My assumption when reading the OP's post was that he was curious what the differences are. The ballistic tables show, if nothing else, the differences in potential......
Funny, my assumption when reading the OP's post was, he's smart enough to find ballistics tables himself and I don't need to explain them to him. Obviously we differ on that. And my other assumption was, he's interested in the opinions of people who've actually shot elk with the cartridges he asked about. Oh wait, that wasn't an assumption, that was what he said.
And take a hint from BWalker, don't flatter yourself. Your opinions on ballistic gack mean nothing to me. More BS has been written about elk cartridges in "outdoor magazines" and on the internet than almost any other subject you can name. And the common thread is, the purveyors of this BS all liberally quote ballistics tables, and talk about foot-lbs of energy. Any time the subject comes up here, you continue that tradition. You're the only guy here who thinks ballistics tables are the answer to the OP's question, that's the niche you occupy, and that's why I commented on your posts. I'd hate to see any new elk hunters here buy your line of BS and think their .308 is inadequate for elk. Because it just ain't so.
You have had a serious reading comprehension problem in the past and that continues to today. I’ve never said a ”.308 is inadequate for elk”. Never even suggested it. The three elk I’ve killed with moderate .30-06 loads that equaled or barely exceeded .308 Win velocities would agree with me that .308 Win velocities ARE adequate for elk.
My point has always been that each cartridge has its limitations. Those limitations, especially when comparing very similar or identical bullets at different velocities, can be easily compared. Using identical bullets, the destructive potential of a .300WM and .308 Win are identical once the .300WM bullet has slowed down to a given .308 Win velocity. Ballistics tables simply provide an provide an unbiased description of where that occurs and show that for any given .308 Win velocity the .300WM provides the same velocity 200 or more yards downrange.
Why is it important? At some point, every expanding bullet fired from a .308 Win will fall below the velocity at which it expands reliably, if at all, providing a limit to the effective range of the .308 Win and that load. A .300WM with the same bullet won’t hit that limit for another 200+ yards. Bullet manufacturers often provide the minimum and maximum velocities at which their bullets are intended to function as designed. Ballistic tables allow hunters to compare the downrange velocities of their loads to the operating velocities provided by the manufacturers or other criteria they may select. Ballistic tables can’t tell you exactly what a bullet will do on impact but they do provide a guide as to their destructive potential.
I’ve hunted elk with a .44 Magnum, .257 Roberts, .30-30, and .375 Winchester and never considered any of them inadequate. At the same time I knew from shooting at the range and at animals they all had different capabilities, with the .257 Roberts being the best for longer range work. Those differences in capability show up pretty clearly in ballistic tables, too.
It isn’t a tough concept but one you apparently have a problem comprehending.
Coyote Hunter - NRA Patriot Life, NRA Whittington Center Life, GOA, DAD - and I VOTE!
No, I'm not a Ruger bigot - just an unabashed fan of their revolvers, M77's and #1's.
