This is meant to be a somewhat lighthearted rebuttal to what seems to be almost a backlash against larger rifles, even for what would be condsidered "large" game animals such as elk. I've read a number of threads (not just on the 'Fire) where you'd swear there was almost a competition to see who can tout the smallest caliber as being all that is needed to cleanly take elk at, say, out to a light year, give or take. Something along the lines of:

"Dang guys, I've been loading up neutrons over .0000001 grains of H4350 for years and filling my tag. Anybody that needs more than that obviously can't hunt well enough to get close and/or is trying to overcompensate for poor marksmanship."

Ok, maybe not quite that but I bet you know what I mean.

Look, I understand the concept of "adequate" and there's not really a functional use for the word "deader" but I think more...now stay with me here I beg...can, under certain circumstances CAN be better. Let me indulge myself enough to throw this out there:

Who here would hunt, say, a Cape Buff with a .243? Why not? Wait wait sit down please! Seriously, why not? Because you don't necessarily think the cartridge is up to the task? Ok, fine, me neither. How about an '06? I will say right now I have absolutely no doubt that the '06 has killed Cape Buffalo. No, I can't cite examples but I doubt anybody else thinks it hasn't been done. Does that make an '06 "adequate" for Cape Buffalo? The late Larry Kelly killed pretty much anything that breathes oxygen...with a .44 magnum handgun. That includes the African Big Five. So a .44 will kill an elephant? Yep. Would I attempt it? Umm, no. (say guys, I must have left something back in the 'Rover, I'll be right back...not) So, if something smaller CAN kill something why would anybody ever use something larger? I think there's two reasons.

First, "larger" isn't necessarily accurate to begin with. A .300 Wby is no larger a caliber than a 30/30 but it does shoot things of that caliber lots faster. This can be a huge aid in hitting something. I loooove flat trajectory. My first rifle was a 30/30, my second was a 7mm Rem Mag. It was just silly. Ranging essentially ceased to be an issue. Point, bang, flop, clean. But for this discussion lets say the point two of bigger isn't "just" trajectory but delivering more in and of itself. I respectfully submit that the reason people tend to use, we'll say "plenty" of gun on grizzlies/cape buff and such is because somehow "adequate to kill" doesn't seem to make you feel warm and fuzzy. In fact your mind goes to the possibility of being gored/stomped on/clawed/chewed on BY something warm and fuzzy. So, again, exactly why are you carrying that .338/.340/.375/.416/.45-70? Do you expect things of it the other (lesser?) cartridges do not? If not, you're carrying them why? So...

Does whatever real or perceived advantages of those bigger cartridges simply not apply to game like elk? Perhaps it's just the fact that when things don't go exactly as planned you aren't breaking into a cold sweat and beginning to really worry about more than a long tracking job or getting a carcass out of some nasty stuff? Again, respectfully, I submit that what you're feeling when you consider what is "adequate" for elk being a whole lot less than what you would consider for a brown bear is "margin for error", or MFE. Being on the bad side of MFE with an elk is another world entirely than for a big bruin. So I put it to you, is an elk less deserving of the MFE?

OK, and now for my concessions;
I love my .340 but yeah, it kicks. It's also on the heavier side. Then again, I've got no interest in shooting a 6.5lb .340. As I grow older though it isn't the recoil as much as lugging the thing around.

It's still sinking into my head how good modern bullets have become. Less really can do more than what you once might have needed. (ok, I said it)

My last rifle purchase was a little Tikka T3 Light Stainless in...308. God help me it's wonderful.

Ok dammit! Concessions over! C'mon you Weatherby people! You .338 "anything on the continent with this one rifle" people! You guys in the woods with your 45-70's and 450's! Let me hear you!!!

uh....i pretty much agree....sorry....

guyandarifle:

I agree with a lot of what you have written but I also must reconcile that with my own limitations. I have been shooting rifles for almost fifty years and I've learned what I can safely and reliably control and what's out of my range of comfort and confidence.

On a few occasions, I have had the opportunity to shoot rifles with bigger bullets (.375 H&H, 350 grains, and .416 Rigby, 425 grains) and they are just too big for me. They nearly broke my shoulder. Maybe it's all in my head but there's just too much recoil for me to control. I saw a guy at the range shooting a .340 Rem Ultra Magnum and it looked like torture. He could only shoot seven rounds before he had to quit.

I own a Winchester 70, .338 Win Mag and I use Federal Premium HE 250 gr Nosler Partitions in it. Its' recoil is just about at the limit of what I can comfortably and safely control. In fact a box of twenty rounds, shot out of that rifle at the range, pretty much finishes me for the day. I suppose that if I ever get the opportunity to hunt any of the big five in Africa, I will use that rifle.

I much prefer my Remington 700, 30-06 with Federal Premium HE 180 gr Nosler Partitions for elk. I wouldn't have any problem using it on brown bears or moose.

I am 5'-11" tall and I weigh 210#, so I'm not a giant but neither am I a midget. I am also 61 years old, and it seems that recently even 180 grain HE ammo is giving me more trouble than I like and my patterns seem to be growing. But when I switch to 150 gr ammo, they close back up again.

I wonder if some people champion smaller calibers simply because they are afraid of the recoil associated with larger calibers but can't admit it to themselves. I know that anything bigger than my .338 is too big for me.

I also wonder if some people champion larger calibers to subconsciously enhance their own macho image.

KC

For big critters, carry as much rifle as you can accuratly shoot.

That's my story, and I'm stickin' to it! :-)

Guyandarifle:

Just cause you called out: I, in my VERY limited experience, hunt with a Marlin 1895 Cowboy in .45-70 (325gr Hornady Leverevolution) with tang peep and factory iron sights. I chose it because I've always wanted an old-school long-range "cowboy gun," period. Now I know its not a true "long-range" cartridge by today's standards, but in the late 1800's it was! Came to find out later it was one of those "big enough for anything on the continent" rifles, and that gives me confidence, but I have to put that big slug in the vitals or its not big enough anyway, right?

Recoil is stout, but I'm young and dumb enough to not mind I guess. Its a joy to carry in the woods, and is beautiful to look at.

I must admit that I hesitate to post because my knowledge and experience is far behind this community, so I don't consider my opinion to hold much weight, I just lurk here for knowledge and ask the occassional question.

68W

KC
Even in my most rabid state of "Bigger Is Better" there's no getting around if you can't shoot it straight it really doesn't matter much. Shoot what you can hit with...that comes first. You and your '06, keep on truckin.

68W
Some day I have simply GOT to find me a big bore lever. Thanks for chiming in!

Agreed, but there is certainly a functional and appropriate use for the phase �dead faster�.

On account of 260 class rifles being great for moose in sweden, this has been beaten to death.

On wildboar the 6,5x55 with heavies regularly fail to produce exit wounds on even small animals. I ask my danish and swedish clients to bring .308 cal. bullets and use premium, only.

Guyandarifle, get one and you'll never regret it. Something just feels right about them levers, don't know how to say it otherwise.

68W:

It's interesting that you should mention models 1895 and 45-70 caliber. I'm old enough that when I was very young and he was very old, my grandfather told me something of the history of firearms in the late 19th century and early twentieth. He started hunting for meat in his adolescence and used a Winchester model 1876, 45-70 that he got from his father. All those cartridges used black powder.

In his late teens, he bought a Winchester model 1894, 30-30 for the outrageously high price of $17. That was the first caliber that used modern smokeless powder based on TNT. He told me that when he first started using it, he was amazed by the very flat trajectory and long range. He thought that it defied gravity.

He got another education when he was issued a Springfield 30-06 to fight in WWI.

KC

I have 3 big game rifles, 375 H&H, 270 WSM and a 45-70 that's in a Marlin GG.
The 375 H&H weighs somewhere around 10 lbs, so unless we'er hunting with horse it gets left at home.
The 270 WSM is in a Tikka T-3 lite, odds are thats the gun I will carry when hunting Big Game.
If I'm hunting timber the 45-70 is my go to gun.

I shoot all 3 every well and I don't have a problem with recoil.

I've killed more Elk, Deer and Antelope with a 270 win then all these rifle combine.

You'll never hear me said anything bad about big rifles just that you do not have to run out and buy a big rifle just for elk or any big game in the west.

KC:

Very neat story about your grandpa. I love my .45-70, its a real challenge to learn its trajactory, which is enormous compared to the M16 I'm use to in the Army. I don't handload yet so for now I've decided to just use the leverevolutions, they are the flattest among the factory loads. I'm very confident I will get the confidence with it out to 300yds this year before the elk hunt in October. I am very new at hunting, last year being my first year, did a mild backpacking DIY over-the-counter antlered elk hunt. I'm going to do the same hunt this year minus the backpacking (realized it wasn't necessary). The other interesting part of that story is that my only other rifle is a Winchester 94 in 30-30 (it was my first gun, bought it for my own HS graduation present 7 yrs ago, cause I love John Wayne movies and thought it was an inexpensive look alike) someday it will bloody some North American big game. As for the 45-70, it didn't get bloodied on that hunt last year but did on a late depradation cow tag and she thought it was plent of gun to die from, she tastes great too! I like your grandfather have started out to be a meathunter, that cow has been a great blessing for my young family's grocery bill. Oh, and KC, thanks for some of your other posts on elk hunting tips, I have saved them in my computer for future reference, I need all the advice I can get! I might PM you some day for more, if you don't mind. Take care.

68W

I've played on both sides of this argument. Last year I hunted elk with the smallest diameter bullet I've ever hunted with for them (.264), but my intent was to have my .358 Norma done before elk season. Since my .264 Win Mag did the job quite well, and so have my .280 and .270 WSM, why would I need/want to step up something as large as a .358 Norma hocking 250 gr loogies at 2840 fps? Because I want to. But how do I "justify" it my own mind? I guess it's because I've had enough elk, pigs, deer and other things down to like what I see when I hit them with something powerful. So, while I've killed hogs and coyotes with a .22 mag, and deer with .22 centerfires, I knew it was only barely adequate (they're dead ain't they?), I like the comfort of using enough gun. I insist on exit wounds and like short blood trails. The game may not be "deader", but they might be "deader sooner". Meat damage never bothered me, and I like to take shoulder shots. A big fast bullet, in my mind, makes em deader sooner. Elk bones are pretty stout and while they can go a long ways on three legs, I feel they aren't going far on just two.
However, my .264 Win Mag blew through the shoulders on the bull I shot with her last year. So why do I need more? Because I want more. Why do I want more? To make em deader sooner I guess.

I know I didn't defend my position very well, but I don't have a basis for comparison. All the elk I have killed have been with been with sub .30 calibers. I've witnessed elk killed with the various .30s, but none of "elk" calibers like 8mm Rem, 325 WSM, .338 Win, .340 Wby, etc. I guess physics is what it is, and I won't deny that a more powerful round dispenses more energy onto its target. I'll have plenty of opportunity this year to make a better comparison with the .358 Norma though.

As much as I like my .300 Savage on elk, my .340 Wby flat puts them down in a big ol' hurry. I just don't like the damn recoil.


That, and I do like the macho feeling of carrying that 340 or my 375 H&H.

I think much of the backlash against the big rifles is really at the owners of such rifles. I think the folks that live in elk country and have hunted them every fall since they were old enough to walk resent reading in the Hook & Bullet rags that their .270, .30/06 7X75,et al are either less than ideal or totally inadequate for killing elk. When they have a lifetime of experience to the contrary. Then we all hear guides with stories of the dude that shows up with is shinny new Ultra Magnum topped with the latest euro uber scope that he couldn't hit a barn with if he were inside. Seems the guide has another story of another dude the same season that filled his tag at the first opportunity with tough shot using a standard caliber. Stories that follow this pattern tend to lead to the conclusion that anybody that uses a magnum anything on elk is trying to compensate for either a lack of hunting skill or shooting ability. If truth were known with regard to the stories I'd bet that the fella that couldn't shoot the big rifle couldn't shoot the smaller one either and the fella that could shoot his gun could still hit with the magnum. IMO bigger rifles provide an edge, do you need/want that edge, how big is that edge, what is that edge worth in terms of recoil ammo cost etc, that is for the individual hunter to decide for himself.

Well gents, I've been hunting near onto 64 years, and all great ones by the way. I have to agree with most but would like a few words with others. Lately (since 1998) I find myself reaching for my .340 Weatherby under most times coming out of the gun room. Don't know why, but I feel real good when I'm in the woods with that rifle. She's more or less my favorite. Whenever I call on her for a piece of game, she delivers and has never failed to produce.I am not casting any aspersions on anyone or any caliber, god knows I have most of the calibers and rifles to go with. Only passing my opinion on what hits my fancy.

That's it exactly. It's the perfect rifle for you. WHY? Because that's what you decided. Doesn't matter if you are hunting elk or pronghorn. You like the way it feels and makes you feel. The numbers folks throw around regarding ballistics can't begin to capture what you are talking about.

dont know about the "big rifle" theory but i do like heavy for caliber bullets.30 cal. i like at least 180s and prefer 200s anf fot the 338s at least 225 grainers

I personally like the big rifle caliber theory on big game species! If the recoil is to much in a particular rifle and caliber, I simply address the problem and rectify the problem one way or another.

I also have several rifles small and large in caliber. I think big game should be taken with big bullets and those that want to put you on the dinner menu should by all means get the attention of the biggest caliber rifle one can possibly shoot accurately.

Today there are several ways to handle or get around the recoil of big caliber rifles! All one has to do is simply choose a known way to exclude one from having to face the torso pounding of heavy caliber recoil. We have muzzle brakes, recoil reducers, recoil pads and extra weight to cut down recoil. Now most of these methods will cut recoil by 50 percent and that is a bunch.

Tonk, wouldnt put a brake on a new hunting rifle ive got one on my 338 win mag. it is a non removeable brake after the season its going to the gunsmith to be removed permanently.i dont hunt with ear plugs on.

68W:

Happy to reply to a PM.

KC

20 years of hunting elk with a 7mm RM convinced me I a) didn't need anything bigger and b) didn't need a 7mm RM as a .308 Win would have easily sufficed for every shot I've taken.

That said, I now have a .300 WM in the stable and it has proven as effective as the 7mm RM. For the really big and dangerous stuff, like backyard rhino, I have a .45-70 that will easily dispatch anything that walks - on this continent or anywhere else. Got a hankering for a fast .338, too.

What do the big boomers do that I can't do with a .308 Win? Nothing so far, but I ain't done hunting...

Big is OK, and I truly love my 9.3X62, but I'm always irritated when someone claims it necessary to use something bigger than a 30-06 for nondangerous game.

I know rifles and tactics have changed a lot since I first started hunting elk more than a half century ago. Then, almost all the elk we shot were in the thick, dark timber, and if you saw elk it was almost always going dead away at close range. The shot we planned for was a Texas heart shot, and heavy bullets were needed to break the pelvis and penetrate. The '06 with factory 220s or reloads with 200 grain Partitions ruled the roost, with the 348, 45-70, and the like working well too.

Now, and elk shot in the boiler with a 100 grain 243 is not going very far, but that shot was just not on the menu when the heavy bullet for elk concept was spawned.

Wayne

MM
I think you do make a good point. During the big "magnum" craze there were doubtless a bunch of people that were not good shots who thought that just touching off their cannon dropped game. The rest of us have more of a clue than that, even those of us that prefer the bigger calibers. Some people just get elitist about anything they do. Some people think anything less than a .300 Wby only shows your lack of manhood. Others actually think it "proves" their manhood to brag about taking an elk with a .243. I also trout fish and I've met fly fisherman that look askance at "gear" fisherman. I use the fly too...when it's catching fish. If conditions point me towards a spinning rod that's what I'll use.

cdhunt
.340 is a darn nice caliber isn't it? If you can find a lighter bullet load yours likes (mine digs the 210 TSX) it thumps hard AND shoots flat. That 210gr load is essentially a trajectory twin of my 7mm Rem Mag's favorite 150gr TSX load. Would that same 7RM load do the task the vast majority of the time? I have no doubt...but why settle for vast majority?

TNT is trinitrotoluene. Smokeless powder is mostly nitrocellulose sometimes combined with nitroglycerine and other stuff in small percentages.

It's nice to use a caliber and cartridge which allows the selection of many adequate bullets for a task. That's one of the beauties of the "more adequate" rifles. I have used rifles on a number of occasions where bullet selection was quite important and placement of the shot was more critical. What does that prove? Very little other than to myself. It certainly should not be a springboard for bragging rights IMO. Then again, I suspect many of the folks who hang out in places such as this aren't all that interested in hearing - yet one more time- how a 180 Partition from a 30-06 works on elk or other species.

I love my 8x57JS. It kills them dead. I love my 30-06. It kills them dead. I REALLY love my old Sharps 45-110. I kills them dead real fast and better yet, I can eat right up to the hole. My 45-70 seems to share that trait.

I guess most get smarter with age, including myself. Years of competition shooting in the .06 class ,I and my shoulder decided it did not needed to take such abuse.I was shooting 100rds every other week in competition and probably 200 rounds per week inpractice. Biggest cartridge I have killed an elk with was 7 mag, and a 45-70. If you don't think a 45-70 qualifies as a big cartridge,touch off a 500 gr slug stuffed to the max, with a brass butt plate on the tail end.
Now I practice with a 22 or .357 carbine or a 6.5 Swede. I shoot the.06 to check the sights and go kill elk.

I personnaly do not get a thrill of killing elk at long range so I do not need those big boomers that shoot flatter. Others do,but it's not my cup of tea

I am one of those who have hunted for alot of years and know the.06 class of cartridge is entirely adequate for elk. I don't see much sense in burning in excess of 80 grains of powder when 45-55 will do the job

Not that I disagree, but for devil's advocate's sake... Animals haven't developed much thicker skin than they had 100 years ago, but today's rifles are capable of slinging lead much faster and in heavier weights at higher speeds. That's fine for those willing to put up with the "meat at both ends" fix and for larger game it's definitely an advantage, but for deer and other true medium class game taken at the average distances the magnums are more than my ears and shoulders are willing to tolerate and in the hands of capable riflemen the 7x57, 270 ect have cleanly taken much larger game (not that I claim to be any where near the group who would successfully chase elephant with a 7x57).

I have never hunted outside my home state of Alabama, So whitetail deer and Turkey are pretty much it here in this state.
I have a brother who has lived in Idaho since he got back from Vietnam in 1973. We have all ways talked about going elk hunting together up there but never got around to it.I often wondered what I would take if I ever go on a one time humt with him, He uses a Weatherby Mark V stainless 300 WBY MAG,But I let him have my Stainless BLR 270 WSM for a saddle gun when he and his buds go riding in the back country. He has fell in love with the light handy little gun and said he might put a small scope on it and carry it instead of his BIG OLE WBY.
I have a WBY Mark V STAINLESS in 270 Roy that ain`t to bad on weight but I also just got a Kimber Montana 338 Federal from my wife last X-mas ,with my old leupie 1.75x6x32 it carries and shoots like a dream to my 47 yr old worn out legs.
If I get to go with him in the next few years which would be the best choice 270 WBY or the Little Sky 338 Fed. ?

Teh advent of premium bullets have changed the game. What was once marginal cartridges for say, elk, are now just dandy. Much of the "big gun" ideas, was more about a lack of bullet performance.

I can't speak for Cape Buff, but a 30-06 with premium bullets will do everything ever needed for North American big game based on my experience and observations with premium bullets, and do it very well. Indeed, many "smaller" cartridges seem to do just as well.

As JB has aptly described, "just shoot them in the front half".

I ahve rarely see somebody shoot a 340Wthby better than they shoot a 243W........

Casey

Amra, take them both to Idaho <g>! They are quite different rifles and cartridges and I could see circumstances where either would excel.

saddlesore:

Like yourself, I do lots of shooting with smaller calibers. Mine is a Savage .22 mag that I use on prairie dogs at the cabin. The trigger pull sucks, so it makes me really consentrate on a slow steady squeeze and beyond 100 yards those rats get pretty small in the scope.

KC

mathman:

Thanks for the chemistry lesson.

KC

Jeff O , I like both my 270 WBY and my Little Sky 338 FED.
But I would really like to try a Elk with my Winchester 1895
405 WCF ! If I could get close enough to have a good shot at one.
AMRA

AMRA,
In the parts of Idaho that I usually hunt(Southern to Central) shots can vary from 25 yards to 500+ yards, sometimes on the same day!

Personally I like shooting my 375 better than my 30 06. I also like the sound signature of the 375; a nice deep baritone of a rifle. I'm gonna hunt exclusively with the 375 for a while to explore its limitations er, rather mine with that rifle. It is, afterall, the only caliber ever specifically created for all classes of game. For the record, I shot the #11 Moose in Maine last year with a 30 06 so clearly it is "enough" gun with proper shot placement for bigger critters. I'm just on to the 375, nothing more and nothing less.

Why carry more than is needed?

Saddlesore -

We often disagree but I'm with you on using smaller cartridges for practice. My .257 Roberts is my favorite rifle. I use it to shoot clay pigeons at 400 and steel at 500. Recoil is minimal.

Love my big guns, too, but they get shot much less. My "Rhino Blaster" .45-70 loads (460g HC @ 1812fps) generate over twice the recoil of my .30-06. They will take anything that walks but I don't shoot them much at all.

Because there's no downside to hitting a big critter with a big bullet, IF the shooter can shoot the gun launching the bigger bullet, of course.

I can launch a 140-gn .280 caliber bullet at 2825 fps from my 7-08, accuratly. Or, I can launch a 225-gn, .33 caliber bullet from my .338, accuratly, at the same speed with the same trajectory more or less...

When the game animal could weigh 600 or more pounds, is considered tenacious in some cases, and that tenaciousness could make extractibg the SOB hellacious if he goes just a couple hundred yards... Then, I find the bigger boomer a comfort. Nothing wrong with that.

You gotta be able to shoot the sucker though. Some can't, or won't put in the work. That's fine too.

Ringman,
I'm pretty sure this whole thread was supposed to answer that question. However, our arguments for the bigguns just don't make sense for everyone.
Compared with the .243, .250 Savage, .260 or .25-06 or similar calibers for elk, there isn't the bet-hedging going on. You don't have to say: "if perfectly broadside at 150 yards with a heavy for caliber superpremium bullet, just behind the shoulder, into the ribs only, I'd take the shot."
There are fewer shots you will feel you have to turn down with a Bertha. I think many guys would rather be limited by their own ability, rather than their equipment(but others enjoy being limited by their equipment and more power to em). As for "why carry more than is needed?", a large caliber doesn't have to weigh more than a little one. My .358 weighs considerably less than my .264, but no doubt a short action can be made to weigh less than a standard or long action.
Now we're also assuming we can shoot a big momma as well as a little sweetheart, which probably isn't often the case. However, this is still an elk thread and elk aren't all that tough to hit under 400 yards. Under 400, 2 MOA accuracy (and I suspect most big bore advocates can do better than that) is plenty sufficient, but maybe not confidence inspiring.
Oh yeah, and recoil tolerance is a personal thing.
So I'll turn the question around, "why wouldn't you carry as much as you're comfortable with?"

Very happy we've kept to my original intent of keeping this lighter than some of the pissing contests such threads sometimes become. Good balance of insight here. (I should be used to that here)

exio, I think your "bet-hedging" angle is relevant to many that prefer the higher octane calibers.

340, Thats what my brother told me about the longer ranges ya`ll shoot up there in Idaho,I will most likely go with my 270 Roy
as a Elk gun.I tote and shoot my 405 WCF MOST of all my guns deer hunting here in `Bama. My first 2 guns my late father bought me to hunt with were a old Sears Catalog Ted Williams model Winchester 94 carbine 30-30 and a H&R SINGLE barrel 10 gauge shotgun with a 32 ? inch extra full coke.
Most of you here on the fire have seen my Z-HAT Custom 1895 405 WCF. I can hit with it real good with the adj. express sights that Fred installed, And it FLATTENS deer from any angle.
Nothing like the thump when 300 grains hits the bone!

Probably the most imprtant thing I have learned in my old age,is that I should have taken better care of my body in my younger age.Not that it matters a hill of beans to me now.

Maybe this will take root in the brains of some of the younger guys though.

Probably occasional use of big boomers is not going to bother anyone much,but a constant diet will. Every trauma you inflict on your body comes back to haunt you after you pass about 50 or so, but with some it is older.

Smacking your shoulder consistently with 25-40+ ft lbs of recoil has some serious effects on the make up of your shoulder. Yes,I know when we are in our 20's,30's and even 40's ,we think we are ten foot tall and bullet proof, even if we are 6-5 and weigh 280 lbs.

There will come a time when even lowly .06's will feel like some one ran a hot poker through your shoulder every time you shoot it.

There are a lot of us out here that use to think stuffing 38 specail cases in our ears sufficed as hearing protection and now have that constant ringing in our ears and say "Huh?" a lot.

Thinking the big rifles will not have an effect on you is about the same thing.

I used to work in a gun shop in a slugs only zone in Southern Minnesota. I couldn't tell you how many 12 gauge slug guns I have fired, because the customer either couldn't or wouldn't sight them in for themselves. I used to love reading Elmer Keith,
and stories about the huge rifles used in Africa.
Now I realize that the 35 Whelen is enough for anything I am ever going to hunt.
whelennut

Good point. Try run that question past the pilot next time as you board a plane.

I don't think any of us can always know or control time, distance, and interceding factors from point A to point B.

Saddlesore taking care of your body is all a part of life and some just do it better than others. It is not in just using a rifle or gettting smacked with all that recoil, it's eating right, proper sleep and training or excercise and stretching that makes one heck of a difference when you turn passed that big 50.

I don't practice much with big bores nowdays....I just don't need to to that anymore, I use smaller calibers that are set up just like my big bores and shoot them from shooting positions, not just off a shooting bench. This type of thing keeps me good to go when hunting season turns the corner.

Tonk.I'll give you that for sure. I worked 30 years in underground nuclear testing in a hard rock mining enviornment.Breathing bad air, heavy lifting, loud noise, 10 hr days. When you came out side, you were dead beat.

When I wasn't doing that I was doing ranch work ,which isn't easy 99% of the time, including breaking rough stock if needed. When growing up,I helped work a hardscrabble dairy farm.

Probably not too differnt from most on here of our generation

Don't know about the sleep as most of the time it was falling into bed exhasuted. Too tired to do that stretching thing etc.
Now retired,I do walk about 2 miles a day and exersize every day.Just can't undo the damage from early years though, and hope to convince some younger guys to take a little more care than I did

I'm sort of one of those one rifle guys. I do have a rifle I inherited from my grandfather that I occasionally hunt with. But mostly I use a .300 win. I shoot one load, 200 NPs. I want to be able to go anywhere and kill stuff from any sane angle with that one rifle and load. That combo gets the job done and is good to go until I see Africa for the bigger stuff.

Saddlesore,
I'm only 32 and the recoil doesn't bother me, but I am starting to see differences from when I was in my early 20s. I don't remember hurting for as long when my saddle has leaked for instance. I did start to play b-ball for exercise, but that hurts too. My brother who is 10 years younger is starting to roll his eyes at my complaints.

There is nothing wrong with shooting a bigger rifle if you can shoot it well.I've seen guys that were bums with big rifles, and I've seen guys that were bums with smaller rifles.The thing that seperates such folks from good riflemen is "practice",nothing more.You find your recoil tolerance and stick to it.

I am a big gun nut! The country I hunt is like 340boy described 25 yards to 500 yards in the same outing.
I have shot Elk with a 30-06 and 7mm rem mag I have also shot Elk with a 300 win mag,300 wby,338 win,340 weatherby.
Until you have had the experience of seeing an animal hit with a 340 or 338 it is hard to desribe the difference.
I currently own 2 338s 2 340s a 375 H&H a 35 whelen and a 270 win. For me the 270 is a "deer rifle" I know people have feelings about it but I did say "for me" this time.
It is not that the 270 would not do the job it will. I just won't carry it Elk hunting if I have better options available to me.
A few years back I came onto a herd of 4 elk in the timber and the one closest to me was a spike. They ran, I got on him, followed him, fired, he went down but as I shot I saw "white" in the scope. Long story short I had shot through 8" of dead yellow fir and the 210 nosler had enough giddy-up left to kill the animal.
I did not intend to to shoot the tree but as in all things Elk hunting something went wrong. I would not try that shot it just happened.
My 340 will push a 210 nosler at nearly 3200 fps! that is flat!
a 225 at 3000 has a better BC and the effects at 500 yards are still over a ton of energy and about only 4 ft.low. pretty easy shot at a 30" target. That same 225 gr bullet @200 yards has more energy than a 45-70 or 30-06 has at the muzzle! look it up.
(I know energy is not everything)
Recoil does not seem to bother me as it does some. I have never been "scoped" I have never had any lasting effects from 30+ years shooting heavy cartridges. In fact I have never felt the recoil from the big stick when shooting at an animal.
The shots we get are few and far between I hunt in canyon country and as I get older carrying a heavy rifle is tougher to carry so I build them lighter. I sight in/ load develop with a lead sled. I shoot the big guns offhand quite a bit as that helps with recoil and learing what to expect.
I practice with the 270 alot and I also shoot a 22-250 (but I can't find bullets) You can train yourself to handle the recoil easier than you think.
For me it makes no sense to work all year so I can go and have to pass a shot or lose an animal because I was not willing to work to overcome some heavy recoil and did not bring enough stick.
Better bullets? it goes up the scale big guns like better bullets too. 235 tsx from a 375 H&H leave the snout at 3000+or - That is a 235 gr. mono bullet! that is about the same spped a 300 win shoots a 180gr.
I would much rather shoot a 375 than a 30-06 or 300 win mag. less punch more push.
You guys do what you want but I'll be shooting the bigger stuff not because I have to but because I might wish I had.

There's a good line in defense of our big stuff.

"because I might wish I had".
Good one cowkiller.

i like to take 2 guns where i hunt. a 338 for the more open stuff and a 30-06 loaded with 200 grainers in the thick stuff. never have felt undergunned carrying an 06

Cowkiller: Good post! You got my blood boiling with that one!Wish I had a 338 again....but I do have a 375 with 250's,when needed

CowKiller.....You and I are on the same page in many respects! I take at least 2 rifles with me when elk hunting and sometimes 3 by golly. A .338 Win mag, 300 Ultra mag and .338/06 that is very light and easy to carry around those mountains.

Yep, unless you have used and shot an elk with a .338 mag, 340 Wby or .375H&H you won't know the difference in hunting them with heavy calibers. I have done so with the .270 Win, 30-06 and 7mm mag. I believe in big calibers and heavy bullets simply put. I feel it takes a lot of those limitations away, that you may have with those smaller calibers.

+1

I'm the OP and wish I'd thought of that one.

My first rifle is a Marlin 336T 30-30. Great for close range deer. I really need to get a nice large bore lever for bigger things and closer ranges. My .340 MkV just feels funny in thicker stuff, maybe because of my being familiar with the 336 in that environment.

Nothing wrong with coming up with a reason for another rifle, right?

I've been using a 9.3x62 and a 375 H&H, guess I need to step up

So where does it all end? At what point do you have enough? Do the .416 and 500 nitro express shooters think the .338 and .375 are inadequate? I could think of a few scenarios where one carrying a .416 or such might be able to take a shot whereas the person carrying a .338 might not be able to.

When we think about handguns,the 44 mag was thought to be the tops 20 yrs ago. Then the 454 Casul came out,now the .500 S&W. Talk to the 500 S&W guys and they seemed to think the 44 mag is now totally inadequte. Yet if you ask them they usuually use to hunt with one.
I'm reminded of my last visit to PA.I met guys carrying.338's .375 H&H's,300 Weatherby Mags,and .308 Norma mags to kill a 150 lb whitetail.

I'm not trying to say,don't use one, if that is what you want, but yes dead is dead, and there is no such thing as more deader.

No matter what you use,there will come a time when you should pass on a shot.Probably you could say,"Well, if I was carrying a 50BMG,I could have taken that shot.

I was shooting my .338 from prone a bunch on Friday, as well as a 300 WM (but it's a much heavier rifle, a Sendero). The .338 did bite me once when I must have forgotten who I was dealing with, and not tucked it into my shoulder properly. Still, no big deal- no bruise.

Modern recoil pads really make a world of difference. I think, just a hypothesis, that in the same way that (say) the TSX has "upsized" smaller calibers, something like a Limbsaver has downsized the magnums into something completely manageable. There's still a big quantity of recoil energy to deal with, but it's not "sharp"; the quality of the recoil impulse is very humane.

Or something like that <g>. Hell, I just like shooting 'em, too.

I have two rifles designated as being for the "big" stuff, a 325 WSM and a 35 Whelen. I dont see a need for anything that is bigger, weighs more, or kicks harder. Both are fun to shoot and kill stuff efficiently. But then "big stuff" in my world is elk, moose, and the occasional bear.

After seeing what my .325 did to two elk last year, i'm sure not feeling the need for anything BIGGER.

Gotta get a Whelen someday... way cool...

Jeff,
I am not sure if I would consider the 325WSM a 'big' rifle.
I guess it is kind of borderline, perhaps??

Either way, I like mine!

Bob makes some good points here.

I've seen an elk or three... ;)taken and from my prospective the bigger rounds give one a bit more insurance just like a bigger car will do so if you're in an auto accident.

The bigger rounds take a bit more commitment IMO and that is something that most should take note of. I do know that a lot of men/women can shoot the bigger rounds very well (by bigger I am talking 338 on up). I also feel quite strongly that if one lacks the commitment it takes to learn to work with and to handle one of the bigger guns then they should stick to their more standard type of rounds.

Both type of rounds will get the job done very well, but once again I feel that if the chips are down then the bigger round may well help you out of a bad situation.

For what it's worth I feel the same way about the use of preme bullets on elk vs the standard type of bullets. I don't feel that the preme's are needed for elk, but I do feel that they may well give you a benefit that you might need. And might is the key word here.

The magnums normally have a bit more weight to them and my opinion is that a 338 on up that weighs in at 8.25 lbs all up (sling and rounds) aint a bad thing and if it weighs up to 9 all ready to rock it aint a gonna kill 99% of the people going (to carry it I mean).

My experience has been that a goodly share of the people who are not fans of the bigger mags have either chosen to not shoot them enough to get used to them, and or just can't handle the bump from them.

I kind of like my set of a lightweight G33/40 in 270 with dotz to 500 yds (6x36 Leo) and then my mag 700 with a 4-14 on it with Premier dotz to 700.

And I am a firm believer in the idea of if you're gonna be shooting at game at past 451 then you had best be running the rounds thru the gun at those ranges on a consistent basis through out the year. I don't buy into the idea where someone shoots their rig to 500 once or twice a year just so they know where it hits just in case...

Mostly though, I believe in the idea of getting out on the hill and hunting for elk irregardless if one chooses a Roberts or a 340.

Dober

I kind of look at this thread like this: "In defense of big [enough] rifles"

Since it follows several sort-of "how small can we go?" threads, I'm reading this in light of using something that is plenty adequate, not so much how big dare we shoot something with. At some point one gains little in most applications for what it costs in terms of blast and recoil. And, while a 30-06 is not generally considered a big rifle overall, I would consider it "big" [enough], and not in a barely sort of way like some things might be when applied to elk sized game. And while bigger rifles can be somewhat more effective, sometimes, on bigger animals, it is more often the effectiveness - or lack of it- on the part of the user which can sometimes cause a perfectly adequate rifle from being enough.

When I think of elk calibers they start with .270 and end with .338. (35's included) I know smaller calibers will kill them, and certainly bigger ones will too!
But the ones that fall between .270 and .338 kill the majority of wapiti in the west.
To use a caliber lower than .270 may decrease ones chances of taking a ethical shot. I said MAY

To use a caliber bigger than .338 makes little sense to me personally. If you cant kill an elk with a .338 something is WRONG! A bigger caliber will generally mean a heavier rifle with more recoil. Why bother?
My 2006 elk season seemed like a great time to use my CZ 550 .375 H&H. I carried that 10 lb+ beast for one day. My .300 RUM felt as light as a flyrod after that!

KC

guyandarifle;

As I type this, on my desk I'm looking at a copy of "The GUN DIGEST, 5th Edition - 1951". In it are articles by Jack O'Connor - "Choosing The Big Game Rifle"; Roy Weatherby - "Killing Power"; and Elmer Keith - "Pumpkin Rolling".

Your wanted discussion, or debate, has been going on for at least six decades, and no doubt longer. It will not be resolved to anyone's satisfaction in 2009! Having said that, I'll jump in with bits 'n pieces of my experience.

I've read through those three articles several times since purchasing that copy of Gun Digest, on sale for $1.99. It was unsold on the shelf of a bookstore, and they had marked it down twice: Original value = $6.95; first reduction = "Now Only $2.99". I forget the year it was bought in.

But what I've never forgot was the strong impression Elmer Keith's piece made on me. I sometimes get the impression from current gun writers that Keith gave rants against anything less than a true Big Bore! That piece was never a "rant" of any sort, but a straight-forward, factual piece in favor of the 45-70, in BOTH single-shots and levers. He was the FIRST that ever stated in print that the 45-70 could shoot a 400-grain at 2000 fps from a lever-action at 40,000 psi! I took my cue from that and have never looked back!

Don't take me wrong... I've owned my fair share of center-fire .22's, .25's, 6.5's, 7mm's, .30-cal's, .338's, .375's, etc., etc.

I became an aficionado of the magnums in 7 mm's, .300's, .338's and .375's. And yes... .35 Whelens and .350 Rem Mags. All of them are great, especially from .30 on up! I loved my .340 WBY.

But, having whittled the pile... the 45-70 is my top pick for doing it all. Have you witnessed what a 465-grain HC will do to a big black bear at 1900 fps? But then, I have also a Ruger No.1 "Improved" (long-throated)in 45-70 that weighs 7.6 lbs with a Burris fixed 4X. It'll fire a 350 TSX at 458 WM speeds and a 500-grain Hornady that matches a 458WM as well. Now, about recoil... It's my favorite rifle that I've owned longer than any other, which generates 80 ft-lbs of recoil with it's max load! And I'm in my 74th year... Then I have a love affair with my CZ 550, 458WM that equals a Lott because of it's 3.8" magazine and long throat! It'll go bear huntin' along with my Ruger or Marlin.

I only mention this because of the apparent worry of getting busted by recoil. If you know how to shoot, and practice, these rifles mentioned are all capable of MOA. Consistently!

Yes, and I do own some that are milder in "kick". Of course, any of these can be made into mere "pussycats" if you want to lob bullets! A favorite "flat-shooter" is my 300WM and a fun gun to tote is my Ruger 96/44.

A few years ago, a friend was taking his father on a bear hunt. I asked: "What is your dad shooting?" He replied: "His 378 Weatherby... he uses it for all his hunting." His dad was only 83 years young! There may still be hope for some of you guys!

Bob

www.bigbores.ca

I'll preface this that I did not real all posts.

My personal issue stems around shots available and the resultant harvest or lack thereof.

When on a "trophy" to me animal hunt, especially when its not out the back door, I'll take what I consider can take the target animal cleanly from ANY angle and TOTALLY penetrate with the correct bullet, at least penetrate enough to get to vitals from any direction. And at a decent distance, IE capable of the above to about 400 yards or more. Trophy meaning something I want to harvest for whatever reason or "need" to harvest.

On a non trophy hunt, IE when I have no issues of walking away from a shot I'll often take something much less... example was use of a 32-20 I was told shouldn't take deer, to take 2 this year. But I'll just as often take something else, IE 100 pound doe hunt, where I needed to take 3 does for meat, I took a 338 win mag because I wanted to. And for head shots... I mean thats workable with a 223 or less easily....

Hope that makes sense.

Would I hunt buff with a 243? I'm game for anything but it would have to be not out of my pocket and plenty time to pick and choose the single shot that will work. I know for a fact that a 90 grain FMJ from a 243 penetrates more steel than I ever thought it would.... A skull would be nothing.

Good point.

I think you nailed it with "borderline".

Some great posts from Dober, Rost, and others!

"I'll take what I consider can take the target animal cleanly from ANY angle and TOTALLY penetrate with the correct bullet, at least penetrate enough to get to vitals from any direction. "

Jeff,I have a real problem with that. I have always believed that part of the equation of hunting,whether it is meat or trophy hunting is to dispacth the animal as humanely as possible. I'm no tree/bunny huger and don't carry on in a holier than thou attitude ,but a lot of those type of shots inferred from such a statement inflict one heck of a lot of pain on the animal and usually results in slower deaths. Texas heart shots will usually put an animal on the ground about as quick as any other shot,but I have seen my share of those aniamls so hit trying to crawl away on two front legs, usually screaming/howling or what ever you want to call it in pain and fear.

Sure,the bullet can get into the vitals and eventually kil the animal,but the chance for a quick dispatch is much more likely to be compromised from bullet defelection or just plain miscalulation fromt he hunter as to where the initail bullet impact should be.

To me,that one attitude alone by hunters,destroys a lot of the myths about "In defense of Bigger rifles". Howver ,it is not only those users ,but the whole group of hunters who profess to use what ever is avaiable ,super bullets, shoulder cannons or? to take game with.

Saddlesore

You have the right to your opinion. And I'm not saying I'd shoot any angle at any distance but thats how I prepare. IF I choose to take the shot, then I need the tool for the job. Or I have to pass. Thats my option and over the years I've probably passed many more shots than I've taken. But I do go prepared.

From shooting some similar sized animals here, Nilgai, that are extremely tough, maybe as tough if not tougher than elk, there often are no perfect shots offered and they are very quick shots. I"ve found that many angles kill quickly.

You do have to know whats going on and be capable and dedicated and I like to think of every hunter as being that. But alas they probably are not goign to be that way.

But personally I"ve no issues of taking a southbound shot on a northbound animal. It works. Its as quick as any other shot. You simply need the gun and know how/where to use it.

As to deflections, heck I've seen that on ribcage shots that enter, hit a small deer, say 75 pounds, and deflect on a rib and end up going out back through the liver... you cannot control everything. And if we start saying we can't shoot until we know the outcome.. well that'll stop it all.

As to animals crawling away, I've never seen that, but we ended up using enough gun on Nilgai after a bad incident with a 300 mag provoked by a guide and 180 NPs... IE I won't shoot a mild round unless I'm in the mood to pass up iffy shots. But using the correct gun and bullet, its never been an issue and its the same as shooting the game in the chest facing you, same results that I"ve seen and so on. Now with the wrong round and projectile I could quickly see that shot being break the hips and stop like the NP did in 16 puny inches the one time....

Boy Scouts, be prepared. IF you can handle it.

Jeff

I had my .35 Whelen built as an elk rifle in the early 90's and ran it with nothing but 250 Hornadys, I leaned heavily towards the .338 but did not want to deal with the belt as a new reloader.

I love the rifle and would still reach for it first "just because" but would not feel handicapped by my .270 or .308 with either a TSX or something similiar. Now if only someone would make a tipped monometal at about 200grs.....

I think bigger diameter kills better, higher velocity kills farther. Bullet placement trumps both.

A person needs to shoot the biggest cartridge they can comfortably shoot.

Better bullet designs have made smaller cartridges more capable.

I personally found my recoil limit with a 416 Rigby and 350-400gr bullets. It went a way to a new home.

Yes. Agreed. I'll take some too.

And some 8mm 180's.

saddlesore-- Vince right?

I knew there was another point that I couldn't bring up due to being busy at the time I replied...
That other point is though I may or may not initiate a angular shot, I WANT the ability to do so especially in a wounded scenario. Worst thing I could think of would be to wound one somehow, IE broadside shot and muff it and break a front leg or two low... then I don't want a 223.... I want a cannon to stuff the next shot/s as needed.

Its' not always about best case its should be about worst case.

I"ve regretted to this day of watching my nephew shoot a deer and then leave to go to catechism, and take the rifle with him, me waiting a bit to trail and find it, only to see it get up from brush and walk off, I could have tried had I had his 223, BUT I"ve had been more comfortable with the angular shot with one of my 300s and a TSX...

Jeff

If you don't mind the weight and recoil of a bigger rifle there isn't much of a downside. I've hunted with the .375 exclusively for a couple of years now and I find that the familiarity of one rifle and scope for all my hunting is comforting. It sure is more than I need on antlerless whitetail and birds but I don't see a problem...

Jeff.That is one scenario I readily agree with. I want to be prepared if things go wrong, but I don't want to knowingly be the cause of it.Which was really the point of my post

Beat the new guy like a rented mule, but.....

I took my first bull with a .308 and a 165Gr Nolser BT. That just happens to be my biggest elk so far.

I have taken a just legal bull (4xrag-horn) and a mature cow with a .257 Roberts.

Funny how things happen, hunting deer while also having an elk tag!

Just sharing this for the comments on shot placement.

rost495 -

That's pretty much where I am, too - work for the best and plan for the worst. Using enough gun on the second shot generally means enough gun was used on the first as well.

I've used and observed most caliber being used on elk..such as the 25-35, 30-30, 250 Savage, 300 Savage, 30-40 Krag, 7x57, 30-06, 270, 257, 338-06, and 338, 375 and 404. and probably some others that I can't recall, I have use some of the above myself..

They all seemed to work just fine...Today I have my favorite elk rifle and its the one that I use almost entirely...The .338 Win is the best all around elk rifle that I have ever used. My gun will shoot 210 Noslers and 300 gr. Woodleighs to the same POI so I set to go whatever the circumstances..

I am not to locked in to caliber on anything, and will be pretty content with whatever I happen to have in my hand at the time as long as it has a properly constructed bullet and I know its capabilities. I will make one exception and that is the Selway elk in the black timber swampy marshes where shots are going away and then I want my .338 and 300 gr. Woodleighs.

I don't consider the 45-70, 45-90, and such calibers capable elk calibers except under very limited situations, they just don't suit me at all and I have used them and observed their use for years..they actually work better with hard cast solids IMO..but still not my cup of tea. I filmed a lot of 45-70 kills on a game ranch one season as I was looking it over. The owner loved his no. 1 and enticed everyone to use it. Those kills were pitiful from a hot loaded Ruger no. 1 with a varity of bullets. I still have those films. Those elk made lots of tracks and had it been on open range they would have all got away...The owner would tell them not to shoot that the elk would die and he would claim a one shot kill!!! and on a couple of those bulls that were standing straddle legged for up to 10 minutes or more I told the hunter to shoot it again or I would take their gun and do it myself...Me and the ranch boss got sideways on that and I packed up and left. I used the 45-90 on about 3 or 4 elk early on in Colorado with hot handloads at near 1800 FPS as I recall, and the elk just made too many tracks to suit me and I was surprised at the blood trails being pretty skimpy...It works well enough on cows and spikes I suppose and its a great short range deer rifle. I know it has a big following, and some folks are real touchy about it, at least on the internet and thats fine with me and I respect their right to use it, but I have a different view of its usefullness. I found the 30-30 actually works better with that roughly 400 FPS extra velocity.

Wow, that's a complete 180 to my experience with the 45-70.

I completely respect your opinion and experiences but after carrying one for next to 20 years in one form or another and a multitude of north American game animals to include deer, elk, bear and antelope (ok...a couple of coyotes too ) the 45-70 has been a trusted round for me. All I have ever loaded has been Speer's 400 gr. flats over a charge of H322. My rifle of choice for the past ten years has been a Marlin LTD with 24" barrel. Blood trails are commonly profuse and trailing, when called for, rarely went for more than 10 paces.

My disclaimer here is that I am firmly against the Texas heart shot and all animals I have taken with the rifle/cartridge have been under 100 yards (typically from 30 to 80). This is due to the terrain I call home and my desire to stalk as close as I can before touching one off.

I've carried other rifles for various reasons over the years but I always come back to the Marlin. Partly for sentiment, mostly because it's worked for me.

To each his own.

Surprises me to.Although I have only killed two elk with the 45-70. It hammered the elk as well as anything else I have used.
I have used the 400gr Speer also. One elk I shot dead on through the brisket.Probably less than 20 yrds.It reared up,fell over backwards, stumbled about 20 yds and went down.

The other was about 10 yds, double lunger. It was little above me,it stumbled,turned and stasted coming towards me.Probably did not need it,but I gave it one again dead on through the brisket.It dropped less than 5ft from my feet.

Rifle was a Browning 1886 reproduction w/peep sights. I decided at 13 lbs it was a little too heavy to lug around an dto long to hunt in the timber with

Saddlesore, I always tried to figure out the worst things that could happen verses the joyous and successful hunt, especially if I was in grizzly territory.

I always figured my 300 Win mag was the hammer of Thor until I got introduced to the .338 Win mag. I even hunted with a .375H&H a couple of years in the high country. The last year was brutal has we had no use of horses or mules that year. It just plumb wore me out and arms felt like wet noodles at the end of the day.
So the model 70 Winchester .338 Win mag got the nod after that ordeal.

I must admit there were times when I wish I had that .375H&H back in my hands, we saw 3 bears in 2 days the following year. It sure gave me something to think about after the sun went down at night. It's the best elk rifle caliber in my humble opinion and that is not taking anything away from those 300 mags.

I am always perplexed by those who feel the need for ass-to-heart penetration on non-dangerous game animals. I have yet to see any expanding bullet that will ALWAYS penetrate straightly all the way through an animal's butt and into the heart--and even if it gets to the heart there is relatively little damage done, especially on a big animal like an elk. Even a good solid will not always penetrate straight every time.

I am not talking about what Elmer Keith called a "raking" shot, a steep angle into the chest, but what my African PH friend Kevin Thomas calls a "Portuguese brain shot," right up the wazoo.

Even if the elk is wounded and you want to put it down a much easier and surer shot is to put the bullet at the root of the tail. That will stop anything on earth, with no problem of imagining where the heart is several feet forward, and will not tear up very much meat either. Even if the shot misses an inch or two in any direction the animal will usually be anchored.

I have used this shot in "emergencies" on game from whitetails to water buffalo and it works a heck of a lot better than trying to shoot the heart through the butt and guts.

"butt and guts..."
Can I use that sometime JB?
Ingwe

Atkinson �

You have far more experience than I will ever have and I truly respect your opinions. That said, my limited experience with the .45-70 impressed me tremendously. I only hunted with it one year but was able to take a buck mulie and a 6x6 bull on consecutive days.

The buck was at 197 lasered yards, across a draw, with a 350g North Fork running 2183fps at the muzzle and an estimated 1580 at impact. The first shot caught him behind the ribs, angling away. The buck made a tight circle, maybe 5 -8 feet in diameter, then tried to walk up the hill. He made it about 15 feet before going down. He was still struggling and I put another round in him to ensure he stayed down. There was fresh snow on the ground and it looked like someone had slopped blood out of a bucket � I�ve never seen an animal leak so much.

The bull was at 213 lasered yards, broadside with the same load, estimated impact velocity about 1545fps. The bullet hit the left leg low, obliterating a segment of bone, exited the far side of the leg and entered the chest, obliterating a section of rib. It nicked the heart on the way to the far side where it shattered another rib before coming to rest under the hide. The bull never moved � it just stood there for a few seconds before tipping over.

No qualms here about the .45-70.

Have a .30-30 that�s a virgin in my hands and am looking forward to seeing how it does with 170g Partitions or Speer FP�s.

I can only imagine that those who use the moderately loaded modern 45-70 without being duly satisfied must not be witnessing proper usage. As with even a 340 or 375, improper or less than excellent use can result in less than impressive results. I think sometimes we expect those weapons which bite back more to be somehow notably more effective than those which bite less.

I know they aren't elk, but the several Alaskan moose I've killed as well as a black and a griz have, with one exception, all succumbed very neatly as a result of a single 45-70 slug. I can't say that about the other bears I have taken and most moose I've killed have allowed several shots from smaller, but more powerful cartridges.

I agree that the 45-70 has limits as to the conditions of it best application. However, killing effectiveness is not one of them in my experience.

Tonk, I bet a Kimber Montana in .325 WSM would float your boat! A very potent LIGHT rifle.

I was mostly a .30 cal guy. I shot several elk with .30's but since my wife bought me the .338 I haven't used much else for elk.

I started with .25-35's then got my own .300 Savage, then a .308, an '06 [several] and a couple of .308 Norma mags.
I actually think the .308 Norma is as good as the .338 when loaded with 200 grain Partitions.

I prefer the .338 to all of them for elk.I too put a bunch of money into a KDF brake for my .338 before I even got used to it. Serious waste of money. The .338 is relatively easy to shoot.

I believe I see the elk react more clearly when hit with the .338 than when hit with smaller diameter bullets.

I like a .35 Whelen also. If I could draw enough tags I could get this figured out.

the more I hunt, the more I appreciate the 35 whelen, 358 win and 340 wby rifles, and the LESS im concerned with shots over 350 yards

340mag, I to picked up on the abilities of larger calibers putting the hurt on bigger game animals, such as elk a couple of decades ago. I learned from those who understood the plain and simple things a .35-Whelen or a .338 mag does on big game like moose in the woods.

Today we have gone from the "magnum" to "Ultra Mag" but shooting common sense yardage for elk is your thing, then those plan jane calibers of yester year will fit a hunter to at tee.

My 35 Whelen is my "go to" rifle for most all my hunting. 200 gr for small deer/antelope, 225 gr for big mule deer and elk, 250 gr for moose and bear. 225 gr Nosler Partitions usually split the difference for one load/multiple species hunts. My personal shooting limit is 250 yards, there is nothing in North America it won't handle within that range. If I can not get within at least that range and I prefer to get even closer, then the animal was not meant to be mine.
I have zero interest in hunting outside Canada, and to be honest, unless I move to another province, I will likely never hunt outside Alberta again.

When I was first starting out I can remember sitting around the fire at night, feeling proud and a little bit arrogant that I was finally out with the "guys" doing real man stuff. As always the talk eventually came around to rifles, bulls from past years and such. I piped up and started yapping about how I was going to buy myself a "real" elk rifle when I got older and how my puny '06 was just for starting out and how undergunned I felt and how those "way out there" bulls were out of my reach. About that time,Dad looks at me from across the fire and says..."Get closer".

Been words to live by ever since.

I love my 35 Whelen, but honestly at the ranges I kill elk a 30/30 would do just as well. I could learn to like a Montana 308 for my hunting style.
But I doubt I'll ever have another "go to" elk caliber, if I hunt the areas I grew up in. That Whelen just seems to HAMMER elk.

This is not my view because my experience on elk is trivial,but I'll relate the opinion of an old Idaho elk hunter who used the 35 Whelan back when it was a wildcat.He said it hammered elk,seemed to hit them hard,and was his favorite rifle,but was a bit limited on "long shots".

When the 338WM came out, he figured that was the answer to his prayers because it shot flatter than the Whelan.After shooting a few elk with the 338,he concluded the 338 did not hit them as "hard" as the 35....according to him,the 338 lacked frontal area....

He also felt, when it came to "hammering" elk, up close and out far,the best he'd used was the 375AI....that it, and the standard H&H were at the top of the heap when it came to hitting elk really hard.

Bombs Away!

Nothing wrong with getting closer, but the fact is that getting closer is not always an option.

At the same time, the .30-06 is more capable than most shooters. I shoot all three of mine at 500 yards on a regular basis, as I do my .308 Win. At that range a well placed bullet will cause the skinning knives to come out. The trick is to practice with the rifle and loads to be used.

I have hesitated to jump in here because my elk hunting almost never provides opportunities beyond 200 yards or so, and most are less than 150--some way less. For the last ten years, all but one of my elk have been taken with rifles with bores of .338 or larger. These include a couple of .338 bores, a couple of 9.3 mms and a .375. The one elk that I took with a .300 WSM and 200 grain AccuBonds went the farthest after the shot--probably 75 or 80 yards. All of the others fell within a couple of steps.

Back when the 7mm Remington Magnum with 175 grain Partitions was my primary elk rifle, bulls shot through the lungs went much farther, inevitably crawling in the damndest blowdowns to die. That required sawing or chopping limbs, etc., just of be able to dress the animal and start cutting the animal into pieces that could be packed to camp or the truck.

Obviously, you don't need a .338 Win Mag, a .35 Whelen or a 9.3x74R to kill an elk, but they often make the work after the kill a lot less strenuous.

Dogzapper has relayed that during his guiding days, that 175 Partition from a 7 mag was, indeed, responsible for a disproportional amount of "rodeos" with elk.

When it's time to rebarrel my 30-06 again, I'm thinking Whelen this time. What a cool cartridge, and a nice big brother to my .358...

This is the view from here: I'm from NW Iowa and have taken few elk here compared to some - ten bulls now - and have been in on the taking of perhaps five more by mostly a 338 and one with a 300 WSM. My elk hunting also has mostly been in blocks of five days with a couple going seven so time is always the limiting factor it seems.

In my deer hunting days I worked up from a 270 through the 30's like any young loony and started hunting elk with a 338 Win. Then I read an article by Ross Seyfried some time around '91 or '91 about the 340 Wby in Guns 'n Ammo ("hits like a 375 and flies as flat as a 270" or something like that was how he described the Wby cartridge) and built one. It has taken all my elk except one that I took with an '06. The 340 has also been to AK and taken a caribou where there seemed to be a bear on every hill on the upper Kuskokwim drainage. It was a comfort to carry there; in fact, at the shot that dropped my caribou, a brownie, unseen to that point, bolted out of an alder patch not a hundred yards to my left.

I've had two occasions on those relatively short elk hunts where I had "good" shots present themselves literally at the last "minute" but at what most here would consider long range and a couple more that did so earlier in the hunts but having practiced and shot that rifle at all practical ranges I know the drop to a few inches to 550 yds. Most - seven - of these were taken before the advent of the "new reticles" and the 340 has been just spectacular. I know any of a double handful of other similar-in-trajectory cartridges may have/would have done the same thing but that is my experience. The TSX 210 is the bullet of all premiums tried that it finally really likes bringing a 1.5 MOA rifle down just about to MOA not that's it's needed for the work I use it for.

The advice of "getting closer" is generally good but not always possible.

There is an outfitter in the area I hunt and I know some of the guides and packers quite well.They have bad mouth the Partitions for a lot of years. They claim most of thier long tracking jobs stem from partitions. Don't know,but that is what they claim.

My trouble is that I am usually in the nasty stuff already when I do see elk, so them falling in any worse stuff is academic. The 220gr RN , .06 at 20 yds smacks them hard enough for me.

"The advice of "getting closer" is generally good but not always possible."

Agreed. When I've exhausted my possibilities and realized that a given animal is outside mine or my chosen rifle's capabilities, I accept it and move on. That's the part that I struggled with as a young man...not to exceed my limitations, self imposed or otherwise, my equipment or my own physical limits. I welcome the challenges when presented and work hard at making it happen. The difference now is I recognize when it's time to try something else rather than make a marginal situation worse.

I've chosen the 45-70 for a myriad of reasons and I'm happy with it. It suits me and I'm content living within its constraints. For those who choose something flatter shooting, harder hitting or generally more sexy I say more power to ya, hope to see you on the mountain.

That's my 340's favorite pill as well. With it my .340 basically twins the trajectory of my 7mmRM favorite 150 TSX load but packs a lot more attitude on arrival. Good stuff.

I got my 35 whelen encore barrel on the classified and I am heading towards a 9.3 x 74r barrel to replace it.
Brass is a bugger to get and bullets hard to find but the more I read about this cartrige the more I like. Slightly more powerful than the whelen but in a long rimmed case. pressures are at about 40,000cup. It is a medium range round at best but should do the trick inside 300 yards.
I do not need this round as I have the .340s and the 338s and a 375 H&H but I do want to play with it. I hear they are just one of those rounds that is accurate in most guns. Like my first wife they are very popular in Europe.
This is all Goodnews fault as he shared those pics of that new double rifle.

Saddlsore, I know you're relating what you've been told,so not directed at you.

IME if you have a long tracking job with a Partition,there is one place to look for the problem.....in the mirror.

Bob,I agree with you totally,but it would seem that over many years there might be something to it. Then again, a lot of guys on outfitted hunts may not be the marksman that they need to be.
I still an old C&C guy not pushing anything over 2500fps,I don't use them,so I don't know.

Personally my take on the Nozler thingy is that some outfitter got it under his skin that they were gonna give him issues. Most likely it came out of a client or two's rifle ability and truly not from the bullets ability.

I've taken and seen a lot of elk taken with 175 and 160 Nozlers and have no issues with them.

As for the notion of "just get yourself closer", my position on this is sometimes it's possible and sometimes it's not. And anyone who says that's the way to go just hasn't hunted elk in enough different parts of the world and needs to get out more b4 they make such a statement!

Case in point, where I hunt the opener the shots can be long (well lets say they can be a lot longer than I like to take game at and I have no problemo under my right conditions taking elk to 700). If a fella goes and the two or so days he gets to go for the year is on the opener and he wants to fill the freezer then he'd be best off prepared. If he tries to get closer then someone else is gonna take out his elk.

Now where I hunt late in the season not many go, and there I can exercise the old notion of getting closer. I like to call this area the "death zone"...

Someday, I'd still like to set my old 700 into a 375 Rugger and run 260 Accu's in it....

Dober

I'll take a guess and say that was directed at me. Probably shouldn't reply but here goes.

Well, I agreed that sometimes getting closer was possible and that sometimes it wasn't. I don't believe I said it was "the way to go" for anyone else besides myself either. If you choose to take those 700 yd. shots on elk...fine, great, good for you. If a person feels pressured to take a long shot at an animal because he's afraid someone else will "take out his elk", that again is a personal issue and I have no problem with it...it's just not how I choose to hunt.

I'm not interested in hunting anywhere other than where I currently hunt and if that makes me less of a hunter in your eyes I guess I'll have to live with that. I'm confident in my abilities, my equipment and my 30+ years of filling the freezer so I'll just keep doing what I'm doing, you do what you do and we'll all be happy.

I apologize to the thread starter for the hijack.

Actually RG it wasn't, I just recall the idea of getting closer coming up during the course of the thread as it always does and I just made a comment that was meant to say, hey we can't always do that. Some times we can, in some country we can and a lot of it depends on ones desire to fill the freezer in the time alloted to hunt if that makes sense.

Trust me, I wasn't trying to toss any gas on a fire, just making a comment or two.

Have a super day!

Dober

And about your 45/70 thoughts, I totally love the Guide rifle. Had two of them, set them both up to rock with XS rears and fiber optic fronts, got them perking (although that took about 3 minutes, man do those guns shoot!).

Then like a stoodge sold them both so now I am Guide less and I think it's one of the coolest rigs going. I'd love to settle in and hunt with one a bit and no of some country where I could sure do it.

What do you power yours with?

Thx
Dober

I've been carrying an LTD II with 24" barrel for about ten years now. I had a standard 1895 before that and a #1 prior to that. Just something about that Volkswagen sized slug (I've loaded 400 gr. Speers and 430 gr. Lasercast) over a respectful pile of H322 loping along at a moderate pace that just works for me. I've got a real dislike for bloodshot meat after some bad experiences with other calibers/bullets and I've never had that sort of trouble with it.

The only time I scoped a 45-70 was with the #1. My eyes aren't what they use to be and the Williams peep isn't cutting it anymore so I'm seriously considering putting some glass on the LTD now. I'm thinking either a fixed 2.5 or that 1.5-5 that Leupold puts out.

As to the previous replies, my response was obviously overboard (I knew it as soon as I hit the submit button) and I took something personally that I shouldn't have. My apologies sir. Good hunting to you.

No harm no foul is the way I see it, the internet can be tough to get a feel where we're coming from trust me I know this all too well.

When I get another Guide I'd be tempted to stick my 3X Leo with a Dot in it on it on some kind of QD's. I really dislike the idea of having a scope on the rig, but my eyes are more and more in need of it.


You ever shot any of the Beartooth bullets? I've used them in my M29 and really like them.

Thx, and make it your best day!

Dober

Dober,

My Guide Gun was set up as you describe- XS rear, fiber optic front. I still have a stainless 44 mag Marlin set up that way.

IMHO, the GG is tough to scope. At least for me. The comb of the stick ain't right for it. When I get another 45/70 I'm thinking the standard pistol-grip version will work better for me. The straight-stock GG also really slaps my face under heavy recoil; again, just my experience.

When I did scope my GG, I used Leupold QRW rings on Warne bases. Very solid, and returned to zero well.

saddlesore: I know you've shot more elk than me and one thing I took special note of the last bull I killed two years ago was that an elk has a pretty substantial amount of body over the vitals,in the upper third of his chest.

I sometimes wonder how many tales we all hear of "chest-hit elk" getting away are the result of a bullet landing "above the lungs" but not catching the spine,so that these elk are still mobile, recover after a hit,and sometimes bullets and cartridges get blamed for wounding, when the real culprit is a hit too high above the vitals.

Not trying to set up a debate here, just mostly thinking out loud

I've read some about Beartooth and heard good things from those that use them. I decided to try the Lasercast trueshots in part because they're manufactured in my backyard and heard good things about them as well. I'll be honest though and say I've not yet taken an animal with them so I can't testify as to their performance but my rifle sure likes them in terms of accuracy.

Every animal I've taken with the 45-70, regardless of rifle, has been downed with a single Speer 400 grainer so it's been tough leaving them at home. I'm thinking this is the year the trueshots get a try though.

Bob, For sure, bad bullet placement is probably the real culprit of a major portion of the claims of bulet failure or super tough elk. A clipped lung, or one lung shot can still let an elk travel a far piece.A good centered double lung, heart, or spine shot and any elk will fall over pronto
I have shot a goodly number of elk with the much maligned Sierra Game King. I have found some with text book mushrooming, some that the core can bep lucked out of what isl eft of the jacket and some with the jacket and core not very close. However, all those bullets were dug out of dead elk,and all of them didn't go bu ta few yards when shot

Saddlesore: Thanks for that observation; it all gets back to placement,huh?

Mark �

My Marlin .45-70 is a standard 1985, not the Guide version. Like you, my eyes prefer glass more and more each year. As a result, the Marlin is topped with Warne Quick Disconnect bases and Maxima rings. A Leupold 2-7x sits in the rings, providing a very comfortable 4.9� eye relief at 2x. (It still took me a long while to shoot the 1812fps, 460g Cast Performance loads with the scope on, though.)

I shoot a wide variety of loads, about 19 total, from 300-350g hardcast over a few grains of HS-g for 1100fps fun to 350g North Fork bullets at 2183fps for elk to 460g hardcast at 1812 for those pesky backyard rhino. (Still waiting for rhino, but they destroy everything else pretty well...)

These days I would try 350g Swift A-Frames if starting fresh with load development for elk. The 300g Partitions are history but I like the 300g Speer Uni-Cor FP bullets and shoot them a lot for practice. Have never felt comfortable loading the Barnes bullets in the tube mag, although they are supposed to be safe.

There are three common ways that good bullets get a bad reputation I believe - maybe more:

1. Some people assume that a good bullet somehow forgives the errors of poor shooting. When they are used - on guided hunts in this case- and they don't do well, who's going to blame the "money" - in this case the client?

2. Some people, perhaps using a bullet early in their experience, misinterpret what they see and blame, obviously, the bullet. (Hey, it doesn't look like the ones in the mag ads and articles.)

3. Some folks combine what they don't see - bullets which pass through leaving smallish exits- with what they hear and believe what they think they ought to. I think the original X got a bad performance rep this way based on less "pencils" than what people were thinking they saw. Mostly even they worked just like most Failsafes: splendidly, in spite of the rather small four-cornered exit through the hide. And Partitions can also do a similar thing. Combine that skinny hole with placement that isn't perfect and voila', "it's a bad bullet".

Time for my meds; gack-attack.

And THAT, as they say, is THAT!
Could not have possibly put it better myself, and it should be required reading with every purchase of premium boolits....
Well done!
Ingwe

While I agree with everything you said, I have to say the X bullets may have gotten their reputation for unreliable expansion honestly, at least in part, by providing unreliable expansion.

Here�s a summary of my very limited experiences with X bullets:

1. Dropped a coyote at 100 yards with my 7mm RM and a 160g XLC running 3020fps at the muzzle, estimated impact at 2840fps. The coyote dropped like a stone. On examination I found no blood and no entrance or exit wounds (I did not skin it). Many times I have joked I merely scared it to death. Still scratching my head on that one, looked like zero expansion.

2. Dropped a second coyote with the same load, range about 50 yards, estimated impact 2930fps. Hit it on the run, broadside, taking out a section of the spine and leaving a �U� shaped channel wound. Looked like instant expansion on impact.

3. Dropped a buck antelope with the same load at 297 yards, estimated impact 2500fps. Two through the chest cavity left a very sick antelope. It laid down but kept its head up as if sunning itself. I spent 15 minutes circling around for a closer shot and as I got to about 75 yards the antelope struggled to its feet and tried to walk off. A third bullet hit the ribs on a quartering away shot, taking the top of the heart. On inspection the first two wound channels showed very little sign of expansion while the third looked more probable.

My intent was to use the 160g XLC�s for elk that season. Instead I fell back on my old Grand Slam load (and took two elk with them, a 5x5 and a cow). Since then I have developed loads for the TSX and banished the XLC�s to the target range. So far I have yet to take anything with a TSX and have had hesitancy to use it due to my experiences with the XLC�s and the occasional report of TSX failing to expand. Instead I have been switching to the MRX and TTSX. One antelope with the TTSX (.308 Win, 168g TTSX) and some testing with water jugs has provided me with more confidence in the tipped versions.

Love my Sako 338 win with 225 grain TSX.

Klikitarik
I think your right.

Guide school mentioned field reports from wounded elk that were later recovered and dissected. Finding high and aft of the real bread-basket shots can do very little damage to a somewhat shock-prof bull elk.

There is a spot just above the lungs, and below the spinal-cord that a bullet or a broadhead can pass and the elk will not die immediately.

Here is a picture borrowed from: Rrifle-Accuracy-Reports.com that can give you an idea of what can go wrong.



As it shows the gap above the lungs, the picture also shows how much lung and liver a bull elk has, a shot to the rear portion of the lung or a shot more towards the liver will not be a quick kill.





I really enjoyed there web site, hope no one minds me giving them a plug here?

Now the problem with hunting bull elk in the high country on Public land, is that a hunter seldom gets the so called "Broadside Presentation" to put a bullet into. I have come upon elk in the dark timber and you better be quick to shoulder that rifle and get the shot off or it's gone over the mountain.

Also hunting with lighter caliber and putting shots on the shoulder of a bull elk is a path to hunting failure in many cases. Bullets can and do strange things when they contact large bones. I have even seen the results of a premium bullet out of a 30-06 strike a bull elk's shoulder and end up going South toward the hindquarters.

This is one reason years ago, I stopped using the .270 caliber on bull elk, it limits one's limitations. I perfer the .338 caliber with heavy bullet to bust through an elk's shoulder. You also mess up more meat this way but that is the hunters choice I suppose.

I certainly do belive that "Poor Shot Placement" is the cause of many elk not being found after the shot. As the picture shows, if you don't put that bullet in that 12 inch kill zone close to the heart, your chances become greater for a lost animal. I always tell younger hunters to aim 1/3 up from the brisket in back of the leg/shoulder for your shot. If you put that bullet near the heart he will go done for the count.

Coyote
Why would you hunt a yote, with a heavy for caliber elk bullet and expect lots of expansion. While the X series have been nothing but impressive to me from 50 yards or so out to just over 800, you were shooting a bullet that was designed to take some resistance to expand... And that was/is the reason for differing bullets for different size animals. I wouldn't want a quick expansion one on an elk.

The antelope wasn't much different IMHO. 70 pounds vs 500 plus for the use of the bullet.

Of course you hit bone with that bullet instead of much of nothing of resistance and it'll usually help expand the bullet.

Your results are about exactly what I'd have expected.

For yotes I don't think you need an X, but if so I"d have certainly been thinking fast 120.....

As to my results, I'm pleased since the mid 90s IIRC, mabye early 90s... Caliber in entry, and double or so size, nothing huge on exits but I can't recall ever recovering one, even from a lung shot and a spine shot at 802 on a caribou. Both of which expanded.

Being in the hunting business for longer than I care to admit and having observed and/or used the Nosler partitions on more animals than I care to admit, I would say that anyone that tells me the Nosler partition is a poor bullet it just blowing off steam and has no real experience or has a hidden agenda..

The Nosler, as any gun looney, gun scribe, or any well informed guide will tell you is the bullet by which all others are judged by.

Being and outfitter or PH doesn't necessarily make one an expert on bullets or firearms, I know a bunch of guides and PHs that are basically farmers by trade and just do the hunting to make ends meet. They are not good shots, they are not bullet diggers, and a rifle is a tool and is treated as such.

rost495 �

Why? Curiosity, lack of any experience with the bullet.

I don�t want a quick expansion bullet on elk either unless the expansion is well controlled and limited. Kind of like the X, TSX, TTSX, MRX, A-Frame, Partition, North Fork, Trophy Bonded, etc.

After the coyote and antelope I didn�t feel comfortable with the old �X� on elk. Still have some I�m ringing gongs with � Midway had some cannelured XLCs for sale at something like $11 a box, returns from a manufacturer or something.

On the other hand, TTSX at .308 Win velocities have, on a sample of one antelope, demonstrated they open can very fast. I�m sticking with them and MRX wherever possible, TSX when not, and North Fork for the .45-70, 7mm RM and .300 WM until I run out.

One reason I like big rifles is that you can use a softer bullet.

For instance, the 225 Accubond from my friends .338 has absolutely flattened the two elk he shot with it- at roughly 300 years each, too.

The two I shot with my .325 (which is a borderline "big" rifle I guess) also were very quickly kilt.

Were I to use a "small" rifle, I'd start looking pretty hard at the X series of bullets. When you got some real overkill workin' for you, you can opt for a softer, quicker-killing bullet.

Just yappin' here... let's not get in a TSX fight <g>.

Yup....this is the stuff campfires were made for.....sitting around after a day of hunting.....chatting about previous hunts.....sipping a bit of (possibly) Crown Royal and telling lies about your previous edventures......LOL

It will go on as long as people go hunting....

It's fun now to listen to the youngsters take up the "chat" and just sit back and smile.....sooner or later they will ask ya...."Ain't that right uncle Jack?"

Hell, if Ray Atkinson used to kill elk with a .25-35 then I used to do it with a .25-20.....and I conveniently whip out my photos of my .25-20 on Safari in Africa!.....(that gets em every time!!!)

It's not about the gun folks....it's about the memories.....and not the ones you have.....the ones you instill in others!

Now why not hunt Cape Buff with a .243 Winchester? Ummmm got to think just a minute or two on that one! Well, first off I know the caliber will not meet lawful standards in Africa. Now the other reason is because Cape Buffalo have overlapping ribs and the blessed bullet from a .243 would never penetrate.

The third reason is that the Buff would most likely regard that bullet striking it's flesh as a tick or fly! The most important reason is that I would wish to be able to go on hunting trips down the road after seeking out that Cape Buff with my .243 Winchester and that would probably never happen.

So, in the light of a campfire....

How hungry would be hungry enough to keep you from trying to eat a Cape Buffalo before you eat a coyote, if all you had was a .243 ?

...bout a half day hungry and a well placed shot.

Capes is tasty... Best damm'd prime rib I have ever eated.

If I was hungry a .243 would not stop me from using it.
I just do not know why I would have a .243
If I had one of those things in my hands That would mean Hunger was not a stranger to me.

I'm coming in kind of late on this topic but it's one near and dear to my heart.

I believe in using the rifle/cartridge that will kill the game being hunted DRT in any situation from any angle with one well placed shot. I've seen too many FUBAR situations where a bigger cartridge, pushing a heavier and better constructed bullet, faster would have saved a long tracking job.

For elk that means a 375H&H or a minimum of a 350 Win Mag and the 338 mags are also excellent.

For big mulies I really like the various 300 Mags and a the 7 Mag is a good choice as well.

For northern bruiser trophy whitetail I like the same rifles as for mulies.

For southern and midwestern whitetails outside of the cornbelt I like the 308 Win and 7mm-08 with 140-165gr premium bullets.

My "do all rifles" are the 300 and 7mm versions of the Remington Short Action Ultra Mags as they can shoot light fast bullets for smaller big game right up to the big Partitions for the bruisers and fit in short actions and use fast burning powders and get great velocity in short barrels.

Carry enough rifle/cartridge is my mantra but I favor the ultra-light rifles that are short and have serious optics like the Elite 6500 scopes or Elite 4200's in less demanding conditions/situations.

$bob$

My first big game rifle was a Marlin 336 30-30. My Second was a Ruger 77 338. Since that timeI have loved the .338 bullets and other than my 45-70 the 338 is all I use.
Getting kind of old now and find that I'm often pushing the .338s out of less powerful and lighter rifles.
I can still enjoy the full power Winchester Mags, and dig one of them out from tme to time, but with a lot more years experience I know I can now do everything I need to do with a 338-06 and often with a 338-08.
The Marlin 1895GS 45-70 pushing 400 grains at over 1800 fps gives me about all I can handle these days but when I find myself at the bottom of a narrow canyon where I might come up on somthing big and toothy at close range, that big old 45 gives me lots of comfort.

I would suspect that your grandfather realized soon afterward, that hunting with a 30-06 was quite a thrill and was the One Gun hunts all things on this planet back in those days.

One thing about rifles, we all have an opinion. My first few Elk were taken with a 30-06 and 220 grain bullets; this is what my father gave me to hunt with. When I had my own job I went with a 338 Winchester magnum. The rifle was great for Elk, but the 30-06 killed them just as well. I took a few with the full length magnum .338 caliber and again, it did the job well. I also used a 7mm Remington once and it did a good jib. I settled with a 300 Winchester magnum when I started hand loading premium bullets.

Now here is something, I had an Indian friend for years who used a 270 Winchester and said anything bigger was a waste. I think all these are good rounds,perhaps you buy a little insurance with a magnum and perhaps nothing replaces hunting experience? I would say have lots of the later and a little of the former and you are ready to go!

I think that with a good penetrating bullet with enough powder behind it will kill. Sure a FMJ .22 lr round isn't going to kill a cape buffalo (maybe if you shot it in the eye, but who's going to attempt it??). I think that everyone should shoot what they like, if that means using a .505 gibbs on whitetail then why not? As long as it floats your boat, one might say. To sum up what I think, there's no doubt that cartridges like 30-06 have killed many african dangerous game animals... But there is reason rounds like the .458 win mag and alike came around!

I agree with most of what I've read here. I've not killed as many as some here but have hunted the mountains for some 20+ years and taken about half that number of bulls. Most of my hunts have been low- to medium-priced guided hunts of five days, limited a bit time-wise, and all on public land.

Contrary to what I've read here, many of my opportunities, when they came, came at fairly long distance; let's say longer than 350 yds. and often with most of the day gone. Had I not been prepared to take those shots, there are at least four bulls I can remember I would have not taken.

I don't care what anyone uses as long as it's legal. When younger I took the ubiquitous American attitude that "bigger is better"; I now realize that's not true (in many more walks of life than what rifle to use for elk).

I took most with my .340, a semi-custom, semi-beat up rifle now that I know how to shoot. I like it but like the originator of this thread, I'm beginning to find its 8.5 lbs a bit objectionable about mid-hunt. I now have a 8lb 350 RM and even better, a 6.25 lb 284, that will compete strongly to go on my next hunt, Lord-willing, there is one.

Two often repeated chestnuts come to mind here:

"A good big gun is better than a good small gun provided one can shoot it."

"The best elk rifle is whatever the best elk hunter has in his hands."

I'll jump in too. I have used everything from the .223 to the 458 Win Mag on big game over the last 35 years. With good bullet placement they have all worked ok. The worst "failures" I have had was with a 358 Winchester and seals on the ice. At long range the bullets were not expanding. Jumping to 180 Hornady's solved that. With the .223 I found past 150 yards it was running out of steam but I never lost a caribou with it. Bullet placement is a key.

For a long time I argued in fact that a rifle with enough velocity to expand bullets quickly was preferable on game to one with a larger bore. I had amazing luck with a 6.5 Rem Mag on caribou. There was a Hooves in the air effect that was lacking with the sister carbine in 350 Rem Mag.

Then I discovered the 358 Norma Magnum. This gave both excellent speed, sectional density and bullet weight. Shooting into mud flats with various calibers confirmed that I had something special here. It simply blew the competition away, with amazing temporary and permanent "wound channels" in the clay like mud of my shooting range. The depth and width were lovely. It out-classed both smaller faster bores and bigger slower ones. Like baby bears porridge, it had a just right quality.

Moving into moose country has confirmed my selection. Combining the long range expansion and shocking effect of smaller calibers, the wider wound channel of a larger, slower bullets and excellent penetration; this rifle gives excellent confidence, kills quickly and is a comfort in Grizzly country (out my back door). I just don't carry anything else anymore. Other calibers work...this works better. A good medium is a wonder to behold.

As for the "guides" who don't like the Nosler Partition.... there is no better bullet in my experience. I have put down many dozens of animals with many different bullets and the NP still has my favourite combination of explosive expansion and excellent penetration. My good luck with .223 to .458 coincided with switching to the NP for the majority of loading. Excellent bullet.

This year's moose will be shot with a 375 H&H using either a 300 gr NP or a 300 gr Swift A-Frame somewhere in the 2400 fps ballpark. the mediums i've witnessed on game have been very effective to watch. the smaller bullets kill pretty well, but generally seem to be going like hell and at the shortish distances we have here do a bad job in terms of explosive wounds with resultant bloodshot meat.

Have a gunsmith friend who took a 358 Norma Mag and necked it up to 9.3 calling it the 366 Barbie (it's the wife's gun). says its quite effective.

Use enough cartridge and bullet to penetrate an animal and kill it out to any reasonable hunting range. Use a rifle that allows you to reliably place said bullet precisely regardless of conditions..

What's your bullet in the .358 Norma? I mostly loaded 250 Speers and Partitions, but thought long and hard about the 280 A-Frames.

To those that use the 45-70, 30-30 etc. on elk and it works for you I have no problem with that..You are apparantly a hunter and apply its use properly...I have seen it fail miserably by hunters and have some ugly films from its use, so suppose I got a bit on guard over its use..I blamed the gun for the hunters ignorance in these cases, thinking back it was their refusal to use follow up shots to get the famous one shot kill to prove the calibers effectiveness, ticked me off.

I realize if your capabilities are up to the chore then whatever caliber you choose will work..

I am not adament over what others use to hunt with as long as it works for them..In these discussions I do try to approach them with a practical point of view and that colides with some that use such calibers and that was not my intent..If the shoe doesn't fit, don't wear it.:)

For myself, I like and use the .338 with 300 gr. Woodleighs in the very thick stuff I hunt elk in..If I hunt in the open country then I will use either my 300 H&H or 30-06 with 200 and 180 gr. Noslers respectively or perhaps my .338 with 210 Noslers at 3005 FPS...I don't think I need to make any excuses for that!!

In my early years of elk hunting I began with a 25-35 SRC and shot my first 4 or 5 elk with it and a few with the 30-30 and then the 250 Savage..all worked and my shots were all under 200 yards as I recall...Later went to the .270 and it worked well, but I did see some elk wounded with it by hunters who took going away shots in the dark timber, so I went to the 300 H&H the the 338-06 and later the .338 which instantly became my favorite caliber fo elk. Its a great elk round if you can handlel the recoil. If I hunt horseback, I will probably carry my Savage 99F in .308 or perhaps my Win. 95 in 30-06 with 220 gr. Noslers.I ain't likely to change my mind on my choices because someone on the internet tells me too, nor do I expect anyone else to do that. My head is made up.:)

I have used the 250 Speers. They penetrate o.k. but occasionally shed cores. Folks in the Yukon seem to have better luck with them than I have has although none have actually failed as the separation seems to come near the end of adequate travel. The Partitions in 225 or 250 are all I use now. They have been flawless with a fantastic combination of explosiveness and penetration. I am trying the Accubond but notice they have no better Ballistic Coefficient than the Partition. I have also used 300 grain Barnes Originals and they have been remarkably good. Down to 75 of them however and the partitions penetrate as well, hit as hard and range better.

Personally, I like big bore sizes(or mediums in the case of .358"). I have two 45-70s, a 35 Whelen, and two 50 cal muzzleloaders.

Shot several elk with the muzzleloaders, they ended pretty quick. One was a cow shot dead through the liver (yea I flinched or something), but she didn't go more than 75 yds or so before hitting the ground.

Have not taken any deer with the 45s or the 50s, but I have shot several with the Whelen (225 grain bullets)...they don't last long.

The elk rifle I use almost exclusively now is the muzzleloaders. Just too many hunters in the woods during rifle season. And during the early (September) muzzleload season, I have not had a problem getting within range of the open sighted gun. During rifle season, the elk are a lot more spooky and the extra range of a good high velocity round can certainly come in handy.

Swedish moose study - Denny

http://www.kifaruforums.net/archive/index.php/t-10343.html

Alaskan accuracy tesy: http://www.wildlife.alaska.gov/index.cfm?adfg=huntingbulletin.hntbul8#cartridges

A note about the Alaskan study...

First, I agree completely with the author that �Big game is consistently, quickly, and humanely killed by accurate, precise placement of a well-constructed bullet in the vital heart-lung area.� Nothing beats the proper placement of a bullet constructed to meet the task at hand.

Second, I agree that a lack of practice and poor shooting skills are primary factors in wounding game.

On the other hand, I would caution anyone from concluding the author is suggesting that no one should use what he calls �a hard-kicking slobber-knocker magnum�. The well-prepared hunter is, by definition, capable of effectively using his/her weapon of choice � and there are many well-prepared hunters that choose what some would call �a hard-kicking slobber-knocker magnum�.

There is also a lot of misconception out there about how much some cartridges recoil. Full-power 7mm RM loads often recoil about the same as full-power .30-06 loads using bullets of similar Sectional Density (7mm/140g, .308�/165g or 7mm.160g, .308�/180g). In fact, the differences are often measured in hundredths of a foot-pound. Nevertheless, some folks consider the .30-06 to be a sensible choice and a 7mm RM to be �a hard-kicking slobber-knocker magnum�.

I will also take issue with the author�s comparison of a .30-06/180g/2644fps and a .300WM/180g/2919fps. The author states the following:


If the author is looking at the most unimportant characteristic, trajectory, then yes, there is about a 25-30 yard difference. Using 180g Nosler Partitions (BC .361) in both and zeroing both for Maximum Point Blank Range for a 6� diameter target, the .30-06 zeros at 257 yards while the .300 WM zeros at 283 yards.

Much more important, however, is retained bullet velocity, momentum and energy. With MPBR zeroing, at 300 yards the .30-06 is down 7.9� and retains 1982fps and 1569fpe. While a MPBR zeroed .300 WM is down the same 7.9� at just 330 yards, it isn�t until 410 yards that its retained velocity and energy fall to similar levels (1985fps and 1575fpe). That means the .300WM will do at 410 yards what the .30-06 does at 300 � or the .300WM will do at 300 yards what the .30-06 will do at 190 yards, and so on. A well-prepared hunter can make good use of that extra 110 yards.


The author also quotes Lee Rogers as follows:


While I agree a well-prepared hunter needs adequate practice, I disagree with this statement on a couple of important points. First, 30-40 rounds with a particular rifle � or any combination of rifles � per session is not a requirement. During my trips to the range it is not uncommon for me to shoot 30-40 rounds or more. Sometimes that count will come from a single rifle, sometimes it will come from 4 or 5 different rifles. Sometime I go to the range, take a dozen shots (give or take a few) and come home. The important thing to me is that I am getting quality trigger time. Come towards hunting season and I will focus more on the particular rifles I intend to use, but by then it is very rare for me to take more than a few shots with the rifles each session, let alone 30-40. Adequate practice, yes, but that comes in many forms.

I also take exception to Lee Rogers� position �After sighting in, all the hunter's practice should be from hunting positions likely to be used in the field.� While I agree such practice is valuable, I have not found it necessary to use such positions exclusively as Rogers recommends. Nor do I believe all such practice needs to be with the particular rifles to be used for hunting. Although I am likely to finish up with the rifles I intend to hunt with (I always take two to hunting camp), my final days at the range often find me shooting several rifles that will stay home. Again, I think �adequate practice� is the key and it comes in different forms.

i find it interesting that the Alaskan study, while seeming to promote the non-mags, shows that the number of magnums in the sample to be 1018 compared to 605 non-mags. it appears that the Alaskans prefer magnums if that small sample is representive of the whole.

I think the presence of grizzly and brown bears tend to legitimize "magnumitis", though.

I've always figured a hunting trip to Alaska would "legitimize" a purchase of a new rifle - something in .338" or .375" that burns a lot of powder...

It might,but only if the right one is chosen,and matched with the right bullet;but given that most bear related self-defense scenarios take place at close range(where bears are dangerous),a magnum case may or may not provide the intended benefit over,say a 9.3x62 or 30/06 with good bullets.

The average magnum user today is likely to be loaded up with the latest plastic-tipped or other tin-foil bullet(unless he knows better),and then he is likely to be in trouble.Hopefully he will be smarter than that

In a test done by USFW Service regarding suitable rifles for bear protection(published a few years back in Rifle Magazine)many of the 7mm,30 cal,and 8mm magnum rifles finished way down the list behind the 30/06 in performance for close range bear work.

Bob �

I agree a proper bullet is mandatory. Lighter bullets and higher velocities generally mean better bullets are required while lower velocities and heavier bullets generally allow less exotic bullets (read standard cup-and-core). Regardless, I don�t use �tin foil� bullets for anything but varmints, my preference for big game including North Fork, TTSX/MRX, and A-Frame bullets. (Although I was burning up some 120g Grand Slams (.257 Bob) and 160g XLC�s (7mm RM) at the range last Sunday, I no longer use them for hunting.)

I have done a study on the results of the USFW study and found significant errors in their methodology (errors a Junior High math student could find). I�ll try to post those results this evening when I get home.

My comment was specifically a response to Toad's, in which he said that Alaskans carried more magnums....

Call me gutless (or heck, go on the Campfire section and take your pick of names to call me! ), but if I were hunting around grizzlies I'd be carrying my .325 or .338 and not feeling the least bit "overgunned".

I used to own a 45/70 Guide Gun and one of my imaginary justifications for owning it, was that it'd be a good "camp gun" or canoe gun if/when I ever got up to Alaska....

Coyote, you and I shop for bullets in the same places..... I think I am followin' you around cause they tell me you been there just before I arrived...

I zero'd my 338 Ultra and 210xlc's this morning for a new scope I put on it. I plan on using it for just about everything this year, to get very comfortable with that rifle.

I joined this site to post my opinions of a 243 being used for elk. I am a big guy and I love recoil. Ive shot Rockchucks for hours with a 375 h&h. Even my 10/22 hurt to shoot at the end of that day. I will not cuss a guy who can kill elk effectively with a 243 or a 45-70. I will cuss the guy who cant handle what he is packing light or heavy calibers. I shoot a 257 stw for everything. 110 gr accubond over 82 grains of imr 7828. Kind of a contradiction big mag case with a small diameter bullet. But pushing that bullet at almost 4000 fps there is no such thing as holdover on animals or targets at ranges I will shoot at. And 9 time out of ten I get complete pass through and huge exit holes. That little bullet has been extremely impressive on elk. I shoot what I have the most confidence in. I dont need to stop a grizzly or a cape buffalo. All I have to do is plant that first pill in the kill zone. One shot one kill is nice but if that bull twitches an eyelash I am putting another in him regardless of what caliber I used to put him down the first time.

Jeff, I carried a 375...nothing wrong with having some respect for those animals

As promised, here is the review I did of the USFW �Safety in Bear Country� report on bullet performance.
[url]https://www.24hourcampfire.com/ubbth...FW_Safety_in_Bear_Country_bu#Post3993695[url]

I started a new thread rather than hijack this one with any comments that might follow regarding my review.

I have argued both sides - for fun - but it really comes down to shooting.

I think that (on average) my fastest deer kills have been with a .22 CHeetah. But my .300 Weatherby dropped them efficiently for decades too.

I've had no problem with heavy bears, moose or elk or caribou with a 25-06 (with premium bullets) - and I've had no problem be-heading grouse with a 7lb (in-the-box) 375 H&H.

It's all fun to argue, debate, imagine scenarios etc. - but, in the end, all that really counts is a man's ability to get close enough to be able to deliver bullets where he wants them to go - and then delivering the bullets there.

Animals hit with good bullets - where they are supposed to be hit - die fast.

We can argue this till the non end...

But what I work with in my feeble brain are the worst case scenarios... sure I can shoot almost anything with a 243... or 06 etc...

What about the worst case angle/distance. ANd if you choose not to take that as a first shot, who is perfect anyway, you may have to do follow up shots.

My bottom line, at some sane distance, lets say 300 or 400 yards max mostly... can my bullet penetrate the animal I'm after, stem to stern, breaking bones, penetrating the paunch(harder than breaking bones really) and at least reach the skin on the other side if not exit.

Thats the parameters I use. Unless I"m cull/meat hunting and can afford to be really picky. Had a gun go haywire on me this spring.... ended up causing me to gut shoot a deer, and lucky the deer was small, the gun was big, but the follow up shot could have been iffy if other things happened, as it was I could have made the follow up with a 223 and no issues. BUT what if it was an elk, in bad stuff and no angle to shoot through in a slot in the conifers 400 yards away with intestines hanging out....

For deer that generally means a heavy bullet in 7 or 30. For elk size 338 though I could fall back to a 300 with the right bullet but simply choose to love the 338 rounds.

All I can say is my favorite elk rifle is the .338 Win. I have hunted elk with a lot of calibers including the 25-35, 30-30, and 250 Savage and others.

I also like the 30-06 for elk, but the .338 is the one I always grab these days..It kills them better, faster and I get better blood trails and shorter blood trails, mostly they just go down at the shot at about any range. I can take a going away shot and dump one on his nose. I can shoot one facing me and the bullet will pass through sometimes and if not will be way back yonder.I have had such good success with it that its what I use...To each his own and the 338 may have excessive recoil for some or they may not feel the need for it, and thats fine also.

Jeff for some reason I just cannot really think of the WSM's as true magnums, more like "improved", a 300WSM shooting a 200 grain partition at 2800 for instance. Its not 3000+ on the other hand I bet it would do in a pinch. I bet you a 300 RUM shooting one at over 3000 would get quick notice on both ends of the rifle.

2500, 2800, 3100 FPS + 200 grain partition or Barnes TSX. I wonder how these fair next to a 338 caliber 210 grain bullet???

I've not owned a 300 WSM (yet), but the word is they will run a 200gn bullet at 2900 fps easily.

My very similar .325 WSM runs a 200 at 2950 fps.

Just FYI. Whether that is "magnum" or not, I don't know.