What I find odd, is that I was born, and grew up in Montana and knew/know some pretty darn good elk hunters.
About the last g-damn thing that any good elk hunters I knew/know talked about, or argued about, were the rifles and calibers they shot. Know some that have used .243's for years, some have shot 25-06, 270's, 308's, 300's, 7 mags, 338's. The thing they all had in common, was they killed a metric [bleep] ton of elk. The caliber they chose to pack didn't make them the elk hunters they were. I also don't recall many giving advice to anyone on what they should be using for a rifle or caliber.
They worried more about the best way to get an elk back to the truck, where to hunt, when and how to hunt a particular ridge, when to take their vacations...you know things that mattered about actually killing and hunting elk.
I've sort of come full circle myself...started with a 6mm Remington, shot my first few with that, moved to a hand-me-down 30/06 for years, moved up to a 338 for a long time, killing 35 elk along the way. Since 2006, I've shot another 30 elk, all but one of those with either a 7RM or 7-08.
I find myself often wondering why some people still give the advice of a 30 magnum, 338, etc. when I know for a fact that they simply are NOT necessary. I even question why I ever felt the need for a .338? Not taking away anything about the .338, as it performed on elk, I had great results. But, like others have mentioned, they are NO fun to lug around, and even less fun to shoot.
I just cant see myself arguing that a .270 isn't enough gun for elk...or arguing that all the "good elk hunters from Montana only use 300 mags and larger".
Just isn't based on reality.
