Home Forums Hunting & Shooting Elk Hunting Smallish bore rifles on elk?

340/Gravestone; Thanks....I try very hard to be as objective about cartridges as I can because I have found we can get wrapped around them emotionally,which clouds judgement,and that said I did not mean to make it sound like elk and other game shrug off hits from 300 mags and 340's....only that I have here and there seen it happen but even more often I have seen a 340 Weatherby in the hands of my old elk hunting pal, Paul (a cigar chewing,fire plug of a guy with the emotions and physiology of a steel girder ) snuff out elk right now with his 340 Weatherby,a left handed Mark V in a Brown stock.

He is one of those people who handles a 340 like a fairy wand and the 340 in his hands puts a serious bounce on bull elk,and I agree...those magnum mediums do seem to get their attention better than the smaller stuff.

Me, I am more high strung and delicate and can use less bounce at the butt end...

With the better bullets we have today, I think the 'minimum' cartridge needed for most game is less than most think. 15 years ago killing deer with a 223 was out of the question, now with the ttsx bullets its no big deal. (other premiums as well)

Knowing your shooting experience Guy I'd rather have you and your 25-06 in my elk camp than everybody else and their magnums. Pick a good bullet and please share photos!

Matt

Respectively disagree...15 years ago I was in high school and killed deer and antelope (not elk mind you) with 22 CFs and el cheapo wallyworld rounds. Never had a problem but I also have always avoided bone.

When I moved out of CA 12 years ago, a friend had 14 sets of elk horns mounted on the wall of his den. What did he use? A .243 with 87gr BTHP's "loaded as fast as they will go", which I assume means 3200+ fps.

There's all kinds of "elk hunting." Taking a bull in the back 40 or in plains country is a bit different than in the timber. In the timber I'm of the opinion it doesn't hurt to have a little more gas than, say, a 243. Certainly the 243 will work, but I'm generally convinced something like a 270 or 30-06, will work better more consistently.

Interesting thread.

If the draw goes my way, my 30-06/168tsx combo will get the nod for hunting massive Roosevelt bulls in the alpine on Etolin Island in 2013. 243ai and 105's will stay at home.

Here's a 168 TSX from my 30-06 I pulled out of a timber bull. I'd have a lot more confidence in it than anything from a 6mm.

Well you should.

I never hear anybody bragging about the shot they buggered, leaving a wounded animal out there a long way off. We all know this happens, and it happens to good shots, too.

Once the little bullets lose their energy on out, they don't perform well or expand at all, sometimes.

When I was a young married guy with a new baby things got very hard financially. I admit to poaching deer to feed my family back then and did it with a 22 LR. It worked.

Nobody here would be foolish enough to call a 22 LR a deer round.

That's just it... chit happens hunting and I like to stack as many things in my favor, within reason, to ensure a favorable outcome. Hunting elk with a 243 ain't one of them.

It's one thing being a young person with an "un-seasoned" shoulder, it's another thing to being able to handle a bit more recoil, but choosing not to. I can't get behind the latter...

Some "un-seasoned" shoulders for ya. Can't for the life of me see how it gets [bleep] harder or requires more gun as you grow or get older...

None are very big elk... nothing like a mature bull.

And I've personally seen rodeos with the 6mm on elk... both lung shots.

Stow your attitude dude, we're having a pleasant conversation here.

So am I...

Apparently you and I have a different view of pleasant:

DUDE.

Brilliant.

FWIW, this bull took more hits, from first "pop" to turf, of any I've seen. 300 Win Mag and 180 original X.



The two that were recovered would be the left two in the top row.

Ain't it?

Beat's "ignorance" I suppose...

Guess you'd be correct on that one...