Home Forums Hunting & Shooting Elk Hunting .264 Win Mag for elk

I'd like to hear your experiences with the .264 Win Mag for elk

It works very well using 140 Nosler Partition. Aim for opposite shoulder and keep it about 600yds or less. Experience does not include other bullets with this round. Last shot a youngish bull moose with it...200yds, 1 shot, went 30 ft and dead with bullet under hide on opposite shoulder. Mac

LOL! I would not expect a lot of replies since the .264 Win Mag is not a very common cartridge. Happy Trails

Says you.

My youngest son (age 33) took a nice 300" 6x6 last year with a 140gr Partition in a 264. MV was about 3000fps, bull was 200ish yds. Two shots thru lungs and he toppled over.

The 264 is a great round and with today's quality bullets, there is damn little that you can't kill with one, I shoot 130 gr accubonds and the damage is unbelievable. Good luck and post pics.

Personally, I have never used the .264 Win Mag. However, five different hunting partners over the last 54 or so years have done so. All killed elk, and I don't remember any of them taking more than one shot. All were handloaders and they all shot Partitions, although I no longer remember exactly which bullet weights and other pertinent info. With good bullets and a rifleman who can shoot, they seemed to work about as well as anything else.

Edited to add: The first elk I saw harvested with a .264 Win Mag was a really big Wyoming bull taken with one shot at well over 400 yards. We had no range finders in those days, but two of us paced it off just because it seemed such an impressive feat at the time.

No 264 Win here, but I have killed an elk or two with 140 gr Partitions. I wouldn’t hesitate to do it again.

Pals have killed lots of elk with the 125 part. In the .264.. I love the round and have had 3 or 4 of them.. But never killed an elk with any of them..

Not long range, but took my 2016 bull with a 142 ABLR at 137 yards.

My experience is that I took mine as a backup on last year's hunt and felt plenty sparky about it. It would have done the job if called upon.

Perhaps the most effective elk killer I’ve had a great deal of experience with is the .270 Weatherby Magnum using 130-150 grain bullets. Barnes TTSX & TSX plus Nosler Partitions have been absolutely devastating on elk.

The second most effective elk killer I’ve used has been the 6.5x284 using 120 TTSX and 125 NPT. Again, impressive results on bulls out to a quarter mile.

I’ve also killed multiple bulls with both the .300 Wby shooting 180s and the .338 Win Mag shooting 210-250 premiums. Both the .270 Roy and 6.5x284 have been more impressive on elk than either.

Even though I have no direct experience with it, since the .264 Win Mag falls right between the .270 Wby and 6.5x284, I cannot imagine that it will be anything less than supremely effective for you. Find a 120-140 grain bullet that will hold up to its velocity and enjoy the DRTs.

I did not imply that it was not a great cartridge for elk or anything else, but it sure doesn’t make any “top whatever” list of popular calibers based on rifle or ammo sales. Perhaps it will experience a resurrection with the current 6.5 mania. Happy Trails

Nicely done.

How much on-game experience with the 142 ABLR can you share? Also, which cartridges and at what velocity?

I have a 6.5 Creedmoor that really likes that bullet at 2730.

Was that a NW Colorado bull by chance?

Actually, a SW Colorado bull.

I'm shooting the 142 ABLR in both my 264 and my 6.5x55. The Swede trumps in the accuracy dept.

100 yards, 4 shots IMR 4350 for the pushin' lotion




I've taken a couple of Axis does out to about 250 and a couple of whitetails from 100 - maybe 250 with the Swede and this elk and a couple of whitetail out to 350 with the 264

The .264 WM is a great cartridge. Dont hesitate to use it. 160gr Woodleighs are the way to go.

If you need dies, brass or bullets let me know as I have some I'd be willing to part with as I sold my .264 a while back

Very limited experience here, but loaded some 160 gr Woodleighs for a buddy back iirc in the mid to late 90's, think these bullets were proto types back then, don't remember where he said he got em, anyway, worked him up a load for his 264 WM, thinking muzzle velocity was in the high 2900's, he smoked a big bull at 200 yards or so, complete penetration that I remember to be in excess of three feet.

If I were to load one today for myself, I'd use Retumbo, H-1000, or H-4831 and the 140 gr Partitions, would be looking for an accurate and temp stable 3100 fps.

My first .264 was a pre-64 Model 70 Winchester that had belonged for many years to a local rancher. He handloaded the 129-grain Hornady Interlock Spire Point and killed a lot of elk at ranges out to 500+ yards with no problems.

Bbear, nice non-typical Bull. I’ve seen some brow tines up north similar. Happy Trails, WAM

Can you provide feedback on the ABLR’s performance on these game animals? Penetration, pass-throughs, bone breaking, exit wound details, etc.

The elk took two to put down for good. Dang thing just didn't understand he was dead and heavy brush was all around him. First shot passed completely through both shoulders and exited leaving a hole about the size of a half dollar. He dropped in his tracks, then stood back up facing away. I was taught as long as they're standing, put another round in. Second shot entered the right ham and through the 'near' shoulder. Found that bullet in the meat on that side when boning it out. It weighed 59 grains.
Everything else was complete pass through leaving quarter to fifty cent sized exits. Other than the elk, all were one-shot and done.
I also use the AB in a couple of 25-06's, a 243 and a 30-40 Krag (in development).

Have been shooting the 264 mag since 1964. Still have my Rem 700 264 ( 23 1/2" stainless Bbl. ) bought new in 1964 & still shoots great.. Since the Barnes "X" came out & now the TSX the 120gr has been my bullet of choice. When used in any of our 6.5's it gives complete penetration. The 264 mag with one of the ultra slow powders will drive the Barnes 120gr TSX at 3450 to 3500fps from a 26" Bbl. 3400+ from a 24" Bbl. It will drive this 120gr TSX bullet completely thru an elk even at an acute angle. Used to use the Nosler 140gr partition at 3200+ but have found the Barnes 120gr TSX will out penetrate it. A tough deep penetrating bullet properly placed will always bring an elk down.

If a 150 gr. c&c with a 308 or 06, bullet will do the job what makes anyone think a 140 gr. bullet (especially in premium) in 6.5 won't? The only elk I have taken was at about 150 yards with a .260, using 140 gr. Corelokt. DRT. Bang flop. Went down so fast I didn't see it go down - and there ain't a lot of recoil there!

The .264WM will do fine.

I was looking for one for long range caribou hunting in 1974 who I came on a fancy grained RU77V in .25-06........Kicking myself yet for selling that thing off a few years later. Didn't think it was "enough gun" for moose, but I've gotten less stupid since..... allegedly.

I have a Lipsey #1 in 264WM (26")& I will start working up a load this summer with the 120TTSX, don't expect a powder charge weight but what powders have you tried to get 3500fps? I have a good bit of H1000, Retumbo, RL 26 & 33.

Please understand the info I giving you here is safe in my rifles. You should always start low & work up. All loads are with the CCI LR mag primer & Barnes 120gr TSX bullet.a proven elk killer.
"Ireco 85" a now discontinued powder of which I have 8 lbs. 72grs = 3514fps in my rifles 26" Bbl. ( If we were closer I'd share a couple lbs with you ) .
"Vihtavuori 24N41 also a discontinued powder ( might maybe be some around ) 74grs = 3456 fps.
"Reloader 33" readily available. 76grs= 3468 fps.
"Vihtavuori 20N29" also a super slow powder I wanted to try but as yet have not. Main reason it only comes in 8lbs container.
Hope this to be helpful to you. Feel free to PM me if you wish more info.

is It a model 70 super grade or a sako pre-Garcia you are going to use?

I have shot 10 or 11 Elk with a 264 Win Mag. Also around 30 Mule Deer, It kills them dead!!! I also shot a Leopard and a Mid Asian Ibex with it. I shot the Leopard with 140 Partitions but the 120 Barns TTSX is my go to bullet.

Thanks, yes I work up with caution, thanks

Nomo, all of those powders you listed will work. Which one, only your rifle will tell you. Mine likes the 142's and RL 33.

As an added thought. You probably are aware but for those reading this post that have never used bullets like the Barnes TSX/TTSX may not be aware. . As stated by Barnes you should start with these bullets seated .050 off the lands . Some where between .030 & .070 off the lands is where you will most likely find your rifles accuracy sweet spot. On my several 6.5 rifles my accuracy sweet spot has been between .030 & .020 off the lands. If you don't see the accuracy you like try changing the seating depth +/- by no more than .010 at a time. Some times as little a change as .005 can make a significant difference. I have seen some rifles that love the extra long jump of .070 off the lands. Be patient & take your time.

I think there are only about 5 respondents that have personal experience with the .264 WIn Mag. The rest offered anecdotes about other cartridges or their buddies’ successes. No doubt the .264 is a capable elk cartridge, just not widely used; backing up my original assertion. Happy Trails

So what, The OP was obviously interested enough. Yeah, your post is vindicated. Good for you.

That really makes be laugh.

If the 6.5 Creed is more than good for elk, then the 264 WM is waaaaaaaaay more than good.

MM

My experience w/ 264 Win Mag. One bull.

Berger VLD @ 496 yds. Did not penetrate opposite side ribcage.

Earlier my 1st shot skipped off ribcage. Angle was too acute. Prolly could have happened with any caliber. Knocked the bull off his feet and left a heck of a bruise below the hide.

Tough crowd....

Roger that MM.

as a hunter ,reloaded and a gun dealer I always point out to people interested in a accurate flat shooting cartridges I tell them 264 win.mag,270 weatherby mag or a 257 weatherby mag because all 3 are great cartridges and have a lot less recoil that the bigger magnums. all 3 cartridges hit like lightning I myself own all 3 of them too my favorite 2 are a 257 weatherby mag and 264 win. mag . when I was a kid and poor I always wanted a 264 win. mag well now I have 2 both in pre-64 model 70 Winchesters !

The .264 mag & 6.5's in general are gaining in popularity rapidly. The 6.5 has cut considerably into the sales of so called main stream cartridges of the past. For 125 years 6.5's have been taking all manner of game world wide including moose in Scandinavia. !20 years ago"Karamojo Bell" ( Walter Dalrymple Maitland ) took numerous elephant's & over 400 head of every type of African plains game with the 6.5MS using 160gr solids & 159gr RSN bullets at barely 2300fps. Tough bullets, deep penetration. He averaged 1 1/2 shots per animal. That means a considerable amount of the game was taken with "1" shot. Also no scope, open sights only. Now think about the advanced powders & bullets available to the hunter of today like the Barnes TSX/TTSX. The rest of the world has know about the ability of the 6.5 for over a century while the US hunter is just recently understanding it's capability. The 264 mag. is a superb hard hitting flat shooting cartridge with reasonable recoil. Those who prefer the traditional cartridges are having a difficult time seeing their favorite cartridges being over shadowed by the 6.5. which is why they attack it. Attacking the 264 shows just how much popularity it is gaining. You see Winchester producing several versions of their rifles in the 264 mag. A new stainless feather weight M70 in 264 will be available this fall. . If the demand were not there it would not be produced. Remington also producing the 264. Whether you prefer the 6.5CM/260 Rem, to 26 Nosler the 6.5 is showing it self to be an outstanding cal.capable of taking mice to heavy game just by changing the bullet. Try one your self & understand.

Took my 6.5-06 AI on one elk hunt but didn't tag out. Carried 160 Woodleigh PP over H1000. They shoot really well. My gun is twisted 1:8. May use it this fall again.

Hey there my friend. Within my stable of 6.5's resides a 6.5-06. Using the Barnes 120gr TSX has proved it very capable of taking elk cleanly with complete pass thru shots. I guarantee your 6.5-06 with your 160gr bullets is well capable of heavy game. Have no doubt!!!! Use it with complete confidence. Me & mine have taken elk with the 260 Rem/6.5x55/6.5-06/264 mag. All one shot kills. We take one to two elk each season.. Once you actually tale elk with your 6.5 you will understand. Just remember a proper sight picture, a squeezed trigger with the bullet properly placed = elk on the ground. Good hunting .

I haven't killed an elk, but my 264 shoots tiny little groups, that you could cover with a quater at 200 yards with this load.

WAM, the OP wanted to see experiences of the 264 on elk. The OP did not ask what anyone thought of the 264 or any other non-related BS. That's all, nothing personal at you and no "toughness" here. Thought this needed saying as it was not getting across but it was obvious. Take care out there. Mac

When the OP asked about the effectiveness of the 264 mag on elk it means a "6.5 bullet" at a certain velocity delivered to the elk. Regardless of the brass case behind the bullet. Since various 6.5's using a bullet like the Barnes 6.5 120gr TSX has proven to be effective on elk it seems reasonable to assume that out of a 264 it will fly faster & flatter. I see this as pertinent information... Every one who contributes bits of info on the 6.5 bullets at any velocity gives a better understanding to the OP of the 6.5's capability. I have taken a fair amount of elk myself & observed many taken by others with various cal's. The 6.5 whether it be a 260 Rem or a 264 mag has proven to be very capable. They will put an elk down & dead just as fast as any other cartridge with a tough deep penetrating bullet like the Barnes TSX properly placed. I have seen elk struck multiple times with large cal's & heavy bullets improperly place which finally put the elk on the ground & then required a finishing shot. Shot placement is important no matter what cartridge you use.

Mac, no offense taken. I think some of the comments did little to answer the OP’s original question, including mine. I find that many on this innanet are of the “ ready, shoot, aim” crowd. Good luck hunting in N. Ideeho from E. WA. Happy Trails

Yes they are. Same to you over there!

I have taken 1 bull elk (6 point) with my 264 using a Swift Scirocco II 130 grain. I have taken elk with numerous rifles shooting many cartridges. The 264 works well, as do many others.

8mmwapiti

I’ve killed elk with the 264 using 140 partitions, 120 ttsx, and 130 accubond. 140 partitions are my preference for elk, but I usually load 130 accubonds because I don’t only hunt elk. I did lose one with an accubond that I believe hit the shoulder based on her limp and good blood trail, at first. I really like the versatility of the cartridge for western hunting.

I cannot argue with your choice of the 140 Partition for Elk as I load that bullet in the Swede @ 2700 and the Creed @ 2800 and my Wife took 1 Bull with each load. Because I have not tried the 120TTSX yet, I wondered what you observed with that bullet that kept it out of 1st place for that application.

The Barnes 120gr "X" & now the 120gr TSX/TTSX have always given me & mine complete penetration with any 6.5 from the 260 Rem to the 264mag.on elk. We have never recovered one of the 120gr Barnes from an elk.The advantage the 264mag has is a faster, flatter trajectory. Consider a Barnes 120gr TSX at 3450 fps. Sighted + 1.5" @ 100, +0.35 @ 200 , -5.30 @ 300yds & -16.67 @ 400yds. That means from in your face to 300 + yds dead on hold. Time of flight is also incredibly fast for an elk round. For sure such a stout bullet is not needed for deer but keeping your 264 sighted with the 120gr TSX for both deer & elk will work.

I have been hunting elk and guiding hunters for most of my life, and I am getting to be an old man. Funny thing is that in all the years I have hunted and guided, I have never seen an elk shot with a 264 Mag.
I have seen them killed with 6.5X55, 6.5-06 and 260 Remingtons. What I can tell you is that all 3 of the above shells mentioned work fine if the bullets hold together.

But driving a bullet faster can make it come apart a lot worse, so my best guess would be to use a bullet of 140 or heavier, and get a Nosler Partition, Swift A-frame, any bonded or any expanding solid, and you'll be fine.

Stay away from any bullet that weights less then 60% of it's unfired weight when it stops.

The 264s I have seen used were all used against mule deer, and I can tell you that they were accurate and had a LOT of range, so I am sure you'll be fine using one on elk, as long as you shoot "elk bullets", not target bullets or any bullet that comes apart and completely sheds it's jacket.

Lack of reaction and longer time till fainting to 3-4 well placed rounds and similar effects with a similar 130TSX out of a 270 WSM on elk a year or two prior. Full penetration, but I get those with Partitions too.

Yeah, don’t use one of those 130 grain Berger VLD’s or 139 grain Scenars. For sure.

Where is Seinfeld when you need him?

Interesting...

How'd you get to 60%?

Did somebody declare war on mule deer and I missed it?

I've always been intrigued by the.264 and have had three, but have never hunted elk with any of them. However, I'm sure the cartridge would be adequate with a good bullet.

I haven't shot that many elk, but I've been on many do-it-yourself and guided hunts over the last thirty or so years. I've run across a number of hunters on both types of hunts but never found one that used a rifle chambered for any 6.5 cartridge. Last season, on a guided hunt in New Mexico, my guide told me of one of his clients that killed a bull the previous year with a 6.5 Creedmoor. So now I know it happens, even if it's not a .264...

"How'd you get to 60%?"

When I was CEO of Cast Performance several years ago we did a LOT of tests of our bullets and compared them to every other bullet we could, in penetration and cavitation. I have found that expanding bullet that retain 60% or more of their weight will nearly always give full penetration in large deer and elk too. It's not gospel, but it's a good rule of thumb.

You'll see I wrote 60%--------meaning AT LEAST 60%.

When shooting machined expanding solids in a 223 that weight 65 grains I found that in our ballistic test trough shooting into media and real bones that a 223 will out penetrate many 30 caliber 150 and 165 grain bullets that come apart. Notably the Sierras and some of the Speers. The "wound channels" are narrower, but far easier to control. Very few deviate from the direction of impact more then about 10 degrees. With fragmenting 30 cals it was common to get wide wounds, but the bullets can and often do turn as much as 30 degrees. On rare occasion I have seen them turn over 60 degrees.

A poor bullet that hits the heart or both lungs is still devastating most times. And hunters that are good marksmen do well with them most times, because they place them right. But a bullet that holds together also does well. Many times the "electric-kill" you see with the poor bullets is not quite as dramatic with a bullet that doesn't break up, but you don't loose game hit with them in the right place either. And they give you exits nearly every time if you are not pushing the edge of the envelope too hard. (as an example, shooting elk with a good .224 bullet is not likely to get many exists either, but 120 grain 25 calibers often do)

The positive point to a bullet that holds together is when the angles are not perfect and you need to break a bone on the close side of a deer, elk, moose bear or whatever. Burgers and many Sierras, as well as many Speer bullets break up on bone (even light bone like a rib) and not penetrate well, and very often don't penetrate straight.

This is my reason for my own preference in bullets.

I want exits, every time. I admit I don't always get them, but I do most of the time.

I want to be able to make the exit right where I want it, or to be or at lease very close to where I want it. Good bullets do this for me.

The fragmenting explosive bullet do kill very fast if you get them into the area of the chest you want them to be. But they don't always cooperate, and I have seen this so many times as a hunter and as a guide that I just don't take the chance much anymore.

60% + seems to be a good rule of thumb to follow.

Some "plain vanilla" bullets hold 60% or more a rule, so you need not always spend big money of a very good bullet. Many of the Remington Core-Lokts do very well (especially the older ones) and the Winchester Power Points seem to think they are Nosler Partition in many cases.
So it's not a matter of expense. Just paying attention to the jacket taper and thickness is a good way to start. Bonded core bullets are very good as a rule too.

Szihn: not quibbling with what you say. But velocity is a pretty important variable, too. Should it not be included in the discussion?

Absolutely. And a good point you bring up too.

But the base line remains. If you have a bullet that retains (as an example) 80% of it's weight at an impact velocity of 2300 and you fire it from a large magnum so it impacts at 2700 you may find that the excellent bullet fired from a 30-40 Krag is terrible from a 300 Weatherby. So your point is spot on.
My base line of "60% weight retention or more" covers all the bases, even when you thrown in impact speed. If your rifle will cause a bullet to come apart at realistic impact velocities, use something tougher.
By the same token, if you have a bullet such as a Barnes X or Swift A-Frame that is very good from a 300 Weatherby, but you fire it in a 30-40 Krag, you may find that it will not expand past about 125 yards, and in some cases not past 75 yards.

Select a bullet that expands and doesn't break up in YOUR rifle, and you will do fine on an elk hunt.

[quote=szihn]

[But the base line remains. If you have a bullet that retains (as an example) 80% of it's weight at an impact velocity of 2300 and you fire it from a large magnum so it impacts at 2700 you may find that the excellent bullet fired from a 30-40 Krag is terrible from a 300 Weatherby. So your point is spot on.
My base line of "60% weight retention or more" covers all the bases, even when you thrown in impact speed. If your rifle will cause a bullet to come apart at realistic impact velocities, use something tougher.
By the same token, if you have a bullet such as a Barnes X or Swift A-Frame that is very good from a 300 Weatherby, but you fire it in a 30-40 Krag, you may find that it will not expand past about 125 yards, and in some cases not past 75 yards.[

>>>> very well said szihn ! our crew all use nosler partitions and swift a-frames bullets out of our 257 weatherby mags. which to many of us is very similar to a 264 win.mag. , for deer and elk these two cartridges 257 & 264 do kill these animals fast.

Very interesting..... I started reloading for a .264 Mag in a 26" Finnbear. This was late '60s and did not have a lot of rifles back then. I wanted to shoot 140G. Nosler Partitions and had to load them. Hunted all over with that rifle and shot everything from Antelope
to bears in the Yukon and Alaska. Moose, Caribou, Fannin Sheep and a number of Mulies out West . One Elk around Thermopolis. The .264 is a good killer with the partitions. Never loaded anything else.

Never shot a whitetail as I hunt in Northern , Wi.......but a couple times I had that long open shot and wished for the Sako. The .264 got me started reloading... and I load for many cartridges now,but I hate reloading now . When I find a good shooting commercial load I use that.

The .264 is best when used in a 26" BBL. Prolly mentioned already. The short barreled Westerners don't do it.

No doubt as to the value of weight retention in penetration, ..what about the factor of frontal area
and how it effects penetration?

Do you find controlled weight loss contributes more to penetration than controlled frontal area?





If you wanted to achieve better chance of exits every time, would you be more focused on limiting bullet weight loss
or limiting expanded frontal area?...ie;..Do you think one effects penetration more than the other?

If one wants exits.....I can't thinkof a better bullet than an A-Frame

^^^^^^
Yes another point to think about. If we look at any bullet I know of that doesn't shed it's jacket, the best I have seen in expansion compared to original diameter is about 2X. In other words the very best 25s will be about 50 cal when they stop, the very best 30 cals will be about 60 cal ----- and so on.
If we look at 60% retention of a 30 cal 150 grain we see a retained weight of 75 grains and at best a diameter of about 60 cal. Such performance will be deadly in the right place, but seldom will exit game. that's why I like heavier bullets then 150 grain for elk. It's also why I was so surprised and pleased with the number of exits I got a few years ago from the Winchester 150 grain power Points on elk. I recovered 2, and those weighed 129 and131 grains. It would have been "better" if I had recovered none, but I also would not have learned how well those bullets worked. I am betting that if I'd been using 180 grain power Points I would not have recovered any.
now the idea that some bullets will open up to a larger diameter than others is absolutely true, but I know of none that average more then 2X original diameter and don't loose more then 40% weight. So the theory you examine is valid and worth study, but I don't see any real-world application of it with frontal resistance being over 2X original diameter. I would not be dogmatic and say that are none, but so far in about 50 years of doing this, I have not personally seen one yet.

bullet that opens up to about 30% over original diameter and still holds together is a very good bullet for elk in most cases. To illustrate, I look at the Swift A-frame 180 grain shot from a 30-06. The nose will mushroom out to about 45 cal and you don't recover many from game. Shot into out test trough we see excellent penetration and bone breaking ability, but a narrower wound channel they you might get with a "softer" bullet. But the wound channel is larger enough in diameter to kill quickly and the fact that penetration is 100% means that you actually get more blood loss then you would from a large but shallow wound as you may see with a Sierra Game King. So matching the bullet to that size of the game is important in marge animals but less so in small er animals. A 3/4" diameter wound clear through a whitetail will kill it fine, but the deer often will run a short distance farther than if you had a 2" wound 75% of the way through that same whitetail. BUT the large diameter wound from a bullet that comes apart is sometimes a wound that veers off and can be gory but not hit the organs you want it to hit. Not often, but it does happen.

My outlook on these thing is pretty simple. Unless I am wanting to test a bullet (like I did 2 seasons ago with the 8mm 170 gr SSTs) I fall back on what I know. That is simply that a 100% penetration with 30% expansion is always good. A 50% penetration with explosive expansion can fail, sometimes dramatically. So if I am in a place to choose, I take narrower wounds that got through in a fairly straight line over the possibility of bullet failure.

In Africa the largest of game is often shot with non-expanding bullets. Why? Because for many years many if not most expanding bullets would break up on Buffalo, Hippos Elephant Rinos and sometimes even loins. Solids didn't. Now days I recommend expanding bullets even for the largest game in Africa, but that's because the bullets we have today beat the pants off what we had only 40 years ago. The idea that a bullet that will kill a hippo is not good enough to kill a deer seems a bit simple minded to me. There are better deer bullets. I don't deny that! But the solids would kill deer just fine too. A bullet that goes from say a 264" to a 35 cal on a deer and hold 60% or more of it's weight is going to kill any deer you shoot with it and do it well. (Baring the times you gut shoot them. A gut shot deer hit with a 12 gauge slug can run a long ways, as many here will attest)

My Garndsons and my Daughter have all killed elk with a 257 Roberts using Nosler and Barnes bullets and all have been good kills with exits. Those kills were not as dramatic as some I have made with larger rifles, but none of their bulls or cows ran more than about 30 yards after the hits.

I have many bad memories of tracking down bulls hit with 300 mags and 7Mm mags that were shot poorly, and also about 15 that were shot in the right place, but with bullets that failed. The 300s and the 7 Mags are GREAT elk guns, but no gun or cartridge is as good as it could be if the bullet you shoot breaks up. I hear that "bullet ___" did fine for me" all the time. I believe them too. But those that tell me that often have not hjunted elk for 50 years and seen more then they can count killed. I have. I see a pattern and I am relating what I have learned to all who want to learn from my experience. "my ___ bullet was fine" is true many times, but I can say that the best bullets for the job are fine too, and I have not seen a pattern of failure with them. So if you have a 90% chance of satisfaction with bullet X and a 99.99% chance of satisfaction with bullet Y, it just makes sense to choose bullet Y. Until you have killed many dozens of elk the statistical eventuality of what works and doesn't work is not learned --------------------------------- unless you learn from the mistakes of others.

I offer my experience to all who want to know. Free of charge too. (I already paid for the knowledge) Those that want to learn from their own experience are well within their right to do so. But I have seen mistakes made and made more then my share too, so I can tell you that I think "bullets Y" are Nosler Partitions, Barnes X, Swift A Frames, About anything bonded, from any maker, and in cup and core bullets the ones I have seen that work very well have been 120 grain Remington 257 cal power points, 150 grain 270 cal Remington Power Points, Hornady 160 grain 6.5MM round noses, 175 grain Hornady 7MM Spire points, 220 grain round nose 30 cals from both Hornady and Sierra, 30 caliber Winchester Power Points in 150 and 180 both, and the Remington 180 grain Core-Lokts made in the 70s (newer ones seem to be made with lighter jackets) and 375" 270 grain Winchester Power Points are some of the best performing bullet I ever used in my 375H&H. Now my recommendation here are shallow because of the exact detail Starman brings up. What was working so well for me may not be the best for you if you shoot a faster cartridge than I did. What works to perfection at 2500 FPS may be a total failure at 3200 FPS.

So I almost always come back to the foundations. Nosler partitions Barnes X, Swift A-Frame and if you don't use these test to see if your bullet will hold 60% of it's weight. If it does you are likely to be fine

You had me until you began referring to "Remington Power Points"....I suppose you drive a Ford Silverado?

Oops!
Winchester Power Points.
Remington Core-Lokts

Sorry

😉

140 Berger HVLD, 3100 fps mv.

Damn target bullets. I sure hope you got a pass-through.

Nice bull. Looks like neck hit....

I’ve got a WY cow elk tag this year! What bullet and load should I use with my 260? I may try that 6.5 SAUM.

A-Frames do not always guaranty an exit, I shot a big muledeer in Idaho that stopped a 200 gr A- Frame in his shoulder at 85 yds shot from a 300 win mag , I really expected an exit but was not to be, perfectly mushroomed and didn't lose much weight!

Yup.....NOTHING guarantees an exit....that's a given always.

I can a TSX or TTSX will penetrate deeper.

vapodog,

Actually, A-Frames tend to exit less often than many other bullets, because their bonded front core expands widely.

In fact, this is a basic characteritsic of bonded bullets. They tend to expand into a more rounded, wider "mushroom" than either monolithics such as the TSX, Nosler E-Tip and Nornady GMX, or mechanically controlled-expansion bullets like the Nosler Partition. The expanded front ends of TSX's and Partitions usually have less frontal area, so tend to punch through the hide on the far side of an animal more often than the wide, rounded mushroom of A-Frames, and other bonded bullets such as the Hornady Interbond, Nosler AccuBond, Norma Oryx, North Fork Soft Point and Woodleigh Weld-Cores.

Thanks for that post John. My previous experience with A-Frames has been in a .300 H&H Magnum using 200 grain bullets on African plains game. All were shot through the rib cage and all exited.....but that probably would have been the case if I were using core-lokts or interlocks, or other traditional cup and core bullets. Further the distances were relatively short.....less than 200 yards with Kudu, Gemsbok, and zebra. I did use the same gun and bullets on a whitetail once only because I had them left over from the previous hunt. I never found the bullet but suffice it to say, I had no trouble following a massive blood trail the 25 yards to the very dead deer.

I'm currently changing all my big game rifles to monometals (for personal reasons) and it's reassuring to know that I'll likely not give up a thing in terminal performance because of it. I've read a great many positive posts on the subject of all copper bullets and they mostly all say the same thing....echoing just the words you have posted here.

Vapodog, I have never had or seen a TTSX or TSX in 7mm or .30 caliber fail to exit an extremely dead critter nor have I had to track one more than a few yards. I would expect similar performance in .264 or any other caliber. Same with the 225 gr Trophy Bonded Bear Claw in .35 Whelen and 160 gr TBBC in 7mm Mag. Happy Trails

No elk, but lots of moose. When we came to Alaska in 1965 my Dad brought his pre-64 Mod. 70 in .264 Winchester. It had a 26" barrel and a steel butt plate and a Bausch & Lomb Balvar 2-8 scope and the adjustments were in the mounts.

He also brought several pounds of surplus H4831, a bunch of Winchester brass and CCI 250 magnum primers. He load measured with one of those little yellow plastic Lee cups and he had been using that system for a long time to load his own ammo. The only bullet he used in Alaska was the older style 140 grain Nosler Partition. His longest moose shot was around 500 yards and many moose were slain with one shot from that fine old rifle. It was usually a lung shot and a dead moose shortly thereafter.

I have heard elk are harder to kill then moose, ya got me. If they were hit in the same place I have a hard time picturing them being tougher. But, moose can be bigger and if that Partition hits an elk in the right place he is dead.