Again having to defend the choice of huntin with a magnum.
300wby, this is the second thread I've noticed you bragging up the magnums. So now I've got a couple of questions for ya.
1. How many elk have you shot and with what cartridges, and what lead you to think you had to shoot a magnum.
2. If a magnum is necessary why did you settle on the 300 and not move on up to something like the 340,378, or 416?
#1 I�ve killed 18 elk, 5 being bulls. I�ve never hunted Elk with anything other than 7mmrem (0 Elk), .300win (3elk) or 300wby (15 Elk). My longest shot on a cow was right around 340yds, shortest about 30yds and most being 150+. What �led me to think I had to shoot a magnum�, a combination of things really including the type of land we hunt in; high, open country. Also my choice has come from my father who always advocated shooting a bigger gun on bigger animals. Started me on .22lr then carried a .243, then shot my first buck with a .270win. When I graduated to the 7mm he took me hunting for elk. My father has shot .270win for deer and .300wby for elk ever since I can remember. BTW I don�t �have� to hunt elk with a magnum; it�s a choice not a mandate.
#2 Settle on a .300? A number of reasons: manageable recoil, shoots flat, hits hard. Another reason is depending on my tags I am hunting elk and deer at the same time. I think the 340, 378, 416 are too much for deer.
Anything else you wanna know? <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/cool.gif" alt="" />
I was always told to hunt with as much gun as you feel comfortable with. You feel comfortable in the .300 Wby and your ability to perform with it. I feel this is the most important thing.
You said that you felt comfortable with the .300 because it was the highest degree of recoil you could manage and because you felt larger cals may be too much for smaller game. Both of these are arbitrary--they vary with individuals. I use a 7mm Rem Mag for much the same reasons.
I agreed with you until you started quoting energy figures. I am not too sure elk study energy figures and very little of what I see in reality would leave me to believe that energy matters much to anyone but the guy behind the rifle. I've seen a garage full of elk killed with a 7mm Rem Mag. I've seen elk hanging in my childhood neighbor's yard year after year shot with a .243 Win and Remington Corelokts. My family has never seen an elk get away when they did their part and put the right bullet in the right place--and they use 06s almost exclussively. You asked why someone would ever take a .270 elk hunting when they could shoot something larger just as well--maybe because you've never seen a need to. Not entirely a concept I agree with myself, but whatever works. I am not advocating using a .243 for elk. I wouldn't. But it sure as heck worked for Bob Altmiller. I've never shot an elk myself. I'd love to, but haven't managed to put myself in that situation. But the more I see from other people, the more I remain convinced that shot placement and bullet selection matter far more than cartridge selection. Not implying you said otherwise here, but I just don't see what all the hoopla is about one way or another.
Rifles are as unique as the individuals that shoot them. I think that is what appeals to most of us. I find other people's tastes intriguing. I think I have a pretty good set up with 160 gr Noslers in my Remington and a Leupold on top. Others may agree or disagree and may have personal experience to back this that points in both directions. We can have discussions, but I don't like seeing hostility among friends, and I try to not judge other people's rifles any more than I would judge them because, like I said, it is 95% personal taste and arbitrary numbers that are largely B.S, and 5% actual fact, if such a thing can be defined in this field.
For crying out loud people, it's hunting, not rocket science. Shoot the largest gun you're comfortable with, pick a good bullet, take good shots, and enjoy your vension.
That's my two-cents [steps off soap box]...
