Home Forums Hunting & Shooting Elk Hunting Elk load - 2 choices

Unfortunately most are looking for affirmation under the guise of asking for advice.

When I was a kid, everyone opined that the 30-06 was a huge cartridge. Then in the 90's, when I started hunting elk, the 338wm was the ultimate choice. I have to say, that those that don't shoot them well, don't practice enough, or have a propensity towards getting buck fever. I've seen many guys with that issue. So, when I first started hunting elk, I packed around a 338wm. My smaller guns were a 300wby and 300wm. Never even considered a 30-06.

I also remember thinking to myself that brad was right, a 308 winchester would have worked on all of the elk I've killed. I've never lost an elk, but I tend to place my shots well. Doesn't matter if it's a 375H&H, or a 243 winchester.

I'll bet if the person was to ask those guys again, how much they practice with said magnum rifles, he'd be shocked as to how little they really get out and shoot. Jordan, I believe made that claim. And yes, we've all heard the crap a lot before. But, when you pull the trigger, it shouldn't really matter what cartridge the rifle houses, it depends on the proficiency of the shooter/hunter. I'll bet if Jordan were to video those instances, it would also show those dip schidts losing it and having some form of buck fever too. Some guys just schidt in their pants and can't control themselves when faced with killing an animal. That is on them, not the cartridge they use.

Got married in 1995. My wife bought me a stainless 300 Wby Mag as a wedding present. Went to the range to sight it in, the new wife stayed in the car. Every time I shot it she’d roll the window down and shout “Two dollars!”

I didn’t shoot it much.





P

While I believe what you said to be mostly true, my direct experience isn't exactly with how much they shoot, but on average, how poorly. And that includes at the bench during zero check before the hunt, so it's not just a buck fever thing.

I have had "more than a few" so-called hunters tell me, with a straight face, that "they are no good on targets, but they are deadly on deer" (or whatever). I don't even go to the range on "sight in days"...the cussing, grumbling, and shooting the wrong targets make "me" nervous, ha.

How far are you planning on shooting said elk. Inside 3 or 400, it's pretty irrelevant as to what you shoot an elk with. A dang 243 win and a decent bullet would get that job done. If your gonna stretch one out, that's when I'd look at bullets a little more closely. A 140 berger is never a bad choice in a 6.5. But I get it, you've probably got some bullets on hand and wish to use what you got. I'd run the heavier one. That little saum would probably be nasty with a 156 berger elite. Probably wouldn't hurt to invest a little cash on a a good bullet that'll give you the highest success rate possible. Elk hunting can get expensive and be a lot of work. Last thing I'd compromise on is a bullet.

True dat

Killed A LOT of animals from 300 lbs or less with 140 Accubonds running at 3050 fps. That bullet will take down Elk for sure. The efficacy of the 140 really surprised me. It made me wonder why I had put so much emphasis on 150’s.

either will, do it, but I prefer heavier, and I've never had a complaint with the accu.

The numbers on the 140 gr accubond are a little better, and should work nicely. An sd of .287 with a bc of .509 will get you better downrange energy with the extra weight. I would sight it in at 2.5” high at 100, giving me slightly over 3” low at 300 with over 1800 ftlbs of energy (more if you are much above sea level). I don’t have any experience with this bullet, but if the 130 gr - 140 gr bullets in a .270 at similar speeds are ok by many, this should be just as good if not better in my mind.

With the 120 gr ttsx, I would try to keep my shots to about 300 yards, where it will have over 1700 ftlbs of energy. The sectional density of that bullet is .24ish which should work, given it shouldn’t lose any weight while penetrating. Sighted in 2” high at 100 gives me point and shoot comfort to 300 yards.

Which shoots better in your gun?

If I had to choose between those two, the 140 AB.












But I'd go with a 127 LRX over both choices.

I’ve witnessed a bull elk’s reaction to a 140 grain Accubond into the ribs. Granted, this was the .277 variety and started out closer to 3200, but impact at 400 yards resulted in a pass through and liquified lungs.

I’d have no reservations about using it.

None. 162gr Nosler solid base out of a 7Mag gets the job done. why would you use a 6.5 120gr or 140gr on Elk?!

The 6.5 works great on elk f you place it right. the 500BMG isn't worth a darn if you don't place it right! In my old 7mm Rem Mag I used 160gr Speer hot cores and absolutely loved them. In my 6.5x06 I used a40 gr Hornady's and three elk with three shots works for me! My 30-06 I use 180gr Hornady interlocks in and another three for three cartridge. Killing animals is not necessarily about the cartridge you use but how you use the cartridge you have! If I had a 7mm-08 I believe I'd opt for a 154gr Hornady interlock of a 160gr Speer hot core. Have had good success with Hornady and Speer Hot Cores for a lot of years; no reason to change now! Understand the Speer's I use are only Hot Cores.

Says Fudd...

[quote=Pharmseller]Got married in 1995. My wife bought me a stainless 300 Wby Mag as a wedding present. Went to the range to sight it in, the new wife stayed in the car. Every time I shot it she’d roll the window down and shout “Two dollars!”

I didn’t shoot it much.





quote]

😂

I've shot 23 elk with my 7-08 and 140 accubonds, seen another 6 shot with my rifle as well. My wife has shot 2 six point bulls with her 7-08 and 140 accubonds. My oldest nephew has killed 2 bulls, 2 cows with his 7-08 and 120 grain ballistic tips. Youngest nephew has shot one bull with his 7-08 and 139 grain Hornady interlock. He also killed his first elk with a .243 and 100 grain nosler solid base.

Elk aren't hard to kill unless you make crap shots.