In this hypothetical, I've opted to pack a 45 Colt Blackhawk loaded with 315gr LFN bullets at 1100. The easily 400+ bull steps out of some timber at 110 yards, and I whip out my improvised rest. He takes the first shot though the lungs, takes three steps forward, and gets the next shot though the shoulders, dropping right there. Other hunters seem to show up out of nowhere to congratulate me, help me cut this guy up, and help me pack him down and out to the truck. I get photos of each with the bull, and have acquired new lifelong friends.
Amazing. I have just successfully completed the hunt of a lifetime. I'm pretty proud of myself. When I get home, my wife and kids are there to shower me with congratulations and hugs, tears of pride welling up in their eyes.
It's Miller time!
LOL, that's awesome and so true. thank you for posting that.
Here's a good read when it comes to the OP's question. It reflects my experience as well with different calibers and cartridges. personally I junt with a .308 suppressed shooting 168 gr berger VLDs. it's poison on elk, most drop within feet of where they are hit. This article breaks down the science between cartridges and the give and take of a few popular cartridges.
I did find it amusing that so often I hear about guys not taking long shots because that's not hunting, or they like to get in close etc. we've all read them and some of us feel the same still, and that's ok. The article shows difference under 400 yards between cartridges is negligible from a practical standpoint. no doubt someone will go off on a tangent disagreeing with me and pointing at the difference in energy etc. that's why I put the word "practical" in there. and the article pretty much says the same thing showing there's not a whole lot of difference in what it takes to kill and elk and what they deliver. the cartridges are 308, 300wm and 338 wm for those who are curious. spoiler alert, the magnums really only shine at extended ranges and poor shot angles with mono bullets. granted you can't always pick how the animal is standing and I absolutely get that. But the practical reality is that it's pretty unlikely that you often get a texas heart shot (yes it has happened to me once and no rifle choice is going to make me want to take that shot ever, I ate that tag). I've only killed 16 or so elk and magnum or not wouldn't have made a difference on any of them when it was said and done. 4 were shot with magnums the rest with everything from a .243 to 30-06.
Interesting read...but why does Ron run ballistics charts at zero elevation, and standard conditions that never applied to elk hunting or the Rocky Mountains, all the while discussing packing rifles up the Rocky Mountains? I get tired of this kind of error, as it is very significant, and easily avoidable. All the energy and trajectory numbers are seriously skewed because of this.
I get that the article is a comparison between 3 typical cartridges for elk, but it reminds me of comparing three makes of truck to use for outdoor recreation, but then picking the smallest engine package in each. The comparison ends up not matching real world results.
