Were I to use my Swede for elk, I'd have to go with my 140 gr partition load, it's very accurate and chronos just under 2800 fps, I'd want to keep my shots this side of 400 too.
When I posed a simialr question not too long ago, the 140 Interlock got a lot of votes. I also didnt have the LRX available at the time. If I didnt use that I took half a dozen deer this year with a 130gr Accubond, none of them took a step.
I went to my local SW a few days ago to pick up some 140gr ABs, only to discover that they had just gotten in 3 boxes of the 127gr LRX. I picked up a box and will try pairing it with RL16. Alliant data shows a max for the 130gr TSX of 2,883 fps out of a 24" Creedmoor, so I'm hoping for a decent load at 2,850-ish fps out of my 22" barrel. I'm sure I'll wind up trying the 140gr AB a try as well, but with all the good things I've read about the 127gr LRX, I couldn't pass up the opportunity.
Yep, putting mine through a22in tube as well. Hoping to hit he range this week with a few loads and the Magnetospeed. If all goes well and I find something in the .5 range I'll load up the other 200 and call it good.
Were I to use my Swede for elk, I'd have to go with my 140 gr partition load, it's very accurate and chronos just under 2800 fps, I'd want to keep my shots this side of 400 too.
Based on my experience with the 129 Interlock on deer, I would agree with this. I had almost identical results with it at over 200 and at 431 yards on two deer this last season. The bullet was found on the off side of the chest, nicely expanded. I have not used the Partition in my .260, as I do not need it for deer. From my experience with the 7 mm mag on elk, I would say that the Partition generally will penetrate a bit better than most standard bullets. The monos will be the best penetrators-generally.
You did not "seen" anything, you "saw" it. A "creek" has water in it, a "crick" is what you get in your neck. Liberals with guns are nothing but hypocrites.
As an update it just so happens that my 143 eld-x load is hitting same point of impact as my 130 accubond load out to 500 with the only difference being 1 click at 500 yds. I'm thinking I could load a mag with 130 accubonds and my spare mag with 143 eld-x just in case I am presented with a 400-500 yd ish shot. 😀
I am hoping the 140 Hornady will do the same. Finally got some Reloader 26 and my Hornady 140 sp interlocks came in so I'll find out what's what soon.
I've never hunted this way before but it makes sense as I realistically could see elk anywhere from 20 to 1000 ish yds. If I see elk at 1000 ish I will get closer.
I wouldn't bother. That Accubond will do the job at all the reasonable ranges.
You did not "seen" anything, you "saw" it. A "creek" has water in it, a "crick" is what you get in your neck. Liberals with guns are nothing but hypocrites.
130 grain AB's shoot bugholes from my Sako 6.5x55 at a very sedate 2700. The only one I've recovered from a deer was a head on shot at 400 yards from above. It broke the spine wrecked the heart and lungs, exited the paunch and reentered to break the femur which is where I found it. I'd use it on most anything, but that's just me.
There are a lot of good 6.5mm bullets out there these days. I bought a box of the 142?gr ELD-X to try in my 6.5 Swede, if they shoot well, I think it would be fine for elk? Of course, the 140NP shoots well out of mine, so no need for another elk load, honestly.
"For joy of knowing what may not be known we take the golden road to Samarkand." James Elroy Flecker
140grn accubond at 2848fps muzzle, impact at 100yds into milk jugs filled with water, 18+ inches penetration into 4th milk jug which caught it....ended at 85grn
So far i've had good luck with the 127gr LRX over RL16 in my Creedmoor Montana. Both 42.5gr and 43.5gr of RL16 are showing promise. While I only got to shoot one of each over the Magnetospeed, 41.5 was running ~2,840 fps, and 43.5 was running 2,890 fps out of the 22" barrel.
I've also worked on some loads for the 140gr AB, and 42.5gr RL16 will be the focus of my next test, velocites in the 2,750 fps range. I'll try to post some pics when I get back home from traveling this week.
I've had great luck with Accubonds, and even most cup and core bullets, but I've never hunted with a monolithic bullet before. If the 140gr AB winds up shooting as well as the 127gr LRX, i'm not sure which one would be the better choice for cow elk.
I took a 1000 lb bull at 400 yards this year with a 130 gr AB. Mushroomed perfectly and i recovered the bullet from under the skin on the far side. MV was 2820 fps crom my tikka. The bull made it about 10 paces and dropped. The bullet went in behind the shoulder and hit the lung.
I am very happy with the AB and the swede overall for accuracy and penetration.
I've used the 130 accubond at 2850 fps for 3 cow elk, from 250 yds to about 350 yds. Always same result, bullet under hide on far side and one very dead elk, one ran 40 yds on a heart shot, the lung shots all dropped in less than 10 yds. The swede is easy on bullets, just pick one that's accurate, reasonably fast and go shoot your elk.
I'd personally have to see a decent sample size of high velocity impacts at closer ranges of, say 50-125 yards for me to be sold on the ELD-X. Not saying they won't be great, just unknown to me.
Accubond's are a proven killer.
It is irrelevant what you think. What matters is the TRUTH.