Just trying to get a couple of threads back on point. For a variety of reasons, eg. bad shoulders, lt. wt. rifles or new hunters, is the .308 a viable elk rifle? Looking back at my elk hunting, my log says I and 5 others have taken elk from 85yds to 335yds.. I have never used one but am considering my 308 Montana for this years cow elk hunt. I can easily expect shots to 300yds so am wondering do I concentrate on the 150gr. Partition/Accubond or the 165gr. Partition/Accubond?
What are your thoughts.

It'll be absolutely model perfect and those that say not have lil or no elk killing experience.

Seriously it is one superb lil rig and if I wasn't such a 270 nut case I would no doubt own a Little Sky 308 as my flyweight rifle.

Now as for bullets any of the choices you mentioned would work very well. Other choices of mine would be the 150 TSX, the 165 Hornady and the 165 Sierra HPBT.

Dober

I carried a 308 loaded with 180 grain Hornady Interloks a couple of years ago. I would certainly use that rifle on elk as long as I could make a good hit with it.

Rick how many elk did you take with the 180 Horns and how did they perform for you on elk?

Thx

Dober

Thanks Mark. I too am a 270 nut and have some 140gr.and 150 gr Partitions ready to go in the morning if the wind stays down.
We'll see what the LA Montana will do. But that little Montana sure delivers the mail!

BLR 308 45.2 grs 748 hornady 165 gr bt interloc, range 245 yds. This one is about the 6th one of the things she's laid low with that lil rifle. If the shooters up to it the 308 surely is.
[img][IMG]http://i51.photobucket.com/albums/f358/Ranch137/tuffbull.jpg[/img][/img]

Congrats to the hunter! A picture is worth a lot of typing.

The load was 47.0 grains of AA4350 under the 180 gr. Interlok. I only used the rifle to bring down the elk my hunting buddy wounded. My shot was in the ribs about 5 inches behind the shoulder and the bullet ended up breaking the shoulder on the far side for a drop. My hunting partner was shooting a 270 loaded with 130 gr. Federal loads, nothing special but the hit he made really made the back half of that elk nasty. Center gut shot behind the liver. I'll bet if I hadn't seen it go into the draw it would have gotten away. I shot from a bit past 200 yards and didn't actually know it was wounded.

Okay now I have a question. My 308 ( which I hate) shoots 165 Balistic tips really well. Minute at 100 yards. Would they hold up to the task for an elk???????? This would be used by my wife.

That's liable to star a war Whelenman Some folks like the ballistic tips some don't. I'll say this tho the 165 gr weight is about perfect for the 308.

yes they'll work!

Dober

The BT will work, but a poor choice for elk. Even the GameKIng would be a better choice. Thier 180 gr RN at 100 yds would be a better choice yet

The expert has spoken...

You might try loading the 165 gr. Accubond or Partition and see how they shoot. The BT might not hold up real well on elk especially with a large bone hit.

You guys talking about all boattails or just the ballistic tips? Cuz I haven't noticed the Hornady interloc bt's having any such problems.

Bewteen my old man and grampa, I'll bet 70-75 elk have sucumbed to a 308, at ranges from point blank to 4-500 yards. Neither of them reload either. Course that was back before elk were bullet proof, and nearly impossible to kill with anything less than a solid copper bullet at 3200fps.

Ballistic Tips kill elk. Period!

The only two elk I ever shot at with the .270W, both died with BT's through their lungs.

Now, Ballistic Tips can indeed be more explosive than other [hard] bullets like a Partition, which is why I prefer a Partition for elk (I have yet to try an Accubond on Mr. Wapiti), but if the 165 BT's are all you have, USE 'EM!

However, if you have the time available, try building some 165-Accubond loads for that .308. See how they shoot.

That Kimber Montana .308 - if it shoots minute-of-elk, it sounds like a superb walking-elk rifle.

Please share what you do and your successes. Good luck!

For factory loads, check out the Federal Premium High Energy ammo. with 180 grain partitions. On paper anyway, they carry a lot of energy out to 300. They shoot well too, at least in my rifle, a Kimber Montana that shoots MOA and weighs 6 lbs, scoped and empty.

smokepole,

What length barrel you using?

have you chrono'd Federal HE .308 Win loads?

The Hornady 165 grain LM load performs better than I expected (2,00 plus FPS) out of my Featherweight with a 22" barrel.

I started out my elk hunting career with a 25-35, then a 250 Savage, then a 30-30, they all worked if I used them properly and I did..I used the 06 and 180 Noslers for a number of years.

The .308 is fine in open type country to 300 yards, thats its max IMO...

In the thick stuff I don't like it because most shots are going away and that can happen anywhere you hunt, the .308 is not a caliber to shoot elk up the keyster. You may have to pass on some bulls because they are departing, so why hinder yourself. I have seen elk wounded on more than a few ocassions with .308 and 30-06 type rounds with going away shots.

Today I just use a .338 or 375 H&H with 300gr bullets and take shots as they come, and it works, they go down and don't go to the bottom of the divide and in Ihaho thats a steep trip...

In todays Pacific N.W. you may only have one window of opertunity to get your bull, so you had better have the right tool for the job...A bull elk is a magnificient animal and deserves a quick and humane death...

The bigger bore rifles will bloodshot less meat than say a .270 btw..they also leave a much better blood trail. By big bores I mean the .338, 375 and 416s for instance, not the enimic 45-70.

So, I realize that deer aren't elk, but, I shot 4 deer in the last week. 2 with 140gn TSX's from a 270Win (150 and 325yds), 1 with an 85gn TSX's from a 243 (200yds), and one with a 300Win and 200TSX (50yds). With the hide off, you couldn't tell which animal was shot with what rifle. Performance was virtually the same. Throw in the cow elk I shot at the end of Oct (200gn TSX, 300Win, 150yds) and the performance is still the same. Caliber size entrance wounds, 50 cent to golf ball sized exit wounds.

After seeing what I saw last week I could be happy with a 308 or 7-08 for elk @ 300 yds for sure, and a fair bit further with a bit of practice with said rifle.

Whatever you've ever heard about a 30-06 as far as killin' power is just about equally true of the .308... they are near-twins, about as close as calibers get really... so factor that into your "sizing up" of the .308. Ifa 30-06 would shoot through an elk and embed the bullet 2" deep into the tree behind it, my guess is that the .308 would embed it 1.5"!

I would only use a Nosler Ballistip Tip on an elk if I had to. It would work, but I'd lose shot angles and, perhaps, my only chance. I'd hunt with a NBT looking for a broadside, head, neck, or slightly quartering-away shot. Shooting through the shoulder might be a little dicey. I've never done it, I'm just guessing that's the case.

Load that exact same rifle with a Partition or TSX or the like and I'd take about any shot angle into the vitals except the most extreme ones! NOW you are hunting elk!

A Ballistic Tip on a deer out of a .308 would be about perfect, though.

If the BT's shoot for you, you should try dropping the same-weight Accubond into that load. I've done that a couple times and it's worked great. As always standard disclaimers apply: work up to it if it's a hot load... check the ogive if you are loading close to the lands with the BT... etc.

That's all I got and probably not worth much. I think the low light levels are making me want to hibernate. Grr. Duh.

-jeff

Some gack to consider,

A 200gr Accubond at 2500 fps, or a 180gr Scirocco at 2650 fps will both be moving over 2000 fps, and delivering over 2000 ft-lbs at 300 yards.

That's significant killing power delivered via appropriate bullets, and easily done with a 22" 308Win.

And that is exactly why a lowly 308 will take elk cleanly well past 300 yds day in and day out.

I mean seriously what the heck happens at 301 yds.......jeesh

Killing elk is not rocket science, well it is to those who've not taken many if any I guess.

Bottom line is you take out the machinery that runs the bod like the lungs/heart etc and you've a dead elk. And a 308 can easily do that to a heck of a lot farther than 300 yds.

More gun gack!

Dober

The B-tips will work but I will tell you something.....if you handload these 165 B-tips,switch the bullets over to Accubonds and you will have the exact same POI with your current load(atleast I have in the several guns I have done this with)

As far as the 308, that is what I shoot and will shoot for a long time. I currently have 2 loads that I use depending on what I am hunting:
1. 150gr Barnes MRX for deer,antelope,etc
2. 168gr Barnes TSX for bears,moose and elk

I have sucessfully used load #1 twice this year and swear by it,first on an Alaskan Mountain Goat and then on a big Whitetail Buck last week.Devastating wound channels and droppped in them in their tracks. I love the little under-rated .308 Win,gets the job done without breaking the bank or your shoulder in the process.Very easy to load for and always puts the bullet where i aim.

Tim

Tim

Yes it will work. It would not be my first choice in fact it would not be in my top 10, maby even my top 20 but if that was all I had I would kill elk with it.

Well, my tagline says what I think about caliber choices. I have always been partial to the .308 family (7mm-08, .243). My grandfather killed a ton of elk with a little .243. Of course, back in the day it was a step up from the old .30-30 Model 94. Of course, he shot the .243 year 'round. I always felt the best rifle to take for elk was the rifle you like best. I have known more than my share of hunters who would drag a big magnum into the field because they thought they needed it for elk... but the only time they shot it was to put a few rounds in over the bench to check zero. If my grandfather were alive and I was making some noise about some huge magnum I wanted, he'd buy a few boxes of shells for it and say, "Why don't we go shootin'"? He'd grin, and insist we stay 'till dark or when all the rounds were fired. The .308 is perfectly adequate for elk and carrying one needs no explanation.

A lot of good thought here but there was one that needs a longer look. Ray Atkinson brought up long distances and steep angles involving penetrating a lot of elk muscle, stomach contents and bone. Now I haven't seen a lot of blood on the ground or snow after a good ehtical hit. Elk just don't bleed like a deer.
Without snow, the tracking can be difficult. I am wondering then if a 150gr. or 165gr .308 will handle the job? I will agree, with broadside shots but turn the animal and the .308 may not be up to the task? Especially at some distance?

I think the TSX or the like is your best buddy with a .308 and elk...

-jeff

Jeff, my 308 has its dots sorted to 525 yards with a 150 TSX... under favorable conditions 550 yards is about as far as I'd use the 308. Guess that means it's a 301 yard elk cartridge

Yep! At 525 I'd want a pretty much broadside shot, but that's what you mean by "favorable conditions" presumably. Calm conditions, calm elk.

You still hunting this year, or is it all over?

I took the .325 Kimber Montana up again today... great rifle. As soon as I can afford, I am gonna pull the Vx-III 2.5x8 off it and send it up to the Mothership for a reticle, and then we'll see how that cartridge relates to the dots... I would expect about like any other 2900 fps cartridge. In other words I expect it to work well with the B&C reticle.

The scope on my .338 has the dots, and i keep getting tempted to steal it off that rifle, but I have it so sorted out, I don't want to borrow it. Superstitious I guess. It's what Dober calls an "honest" setup at this point, I totally trust it. If someone called tomorrow and said "get your butt over to XXXXX, I have an elk tag for ya!" I'd grab that thing in a heartbeat, and it's hard to "undo" a rifle that's been well sorted-out.

Anyways... hope to see a pic of your .308 elk ASAP.

-jeff

People that start this "hard angle" and other such are just trying to convince other folks they really do know what they're talking about. Unfortunately it don't fool many folks with real experience.
Anybody that's had the pleasure of trying to roll and elks gut out of the way on a side hill , by yourself is soon going to realize the folly bullspit of thinking a bullet is going to pass thru that jumbled mess of ground up goo and water and get to anything particularly important. Most elk guts are gonna out weigh a whitetail doe.
The guy that said anybody using a 308 doesn't need to appologize for it, is closer to something to listen to than the hard angle bunch of bullspit.

Mando, it's 22" and I 've chronoed them once and they were right at 2,700 if I remember correctly. I believe they advertise them at 2,740 or 2,750.

smokepole,

That should have read 2,900 FPS with the Hornady 165 grain load.

This might amaze you, but Rem 180 grain Core-Lokts chrono at slightly better than 2,700 FPS out of my rifle.

The "little" .308 Win, at least for me, sure has lived up to its billing. It is a great round for all my hunting needs. I keep getting a hankering for a Sako 85 in .270 Win, but I ought to buy another Baja tuna trip with that money instead, but that's another thread entirely!

Ranch 13, I take it you like the little .308 for elk. You have a "western way" of speaking your mind - minus the bullspit.

Bigwhoop I've used and like quite a few cartridges on elk. The 308 is plenty fine, 150 and 165 gr bullets do quite well. In fact it does alot better job than most of the folks who's greatest amount of elk shooting has happened either on the internet, or perched solidly in their easy chair watching the Outdoor Channel, can even begin to imagine.

I cannot imagine why so many hunters "hate on" the .308 Win. Before I contemplated buying one I hadn't given that cartridge much thought. But when I decided to buy a lightweight backpacking rifle, I did considerable research. Since I hunt in Wyoming where there's a slight possibility I could run into a mean critter, I wanted a cartridge that would protect me while providing ample power to fell all ungulates. Since I knew I would probably never have use for projectiles larger than 180 grains, the .308 Win looked better and better. I read articles by Ken Waters and others. I talked to hunters, including many in Wyoming and Utah who hunt with the .308 Win. I listened as I was told how it worked on elk and Shiras moose. Finally I knew that while I could've opted for a more powerful rifle, I felt completely confident with a Featherweight stainless in .308 Win. Unlike other purchases, I have yet to experience even scintilla buyer's remorse. In fact, I would buy the exact same rifle again in a heartbeat.

My son's getting to the age where he wants a deer rifle. I will let him select the caliber of his choosing, except I will not let him buy a rifle that is based upon the .308 Win case unless it is a .308 Win. I do not want the possibility of chambering the wrong round in a rifle while we're hunting. But if he asks my advice, I'll tell him he can't go wrong with the .308 Win!

Duuuude, knock off the common sense,

We're talking GUN STUFF . . . .

BMT

The reason so many hunters hate the .308 is that it is TOO SHORT. How can you trust a cartridge that's essentially a midget? Doesn't anybody here KNOW that "killing power" is directly related to the length of the brass? Or maybe it's the length of something else, I forget. But I read it in a book one time and kind of remember something.

Some years ago I was with a hunter who shot a big elk cow with a HK91 using a 165gr partition.
1 shot through the lungs at around 350yards.
That cow dropped like a stone...
Sample of one, I realize, but I was impressed with the 'little 308.'

If you guys have shot an Elk with a .308 over 299 yards 6 and 3/16 inches you're just lucky!

None of my elk were killed with a 308 winchester but I have killed a pile of hogs with the 308 including some very big ones.

It is an awesome killer that works just as well as the 30-06 in the field with good 150 and 165 grain bullets.

In really open country where I didn't have to carry my rifle a lot,I'd probably take a little bigger rifle,but in rough country where you have to carry a rifle a long way; you just can't beat a nice light 308.This is even more true if the shooter is recoil sensitive. The 308 just seems to kick like a little gun and kill like a big one and it's super accurate as a rule too.


Britt

If you guys have shot an Elk with a .308 over 299 yards 6 and 3/16 inches you're just lucky!

I wouldn,t trust it past 299 yards, 11 inches and 15/16th's.

Is that 299 yards from the muzzle, or from the chamber?

From the muzzle of course, only an anal compulsive type would measure from the chamber, DUH!

Yeh, the muzzle for me also, but have to adjust for the recessed crown on some of my rifles.

OOH, didn't think of that! Gonna have to refigure trajectory on some of my rifles now.

Nice bull, Carol.

And it sure looks as though that .308 and the shooter were both up to the task at hand.

Save me some back-strap!!!!!!!!!


Kodiak

JIm you need to be here .
Got various chunks oh him browned , and lightly treated with Lowry's seasoning salt, then put into the crock pot with taters, onion,carrot, corn,celry, mushroom soup, worscesthshire sauce, and a liberal dose of Mrs Dash. And just before she gets home I'll dump in enough rice to soak most of the liquid.
Carol will fix up some fresh biscuits when she gets home tonite. hmmmmmm gooood.

Ranch13, we need a "scratch and sniff" option here! Save some for us!

Shot a cow elk at 297 yards last year using a light weight Ruger 77 in 308 Win. and 180 Nosler Solid Base. With the short tube I get around 2650 mv. Took off top of heart, messed up some lungs, broke the off side upper front leg bone, lodged under the skin with 120 grains left. Very dead elk cow.

You mean size DOESN'T matter?

LC

michiganroadkill,

I do agree that when animals are shot in heart/lungs, caliber makes very little or no difference, assuming we're within the realm of reason. Hence, an elk ain't gonna know the difference between a .308 Win and a .300 WBY. This is one of the reasons why I love the "little" .308 Winchester! They are accurate as hell according confidence that as long as I do my part it will do its!

BTW, when I started hunting deer about 36 years ago, my dad told me that there was a time when the .300 was all the rage for big game. He was talking about the mighty .300 Savage, legendary for felling all big game! In short, he was telling me not to demand my 7MM Rem Mag do anything for me, that it was up to me to shoot properly. Borrowing a term from another poster, it was true then, and like most truisms, it still is true!

leftycarbon,

"You mean size DOESN'T matter?"

This is not what honest women have told me!

FWIW, cause I know Campfire discounts Jamison.

July 02 Peterson's Hunting Magazine Choosing an Elk Rifle.

Jamison lists his max effective range of 34 cartridges. A table on page 49 gives the yardage where velocity drops below 2,000 fps and the yardage where energy falls below 1,500 ft-lbs. One bullet weight typicaly used for that caliber. Nominal velocitiy of chrono'd factory rounds I guess. You pick the figure that is lower (vel. vs. energy) from the table for comparison. Examples:

Cartridge/ Bullet/ Max Range (yds - limiting variable)

25-06/ 120/ 235 energy
270W/ 150/ 345 energy
280/ 160/ 365 energy
7mm RM/ 160/ 470 energy
308/ 180/ 295 velocity
3006/ 180/ 375 velocity
300 WM/ 180/ 550 velocity
300 RUM/ 180/ 625 velocity
338 WM/ 225/ 380 velocity

So no, 308 doesn't make it!

gmack,

No hard feelings, but I look upon writers who write stuff like this as not having credible material. It seems overly arbitrary to assign a value (energy) to penetrating the vitals of elk. And how would the author account for the fact that the .303 British was once a very popular big game round in Canada? What about the also once popular .300 Savage?

Ain't no doubt in my mind that the .308 Win is capable of taking elk as far away as most hunters can shoot!

If I had to live with only one rifle for all North America it'd probably be chambered in 7MM Rem Mag. But I am not so sure I could eliminate the .270 Win or .308 Win. Ain't it great that we in live in a country (USA for you foreign folk) where capitalism allows us to have what we want (in this case, lots of rifles)?

Without listing specific MVs, and BCs, that evaluation is less than useless. It's misleading.

Hard to rate a CoreLokt and a Scirocco as equals, despite having same diameter and weight.

gmack,

I have a book on elk hunting. In it, the author wrote that the. 308 Win was one of the four best cartridges for elk hunting, so it's good to know that OPINIONS on this topic will vary, just like gas mileage!

Mando,

Don't shoot the messinger.......again. I accurately presented a gunwriters work without judgement (and a ), not mine.

I was trying to show that an article like Jamison's (and there have been others) is the reason that the 308's capability gets questioned.

Sure, Jamison over generalized with respect to the 308. That's because the focus was a broad "apples to apples" look at 34 candidates.

I don't think there's anthing wrong with recommending (for mass consumption) 2000fps and 1500 ft-lbs for elk. I do believe that bullet selection is more relevant for the 308 in elk camp than say my 300 RUM. Information like Jamisons informs the reader that more planning is prudent when selecting the 308. That's my take on it.

That author of the elk hunting book knows that almost all elk are taken with well placed shots well under 300 yards.

... I'm no great killer of elk, to say the least, but in my limited hunting experience the furthest I've killed a critter is about 125 yards.

However, I've burned a LOT of powder and gasoline and time and money and internet bytes, practicing and preparing for and researching and obsessing over longer shots! I'd guess that's pretty typical.

-jeff

That's interesting to see Jamisons' list using 1500ft/lbs.. Boddington, in his book "American Hunting Rifles" on page 311 states his opinion that 2000 ft/lbs is HIS minimum energy for elk. He does go on to state that "sensible minimums" were the .270Win., .280Rem and even the 7x57. So his distance using 2000ft/lbs would be a lot shorter.
However, he has backed off a bit in the last couple of years.

Placement, placement, placement.

Take a .308 Win and a well-placed bullet and its good well past 300 yards. Blow your shot and it won't matter what you use.

If you are honest and have a measured 300 yards, the 308 does not have enough energy to put down a moose-elk type game, notwithstanding a lucky brain shot. check the ballistics, they will tell you.

cdhunt,

Oh yeah, you're right, it's in the ballistics tables.

Would you believe I have had others try to convince me the .45/70 is barely suitable for deer because ballistics tables to them so? I guess no one ever exposed them to the fact that the .45/70 will take every animal that walks, elephants included!

God, how did our progenitors get by pre-magnum days? They had to be awfully darn dumb to think big game could be harvested with the likes of the .35 Remington and .300 Savage!

I guess I better sell my puny .308 Win and buy a .375 RUM before next muley season

Totally tongue in cheek obviously, thx for the morning chuckle.

Dober

Read my last signature line...

Splains it all...

Sounds like good, common-sense gun-gack to me!

Good for you, CH.

I would agree that setting parameters is a worthwhile endeavor. If someone understands ballistics enough to know that the parameters are arbitrary and why they are moveable, then they probably don't need the chart anyway.

However, I would have to disagree with your statement concerning bullet selection. The 308 will work with most any stout bullet owing to its lower velocity potential, while the 300 RUM might not.

"Is the .308 a 300yd. elk cartridge?"

Not if you miss. If the shooter does hit part it works just fine.

Ah, yep!

BMT

I was gonna mention that too, but ya beat me to it. More than half of the elk I've killed were under 100 yds in heavy timber. I'll take a .308 for that chore over a .300 ultra any day. I don't particularly care for shoulder jelly.

The longest shot I've ever made on a game animal--NM mulie @376 yds lazered--was with a .308. A bull elk would have been just as dead that day.

I knew a guy in MT that shot his elk every year with a 25-06--he had some impressive bulls hanging on his wall too--his wife used a 7x57. Go figure.

As Socrates advocated, reasoned debate produces knowledge. After reading through the well thought-out contributions here, I have grown to appreciate the .308 Win even more!

Guys, remember we're talking about using the 308 to 300 yds. and beyond. So I'll defend my post; the 308 is not bullet sensitive at close range but at long range I believe it can be. I personally would not choose a Fail Safe or X bullet if I thought velocity might drop below 2000 fps. Go and find the "What I found in the game I gutted thread", quite a few unexpanded bullets.

I'd give my 300 RUM the opposite consideration. I would not choose a rapid expanding bullet type if I invisioned a 50 yd shot. I admit, my experience is largely from reading but I maintain that bullet performance at 300 yds as launched by a 308 requires more consideration at 300 yds than my RUM. There's no wrong bullet for a cartridge at 300 yards that is rated for 600 yards like the RUM. Similarly, virtually any hunting bullet will work in the 308 at 150 yards whereas it may not at 300 yards. If I'm wrong you can blame the gunwriters.

gmack,

Okay, I see where you're coming from. You were worried about 300 yards and beyond; I was thinking 100 yards and closer.

I agree that most bullets need about 2000fps remaining velocity to perform well. That becomes their longest effective distance for consistent terminal results. However, I still worry far more about a bullet blowing up at close range/high velocity, as I think most game is shot well under 300 yards.

While I tend to agree in general, it�s definitely not true for fat bullets. A .45-70 pushing a 405g flat nose at 1330fps (Remington load) is surprisingly effective. A couple years ago I took a buck a d bull at 197 and 213 yards respectively, both with a .45-70 pushig a 350g bullet to 2183fps at the muzzle. Impact velocities calculate to be around 1592fps and 1539fps respectively.

The bullet passed completely through the buck on a quartering away shot. The bucked leaked buckets of blood in the fresh snow before laying down maybe 15 feet from where he was shot. The bull was hit broadside. The bullet passed through the left leg, entered the chest and came to rest on the far side. It obliterated a section of near-side leg bone obliterated a section of rib, and shattered a far-side rib. The bull never moved and after a few seconds toppled over sideways. The recovered bullet was fully expanded.

That said, when using little bullets like a .308� I generally prefer at least 2000fps on impact.

Gun writers make money by writing about guns. The .308 Winchester is the commercial "branding" of the 7.62x51 NATO round. The .308/7.62x51 has been around since the early 50s and I suspect there are at least a millions words written about the cartridge over the past 50 years when one considers its history of military and civilian use.

What I find amazing is that over the next 50 years, there probably will be more than a million words written about .308 and very little will actually say anything that has not be said before. There may be new bullets and powders and combinations and rifles, but the cartridge will still do nothing more or less than send a .30 caliber projectile out of the barrel of a firearm. Most of the writing, like most of gun writing, will be the endless rehashing of opinions.

If a shooter does his (or her) job, the .308 will kill elk consistently at 300 yards. These elk will be just as dead as if killed by a larger or smaller rile. If a .30 caliber bullet is properly placed and functions according to design, I suspect there will not be a meangingful difference in the kill percentage between the .308 and higher velocity .30 caliber cartridges. In other words, if you hit an elk in exactly the same place in the kill zone with a .30 caliber projectile, an additional few hundreds FPS on impact will not lead to any statistically significant difference in the kill percentage. Of course, this is an opinion because I have not shot a statistically significant number of elk at exactly 300 yards in exactly the same place.

What I find really amazing is that some folks can talk about rifles and cartridges for days on end when, in the over all scheme of things, a rifle is only a very small part of hunter performance or hunting success. For every animal killed by virtue of a bigger rifle I suspect there are 100 that are not killed cleanly by "operator failure." This includes a lack of practice or "flinch" by hunters using magnums with uncomfortable loadings in unfamiliar firearms. At the end of the day, the choice of a rifle and cartridge is mostly a matter of preference. Empirical lines drawn in the sand about velocity or foot pounds of energy are mostly just opinions in spreadsheet form. You might as well try to draw up a chart showing the numericial differences between love, lust and a passing infatuation.

I understand firearms can be a hobby just like baseball and that otherwise sane grown men can argue with intense passion over things like who was the better pitcher: Tom Seaver or Sandy Koufax (insert any other two Hall of Famers at your leisure). And some of these guys can quote Seaver's or Koufax' strike out percentages with men in scoring in position in night time away games against teams with four or more left handed batters. At the end of the day, there's no way to "prove" Koufax was better than Seaver (or vice versa) just as there's no way to prove the .308 is a 300-yard-elk cartridge. It is simply a conversation for folks who like baseball, or rifles, or elk hunting without any possibility of an outcome... not that that's bad, but it is what it is.

Yup.

You realize of course that sensible posts like yours should be required reading for some folks.

OTOH, you're takin' all the fun out of tossing gun gack around the internet!

And Koufax blew Seaver out of the water!

So "new" and "the truth" and "a myth" are relative???? I'm so confused. I may have to go join up with MD's "other brother Darrel" for some sage advice before I fire another shot.

I'm not sure anything I write should ever be called "required reading" nor do I want to rain on anyone's parade. Talking about guns is a hobby, just like talking baseball or trucks. Guys will have the same heated arguments over obscure baseball statistics or the amount of horsepower in Truck "A" versus Truck "B." A rifle is a tool like any other. A master craftsman can make a poor tool do fine work; a poor craftsman can do shoddy work with the finest tool. Personally, I don't have any problem talking guns, as long as the folks doing the talking understand that we're just whittling wood and wasting time. Unfortunately, some guys talk guns like the Pope talks theology. There's nothing written about the .308 that is the Revealed Word of the Lord our God... although I would like the think that had the Lord hunted elk, he would have packed a pre-'64 Winchester chambered for a .270.

30-06!

-jeff

So why are you wasting your time? The pope believes in absolutes and so do I.

The truth is out there and by god we'll try to uncover it on this forum. That's what I'm here for. The 308 is a 300yd. elk cartridge or it isn't, I don't see the grey area. In fact, before I spend 6k on an elk hunt I need to have done my homework.

Kindly hush up. some of us are trying to study.

I think a .308 is a 300 yard elk rifle and good enough for out in the Sage brush.

I don't like it in the black timber for shooting going away elk in the keyster, that's when I want my .338 or 375 with 300gr. Woodliegh bullets. I hate it when an elk goes "down" one of those steep drainages several miles deep!

I'm starting to see the grey area. I think the original question is wide open to interpretation and therefore points of view. In my mind the poster was asking if the 308 is a good 300 yard cartridge, good for every circumstance and shot presentation with available loads, good for a few yards beyond if needed, flat enough to counter misjudged distance, etc..

Craig Boddington dropped a bull cleanly with a 270 at 400 yards. IIRC Jamison rated the 270 as a 340 yard cartridge. So my answer is a qualified.. yes... the 308 can get the job done; if that's all I had I'd pull the trigger.

But, my mind is drawn back to what I'd pick off the rack for my first elk and the 30 hour drive to elk mountain. I've got better 300 yards guns. I'd be the untested newbie with the magmun. The exception being that I'd arrive with the skill to shoot one.

That right there is funny!

Brad:He probably based it on some "minimum energy requirement" or some such.

This is an interesting thread. The question in my mind is "how many elk are 300 yard elk"?

absolutes in a world of dizzying variables is drooling on yourself at best.....

woofer

I've been in on skinning a couple of elk hit in the "keyster" with the decrepit 30-30 at very short range. Penetrated a ham and broke the pelvis allowing a finisher. Didn't damage much meat either. 170 grain Power Point factory loads. I don't see "Keyster" shots needing to penetrate all the way to the heart/lung area just that they break the pelvis. The 308 with 180 grain Partitions can easily do it. This all said I prefer my Whelen for timber and my 7MM Remington magnum for the sage.

Depends where you hunt... I've shot them at 300 yards but most well under that. Before I got a rangefinder and dots I'd had 500 yard opportunities but wasn't set up to take them. Where Dober hunts on the opener, most shots are long and I know he's taken several bulls with the 270 out to 500 yards.

So I guess the answer is "it depends."

Brad: 500 is a fur piece!!

The 308 Win can certainly handle cow and bull elk at 300 yards. With 165 or 180 grain loads it retains significant velocity and energy (in the realm 2,000 ft-lbs)at 300 yards. Is the 30-06 a 350 yard elk cartridge? Me thinks so. Most of this thread is full of personal bias one way or another. Putting it all aside, a quality projectile out of a 308 Win is plenty provided you hit the animal in the vitals. This whole discussion about azz shooting an elk always interests me, as if a 270 Win or 30-06 is going to be a better azz shooter then the 308 Win. Truth is, you better be pushing a 250 gr. 33 Mag if you plan on rump shooting elk and putting them down at distances greater than 200 yards.

"It depends"...

I shot a bedded antelope at 548 yards last year... the conditions were ideal so it was a one shot kill. A bedded antelope is a lot smaller target than an elk. Under the same conditions a bull elk would have been an easy kill.

I'm with Brad on this for sure. I mean it all comes down to practice and preperation. Practice teaches you a lot of things. Like what kind of a rest do I have to have to do this, and how to find that rest and get set up right now! It also teaches one when you cannot get it done and when not to drop the hammer.

If I can say consistently take out a pd that is balled up at 500 from field positions (not some flaky shooting table) and if I can consistently shoot sub moa @ 500 from similar postions then I really do not worry about an elk/deer/lope etc.

Long range is really a person to person kind of thing. I can well remember playing ball in college, to some a 12' shot was a long range to others 19' 9" wasn't long at all... it all comes down to practice.

Under many conditions I feel quite comfy I could stick my bullet out of my Mashburn in a bulls ear at 500. So, the old arm pit shot isn't too tough at all. Range, set up, pick the dot and drop the critter.

Oh and b4 someone gets all bent about taking shots at range my old Mashburn is having its 9th tube put on it this year so I kind of feel like I've put my time in.

Bottom line, I have learned that to the practiced and properly set up person 500 isn't very far.

Dober

Bought my 11 yo son a .308 (Remmy SPS youth w/ VX-1 2-7x33) for x-mas last year, Grew tired of the single shot .243. It's made 5 shots this year, with handloaded 150 HDY SP's at 2700 fps. 2 deer, 2 bobcats, and 1 coyote. Everything dropped where it stood. My 8 yo daughter killed her 1st deer with it this year also. The .308 is much more impressive than it's stature would have you believe. I've killed whitetails with my .308 well past 350, treated 'em the same as those longer cartridges. The .308 gets my stamp, for what it's worth. My only Elk is a large 6x7, as pictured next to my name, was killed with a 7RM at 200 yards. After skinning and disecting, I would fully trust a .308 to carry the mail on my next Elk hunt.

Wanna find out how a couple of hundred fps DON'T matter? Haul a good cross section of oak out to 300 yards and shoot it with 'yer magnum, turn it 90 degrees and shoot it with a shorty. I've done this with rifles out far and muzzleloaders up close. Tears your bullets all to he11, but proves that magnum does not equal armor piercing. A few buds and I did this last year, does it prove anything, not really. It just makes all those guys that scream '7mag' and 'my 3-hunnard' take a pause. My friends did. They are much more shorty friendly these days. Are they equal? Heck no! Just made them realize that a .308 isn't just a glorified .22 mag.

Your right Big Whoop, you don't want to go around shooting elk up the keyster with a .308 or any medium caliber cartridge..That is when smart hunters pick up the 338 Win or 375 H&H and venture into the black timber...the medium calibers are for open country and broadside or slightly angled shots..The Mountains are full of carcasses because some jerk stuck a 150 gr. Bal. Tip or Silvertip up a big bulls ass...It's foolish...

Ray, you're so full of prunes it's amusing. The only elk pic I've ever seen you post was a high fence bull...

Brad/Dober: I can understand the practice issue real well. You have to know the rifle and load.

I let a very large mule deer walk year before last at 550;just did not like the opportunity....

A mule deer. Hell, I've taken out camels past 500 yd with the 308. The ones I saw sure are a might bigger than a mule deer.

Uh.... details?

-jeff

elkcreek...sounds like we shared the same sandbox back in 1990.

elkcreek: My point was not whether the cartridge was sufficient, just that I was not familiar enough with the trajectory at that distance to chance it; plus it was late in the day,and a bad hit meant a disagreeable chase on a rugged mountain with darkness closing in.I figured it was best to let him walk.

I have it figured that a camel is bigger than a mule deer, but thanks for the advice. When I'm going camel hunting, I'll give you a call..........

IMHO
Shooting anything up the rear end with any weapon is not something I support -- unless you are trying to stop an already wounded animal -- or you are in a fire fight.
again, just my opinion
mrk

During deer season, I get called a couple times a week to help people cut up their deer. It's amazing how many people don't know how to do that. I hate it when someone gets the urge to try a Texas heart shot (why Texas?). It makes green oatmeal out of the guts and spreads it through the meat. They smell and the meat has a smell to it no matter what you do. I don't like gut shot venison either for that matter. It usually winds up sausage.

I also have a comment about the "enough gun argument." I helped three people look for wounded deer this season. All three felt good about the shot, immediately found blood, and couldn't find blood after a few dozen yards. We lost all three deer. I only found 1 deer I helped look for this season. I hunted N.C. for 18 years. In that time, I've only had to look for 1 deer, which I found the next day. It was the only deer I ever shot in the neck. If you're shooting a round with enough energy to penetrate the body and destroy the vitals, you're good. Guys wounding deer are shooting at deer, not vitals. Moving deer, off hand snap shots, nerves... The shotgun slugs the guys were using would kill a moose, so it's not the cartridge's fault, just bad shooting. I can't imagine a .308 with a thick jacketed heavily built bullet like a Swift A Frame or the Speer Grand Slam wouldn't do the job. I've loaded the Speer 180's for guys moose, bear, and deer hunting.

Brad,
You don't know [bleep] about me..I have been hunting elk in Idahos wilderness for over 25 years now, my garage is full of horns...Where do you come from, Flame hill...

Don't feed the trolls, they are becoming too abundant.

Sure Ray, whatever you say... could be your garage is full of dead elk but the only elk pic I've ever seen you post was one you shot behind a high fence. You know it's true.

I suspect your "dark timber elk hunting" is about exactly the same as your legendary gunsmithing...

Aww heck, it's time for the oral diarhea.

Trying to put the thread back on track again. I just read a couple of posts this evening from the likes of Mule Deer and Aussiegunwriter extolling the virtues of the 7x57. John said something like you could hunt a lifetime and not tell the difference between a well pointed 7x57 and a 30-06. Now that carries a lot of weight coming from him! Aussie with his culling experience and John B. with his hunting travels.

Add to that all the kids and women who routinely hunt elk with non-magnum cartridges enjoy elk roast on a routine basis.
I guess what the "experts" are telling us is that a combination of a quality bullet, great bullet placement at sane ranges will put the great animal on the ground - for good.
Carry on.

From here, the debate would go towards whether, say, the .308 will put them down as decisively as, say, a 338 Win Mag. With anecdotes a'plenty about the country elk live in and their predispostion towards diving into the deepest hole they can find to die, if given that option...

Just warning you about the can of worms you just opened up <g>.

-jeff

Since I put my 7x57 together it has become the first rifle I choose for many tasks. I could have done the same with a 308, in fact I recently had a 308 barrel put on a Mauser 24/47 along with having the bolt bent, drilled and tapped. All I need now is a Bueller safety, a piece of wood, paint job and a tough scope. In 18 years of elk hunting I only took one shot over 400 yards. 450 yards with a 338 using Barnes x bullets. I'll never again take a shot that long with a 338 or ever use an X bullet again. I got the elk though.

long ago I learned to not even use a X bullet for a shot across the living room....

That bullet was some piece of work, IMO most of the proponents of it were as well.......


Dober

"the .308 will put them down as decisively as, say, a 338 Win Mag"

What matters is shot placement. If you have acceptable shot placement at a good angle using a top-grade bullet within 300 yards, I don't think there's a statistical difference in the kill percentage between the .308 and the .338. A well-placed shot is going to anchor an elk at that range with either chambering.

On this subject, I think we can learn something from economics. As cars become more safe with advanced safety equipment, people have more accidents. Why? As people feel safer they tend to engage in riskier behavior. The guy who will drive 20 mph down an icy road in his old beater may run at 40 mph in his brand new Hummer. The economist Stephen Landsburg half-joked that if we want people to really drive safely, we should pull out seat belt and mount a spear on the steering wheel pointed at the driver's chest.

I think the same thing happens with magnums. A hunter with an ultra magnum might take a shot that he would pass if he were packing a rfile chambered for a .308 or a 7x57 or some other "modest" cartridge. While not universally true, I think the hunter who carries a "modest" rifle is generally more likely to 1) shoot the rifle more often, particularly in the off season; 2) know and understand the limitations of the cartridge; 3) pass on shots where the range, angle or conditions are suboptimal. Now, there's really no way to prove this, but the same phenomena occurs with driving and other human activities... so I think it reasonable to assume there is some degree of this occuring in hunting and shooting.

In the words of F. Lee Erney, "A rifle is only a tool. It is a hard heart that kills." From where I sit, it is the good hunter that kills, quickly and cleanly.

+1 on that.

Hampstead,

I agree! How could an elk discern whether its vitals were to be destroyed by a .25-'06 Rem or a .300 RUM?

A bullet of a .308 Win through the vitals of an elk will kill it just as plainly as if it were struck by any other round in the identical place.



Merry Christmas,


Mando

We quit calling them "X" bullets years ago... "F" bullets described them better.