Home Forums Hunting & Shooting Elk Hunting More bullet gack - elk in the timber

I've been spending alot of time planning next years elk hunt. Google Earthing a couple new places in both Colorado and Wyoming. In the past 3-4-5 years it seems I spend alot of time hunting and killing elk in the timber. Shots on my last 3 elk were: 50 yards, 50 yards, 30 feet. I used 180 Partition launched by a 300 WSM and 150 gr Partition launched by a 270. All elk were sufficiently dead

The thing I'd really like to see is 2 holes. Two of the three elk above were almost head on - getting an exit isn't likely because asking a bullet to drive through 3-4 feet of elk is a tough ask.

So, I'm chewing on a few things. I'm currently thinking a 200 gr Partition from my 30-06 or 300 WSM might be a better mousetrap. Which got me to thinking about larger calibers/heavier bullets. I've had several 35 wh through the years shooting mostly 250 Partitions. That would be ideal for timber - except a 200 gr from my 300 WSM shoots flatter and likely penetrates as far.

In full disclosure, I never really bought into the whole timber rifle concept as some apply it. I see no sense in using something that can't reach out to 3-400 yards if the situation arises. I'd feel handicapped to carry such a rifle but have done so, especially the 45-70.

I also have developed an affinity for light rifles. Anything over 8 lbs all up is too heavy for my style of hunting which involves roaming 2-3-4 miles from the road.

So for those that have done so, any advantage in timber situation to using a 338-06 shooting a 210 or 225, 35 wh shooting a 225/250, or any other such cartridge, over a 200 gr 30 cal?

I can't really see it but am curious what others think. Plus I like thinking about all things elk hunting!

Ive used the 180 and 200 gr Partition on some nice bulls,from a couple of 300 magnums and gotten two holes from both. The 200 gr penetrates deeper more consistently. I once drove one from the back ribs of a bull aiming for the off side shoulder,and broke it. That's a lot of penetration and the bullet was still able to break the leg bones.But it did not exit.

Still I think the 200 will out penetrate the 180.

After using both I sort of concluded it did not matter though. The 180 had enough penetration for any rational angle,and the elk ended up dead; exit or no exit.

I would not over think it.

Of those you list, I've used the 338 WM, 300 WSM, and 30-06. The 338 WM always got 210 NP's, the 300 WSM 180 NP's, and the 30-06 180 NP's (and one kill with the 168 TSX).

The only DRT kills on bulls I've had, apart from spine shots, were broadside lung shots from both the WSM and WM. Both pushing NP's around 2,950. Both shots under 70 yards. Only the 210 NP exited.

I'm of the opinion, if you want consistent exits (I don't really care), I'd run a 250 NP at around 2,650 from the 338 WM, or a 200 NP at 2,800 from the 300 WSM and 2,650 from the 30-06.

The lightest build could be the 30-06, so that would be my choice of those you mention.

A 200 TTSX would give you even more penetration.

I have been hunting elk for most of my life and I am an old man now. I have killed and seen killed more than I can easily count.
In my years as a hunter, a guide and also a gunsmith with 48 years of experience I have come to a few conclusions about elk rifles.
#1, IMPACT velocity is what needs to be looked at, not muzzle velocity.
#2 bigger bullets impacting "slow" out penetrate most light bullets impacting fast. In this context "slow" means impact velocity of 2500 FPS and all the way down to about 1400 FPS.

Most hunters make far too much out of flat trajectory.
The real truth is this. If you shoot a flat magnum, say a 270 WSM or a 300 Weatherby, you STILL need to start holing elevation at ranges past 350. So the logical question is this:
If you can hold your cross hair up 8 inches, why would it be a problem to hold it up 14 inches? Or 60 inches? Or anything else?

In fact, it's not a problem. The problem is not being familiar enough with your tools.

What IS a problem is poor placement from bad marksmanship and poor bullet performance. In the 4 decades of hunting elk and guiding elk hunters I have seen probably 30 elk killed at "long range" that meaning over 450 yards, and of those 30 not more then 7 were killed past 550. Last year I hunting and killed my elk with an 8X57 Mauser with an 18.5" barrel. No problem at all. I practiced with my rifles on steel targets until I could hit a 14" gong out to 500 yards with certainty.
My shot was at about 200 yards. Nice 5X5 bull.

Anyway, my point is simple. For elk hunting I recommend using a bullet that holds its weight and expands out to about 500 years. These days so many "hunters" seem to think they need to rig up for 800 yard shots. In all my years and years and years of hunting I have never one time needed or wanted to take a shot that far on an elk.

I have some flat high velocity rifles. 2 seasons ago I killed my elk with my 270 WSM. Many times I have used my 270 Winchester and I also have two 300 magnums. I have owned 338 mags and other rifles on the last 48 years of hunting too, so I am talking from experience here.
So I am NOT advising against the use of such rifles.

But it's the man doing the killing, not the gun.

What ever you use, learn to use it well. I have killed elk with handguns and bow and arrow. I have done it with flintlocks. I have killed them with all sorts of weapons.

But guys, it's not technical aspects the weapon you need to focus on. It's your skill level with what every you want to use.

If you are in question about rifles and bullets the choice is not hard. Use anything you like that will drive a bullet clear through. Use the bullet that is most likely to go deep and still expand.

More power does not mean deeper penetration. It means a bigger hole, all other things being equal. As an example, I have found nothing so far that out-penetrate 150 grain Remington CL 270 bullet below a 375H&H. I have used 300s, 30-06, 338s, and 8MM and nothing has shown me better penetration than a good 270 bullet. Now my 300s and the 30-06 with 220 grain bullets and my 338 mag with 250 grain bullets make larger diameter wounds, but they are not deeper.


Bottom line is fairly simple. Use a tough bullet and learn to shoot well. I have friends that kill elk every year with 6.5 Swede and another that has killed more elk than I have, (that a LOT of elk) who used a 257 Roberts for most of them. They both tell me the same thing. Use tough heavy bullets.
My friend that used the 257 is a fan of the 115 Barnes X and my friend that uses the 6.5 uses 160 grain Hornady bullet.
They have never lost an elk either.
If in question, go with heavier construction and if possible step up in weight. Trajectory is less important than you think.

If you MUST have 2 holes, the price in recoil (and perhaps rifle weight) will be high.

Otherwise, the Barnes is your huckleberry.

Given the same rifle, say a 30-06, I don't know which Barnes would penetrate the most critter -- TTSX, TSX, 150 grains, 200 grains, etc. Mine is loaded with 168 TTSXs, mostly because the load was designed for hunting on Kodiak. No doubt a 150 would have killed the blacktail dead enough.

szihn,

Excellent post.

I'm of the opinion the Partition does more internal damage than the Barnes. The Barnes also opens to a relatively large front, slowing penetration. I'm fairly certain a 200 gr Partition will out-penetrate a 168 X from, say, a 30-06. And I personally wouldn't load a heavier than 168 X in a 30-06. Not enough juice to open reliably at longer ranges IME.

Personally I like the shrapnel/penetration combination of the Partition over the mono's. But everyone sees the problem differently.

Bob Hagel did penetration tests with Noslers years ago.. The one that gave the greatest penetration was a 7mm mag. with a 175 Nosler, second only by a bit was the.300 with a 200 gr. Nosler.
When we were in Africa, my pal had a .338 with 250 grain Noslers.. We recovered several of his bullets from angle shots on game.. I use a .300 with 200 gr. Noslers, the only bullet I recovered was from a wildabeast. Shot in the left shoulder the bullet was recovered in the hind quarter on the opposite side..

True enough.

Good posts fellas!

I agree wholeheartedly with szihn on use enough gun and be able to hit what your shooting at being more important than the rest of the gack. I see the current trend toward shooting smaller cartridges in, as I see it, frangible bullets and am not quite on that bandwagon. I'll run into more elk at less than 100 yards than 5-600.

I find it a bit comical when 1 of our infamous posters always tells everyone how FOS everyone else's bullet choice is and then quotes 1000+ yard trajectory "where the smaller cartridge/ABC bullet leaves 'them', pick your bullet, in the dust". I always chuckle and wonder how many 1000 yard animals have been taken, and how many more have been wounded that no one ever hears about. If you limit your ballistic gacking to realistic ranges - say the 95% confidence interval which I'll define as 500 yards, any cartridge shooting a non-frangible bullet somewhere around 3000 ft/sec is viable because as szihn points out, you holdover after ~ 325-350 yards any way. You might use KY windage, use a different reticle line, or twist turrets, but you're compensating in some fashion for bullet drop.

I was hoping one of the 35 whelen guys would weigh in. My Dad has killed a couple moose with the Colonel using 250 Partitions and has penetrated alot of moose on its way to the freezer. I've killed some deer with the 35 just because. A 250 will leave 2 holes in a deer

The 200gr. partition is a plow, even at 30-06 velocities. I shot one head on this year with that set-up and it penetrated. Dead critter on the ground almost instantly... I've also dropped bulls with the 300WSM (180 partition) and 338WM. The 180 partition (fired from 300WSM) was found on the offside hide. I have no doubts the 200 would have penetrated. If it were me, I'd stick with a 30-06 under your weight requirement (very easy to do) of 8 pounds and run a 200gr. partition. Buy up a bunch of them when SPS has the blemished ones on sale. The last bunch cost me $13.45/50. You can do a hell of a lot of load development and practicing with your hunting bullet at that price...

I agree...

Good post. I've shot my 338WM a lot and I'll agree with you that the .30 cal 200gr. partition will out penetrate the 250gr. from the 338. The .338 will open up bigger, thus creating a larger wound channel. By doing this, it actually slows the bullet and decreases penetration... I'll bet if Hagel would have used a 7mm mauser (instead of the 7mm rem mag) in the penetration test, he would have still found the 175gr. partition to be a freight train in the plow department... That doesn't mean I'm giving up my 30-06 or 338WM though...

Those old-timers everyone likes to poke fun at today,knew what you could do with a 7 Rem Mag and a 175 gr Nosler Partition.



They learned by killing BG animals.






Gee.....Hagel never knew what he was doing either.

That's why these conversations are maybe a bit shop worn....the info has been out there maybe 4-5 decades






B: Pay no attention to the loads; trivial distractions. That was the old H4831 which was slower. I know both guys had loads tested for pressure at Remington and HP White Labs. But maybe they used antiquated methods.

Wowza - 68 gr 4831 under a 175! I'll bet that less than 65k psi..... NOT.

Every animal will be a little different but those TTSX's penetrate like no other I've seen , My hunting partners daughter drove a 168 ttsx length wise thru a big 6 point in Utah this year and it was still going, the game we have shot with ttsx's don't seem to drop on the spot save a few compared to Bergers or the Partitions we use in the past, but for the most part they work well and are very accurate!

I have no idea. That's the old H4831. Not really important. What those guys used is not that important...it's just discussion.

How come guys get to chase any old velocity they want today and it's "OK", but if they did it back then they were playing fast and loose with their lives? I have seen crazier [bleep] on here than anything Hagel ever did LOL


At least the guys back then made the effort to know where they stood pressure wise. They were not unmindful of high pressures.

Bob Chatfield-Taylor used to send stuff to HP White Laboratories for pressure testing. Hagel sent his loads for some cartridges to Remington, as did Warren Page.For the day, they guessed a lot less than many of us do today.

Several times in my past hunting career,I have looked at the 35 Whelen and a 250 gr bullet, comparing it to my 30-06 and a 220 gr bullet. I always came to the same conclusion that the 35 won't do much more than the .06.

Anyone looking at ballistic tables will soon find out that most heavy for caliber bullets in typical elk hunting rifles,leave the lighter bullets lacking at any appreciable distance.

I am in complete agreement with szhin and probably have about the same number of elk kills and witness to others killing them. In addition to killing a good number of elk with more than a few different chamberings in different calibers

I dont want to send you in to cardiac by suggesting what i'd probably use today..

But it is too bad a guy cant get TBBC anymore.

140gr TTBC, 270wby. head on shot,only move the elk made was his nose plowing in the dirt 6".





Just to hear myself talk, i'll give my .02 on "raking" shots on elk..Most of the time when they turn out bad is because guys aim too far forward.There seems to be a mental block having to aim pretty much into the guts so you can get to the vitals..I learned this the hard way myself, and i thought i knew better.

seen it many times where the bullet goes in behind the shoulder and punches out the brisket, missing everything that makes them live.

The 35 Whelen is good with 250's.Mine is now a 280AI tho.