Home Forums Hunting & Shooting Elk Hunting New rifle for 1st Elk / Mule deer hunt

Agreed! And we're lucky enough to have two going on at the same time ...

You’re not buying success by buying a different cartridge.

So this made me contemplate the longest run I can remember on any elk. It was a bull that I shot through and through at about 45 yards, just behind the humerus, as a central double lung hit. I didn't hit the heart or any of the blood vessels at the top of the heart. I also did not break a rib, so there was no additional bone shrapnel. That was a 7mm RM, 175 grain Nosler Partition. That bull ran about a quarter mile - 440 yards more or less - and was going full tilt when he hit a tree, broke a tine off, and finally came to rest. The fastest human time for a 440 yard dash is 44.5 seconds; an elk can probably at least double that. So a 600 yard run could be accomplished in well under a minute. A dead elk can easily live that long.

I will note that most elk shot with that rifle and load have taken few steps if any. Those were mostly hits that involved secondary projectiles in the form of bone shards, and often took the vessels at the top of the heart in addition to double lung damage. All had entry and exit wounds. I have never recovered one of those bullets. Any caliber and load that is similar ought to perform about the same, given similar hits. Enough have been listed in this thread to get the idea.

But, a point was made that you might not want an elk to run 600 yards, or even 440, especially if you have grizzly bears present. A longer tracking job may allow the "competition" to join in with the tracking. So it is a valid point that you don't want to use a combination that may not be as effective as quickly as some others. That bull of mine covered that distance a lot faster than I did tracking. There was no snow. Over that whole distance I found some running tracks in pine needles and one spot of blood the size of my little fingernail. Despite the entrance and exit wounds, he left no real blood trail. I was lucky to find him quickly. Even with a very effective combination, sometimes things don't go according to hopes or plans. Thus, I subscribe to the thought that you should use a caliber and load that is adequate when things are not perfect. And also, I try to put the bullet where it will do the most damage to vitals. Field conditions seldom allow bench precision.

I shot a large cow at 11 yards through both lungs with a 7mm RM 150 grain TTSX. She snuck up behind me in crunchy snow thought it was another hunter until she popped out from behind a tree awkward point & shoot. Through both lungs she ran about 100 yards dropped just before I could shoot her again but that was at almost powder burn range. Only a short way from where an ATV could get with a rope. One of the 2 elk I was able to get out whole. We were exhausted from packing out a bull the day before and wanted to hunt somewhere flatter - turned out to be a great “rest” hunting day. My partners both had close calls chasing elk that were pushed through the woods one pushed a cow into other hunters who shot it after trailing it for a mile.

If you were to peel an elk hit by a 257 WBY pushing a 115 Grain Partition and one hit in the exact same spot with a 150 Partition pushed by a 7 mag, I doubt you'd be able to tell which one was hit with what.

I can't tell the difference in damage to a deer imparted by a 60 grain Partition launched from a 223 and a 115 launched from a 257 Roberts.

If you are simply looking for something different, you could rebarrel your 257 to 7mmRM and save some money buy not buying a new scope and could always have your smith change it back from time to time as necessary.

Have you ever handled a Bergara Wilderness Ridge to know how it fits you? It may or may not make a difference in how well you will shoot it. As will the increased recoil, especially from a .300 WM.

I am absolutely sure that would be the case out to a certain distance say 350-400 yards. Even a 25-06 should produce similar results out to 300? Something of a guess where ft. Lbs drop off to under 1500. And then bullet performance gets less effective and the potential for a lost animal goes way up. Shorter than that going through bone. I recommend to get more performance than his great 257 Bee that the OP skips the 7mm and goes with a 300 of some flavor to get noticeable improvement.

Using my 180 grain TTSX 300 Weatherby load vs a partition 115 gr 257 velocities are still over 2,000 FPS at 500 yards but energy is rounded 1100 vs 2000 foot pounds. One is hopeful the other capable. Nobody who isn’t selling fancy rifles wants to take that long a shot - but it is nice to have the horsepower to do so. Particularly handy if they are wounded and on the way out of public land or your hunting area.

270 Win, 30 06, and 7MM Mag are like peas in a pod and would use any one of them over the 257 Bee. I'vew never used the 300 Winchester, but my 300 H&H worked well. I know all about bullet placement, you can kill a moose with a .22 Long Rifle if you put the 40 grain bullet between its eyes! Always bring enough rifle! Seems like hunters recently think using a lesser caliber rifle means you have a bigger dick, or at least a bigger man bun.

I’ve asked this before, but have never got a good answer.

What is magical about 1500 pounds? If within the velocity window of a bullet, what is 1500 going to do that 1100 won’t?

Finally got to hold a bergara wilderness ridge in 300 win mag today. I must say I’m pretty impressed. Lot of rifle for the money.
After much thought I am going to purchase the bergara, just trying to decide between the 7mm rem mag and the 300 win now.
I have had numerous 7 mags and had no issues with recoil on them.
Leaning that way and shooting heavy for caliber bullets. Have until mid November to practice.

1100 foot pounds gets you in the range of the mighty 222 Remington. Less than a 223 at the muzzle. Less than a 45 long colt pistol generates. So if you advocate elk hunting with your cowboy pistol than 1100 ft pounds seems the right benchmark. It is a 150 yard 30-30 that has killed plenty of elk. If you shoot your elk in the ear hole all of those work fine. My grandfather used the 30-30 rifle to kill a deer at 500 yards - they needed the meat - I think he killed it with the 4th shot - in the head.

I’ve heard minimums of1000 for deer & 1500 for elk as long as I can remember but after killing a couple of deer with a 30-30 I’ve never really looked for minimal killing power. At 17 I bought a 7mm RM because the most knowledgeable gun guy I knew used one. Not sure what motivates someone to flirt with barely adequate killing power and feel if you want to be handicapped a bow is a better tool than an underpowered rifle.

A .243 is more than capable for elk and mule deer. But everyone needs more than one rifle, good luck on your hunt. My advice is, practice shooting under hunting conditions not off a bench and bags.

You have a misunderstanding of how kinetic energy translates to tissue destruction. Or at least you're applying it incorrectly. Kinetic energy is not the dominant factor in the lethality of a bullet. When a bullet has sufficient momentum to penetrate through whatever comes before the vitals in its trajectory, and enough velocity to expand adequately, it does plenty of damage to be promptly lethal.

Understand lethality of a projectile - bullet, ball or arrow - isn’t as simple as a measure of foot pounds but that is the standard used by ammunition manufacturers as an apples to apples comparison so it’s what I used. There are various knock down or killing power measurements but none are so widely accepted.

As I indicate shooting elk in the brain through ears or eyes let’s almost any gun work. My assumption is a classic 50-500 yard heart lung shot as the basis with a challenging angle or shoulder forward shot presentation where you might have to penetrate bone or more paunch to reach the vitals. I’ve killed elk with neck shots & finished cows with head shots but don’t assume that. I’m more comfortable having enough gun - others prefer staying nearer the minimum required to preserve their shoulders? Hearing? Ego? something else?

Even assuming identical shot placement, there are still a number of factors that go into the amount of tissue destruction that a projectile does. Assuming equal shot placement and equal kinetic energy at impact, which does more damage to vitals (with a humerus bone in the path before the bullet can reach the vitals), a .224" 50 TTSX or a .45" 230 HP? Assume that both arrive with enough velocity to experience "full" expansion. It's an over-simplification to equate kinetic energy at impact and tissue damage to vitals.


Typically, it's shot placement. Shot placement precision tends to be proportional to volume of practice and inversely proportional to recoil, muzzle blast, and ammo cost.

I’m fortunate to go on a couple youth elk hunts almost every year. Unless dad is projecting, almost everyone of them is using .243, 7/08, 6.5 Creed, .308 etc. Some of them use my .243 after dad has beat them up with his rifle for a couple months before the hunt.

My daughter and son have both killed multiple elk with a .243. You can call it ego, or whatever you like, but it just works. It’s funny that women and kids can kill the sh it out of things with marginal cartridges, but men need much bigger.

Has there been a couple rodeos in the years? Absolutely, but not because “energy/ knock down power (that one cracks me up) was below 1500. Everyone of them was poor shot placement.

Every once in awhile, I need a dual wheel 3500. I’ll keep driving the 2500 and dealing with that rare time I need more.

My wife once mentioned essentially said the same thing to a guy who asked if a .243 was really big enough to kill a mule deer. He was one of those convinced anything less than some sort of .33 magnum couldn't kill an elk cleanly, mostly because he'd read too much Elmer Keith and had never hunted elk with anything less than a .340 Weatherby.

I would be interesting to know how many elk specneeds has seen shot with smaller cartridges. I have seen quite a few elk taken, but over the decades also have gotten to talk with many guides who've seen a LOT more taken. One was a Colorado outfitter whose clients regularly killed 30-50 elk a year, and he'd been at it for decades. I asked him what he thought was a good minimum cartridge. He said .257--whereupon I asked, "Roberts or Weatherby?" He immediately responded, "Either one!"

I then asked about the .243 Winchester, and he said nobody had ever brought one, but suspected it would work as well.

But whatever....

With the right bullet, small calibers are VERY effective:

https://www.rokslide.com/forums/threads/223-for-bear-deer-elk-and-moose.130488/

If I was building a gun now, it would be a Tikka with a 1/7 .22 CM tube shooting 88 ELDs.

My Aunt over on the adjoining ranch shot everything - coyotes, mulies, black bear, and elk with her .257 Roberts and Core-Lokts.

Always seemed a bit puzzled when hunters showed up with 300 WM, Weatherby, etc.