Home Forums Hunting & Shooting Elk Hunting Elk and Moose and a 30-06 with three bullet choices... which one?

From what I have read, any one of the bullets originally posted would be a good choice but my question is which would you recommend for a small frame female? She shoots good, as good as most men but I don't want her to get recoil shy and she has shot a few 180's in a 06. We were in Africa so adrenaline may have eliminated recoil.

In my experience on deer only, I have found that the Barnes 130TSX penetrates/performs almost identically to the 180CoreLokt. If anything, the TSX consistently exits on the hide rather than being caught.

The recoil is much lower on the 130 load.

Undoubtedly a good bullet for elk and moose, but I wouldn't call it the "only one right choice."

I have been lucky enough to have lived in elk country most of my life, and have hunted them for most of the past 50 years.

In the late 60's and early 70's I lived in Steamboat Springs, Colorado which was in the heart of some of the best elk hunting in the world. Five of the first seven elk that I've killed were while I was living there, and I killed them with a .30-06 using 180 grain Sierra GameKing bullets.

In 1975 I moved to Northwestern Montana, and the three elk that I killed there were also with my .30-06 and 180 grain Sierra GK bullets.

I moved to my present home near Bozeman, Montana in 1978, and 21 of the elk and the two Shiras bull moose that I've killed while living here were with my .30 Gibbs (an improved .30-06) and 180 grain Nosler Partition bullets. The last two elk that I've killed were with my .300 Weatherby using a 168 grain Barnes TSX and a TTSX bullet.

Both of my moose and most of my elk (including the elk that I've killed with sub .30 caliber bullets) were one shot kills, and I've never felt that I needed more gun or a heavier bullet.

Accuracy and bullet placement are the most important. Any of the three bullets listed in the original post will easily kill any elk or moose IF they are put in the right place. I'd pick the one that shoots best in MY rifle.

A couple of thoughts here.

First, “examples of one” are often good representatives of “examples of many”. If there is any consistency in outcomes, which is often both desirable and the actual case, there are sound statistical reasons why this is so. Some people foolishly believe you need to shoot a large number of animals to determine how a bullet will behave. This is often not the case at all. For example, if a bullet fails to perform as advertised on the first use and again on the second, what are the chances it will perform as desired for the next 98 uses? Put another way, if the bullet will fail 2% of the time, the chances that both failures will occur on the first two uses are 4 in 10,000. For myself, if a bullet fails on first use it may never get another chance – there are way too many good and well proven alternatives. My first elk was taken with my 7mm RM and a 162g Hornady BTSP InterLock. I was not impressed with its performance and switched to 160g Speer Grand slams instead. The Grand Slams performed flawlessly for two decades. When Barnes introduced the XLC bullets I tried the 160g version in my 7mm RM. After a miserable first use experience involving a very unfortunate buck antelope, the rest of my XLC’s were relegated to target duty only. No regrets and the replacements (North Fork SS, Barnes TTSX and more Speer Grand Slam bullets) have worked flawlessly for the last decade and an half.

Second, Starman’s example of the 286g NP and 300g AF penetration is a quantitative data point – and certainly better than no data point at all. While bullet weights and muzzle velocities were undoubtedly different, the penetrations were what they were. Thank you, Starman, for presenting that information.

Lastly, “what’s good for the goose…” and “the pot calling the kettle black” come to mind…



The fact that none of the target types accurately replicate the mechanical properties of animal tissue doesn’t mean tests using those other media are uninformative. I don’t use gel or phone books or old newspaper, but I do use a lot of water jugs, which, admittedly, is a “hard” medium due to its non-compressive nature. What I’ve seen is that bullets that come apart easily in the jugs also tend to do so in animals. Conversely, bullets that tend to hold together well in the jugs and penetrate deep into the water column also tend to do so in animals, although stopping them in animals can be problematic unless heavy bone is hit.

For example, consider my tests with my .338WM, Nosler 225g AccuBond @ 2742fps and 225g Hornady SST @ 2707fps. The AccuBond retained 140.1g or 62.3%, expanded to .628” and penetrated 6 water jugs. The first Hornady SST retained 98.2g or 43.6% but that weight was all in the small fragments that were recovered as the bullet came apart. Penetration was only 3 jugs. A second SST did better, retaining 126.5g or 56.2%, expanded to .743” and penetrated 4 jugs. The two loads shoot to about the same POI but based on these test results only the AccuBond go hunting – the less expensive SST are used only for target practice. Since that test I’ve taken two elk with the AccuBonds at ranges of 262 yards and 487 yards and, since they were pass-through shots, recovered none. While the first SST was an “example of one”, I didn’t need to shoot another 99 into water jugs to get the information I wanted.

The great thing about water is that it is highly consistent, readily available and dirt cheap. This is pretty much the opposite of animal tissue where angles change, bones and grass-filled gut may or may not be hit and shot opportunities may be limited to a few per year or maybe years or even one or two in a lifetime, depending on how often the hunter gets to hunt with a particular rifle and load.

More great things about shooting water jugs is that, regardless of arguments about their validity as a test medium, they are quick and easy to prepare and set up and a ***LOT*** of fun to shoot.

Which is why I have 40-50 empty one-gallon jugs out in the garage waiting for warmer weather.

Some time when you are going out to the club (BLGC),I'd like to meet you and hit a set of jugs with these 220 gr RN from my 30-06. It would take me a year for me even get 10 jugs.

I think that nose bullets will work great especially with vintage bores that may need recrowning. The non boat tails will help slug the bore coming out the muzzel. Them pesky Barnes bullets are a freaking nightmare for me to load with them deep grooves in the bearing surface of the brass. I like the originals and the blue xlc bullets. Don't like them newer ttsx or tsx things. They are too fussy 2 load 4 me.

Get her a 300 wsm. My wife, 5' 5" or so, shoots a Rem 700 with a youth stock. I also know 3 or 4 other woman, none of whom are large frame, who choose to shoot the 300 wsm. Just get a rifle that fits her, that is more important than anything.


As far as 30-06 bullets go, any decently constructed bullet from 165 on up will kill elk or moose just fine.

Saddlesore -

I'd be very happy to meet you and let you help destroy the jugs. Not only am i curious how the 220's will perform I'd like to thank you personally for your advice about hip surgeons. Last November when I was hunting I didn't think about my hip at all except now and them when I realized that I wasn't thinking about it.

I'll say this, it takes a lot longer to collect the jugs than it does to destroy them. I think Dave (my long time hunting buddy) and I destroyed 44 jugs with 7 shots or something like that last time we were out. I have a couple of contractor-size bags filled with jugs (guessing 40-45 or so) but any you could bring would be a help.

Some nice warm day in the spring...

165 gr. Barnes TTSX is what I've used for Elk, Moose,Deer, and Antelope. No Complaints.