6.5 saum

120gr TTSX at ~3250

Or

140 accubond at ~3000

Which do you choose and how good do you feel about it as an elk rifle. Assume both are really accurate

No other choices please

Tia

I am sure that both loads would be adequate. But the 140 grain Accubond at 3000 fps mv is exactly what I load in my father’s .264 Win Mag and it is an excellent all-around load.

We have had very positive results with the Accubond on elk in multiple calibers and weights. It works VERY well!

Bull elk or cow hunt?

Bull

Accubond.

TTSX for me, never a problem in any caliber I’ve used them in.

Cabin fever setting in. Flip a coin and go hunt.

Either will do the job if you do yours. I shot my bull this year with a 338 Accubond @ 225 grains. I’m risk averse though.

Accubonds are always excellent!

Wouldn’t pick those two, but they’d work.

Scenarshooter wrote the book on it ,bet he would say 139 scenar or stay at home and do what your wife tells you to. Mb

TTSX.
The true test of a bullet’s terminal performance is up close and personal. Most hunters don’t seem to consider that. The TTSX will hold up and hold together.
The AB is a good bullet, but asking a lot more of it when it hits bone at 2900fps.

The last four years I’ve killed six elk. One at ~250, the remaining at 80 yds or less. After 53 years of elk hunting that is pretty representative of my ratio of elk killing distances.

The 140 Accubond would be my choice and is in my 26 Nosler pushing them around 3450 fps. Last elk I killed with it was 127 yards broadside. Bullet went though both shoulder blades a rib on each side, and caught the bottom of the spine and was found just under the skin on the far side with a perfect mushroom... and they are very accurate in my 26 Nosler...

Whichever shoots the best in your gun. Both more than adequate.

Have killed three elk with my 6.5x06 and 149 gr Hornady interlocks. One shot each! Haven't used it again but if I felt I could afford bonded bullets that's the way I would go. Never used monolithic bullet, way to expensive for me and if you do your job, I can't imagine any advantage with them at all! Most any bullet with a well placed shot kills very quick. Any bullet with a poorly placed shot wounds! Yep, even the great monolithic bullets!

If I were hunting elk with a 6.5 and wanted to use a mono I'd probably pick the 127 grain LRX. I haven't used it on elk but it penetrated completely on a 250 lb boar hog I shot through the chest.

I think the 140 Accubond would be a great choice too. Again, I haven't used it on elk, but it's worked very well on some good sized mule deer.

I killed a big cow--as large as some branch-antlered bulls--this year with the 127 LRX from a 6.5 PRC. She was quartering toward me at around 200 yards, and put it just inside the near shoulder. Dropped and never moved. The bullet broke the spine, angled through the lungs, and ended up somewhere in the innards.

A hunting partner on a hunt a few years ago killed a 6x6 in timber with a 140 AccuBond from a the dreaded 6.5 Man-Bun. The range was about 50 yards, and he put the bullet tight behind the shoulder. The bull went about 50 yards and keeled over dead--and the bullet exited.

Which ever one shoots the best! I have killed two bull elk with my 6.5 GAP 4S (6.5 SAUM) using 156 Bergers @ 2850 fps!

140 accubond at ~3000

How many times did you shoot the elk?

Back when bonded bullets were unobtainium I could always get ELD-X's for the 6.5 CM. I've put down 4 cow elk with the 143 gr. ELD-X, always waiting until I could put the bullet tight in the leg crease.

Now I have a pile of 143 gr. Norma Bondstrikes which gives me warm fuzzies when the broadside shot just isn't offered up.

Once and down. Yeah, I know I got this answer from several people who don't understand elk anatomy. Take a look at an elk anatomy chart and you will see the spine travels down between the top of the shoulder blades at that point. I was purposely aiming for a high shoulder shot so I wouldn't have to track as this elk was standing in the middle of a very large herd of elk- probably 250-300 elk and all I had was a spike tag...

I’d take the 140 AB myself. But either or would be great. Accubonds have smashed a lot of elk for my hunting group.

I would choose the 120 TTSX @ 3250 fps of the two loads offered. Personal preference - if I can have a TTSX in a caliber, thats my default. Have seen them work in 6mm, 6,5 mm, 7 mm, .308, 8 mm, 9,3 mm on critters from roebuck to brown bear (just the 9,3 :-)

How do I feel about the 6,5 SAUM with Barnes TTSX 120 @ 3250 as an elk rifle? I feel, I could get it done, but it would not be my choice for an outfitted, once-in-a-life govenours tag elk hunt nor a rations late season OTC any sex hunt.

Anything will work, when things go right - I just like a bigger hole in the hide for added insurance of a proper blood trail, when things go wrong.

My two cents. Good luck with your choice.

I'm in the TTSX line...

Barnes ALWAYS work when put in the right spot.

Nosler, I won't buy any of their products until they quit this drug dealer pricing on their stuff that they got going on.

You didn't mention a partition, but I have a bunch of 140 grainers in 6.5 bore...

I know they work.. never used the AccuBomb.

Hey Seabud- I have only used an Accubond on one animal, that West Texas Aoudad (32" he was a good one!) I was given a 338 RUM from my old gunsmith friend, Ray, before he died. This was back in 2007. I worked up a load with the .338/180 NAB going right at 3500fps. It was a flat shooter. Ram was 240-270 yds away. When he turned sideways I popped him. He staggered, made one "crow hop", died. That Accubond acted like a Partition! .75" entrance, golf ball size exit, chaos in between. Man did he stink! But I did my exam on him. We dressed him out and gave the meat to the Mexican cowhands that lived/worked on the Ranch. They ground it up for Tacos. This was out beyond Sanderson. Its only one example, but I have shot many in several rifles. Usually very accurate. I used H4831. The Outfitter really wanted the rifle so sold it to him. Since my gunsmith has died, I wish I had it back. I had his OK to sell it, as he knew the rife was butt ugly too! ha It was a blued Vanguard Action (Howa of course) with a "Gain Twist " barrel made in Kalispel, Montana. It was in a Boyd Pepper Laminate stock. There was just something about it that did not please the eye. lol

I don’t know what kind of terrain you hunt
But the TTSX for me. It just works!
I would consider the AB if you hunt open country and shots can be on the longer side. Then I might consider the AB

I wouldn’t shoot any 6.5 at elk. Stubborn like that I guess. I elk hunt with a 225 partition and it drops them immediately. I typically hunt in heavily wooded areas and prefer to not lose my animals because they are wounded and can travel a long way!
Can an elk be killed with a 6.5? Yes. Can an elk be lost easily with a 6.5? YES! This conversation usually incites some sort of negative response from someone who has killed an elk with a Creedmoor and wants to compare ballistic charts. For every story someone has about killing a bull with a creedmoor, I have an equal or greater amount of stories for people that have lost one.
None of that crap matters for elk hunting. Learn your rifles shooting abilities. It’s that simple. Back to your question:
I think either bullet would work fine, as long as the gun shoots them well. I would just prefer a bigger cartridge.

My first inclination / smart assed answer would be: None of the above…

But given the choices, I would go with the TTSX because they have never failed me in any calibre. Since you are starting out with light bullets anyway, I would stick with the highest weight retention one. With the AB 60-70% weight retention, you are left with something under 100 gr to keep on penetrating. With the TTSX, you have 114 or so grains with cutting petals instead of a mushroom.

Good luck on your hunt!

What's the smallest cartridge you've used to take elk? What cartridges have you used?

35 Whelen. 225 Partition at 2725. I have others that I could take elk hunting, but choose to avoid the situation I previously mentioned

I appreciate the honest answer.

Since your bias is towards medium/large bores, I'd suggest your lack of experience with smaller calibers doesn't really qualify you to comment on rounds under .358."

BUT I also realize most everyone has an opinion, and a lack of experience doesn't stop many on this forum from offering one. But I'd also note not all opinion's are created equal, as is the case with your opinion of the 6.5 CM.

Not trying to be a smart ass, just pointing out the obvious.

I've had good results with both TSX/TTSX and Accubond bullets, but not in 6.5 caliber. TSX and TTSX are my go to bullets in my .375 RUM and .300 Wby. 160 gr Accubonds are my go to bullets in my 7 mm RM. I've killed a pile of critters on 4 continents with those 3 bullets and rifles. To the OP's question, I'd have to flip a coin...

The smallest cartridge that I've killed an elk with was my .257 Ackley with a 117 gr Sierra GameKing bullet. He was my second largest 6x6 bull, and at my shot, he simply collapsed dead where he was standing.

I killed my frist elk with a .30-40 Krag, then a bunch with a .30-06 with 150 gr Hornady or 180 gr Sierra cup and core bullets, one bull with a fiberglass arrow from a recurve bow, the bull with my .257 Ackley, then 20 some elk with 180 gr Partitions from my .30 Gibbs, one with a 160 gr Accubond from my 7 mm RM, then 2 bulls with my .300 Wby, one with a 168 gr TSX, the other with a 168 gr TTSX bullet. All were DIY, most were bulls, and most were on public land.


I have a pile of recovered .30 and .375 caliber TSX and TTSX bullets that all mushroomed perfectly except for a few that probably hit a bone and lost one petal. The petals of all of them mushroomed over leaving a larger than caliber frontal area with no sharp cutting surfaces.

Just because I choose to not shoot that caliber does not mean I have zero experience with how those cartridges perform. I’ve hunted elk for 35 years, and have an opinion based on results. I have never lost an animal in that many years in the woods. An assumption that I don’t have experience on how those cartridges perform for others in my presence, just because I prefer to hunt with a different rifle/ cartridge is ignorance.

A lot of things will work for elk but I prefer 30 cal and above and 200gr and above. The smallest I've used is a 7-08. It worked but I prefer bigger. I tend to subscribe to the Bob Hagel school of thought.

You betcha AZ, I'm a Hagel Fan from way back! Ha. I could never get my rifles to shoot as hot as his load data, but had fun trying! I almost had my BDL 7mm RM rechambered to the Super Mashburn or 7mm/300WBY,(Amended: I forgot that I wrote Mr Hagel for his advice on reaming my 7 mag to 7mm/300Wby. He wrote back that I would not gain much in a 24" barrel. Too much powder, Not worth it. At that time I knew no one who would do a 7mm Mashburn , saw no dies offered , was 1981, out of it.) but having no hobby money (young family) I made do. I shot those little deer with 150 PT. I was just looking at his book last night, reading again about rifles for Heavy Game in Timber. I wish I had met the man. I am a firm believer in hitting elk size Game hard, real hard.

20 yrs later, smallest caliber I ever used on a big animal (Scimitar Horned Oryx in Texas) was a little 6x47mm (222 magnum necked up) in a 27 inch barrel. I got 2900fps/85xbt. (like an 18" .243 would be)_ I was recovering from a fused neck surgery. I had taken an axis doe and a big axis buck and the Oryx was an unexpected surprise. I traded a rifle and 2K for him to the Outfitter. Followed him and 4 cows about a half mile. Wind was swirling. At a lasered 184 yards I shot him (kneeling supported) at the base of the neck. DRT. It had made a pass through. At 75yds, I gave him an insurance shot, ( he was on his side, chest toward me), shooting him up from the brisket bullet through his heart it broke and stopped in backbone. He measured a tad over 41". Needle sharp horn tips. That was very surgical shooting, and very rare occasion. I only used that rifle because it had no recoil to speak of. It later got reamed out to a 243 and I gave it to my friend in South Africa. Point being, that yes, even at that speed and light bullet, I was able to get the right shot. That too is very rare, 90% of time they are at a very hard angle. If I had too, I was going to head shoot him. I like a big enough gun to punch him from groin to breaking an off shoulder as it exits!

Barnes TTSX, though either will work. A good bullet, in the right place, kills stuff.

I've been using Barnes X, XLC, TSX and TTSX since about 1992. Have not recovered a bullet yet, and I have not needed a 2nd shot since.

This past season, my son took his first elk, a cow, at about 245yds, with a 243 TC Icon and 80gr TTSX. She was facing him and I heard the bullet hit, but she went down so fast he thought he missed. Shot hit the left front, busted the heavy bone, went through the left lung and I found bullet holes in the intestines.

I would have loved to find that bullet, but the shot was made within the last 10 minutes of legal shooting time and my headlamp battery was failing. We ended up getting her out of the woods using his cell phone flashlight to light the way.

A few weeks later, using the same rifle/bullet, he took his first deer, a whitetail doe, at 308yds. First shot was in the last ribs and exited, she moved about 20 feet, and 2nd shot hit her in the left front leg, went through both lungs and exited.

I've only killed six elk so not a lot of experience. First three with one shot each from my 6.5x06 with 140gr bullet. Hit them right and they just fall down. Last three with my 30-06. One shot each with a 180gr Hornady Interlock. Again, hit them right and they just fall down. Those three with the 30-06 are the only three animals I've ever shot with the 30-06. But lot's of experience shooting deer with a 308 and 165gr bullet's. It's the bullet that kills but it has to be placed right! Doesn't surprise me one bit the 200gr from the 30-06 works well. I also believe that I could use my 243 on elk and do very well. Secret is use a good bullet and place it properly, animals are not bullet proof! Over the years I have also gone from liking velocity to kill with to thinking all velocity actually does is tear up lighter bullet's and helping heavier bullet's penetrate. I think choosing a proper bullet requires some though! Then of course, as with something like a 243, a bunch of though has to go into what makes a proper shot for the bullet your using at the velocity it's traveling. I have always found it best to get as close as I could to animals before shooting. Hitting even an animal large as an elk at 300yds from a field position is no where near as easy as shooting a 1" group from a bench at a paper target at 100 yds.

A friend of my Dad's used a Savage 99 in 243 for everything (this was 50 years ago) - he was not a "gun guy" and it was the only rifle he owned. I watched him shoot deer, elk and antelope with it and he killed a mountain goat with it. I wouldn't do that but I am a "gun guy" and have a lot to choose from that are better suited to the job.

I bet if you interviewed 100 hunters that used

308
270
280
30-06
7 RM
300 wm
338 wm
or similar

And asked them to honestly answer how many elk you’ve wounded and lost/ wasted.

Compared to:

Those willing to admit their loss/wasted animals by themselves personally or by friends with the use of a 6.5 cm, 243, etc

I bet you would be shocked at the difference.

I have heard of way too many stories of unsuccessful hunters wounding animals, and then going to shoot another because they never recovered the first and wasted it. If hunting regulations worked in a way that you were done the first time you pulled the trigger, you would see people converting to cartridges that provide stronger success rates.

Same here, but maybe more of a blend of Page and Hagel since I have really come to like how well the 7 Mashburn Super has worked for me on the last 5-6 elk taken with it. I definitely don't prescribe to needing a 7 or a 30 or a 338. I'd still contend that any elk I have take from 30 yards to a hair over 600 could've been done with a 270 and a good bullet. Or 99 other great cartridges.

This is basically nonsense and is constantly trotted out by the old time “big gun” guys. Small bore shooters won’t admit wounding game any more than big bore guys will and both of them wound game.

The main issue is and will continue to be that most people cannot shoot. Most all bullets on the market today will give sufficient penetration to reach the vitals on shots taken from decent angles, regardless of caliber there is something that will work.

Having shot game, watched others in my party shoot game, and guided hunters to game, all while keeping notes for a good while now. Having killed game from 75lb to 1500lb with cartridges from .172 to .510 diameter with velocity from over 4000 down to 750 and ranges from single digits to over 500 yards. Using over 50 different bullets of every design imaginable.

The ONLY thing that matters is that the vitals get scrambled. No elk, deer, moose, or unicorn cares what made a 2” diameter hole through its lungs. They do not care one bit if that 2” hole was crushed through there by a 250gr flat nosed cast bullet from a 44 magnum or by a 77gr bullet from a 223, they die just the same.

Feel free to try to scramble a bull elk’s vitals with a 223. You won’t catch me trying a stunt like that.

With the difficulty of drawing elk tags these days, I want every advantage available. I don’t want to have to pass up a shot because I’m at the wrong angle to slip a too-small bullet into the vitals. Sometimes all you’re presented with is a less than perfect set-up. Then again, you won’t catch me shooting at anything at 800 yards either but people think there’s no problem with that.

Exactly. And I would actually say that, IME hunting with family and friends and guiding clients, "big gun" guys wound more often than "small gun" guys do.

⬆️ This is accurate.
The investment in scouting trips, packing in/out, time off work for the scouting, and also the hunt, the firearm, shooting practice, any travel involved, tags, the list goes on and on. The investment is huge! Then the shot presented frequently is not as clear as some fantasize about. I would not consider myself old, but elk hunting rarely culminates in a textbook broadside shot for someone to slip their shot in. The bull I got this year was at 90 yards and he was hustling! Waiting for some perfect shot and for him to hold still; he would have disappeared in 40 yards and never been seen again lol. You miss your opportunity here and that bull gets 600 yards away, there will be 4000 trees between you two.

Safe to say, I’ll keep hunting with my old guy rifle and drop them, and fill my freezer every single time lol

I will agree that there are many peeps out there that absolutely do not have enough shooting experience to be proficient in the woods. They will fail with most any firearm.

😆 I’m sure you’re right, sniper.

A gut or leg shot with a .378 Weatherby is still a bad shot and a lost elk.

Thank you

But, but, but....... It's all in the 'knock down power'........

As far off the rails as this has gotten, you need to know just how and where to hit the chicken to kill it. This diagram shows it doesn’t matter what cartridge or bullet as long as you hits the gizzard..

nm

You must be getting old Brad.. I saw what you did there

Yeah, a waste of time. "A man convinced against his will, is of the same opinion still!"

That's a good piece of advice.

I can remember reading magazines as a kid and writers were saying you really needed a 338 Win Mag to humanely hunt elk.

I am a fan of the TTSX. How about the 140 TTSX?¿? RZ.

Back in the 70's, (back in Texas) I was a big reader of Elmer Keith. I only had a .280 Mod 77 and was convinced it was "marginal" for elk! I was also lusting after the Ruger Tropical in .375 H&H. I figured it would be an "all around" elk rifle and bonus deer rifle. (couldn't afford nothing, but I could dream!) had never even held one , but I felt it was "perfect" for elk. (It was a truck axle, come to find out!) I'd never killed any game by then but deer/hogs, ha. I was on a Wireline Truck one night in 1979. I was on the winch and slow pulling a tool out from 10,000 ft. Took a couple hours. I got in a conversation with an older Gent (40's) we got to talking elk. I just opened with "I would not hunt elk with less than a 375". (Typical 26yr old, ha) He scoffed and told me him an three other buddies went elk hunting very often, up in Colorado. They all used Remington 742/30-06 (very, very popular in that region) and they killed them very easily. In fact he gave several accounts where the quick follow-up shots from the semi-autos came in handy. It helped me get back on the reality trail, ha.

I still like to use Big Guns (anything over .30 cal) on elk, but that's just a personal thing. When I first moved out here in 1990, I always asked the Locals what they used on elk. 30-06/270 and 308 Winchester was a given, followed by 300 Savage, 250/3000 Savage, 25-06, 243, 6mm Remington, and if a Magnum, it was the 7mm RM. Very few used a 300WM or bigger. My first hunting buddy here uses a .308 for everything, and with the 150 Corlokt.

I was the first to buy a rifle and hunt in my family. My influence came from three cousins who had 30-06's and hunted from tree stands in Minnesota forests. My exposure widened as I was helping a church paper sale and discovered Outdoor Life magazines. One parent said I could take the bundled magazines home for a few days and return them before the drive ended. In those magazines, I read stories from a guy name Jack O'Connor and was first exposed to the .270 Winchester. His exploits with sheep and medium game were influential and I began buying magazines off the local newsstand.
Now back in the late '60's and early '70's it was mostly frowned upon to hunt elk with the lowly .270 Win., especially by a writer named Elmer Keith.
When I had money and time, my first elk hunts were with 300 WM's and 338 WM's which certainly did the job. But fellow hunters were using .270's. 308's and 30-06's and tagged just as many cows and bulls. For the past 25 years, I only hunted elk as I became a student of their habitat and thoroughly enjoyed mountain hunting. So much so that I sold my 40 acre beautiful deer hunting spot. As I got older, the 300's and 338's weren't so kind anymore and in fact became downright difficult to shoot. So I sold them and since have taken cows and bulls with the 308, 30-06, 270Win and yes, the 6.5CM (cow, bull & caribou). Trimming down my rifle options, I may part with two Montana CM's and finish my elk hunting career with the .270 Winchester along with 150 gr. NP's and Accubonds.

This guy didn’t think my dad was undergunned with a 7mm-08 and a single 140 AccuBond at 225 yards.



This fella didn’t look down on a single 140 Partition from a Mighty-08 either.



This guy, on the other hand, went down harder than most from a single 140 Partition from a Mighty-08 at 346 yards.



My nephew went up in grade significantly with this bull, with a 10 grain upgrade, to a 150 ELDX out of a Mighty-08, but at 409 yards.




I wish I weren’t so undergunned, maybe I could kill more elk.





P


P.S. Sorry Brad, I couldn’t resist.

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.