if the game is predators, running isn't ever going to get you a second shot that you could make.

I have killed several deer, where I spooked or saw deer topping one ridge, and I ran to get a shot at them.

Have ran to cut off elk when I knew where they where going.

If you aren't willing to run when applicable you will limit the shots you will get.

As a side note. You will definately need a tree or be able to get prone, because the chance of you holding the gun still is slim.

This isn't how I sight guns in or anything like that though. When I have guided, it is real hard to get clients to understand that when it is time to go it is time to go. The clients that where in good enough shape, and said ok usually got that second chance I am talking about.

While I've never given such advice, the guys that do recommend running are not trying to simulate you running after game but to simulate your heart pounding and the excitement when faced with a potential shot.

But to answer your question...the 270 w/ 150s is enough for elk provided shot placement is good.

RH

ooooh, you smartass.......that's good......

I just finally got around to reading this thread again.


Casey

Well, actually it IS possible.......take my word on this.......




Casey

I think it depends on the type of hunting you do. When I guide caribou hunters, for example, we're constantly running around because we're hunting an animal that is always feeding, and they travel while they feed. So you play spot and stalk, but it's more like spot and try-and-cut-off. Even walking over the tundra, they can move faster than a man jogging. If they're headed away from you, you don't even bother.

I've also hunted deer and elk that were traveling and unaware of my presence when I've had to run to get into position before the animal arrived where they were going.

Being in good physical shape is never a bad idea.

My Colorado elk this year, I could have taken a catnap practically while waiting for the shot I wanted.

However, I DID run after my Oregon bull. I ran about 40 yards or so after him, and jumped up on a log, and had time to get my feet set before he started going up the relativaly open ridge I'd hoped he would go up...

So it happens.

I killed my first bull at 20 yrds while trying to make up 500 yrds on another bull. It was a late Sep hunt back in the 80ds. we were moving fast through some timber on a game trail and as near as I can tell this bull mistook us for another bull come in to his cows. there was no time for a rest. I was luck to get stopped myself. It was all just a flash.
I've never ran into a situation like that since, But many times since then I've had to close the gap on game to get the job done.
Now add adrenalin, elevation, and the fact I'm not a young kid anymore and them hill get steeper every year.
All that 100 yrd dash does is give you a way to learn to control your breathing and make the shot.

As a side note many years before Jack Oconor had kill a Wyoming Big Horn Sheep On the other side of the drainage were I killed my 1st bull. any one happen to know the name of the Drainage.

gotlost - I'm going to guess Mammoth Hollow, just east of Commissary Ridge.