How many of you use a 270 for Elk what grain bullit are you using

130s work.


150s work.


By extrapolation, 140s work.

150 grain Partition works great.

I've taken lots of elk with a .270, and I use a 130 grain Barnes TTSX. Very effective.

I've shot a bunch with 150's. At 300 yds, they have almost the same POI as 130's and hit harder when they get there.

Shot 2 last year with the 270 - 150 grain Partitions. Works great.

150 grain North Forks here. Got really surprising accuracy during load work up.

I've used 150 gr. Partition's and Ballistic Tips. I'd also be happy with an Accubond or Partition of any weight, and really a 130 Ballistic Tip would do a dandy job without doubt.

I used the 150gr Partitions out of my 270 from 1970 until 1992 on elk. They worked very well.

In 1992, I switched to Barnes, first the 150gr X, then the 140gr X and XLC, and now I'm using 130gr TTSX.

So far, I've not recovered a single Barnes bullet out of any big game animal.

Cookie uses a 270 with 130 grain slugs and has had complete pass throughs. No elk have complained.

Whttail_in_MT,

Is that a 130 gr. Nosler E-Tip?

No, it's three of them.

The two expanded were from a moderate size bull.

Can't let mathman have all the fun.

Do you get good accuracy with the etips? I've got some 150's to load up for my 30/06 but haven't gotten around to it yet.

Yes sir.

Yup, lots.

I like the old round nose Remington 150 gr, the Nosler 150 and 160 grains.

All but 2 I have killed with my 270s have dropped at the shot and those 2 only went about 20 yards.

The 270 is just fine. Like every rifle, it's more about the bullet then the cartridge.

My daughter has killed elk with a 257 Roberts and so has my grand son. My friend Rich killed 8 with a 243. They all use Nosler Partitions and Barnes X bullets

If I wanted to use a .270 on elk I'd find some R26 and load 150gr. Nosler NP to 3000+fps and go hunting.

That looks vaguely familiar. I'll bet 60.5 grains will do that

I used that load to punch my cow tag in January. It was short range and bullet not recovered (obviously), but I would be confident with it out a long ways.

I used 140 sst on the elk I took with my .270..

130 TTSX

My buddy put his bull in the freezer this year with the 150 Fusion factory load.

That's what I did, 'crept with the NF's. Love that 26 with 150 grain bullets.

i've used 150gr partitions in years past and they did fine.

I would go with a 130, or 150 gr partition.
If lead free bullets are a requirement a 130 gr TSX GMX or etip would fit the bill depending on which one shot the best.

I dont really use a 270 now but there was a period of about 10 years when I got one each year in Northern New Mexico with a 270.

I always used 130s and never really felt like I needed or wanted more.

I think you mean by interpolation.

I worked up a load for deer/elk for a girlfriend's .270 Win (Mountain Ascent) using a 130gr TTSX. That rifle/load combination is awesome. Here's a 6-shot group from that rifle/load.

The ICBM 150 BT always shot better in my rifles than the 130s

I'd happily hunt Elk w 140 ABs, 150 BT (ask Brad about his 7-08 ) 150 PT and 150 ABLR. I carried the 150 PT in CO and went end to end thru a Mulie at 275 yds.

Oh. That was just poking along at 2850 via 52/IMR 4350.

270 owners hunt w confidence using good bullets thru vitals.

Can't beat any of those combo's a bit.. The 140 Accubond and 150 Partition have been excellent for me.

Yes, guessing between two known points, in this case 130 and 150 is interpolation. It's more certain than extrapolation, which is guessing beyond a known point, e.g. 130s work, 140s work so 150s should work.

Grammar lesson over, we will now return to your regular programming.

I would like to use a hand load I made for my 270. The load is a Hornady 140gr. Interlock spire point that I have shot less than moa at 100 yards routinely. I have taken this load out to 500 yards and also have shot moa at 500yard. I have heard nothing less than excellent reports on performance with this bullet at these ranges. I have taken a whitetail this past season with successful results, the deer did not go more than 15 yards. I did not have a chance to collect the bullet, it was a neck shot that hit the aorta and I didn't even think to see if it was a pass through. The processor didn't recover any bullet although I did not ask if they did. Yes, I do use the 270 for elk first chance I receive.

I toted a 7/08 Win M70 20" Synthetic carbine loaded with 139s at 2850 over Varget in Colorado. Took a deer, a very killing load. Had an Elk come by under 50 yds, unfortunately it was not legal per brow tine length of 5" in that area, lucky him

Hornady makes good bullets. A few are a tad soft like the SST and Amax for harder targets, but would do great on lungs or at extended ranges. The IL SPs are GTG. I ran the 162s in a 7RM

Obviously neither one of you read all the posts in the thread. Interpolation and extrapolation were covered earlier. Welcome to the Office of Redundancy Office.

AKA the 24 Hour Campfire Forums.

Or any Internet forum.

As George Santayana put it so well: "Those who cannot remember the past are condemned to repeat it." Though on the Internet, substitute "didn't read" for "cannot remember."

Is that an extrapolation or an interpolation?

Whitetail,

I just read through all the posts. Twice. Interpolation or extrapolation were never mentioned.

Read mathman's post (the whole thing, including what he quoted) and my post about not letting mathman have all the fun (the whole thing, including what I quoted). Hope that helps.

I've used a 270 for most of my elk, although I'm now using a 300WM just for the heck of it and because there are a good number of Grizzlies where I hunt. In my younger days I often used Remington Corelokts both 130 and 150, have also used
Partitions. None of the bullets failed to put the elk down.

This year's Idaho elk. 5x6 at 235 yards. Tikka T-3 .270 with 150 Nosler Partition.

Before he died, I used to correspond with the late African PH George Hoffman, inventor of the 416 Hoffman, which eventually became the 416 Remington. He was a real Texas gentleman!

In our correspondence he told me he'd taken a bit over 50 elk, all with the 270, and that he never found it wanting.

Given the man's experience world-wide, I took him at his word and started "de-magumizing" my own elk hunting arsenal. In the many years since his death, I found his advice to be spot-on and I'm glad I listened.

The 270, like the 308, "kicks a little and kills a lot."

And I'd put the 7-08 in that company as well.

Brad, allow me to finish this for you: "... and the 280 rules them all."

Rifle Nut!

BTW, I had one of those abominations many years ago. It's a cartridge for those that can't decide if they want to be a German or an American

I'll sink to any level to justify my own choices while ignoring others

Besides, if Montana had a standing army all would be equipped with 270's!

While the 270 will certainly kill elk -dead, I have moved away from my 6.5-06 elk rifle. Where I hunt the grizzly are in full "get fat on" mode during elk season. A rifle shot is like ringing the dinner bell for a grizzly. I now carry a 358 Norma or a 300 Wby for elk, just to have enough to get a grizzly off of me.
Until the libtards in DC, and the circuit judges in the west, let the states regulate the griz population, this will remain a problem. Hunting elk in CO, NM, AZ or even KY would be fun with a light weight like a 6.5-06 (270 is too gay for me), but within 100 miles of Yellowstone or Glacier, it is risky.

All my elk hunting is in grizzly country. Unless you get a CNC shot, whatever you're shooting short of a 375 H&H is not likely to anchor/stop a charging bear. I'm not going to base my rifle choice out of fear, and a good case can be made for having 5 rounds down in a standard rifle than the typical 3 down of a magnum. Also, the lesser muzzle flip of a lighter round like the 270 makes for faster follow-up.

Besides, if the thinking is that a 150 Partition from a 270 won't kill our middling sized grizzles, there's a certain bridge over the Hudson River that should be considered for acquisition

A buddy of mine once shot a bull elk in the snow. It ran a short distance into the timber and died. So did a second bull that he did not see until he found it dead next to his intended target.

He killed two bull elk with a single bullet. He used a 270 with a 150 grain Partition.

Phil Shoemaker once told me that a 270 with a 150 grain Partition was a very effective brown bear killer. He has seen it used a good bit and recommends it to shooters wanting to avoid heavy recoil.

The oldest/largest bull I've ever taken, a grand old 10.5-11.5 year old 6pt, it took with one shot from a 270 with the 150 Partition. It's a good combo.

Yeah, I've never seen a .270 and a 150 Partition "fail" on an elk--or similar-sized African plains game. Haven't seen vast numbers of moose killed, but the "quickest deadest" was the medium-sized Shiras bull my wife killed in 1989, using Jack O'Connor's old load of 58.5 grains of the original mil-surp H4831 and a 150 Partition.

The bull was standing angling away at about 125 yards, and Eileen aimed for the far shoulder. At the shot there wasn't any of the typical moose reaction of "gee, that felt funny, I'll stand around for a while and see how I feel." Instead the bull took a step-and-a-half and folded up dead. We found the Partition in the far shoulder.

My 14 year old son killed his first bull this fall. He used a 270 with 130 grain Hornady Interlocks. Shot him in the lungs and he went maybe 40 yards.

270 lacking on Grizzly

9mm slays 'em.

Go figure

9mm on the griz...

May have something to do with the trigger man...

DF

Agree 100℅. Prior to finding the Campfire in 2003, I was convinced the 338 WM was THE elk answer. At least until I started seeing what guys on the Fire were actually killing them with. Even some dude in Montana had the cajones to actually use a 270 and later a 308. He's some kind of stunt shooter 😁

Then I started killing a few and going to progressively smaller cartridges. Used the aforementioned 270/150 NPT last year on 2. The elk hated it <G>

I dreamed up a 30-06 over the winter which was supposed to be my elk killer but every time I pick up my 6.5 lb Kimber 270 and think about where I hunt, I'm reminded how well it worked - and carried. And shot. It's likely going to the elk woods this fall in MT. Bet it works.

I work with and know a bunch of elk hunters up here in MT including a buddy who has been a professional guide for almost 30 years (and who has a TV show). None of them hunt with a .270 Win. One individual has moved up from .270 Win to 300 WSM in the past couple of years with good results, and despite his claim that he's taken many elk with a .270 Win. Having an elk go 20 yards after being shot can be a problem up here making the difference between an all day recovery or less than an hour. As many know, elk are tough animals so I choose to shoot the biggest bullet I shoot well and that's the advice I'll give anyone. Mass and velocity buys margin so I shoot a 250gr TTSX from a .375 H&H. Magnums require practice and my experience is that most hunters simply don't practice enough, or don't practice at all.

It's shot placement. A large caliber in wrong place, Elk can go 20 yds
A Elk dropped on the spot can roll down a mountain a long ways

MC you are quite right.. Most hunters don't practice at all..

Killed my first elk in 1952, with a 44-40 lever gun don't remember how many elk and mule deer I killed with the 44-40 it was kinda like hunting with a bow you had to be close.

As I remember I bought a 270 model 721 around 1958 + or -
150 gr. coreloke worked real well on mule deer and elk, and I didn't have to get as close, only reason I bought a 270 was the guy at the hard ware store said it would shoot faster and flatter than a 30=06 and all my friends had 30-06's.

nothing has changed since 1952 when it comes to killing elk,elk have not gotten any tougher, it does not make a hell of a lot of difference what you shoot them with if you can hunt and shoot. Rio7

Well I can't say what others have in experience, but I have 41 years of experience with elk, and of those 41 years I have guided 33 myself. I have seen more shot then I can count, and I have shot several myself with various calibers and bullets.

I have used and owned 30-06s 308s 270s 8mms 338-06 338 mags and 375H&Hs. In fact the top of my personal list of kills is held by my 375H&H.
But up to a 338 Win mag, I will report what I have seen and done myself, and it goes against the grain of the those that are trying to sell new products and guns.
In a nut shell I can say with no hesitation that comparing the 270s to the 7mms (including the magnums,) the 30s (including the magnums) and the 338 magnums, I can't see ANY difference in how fast elk hit the ground, and I mean NONE AT ALL.
I have killed and seen killed probably about 35 elk with the 270 Winchesters and a few with the 270 Short Mag and the 270 Weatherby. Shot for shot, if the placement of the bullet are good, and if the bullets are well made (not the ones that blow up) there is NO difference in the speed of dropping and death between a 270 and a 338 Mag on elk. Moose and bison....yes, but not on elk.

I do see a faster result with my 375, but to be 100% honest, it's not that much faster.

How do I explain this?

I don't!

I just report what I personally have seen and done.

Speaking from my own kills I have used 270s 30-06 300 mag, 338-06, 8X57, 338 mag, 375H&H magnums. In handguns I have seen 41 mag and 44 mags used, and I have killed them myself with 44 mags and 454 Casull. I have seen elk killed with C.F. rifles as small 250 Savage (not impressed) up to 458 Winchester.

The ones I can remember as I write this are
250 Sav.
257 Roberts.
25-06
6.5 Swede
6.5-06
270 Winchester (lots of them.....probably 30-35)
270 Weatherby
270 Short Mag.
7X57
280
7MM R. Mag (lots.. probably 30)
7X61 Sharp and heart
7-08
30-30
300 Savage
30-40 Krag
308 Win (Lots....maybe 20)
30-06 (Lots and lots ....probably over 50)
300 H&H
300 Win Mag (Lots....maybe 20)
7.65 Belgian
8X57
325 Winchester.
338-06
338 mag (quite a few, maybe about 15)
348 Win
35 Whelen.
9.3X74R
375H&H (Quite a few..... about15-18)
416 Taylor
416 Rigby
444 Marlin
45-70
458 Winchester.
50-90 Sharps.
50 cal muzzleloader with round balls
50 cal muzzleloader with bullets
54 cal muzzleloader with balls
58 cal muzzleloader with balls
58 Cal uzzleloader with a bullet
62 cal muzzleloader with balls
41 mag
44 mag
454 Casull.

And I probably missed a few on the list that I just don't remember as I sit here.

This may be a boring post, but the point is that I speak from actual experience, not 2nd hand experience, or from reading a magazine somewhere. In the years of hunting them there were seasons when I killed or saw killed only 2-3, and other years we'd bring in 15-20 in one season. I have seen it enough to know that many "salesmen" are simply telling you what they believe to be so, not what they know to be so.

I can tell you with confidence that the 270 with the right bullets is just fine.

Always remember, guns don't kill
Shells don't kill.
Even bullets don't kill.
Bullet HOLES kill.
If you put a hole of over 3/4" or larger clear through an elk's vitals it doesn't really matter how that hole gets there. That's why I am a believer in good tough bullets that get through. Use a good bullet and shoot what you like, but learn to shoot it WELL and you'll be just fine

How do you get them to roll into the back of your pick up after the shot?....

MY son was hunting be up the canyon behind his house last fall after their first snow, shot a big dry cow at about 60 yrds with his muzzle loader,she started to slide down the mountain,he ran up and kept kickin her down the mountain and she ended up about 10 yrds from his jeep.he called and told all about it said it was the easyist pack out ever. Rio7

Eastern hunters going out west think they need a magnum - just "because them elk are big". They base that off of the size of deer.
Western hunters typically have a more moderate approach and use moderate cartridges. They base that off of walking up to dead elk from a non-magnum rifle.
Eventually the eastern hunters realize the western folks are on to something.

Man, I dream about that happening... can't wait to tell the story someday!

Our own Mule Deer may have written an article in the latest Sports Afield that is similar to your empirical observations.

Good article John.

Shooting elk in timber will usually mean tracking, no matter the cartridge. Blood alone can't be relied on as a tracking guide no matter what it's been shot with, so you've got to be able to read more than that. I've had bulls go equally far shot with the 338 WM, 300 WSM, 30-06, 270, 308 or 7-08. I've had them drop in their tracks with the 308 and 30-06 without CNS hits.

I will agree that it's not unwise to shoot the largest rifle you're comfortable with, on the other hand, it conserves more energy packing a light rifle rather than a heavy one all day in the mountains. For me, the "ultimate" elk rifle would be a 22" bbl'd 338 WM weighing around 7.5 scoped, with sling and rounds. Problem is, I don't want to pack or shoot a 7.5lb 338 WM anymore, so pack a 6.5lb 308 win!

Funny how elk just die when you shoot them right with a good bullet. Bullet placement and bullet quality trump cartridge size.

bwinters,

Thanks!

I must also point out that my experience is similar to Brad's. Still have a 22" barreled .338 Winchester Magnum that weighs about 7-1/2 pounds with scope, but haven't hunted with it (or my .375 H&H) since acquiring my 9.3x63 over 15 years ago. All I apparently use the .338 for anymore is breaking scopes when testing them for articles.

Must also note that the .338, 9.3x62 and .375 do not guarantee quicker kills than "lesser" cartridges, even on deer-sized game.
Might use my .375 if I go back to Africa again, but aside from one bison have never used it in North America, mostly because I found it too heavy for mountain hunting even when I was much younger--the reason I built my light .338.

But these days have several rifles weighing less than 7 pounds that are perfectly capable of taking elk, but probably my favorite is my NULA .30-06, which weighs 6 pounds on the nose with scope. Have taken more elk with the .30-06 than any other cartridge, including my biggest bull, and none have gone more than 45 yards after the shot. But then my wife could say the same thing about the elk she's taken, and all of them have been shot with the .270 Winchester, except one with the .257 Roberts.

Your life - hunt the way you want to.
I wear seat belts too. Not out of fear of my skills, but because the other guy is a drunk texter. I don't call that fear - just prepared.

I agree with both you and Brad on the 338. I've shot a couple sub 8 lb 338 and don't like the recoil they generate. I started hunting elk with 338 but it weighed 9 lbs. So decided 9lb rifles and lightweight 338s weren't my cup of tea.

I guess I met your son with you a couple of years ago at Armijo Springs. Hopefully, you will get him back agin this year.

I have had big plans to bring my wife and kids to Armijo Springs, plus my new diesel pickup and big Cabela tent, this year. However, they are now all talking about hanging out in Japan this summer, in which it might just be me, again. (Got some new guns, though, to show off.)

Bill, when I first came to Montana in 1992 I'd read all the scribblings guys like Boddington had recorded about elk in the various gunrags through the 1980's. I was fairly convinced a small howitzer was necessary for elk. I'll never forget one fall evening I was driving South through Bridger Canyon when I picked up a hitchkiker sporting blaze orange and a rifle. He'd just come out of the mountains and needed a lift to his truck. I asked what he was packing, his reply was "308." I remember thinking to myself, "that seems kinda small" but kept my mouth shut. I'd always been a 308 fan, but just couldn't see its place on elk. Then in the early 2000's I started packing one, and eventually found it worked just fine. And, of course, ditto all the other "lesser" rounds like the 270 and 7-08!

I think a lot of guys are still influenced by those 1980's writers, many of whom had thin resumes with elk. I also think in all American males there's an element of machismo that requires a "big/bad" remedy. Add peer pressure, group think, ego/insecurity and viola, the Remington Ultra Mag!

As someone once said, "experience can be very long but very narrow."

I'd also add, there's a definite "confirmation bias" of many magnum shooters that guides them to only seek out those sources that confirm their pre-existing biases, while ignoring all others in contradiction. I had those same biases, I was just flexible enough to learn something new. There's often a better way.

I'm glad I did listen...

Lots of good info in this thread. The only thing I can add is that some of us can't handle the recoil of big rifles and therefore would use a 270. I hunted elk twice, in 1989 and 1991. The rifle I used in 1989 was a Remington 700 ADL in 300 Winchester Magnum. 8 lbs. with 3-9x scope. In 1991 I brought two rifles, a Weatherby Mark V in 300 Weatherby and a Mauser action 358 Norma. Each rifle weighed nearly 10 lbs. I didn't mind the weight or the recoil. Killed a bull elk with the Weatherby.

Now, at age 70, and on blood thinners after bypass surgery, hard kicking magnums are not for me. I have tried a NULA 30-06 like Mule Deer's, and it kicked the snot out of me.

So, I guess I'll follow Jack O'Connor's advice and use a 270 (or maybe a 6.5x55) if I ever go out west to hunt again. My 270 is not a lightweight at 8-3/4 lbs.

Funny how smart Jack O'Connor has gotten the older I've gotten...

Boddington also got smarter as he got older--partly because of watching his daughter kill a bunch of big game with the 7mm-08.

But Craig also finally used a .270 on a bull elk during a hunt on the Whittington Center in New Mexico, mostly because some people gave him grief about putting down the .270 as an elk cartridge without ever having used one. So he loaded up some 150-grain Partitions with H4831, and his chance came on a good 6-point across canyon, at a little over 400 yards. He aimed just behind the shoulder and that's where the bullet landed. The bull stumbled a little ways and fell over dead.

In fact, at that time it was the quickest kill he'd made on an elk. I know this because I hunted the Whittington myself a few years later, with the guy who guided Craig, Mike Ballew. We ended up at the spot where Craig shot his bull, and Mike pointed out where the elk had been standing, and then told me how Craig mentioned it being his quickest elk kill.

Does anyone here on the campfire feel a difference in recoil between shooting a 270 Winchester loaded with a 150 grain bullet and a .30/06 using the same weight bullet?

No, but yours is an apples/oranges comparison. A 270 150 is in a different class of bullet than a 30 cal 150 of lead core construction.

A more accurate comparison (BC/SD) is the 270/150 vs 30-06/180... I definitely can feel that difference in equal rifles.

I don't know if I would call it apples and oranges.

Tons of bullets on the market, in both calibers, of all sorts of shapes and construction.

We aren't talking big differences in dimensions from .277 and .308.

So a 308 cal 150 Partition with an SD of .226 and a BC of .387 is the same as a 277 cal 150 Partition with an SD of .279 and a BC of .465?

Nope. Just like a Jonathan Gold apple isn't a Golden Delicious.

No reason to start talking oranges.

Fair enough!

But it remains, the better comparison is with a 30 Cal 180…

I don't see how sectional density and ballistic coefficient are going to affect felt recoil. Idahoguy101 asked about recoil.

When you are measuring effectiveness on game comparing SD's is far more accurate than bullet weight. Comparing effectiveness of a 270/150 to a 30-06/150 on game isn't a fair comparison, the 270/150 is a much better choice with similar recoil. Comparing the 270/150 to a 30-06/180 will result in similar results on game, but with slightly more recoil for the 30-06/180.

JMR40,
Nobody mentioned effectiveness on game. Idahoguy asked about felt recoil between a .270/150gr and a .30-06/150gr.
Both you and Brad are totally missing the point in Idahoguy's question.

Didn't miss it at all, I said "NO" I don't find any difference... can't you read?

I went on to explain that I think it's a pointless comparison given that a 270 150 is a superior projectile.

Good grief...

Idahoguy asked what time it was. You told him how to build a clock.
Good grief is right.

It's called conversation, something you apparently don't engage in...

Oh, that's what conversation is? Thanks for the clarification. I feel so foolish. This whole time I've been going around with the assumption that giving simple answers to simple questions was sufficient. My mistake. I apologize.

I'm so embarrassed I think I'll excuse myself from this "conversation." Please carry on without me.

I will carry on.

And BTW, I think the Gestapo is looking for a forum monitor... you may want to apply.

That argument can be used for the anti magnum crowd too. Refer to the last post by Mule Deer which reminds me of a comment my old boss once made. We worked on military funded research projects and he told me that any monkey can collect data, but the real challenge is interpretation. He has a PhD from MIT so I tended to listen a lot.

As for myself, I know confirmation bias isn't problematic. I was a magnum shooter and took elk with various ones as I previously explained. I still own a 300 Mag. If I had such a prejudice I would have been looking for reasons to stay with the magnums I started with.

Data and interpretation, great point! Alas and problematically, killing animals rarely fits into neat little qualification boxes.

However, you seem to have pretty strong ideas on killing elk so you must have a lot of experience on the subject. And since I don't know you it would be great to hear about your personal elk hunting with both magnums and non-magnums.

Also, does your MIT/PhD boss hunt elk? What does he think?

Boys, boys, boys. As far as magnum rifles go, here is a simple little axiom for y'all.

"If bigger was better, Miss America would weigh 400 pounds"

You should learn it and listen to Brad, Mule Deer, et al.

I would use one of these,Nosler Partition 150 or 160 gr or a Swift 150 gr A-Frame.

Dayum, almost spit my coffee out all over the computer!

Just trying to break it down, make easy and understandable for the Phd's, MIT's and all the other initials.

I use both. A .270 150 Grain for Deer and a .30-06 165 grain for Elk. Both from the same rifles, Tikka T-3 Lites. I cannot tell any difference in felt recoil. There may be measurable difference, but it must be very small. I do not have special recoil pads on the rifles, however I use a gel recoil pad in my shirt. Just my humble opinion.

MCMXI,

Gee, so my comment on Craig Boddington wasn't backed by enough "interpretation"?

I was a science major in college, and have gleaned as lot of statistical information from my big game hunting notes, which include not just the animals I've personally taken but those shot by all my hunting companions over 50+ years. I'd hunted quite a bit already before 2000, but between then and 2010 deliberately spent a lot of time going on various "cull hunts" to glean more information on how big game cartridges and bullets work in the field. These took place not only in North America but Africa, Europe and New Zealand, and provided a LOT of information. Occasionally I also find other good sources of data, such as the Swedish hunting survey that analyzed the taking of close to 8000 moose with various cartridges and bullets.

If you want to discuss statistical analysis of cartridge performance, then I've got some numbers. But in the meantime I think Brad has a very good point. How did you come to the conclusion that your choice is the ultimate elk rifle?

Point to the post where I stated that my choice is the "ultimate elk rifle". I've only made the point that my advice to those that ask is to shoot the biggest bullet that you can shoot well. Perhaps I should have added something along the lines of "a bullet of appropriate construction shot from a rifle/scope combination you can handle in terms of weight".




Everyone is free to take away whatever they want from your stories. For me it's a single data point from which nothing can be determined, but the reference to Boddington attempts to give it more significance than it deserves. That's the definition of disingenuous.

I'm just thrilled that I finally understand the complex theory that bullet holes and shot placement kill elk. Now I can enjoy my weekend.

If it could all be somehow jammed into the tits and ass cheeks Jorge would go for it!

And you still haven't answered my questions...

No, and he probably won't--or recognize that though the Boddington story is a "single data point," it does involve the entire point of this thread, where there have been plenty of other single data points cited, by other people who've shot elk with the .270 Winchester.

My favorite Single Data Point with the 270/150 NP... handsome fella ain't I?!

Good Grief Man! Your face!

Have used 150gr Grand Slams, Partitions,& plain old Interlocks previously, last elk was with 130gr GMX.

I have no where near the experience of Mule Deer, Boddington, or Brad. But have successfully shot/guided elk with:
243
270
7-08
7mm Rem mag
30-06
300 Win Mag
338-06
338 Win Mag
35 Whelen
375 H&H

Only problem we ever encountered happened to be a guy carrying a 270 that was off by 18 inches. Re-zeroed, and a dead elk with the next shot.

Hey, I've shot two elk, so I'm an expert right? Ya, only two elk. Sheesh... 7mm Rem mag for one and a .30-06 for the other. Two hits, two elk.

Didn't use a .270 on either of them, 'cause I heard the .27's just bounce off elk...


Honestly, there is some great info on this thread. Thanks, and I'm seriously impressed with the experience level here.

Regards, Guy

That's it. I'm getting some spray tan...

What about the cankles?

Is your face tattooed on or are you like a cartoon character? Nice bull though...

That's spray-on camo... if you're shooting a 270 you need every advantage you can get.

Great bull, and AWSUM face camo!
Is that Mossy Oak's new Urban Face pattern?

Good eye!

Boy, the elk cartridge argument just never dies. It has a life of its own. I remember similar debates in gun magazines back in the 70's and 80's. Prior to that hunters used mostly what they owned. Of course there weren't so many options back 40+ years ago.

Still waiting.

For as many medium caliber rifle hunts I've had I could honestly say I would have been fine using a 30-06 or 270 on any of them. To me the 30-06 and the 270 are the epitome of ideal cartridges that would MAKE the ideal elk rifle a reality. Much of this has to do with the terrain I hunt in and the style of hunting I do but also the cartridges themselves are both very capable on Elk and larger size game. Not in an ordinal ranking but the 270 still has quite a wallop on game.

Time to split hairs about the 150NP from a 270 and a 150NP from a 280...

They are both good.... Who needs to split hairs on that one?... Damn, I'm still creeped out about Brad's face. I always though he had no neck, come to find out, he has no face...

Got one Bull using 140gr Accubonds behind superformance
powder. 1 Cow and one Bull using 150gr Nosler Partitions,
using Norma MRP. Going to use 140gr Accubonds next year,
with MRP or RL26.

I looked kinda like that one time when I took a shot at a bad angle and got clobbered by the scope.

He Camo'd his face so the game warden wouldn't recognize him

I might suggest you seem to be confusing data point with data source. When MD references his data set or the experiences of Boddington or Brad's experience they are data sources with multiple data points - not a single data point.

What you are hearing/reading, and the point of this particular post, is that there are data points and there are data sources. When JB speaks, especially of his 50 year record/data log, he references multiple data points acquired by a guy with a science background under multiple scenarios. He literally has numerous lifetimes of game animal records. To put it in terms you used related to your MIT professor - JB is the dean of the hunter nerd University of Big Game. I say that with all due respect - cause I are one as well. Brad, and a few others on here are your PhD elk hunters. I'll extrapolate from known data points - Brad will post a pic of a mature 6pt bull the first week of November 2017. Shot 3-5 miles from the nearest road with a non-magnum while reading a book and sipping a latte. The latte is made up, the book not so much 😎

I'll interpolate between my experiences, JBs notes, Brad's experiences and several others on the Fire with similar elk resumes and arrive at the thesis that a magnum is not required to kill an elk. I proved it to myself last year - twice.

My main point is not directed to those that have killed elk but to the guys like me 10-15 years ago thinking I needed a baby howitzer to dispatch an elk. In hindsight, I wish I would have resolved that piece of elk hunting sooner - and used a Kimber-esque rifle in a non-magnum cartridge. And frankly spent my time learning about lighter gear and backpacking. I would have a few more bulls under my belt had I done that.

You guys are a hoot!!!!!

Maybe the question should have been, "Who would not go elk hunting if you only had a .270"?

Answer, no-one.

I knew Montana was big country, but I never knew it could take you all day to go 20 yards.

Must be like Texas??

I was gonna call BS on that myself. I've killed elk in black timber and have shot them at less than 20 yards several times. If you can't see 20 yards, you have more issues than cartridge/bullet. In fact I tracked one last year I shot at 30 feet with only snow patches about 100 yards.

ingwe

Well, he might take "the little .270," his 6.8 SPC. After all, ingwe is a notorious stunt-shooter.

And, his leopard print attire suggests he's secure in his manhood, not needing a magnum...

"Use enough thong."

Much of this debate boils down to personal confidence based on successful elk hunts. When some start at the "higher end", they may modify their thoughts as tags are punched. Over time they see that elk are equally are vulnerable as deer are. They prove to themselves that placement with an adequate bullet is the answer.

I have a real life that doesn't involve internet forums so if you have to wait an hour, a day, a week or a year for a response you'll have to learn to deal with it if that sort of thing is important to you. It's not to me. I don't know you, I don't answer to you, I don't care how many posts you have on a forum that implies that you spend more time here than out there, I don't owe you anything and I don't spend time thinking about you or this when I'm doing the things that are important. If you want to hunt elk with a .270 Win that's your choice. Regardless, if you really need to talk to me then come up to NW Montana and we can have this conversation face to face. I'll show you around the office, introduce you to some hunters who don't use a .270 Win and we'll set up the conference room so that you can talk to the entire company and educate all of us Montana hunters as to why we're a bunch of macho idiots for using anything bigger than a .270 Win. You can explain to one of my best friends who spent 20 years as a MHP officer, and who's a seriously good shooter who's hunted this state for over 30 years, why he's an idiot for reversing his decision a couple of years ago to drop down from a 300 WSM Browning A-Bolt to a .308 Win Montana 84M for elk hunting after a day hunting with his brother outside Great Falls. You can explain to him that his brother must be incompetent since the three 180gr TTSX bullets that all ended up under the skin on the far side, two of which went through the lungs and one of which passed through the heart, still allowed a nice bull elk to walk 30 yards and almost topple over the edge of a coolie. You can explain that a .270 Win would have been so much better because it's all about shot placement and holes.

I do care about my hunting experience and my interpretation of data combined with that of numerous coworkers and friends that have hunted up here in MT and all over the world for years, have taken hundreds of animals, work in the firearms industry and don't spend their lives on forums. I care about the experience of my good friend who's been a professional guide for 30 years, who is paid to speak all over the country and who won't use anything smaller than a .300 Win Mag for elk. He's not on this forum though so what does he know. What a loser! He just guides, speaks at events, has a hunting show and makes hundreds of thousands of dollars a year doing what he loves. Yep, a real ignorant loser! Like I stated earlier, I don't know anyone who hunts elk with a .270 Win anymore. Does that mean the .270 Win is a bad choice, I don't care. Maybe it's because everyone I know and work with live and breath MT air, many were born here, many have been here 40+ years. You really need to come up here and convince me and others that we're idiots.

I don't have the impressive qualifications of the 20,000+ crowd here but I do have two degrees in mechanical engineering including an MS, have been shooting, reloading and hunting for decades, worked for Remington as an R&D engineer, have a couple of patents pending related to military projects and firearms, spent more than ten years as a research engineer on military projects and currently work as an engineer in the firearms industry in addition to consulting for a couple of other non-compete companies. What I've come to accept it that everything is statistical probability and a whole lot of Gaussian distribution. Ammunition velocity, tolerance stacks in firearms, manufacturing of parts, internal/external/terminal ballistics, accuracy, precision, animal physiology, how elk die and on and on is all governed by the math of probability. My choice is to move the boundary conditions as far apart as possible with the tools available which include bullet mass, bullet velocity, bullet construction and firearm proficiency.

One individual in the R&D group at Remington killed a deer in upstate NY many years ago with a rock. He wasn't proud of it but it sure worked. Maybe that's what I need, a backpack full of rocks. He surely proved that only whiny little bitches need firearms.

I like to use enough gun.

Simple yes or no question, no MS in engineering or gaussian distributions required:

Are you saying a .270 Win. is not enough gun?

Elk threads are always good entertainment.

I sure miss BibinNH

So in other words you've never killed an elk.

I find it interesting the debate goes on to cartridge alone without thinking about maximum effective range. Like for instance.....one could harvest an elk with a recurve 60 pound bow to perhaps 50 yards, a 70 pound compound perhaps 80. But with a rifle no one really discusses range cartridge relationships. I purpose the following dogma. With a traditional cup and core or lead projectile..... twice the foot pounds of energy upon impact that the animal weighs. Sectional density for elk at about .250. With monolithics drop the sectional density by 30 percent but look for a minimum of 1800 feet per second upon impact. Then each caliber and each bullet could generate a maximum effective range?

What I find odd, is that I was born, and grew up in Montana and knew/know some pretty darn good elk hunters.

About the last g-damn thing that any good elk hunters I knew/know talked about, or argued about, were the rifles and calibers they shot. Know some that have used .243's for years, some have shot 25-06, 270's, 308's, 300's, 7 mags, 338's. The thing they all had in common, was they killed a metric [bleep] ton of elk. The caliber they chose to pack didn't make them the elk hunters they were. I also don't recall many giving advice to anyone on what they should be using for a rifle or caliber.

They worried more about the best way to get an elk back to the truck, where to hunt, when and how to hunt a particular ridge, when to take their vacations...you know things that mattered about actually killing and hunting elk.

I've sort of come full circle myself...started with a 6mm Remington, shot my first few with that, moved to a hand-me-down 30/06 for years, moved up to a 338 for a long time, killing 35 elk along the way. Since 2006, I've shot another 30 elk, all but one of those with either a 7RM or 7-08.

I find myself often wondering why some people still give the advice of a 30 magnum, 338, etc. when I know for a fact that they simply are NOT necessary. I even question why I ever felt the need for a .338? Not taking away anything about the .338, as it performed on elk, I had great results. But, like others have mentioned, they are NO fun to lug around, and even less fun to shoot.

I just cant see myself arguing that a .270 isn't enough gun for elk...or arguing that all the "good elk hunters from Montana only use 300 mags and larger".

Just isn't based on reality.

"270 win is not good enough for elk" said the dbag who has never killed an elk.

A rancher I know has killed lots of elk with a ..222 & you worry over a .270!!!

Here in Idaho the .270 and 30-06 are very popular for elk. I'm assuming the same in Montana. My cousin has killed his elk with the same Ruger .270 every year for the last 30 years. My bull I shot this year with my .270 win. was at 235 yards and dropped at the shot. A 150 partition broke the shoulder, punched the lungs, and yanked the rug out from under him. I have been off the forum for some time and just found out Bob passed. We corresponded about the .270 and other topics. He would have been in the middle of this one! RIP Bob.

Not to be too big a Richard but the highlighted text is the likely culprit - not the cartridge. If I'm reading your post correctly, using a 180 TSX in a 308 is not correctly matching the bullet-cartridge-game. I now understand why his elk took 3, 180 TSX's to kill it - its not a cartridge issue. I am a bit surprised it only went 30 yards given the artillery used. I'm not sure any cartridge/bullet combo will keep an elk from moving 30 yards - 30 yards isn't that far. Carry on.

Thinking about this a bit more - how far was the elk in question that was shot with the 308/180 TSX? Seems a 308 should be able to drive the 180 to 2550 or so - and that all 3 TSXs should have exited. I'd also like to see the recovered bullets if they are available.

OMG, the horror! An elk walked 30 yards after being shot! News alert!

Of course, using a 180 TSX from a 308 is a questionable move. I wouldn't call it "incompetent", just uninformed. I'd not use more than a 150, and even then, as I've posted before, I've seen a 150 TTSX not open at modest 308 speeds on elk. Better to have used a more frangilbe bullet with some "grenade" effect. A 165 Cup and Core is my choice in the 308. Hey wait, that's what I generally use on elk!

And yes, most bullets from a 270 would have been better than the 180 TSX/308 combo...

Good post buzz, but you forgot "boots."

This has been an interesting and entertaining read. I believe only "elkhunternm" mentioned the Nosler 160gr Partition. I've used it on the two elk I've shot with my 270 Win. Worked wonderful! Surprised it doesn't get much mention, it's a damn good bullet.

And for some reason the 160r Partition has been super accurate in any 270 I have ever tried it in. Including a 270Wy mag. It is the best bullet for Caribouon up to and including Moose for the 270Dees IMHO.

That bullet shoots really good from my 270 Win. Shot a couple of black bears with them but would love to launch one into a moose or elk, I bet they wouldn't bounce off a grizzly either



What kind of speed do you get out of the 270 Wby with that bullet? I really like the 270 Win but wouldn't mind adding a 270 Bee one day.

Quite a few gun writers and the industry fanned the flames of the necessity for a "big gun" for elk back in the 70's. This really never subsided unless you harvest a number of elk and see the earlier claims were over blown. It's natural that people like to defend their personal choice.
It still comes down to using whatever you have confidence in.

Ok, start fighting again...................

But, if you've never actually killed an elk yet are willing to take a strong position...?

Not all opinions are equal, and that's a fact.

I've come full circle with the 270 and elk.

I used a 270 on my first half dozen elk and it worked fine, but I got bit by the magnum-craze in the early 1990's and bought a 300 Win Mag. Used the 300 Win for the next 10 years or so and it worked fine for elk.

I realized I wasn't shooting the 300 nearly as much and enjoying the recoil less and less. I switched back to the 270 about 10 years ago and have been packing it ever since.

Thinking back over things, I really can't remember where the 300 was a deal changer or where elk died any quicker than when I shot them with a 270.

MCMXI,

I'll match your "good friend who's been a professional guide for 30 years, who is paid to speak all over the country and who won't use anything smaller than a .300 Win Mag for elk" with an elk outfitter from Colorado. At the time I got to know him 10-12 years ago, he's been guiding and outfitting elk hunters for 30 years, and Colorado has more elk than any other state.

He and his guides liked to exchange info on what rifles and bullets their clients used, and the results, and since those clients took around 30 elk a year, I thought this might be statistically valid info. So I asked him what cartridge he thought was a good minimum for elk, and he said, "Two-fifty-seven."

I asked, "Roberts or Weatherby?"

He said, "Either one!"

Mule Deer, what do you think?

I note something I have seen now for about 40 years.
I bet you may have noted the same thing I have.

Funny but those that demand that the only proper elk rifles are magnum sized are almost never same hunters that live in elk country, have hunted them for their whole lives, and seen many dozens or even hundreds of elk killed.

Your thoughts and memories are welcome. Please share.

My bet is that you have similar experience.

I like my magnums and I have killed a LOT of elk with them.
But I have also killed a lot with 270s.
I can't see ANY difference in how fast they fell or died from the 270s I have used, or the 300 magnums, or even my 338 Win Mag.

As i said, I like my big rifles too, but I am not going to try to make others believe they are the only proper guns for elk.

He and his guides liked to exchange info on what rifles and bullets their clients used, and the results, and since those clients took around 30 elk a year, I thought this might be statistically valid info. So I asked him what cartridge he thought was a good minimum for elk, and he said, "Two-fifty-seven."

I asked, "Roberts or Weatherby?"

He said, "Either one!"

Although the 257 Roberts is my favorite cartridge I always thought it was a little on the light side for elk. Maybe I'm wrong.

I've killed elk with rounds ranging from the 6mm Rem to .375 H&H, including a .270...and I can say without a doubt that a 150 speer hot-cor out of a .270 Win will straight up knock an elk's dick in the dirt.

I do dearly love my .340 Wby and how it puts elk down with authority with good bullets, but it also kicks the living $hit out of me.

A good guide is going to get his hunters in close and hold for the best shot. He's not going to let them take high risk shots. With a good setup, about any rifle will do the job.

Truth. I've heard it said if you are the smartest person in the room you are in the wrong room. I seek out folks like Brad, BobinNH, and others who have been there and done that when I need info. I'm eating elk steaks this year.

I've heard it said that if you think you're the smartest person in the room and back that up by listing your college degrees, chances are you're not.

I guess I will just keep rolling the Dice with my 30-06 and 165gr Accubonds..

Thread more entertaining than Fox News.
Brad - your new camo line is already getting rave reviews
Lastly, JOC is smiling, and Elmer is rolling!

Rock Chuck,

So that's what good guides do!

I've guided and been guided, and been around plenty of guided hunters. Most guides do try to get within sure range, but some clients don't want to get close, partly due to the recent long-range trend. When I talked to that Colorado elk outfitter, one of his recent elk clients told the guide he was good out to 600 yards. First, the guy completely missed one elk at a little under 500, then wounded another at around 400, which they had to chase around for a while and shoot some more. That was with a 7mm Remington Magnum.

Then there are the clients who can't shoot worth a damn even at 100 yards. About 15 years ago I went on a multi-species horseback hunt in British Columbia, and one of the other guys in camp couldn't keep shots from his brand-new .300 Winchester Magnum in a 1-foot circle at 100 yards, from a benchrest. He'd bought the .300 rather than bring his long-time hunting rifle, a .280, because he was hunting elk and moose and thought the .280 wouldn't be enough. His guide was not happy with the benchrest results, so tried get the client as close as possible to a moose, elk and caribou, but the clients still took around 20 shots to kill the three animals.

Then there are the clients who shoot fine at the scope-checking target but get excited in the field. A long-time brown bear guide in Alaska was very happy when one of his clients shot the scope-check, but the guy absolutely fell apart when they stalked within "sure" range of a big bear. He wounded it and the guide had to go into the brush and shoot the charging bear--and no, he did not allow the client to accompany him. But the same guide has had a number of clients make clean kills on big bears with .270's, 7mm Remington Magnums and .30-06's. He's happy to take them, because they usually shoot well.

His experience, and that of other long-time guides and outfitters I've known, plus my own guiding experience, is that clients almost never wound animals by being under-gunned, whether they're hunting deer, elk, moose or brown bears. Instead over 90% of the time the problem is being over-gunned to the point of flinching. This apparently never happens to Campfire members, but the consensus is that somewhere around the .300 magnum level the majority of guided clients start flinching. One close outfitter friend, who's been guiding mule deer hunters in eastern Montana for over 40 years, says only 20% of his clients who bring a .300 magnum of some sort can cleanly kill deer at 200 yards.

Oh, and the Colorado elk outfitter said one guy who brought a .257 Weatherby Magnum made a clean kill at 400 yards. That outfitter's also had far more problems with guys shooting magnum cartridges from .300 up than people who brought rifles chambered for cartridges like the .270 Winchester.

My general experience is that outfitters who have a "cartridge" minimum generally don't know much about bullets. Among my acquaintances (I can't really call them friends) is a Colorado couple who've been guiding elk hunters on private land for over 30 years. Their minimum is the 7mm Remington Magnum, apparently because that's what both husband and wife shoot. They won't allow .270's in their camp. If you try to discuss bullets with them, they start talking bullet weights rather than brands.

Have encountered the same thing in Texas a number of times, where aoudad and nilgai outfitters strongly suggest a minimum of .300 magnum, or even .338's or .375's. Yet on a nilgai hunt some years ago, when the .270 WSM was brand-new, a party of 15 hunters used 140-grain Fail Safes to take 15 bulls and 15 cows. By the end of the hunt the guides and outfitter were declaring the .270 WSM one of the best nilgai cartridges they'd ever seen. Some this was due to good shooting, some to the bullets, and some to the guides--but when 30 nilgai are taken, some of the shots aren't going to be on unalarmed animals standing perfectly broadside inside 200 yards. And neither are all shots when guiding clients to 30 elk a year in Colorado.

.270 works fine on elk. The issue with .270 is that if you have more than one guy in camp with them, you gotta be careful to keep them apart... different tents, etc. Otherwise they are like a Gay Amplifier.

Much, much safer to just run a .280 or a 6.5 if a guy wants to run bullets in that weight range.

Now..... two WOMEN in elk camp running .270's.... that can get HOT......

Especially man licker actions, with a beaver tail forestock.

You Idaho boys know what I'm talking about. My BiL lives and hunts in Idaho and he said even the F&W regs mention it.

Moat guides I have been around aren't gun nuts or even shoot a whole bunch.

With respect to elk being solidly anchored with a 270 and then stumbling 30 yards into the wadi from hell, may i suggest the solution is to taze the beast at the same time he is shot thru the vitals with the 270? I wonder what the minimum caliber is for an elk-taser?

If I had to anchor bull on the spot I would use the high shoulder shot regardless if cartridge.

+1

I still maintain an elk moving 30 yards after being shot isn't a big deal. If the risk is so great that a pitch over the side of a canyon is a deal breaker..... well its a deal breaker with any bullet.

If I HAVE to anchor something 'cause a bad thing will happen if I doesn't, then I shoot it *in the head*, and if it's too far away, not a good enough rest, moving around too much, etc. to make that shot reliably, then I don't pull the trigger.

Trigger control is knowing when not to, too.

Tom

I agree about the 160 Nosler. It is overlooked for the 270 for large, big game and IIRC, Bob Hagel like it in the 270 or at least mentioned it in more than just passing.

I use Nosler's Book max of IMR 7828 for right at 3,110 FPS with out pressure signs




What kind of speed do you get out of the 270 Wby with that bullet? I really like the 270 Win but wouldn't mind adding a 270 Bee one day. [/quote]

Thanks for getting back to me, 3100+ fps is moving pretty fast. I'm running them at 2817 fps With IMR 7977 from my 270 Win.

I've watched 2 elk die via 270Win/140TSX ammo I loaded. Buddy killed one with his rifle, cousin killed the other with my rifle. Buddies was 125yds, broadside, punched the lungs and the old girl stood there for a good 3-4 sec before tipping over, never taking another step.

Cousin's was ~400-410yds, took 2 through the lungs and died in roughly the same amount of time as the one I shot that was standing next to it. I was using a 300Win/200TSX and also got a couple into it.

I've killed 5 bulls, 6 cows, all but 1 with a 300Win and either 200gn partitions or TSX's. The one outlier was a cow killed via 257Wby/100TSX.

If for some reason I was offered an opportunity to hunt elk this afternoon and the stipulation was I had to use my 270, I wouldn't be the least bit concerned as there's nothing I've done with my 300 that couldn't have been just as easily and cleanly done with a 270.

I agree. This gun/barrel have always ran on the fast side for me. I have learned over the years hunting in some very high temps that I can trust this load for this rifle. as always your mileage may vary.

Comparing SDs of say .270cal 150NP vs .30cal 150NP is ok, but SD is not a reliable method of determining comparative bullet performance in the case of
.270cal 150NP vs 30cal 150 monometal....because it ignores important differences in construction and design that effect terminal performance.

Idahoguy101 in his orig Q. said nothing about like construction and/or brand of bullets as a requirement when asking about RECOIL between 150gn bullets.

Nosler data:
.270win 150gn R19 55.0 max
.30/06 150gn R19 61.5 max

more powder = more recoil = question answered without all the distracting tangents he didn't ask about.




270/150 is a better choice or not? , or 270/150 vs 30-06/150 a fair comparison or not?
really depends on what actual type/variety of bullets you are comparing.

A 30cal 150 mono may have very simliar (or even less) frontal expanded area and retain similar(or more) weight, than some types .270-cal 150 cupcores
which makes the static unfired bullet SD comparisons people use in determining terminal performance, unreliable.
Although SD will be the same in a range of cup-cores in same weight & calibre(or a range of monos in the same weight and calibre) it can still be misleading
in regards to terminal performance outcomes.

Nosler data:
270win 150NP 2910mv MAX...200yd: 2512/2102 400yd: 2155/1545
Barnes data:
30/06 150TSX 3050 MAX.......200yd: 2597/2246 400yd: 2195/1605

Regardless 300yds is what would be my range with any caliber
I have respect for the Elk and would be sure for making a humane kill
270 300yds is just fine and justified shot should be able to get even closer

I would still stick to a 130 gr bullit

270 - elk - 300yd ...no doubt. One gent here rolled one with his 6.5x47 just shy of 1,000..........

I like hunting elk, eating elk and talking about hunting elk. I really like talking about suitable rifles and cartridges for elk too because it's fun and often entertaining. I've noticed that there is no universally prefect rifle cartridge combo, but most guys think there is. I've also noticed that the fewer elk a guy has killed or seen killed, the more certain he will be about what constitutes perfect. What's right for me might not be right for you. I have a friend who thinks his 300WM is perfect and it is for him. His a big guy and he shoots his .300 very well. When asked if he's bothered by the 300's recoil he'll say what recoil. I'd not think the 300WM perfect, too much recoil for me. One reason there are so many perfect elk cartridges is that elk aren't that hard to kill despite their large size. I don't know why this might be so. While a bull elk can be almost 3x the size of a buck deer they aren't nearly that much harder to put down.

Having read many past posts about the .270 & elk, I would have thought a .300 mag would be the minimum needed for elk. I am now advised that a .270 bullet will not bounce off an elk.

I read a book, I do not have it with me on the road. 30 or 40 years with the 45 70? I think it is called. It has a bunch of letters from Elmer Keith, and others. I personally think these debates are splitting hairs or comparing red delicious to Granny Smith, they are all basically the same. What the the heck is a few 100 yards between friends? The 270 is fast, very fast, it has bullets that can get up to an impressive sectional density. The 300 mag is fast, Very , very, very fast. It can shoot bullets with a impressive sectional density. Ol Elmer Keith claims neither one works as well as a 45 70 does when you " miss the rib cage". But like I say apples to apples in my book.

You can always count on the 270 Has for a long time been a Elk rifle
Has many choices for ammo. And will and has got the job done.

I plan on using a 140 grain Swift A frame on a late September elk hunt in a pre-64 Model 70 featherweight. I'm not worried with either the bullet or the rifle.

It's all in the bullet.

I started following my dad as a kindergartner in the early 60's and have witnessed LOTS of elk being killed, including guiding elk hunters for 25+ years. Today's premium bullets have changed the game--especially in the small and mid bores.

Pick a premium bullet and choose your fav cartridge, it's simple after that.

Personally, my favorite elk combo is a lightweight 270 and 150gr NPt's. With my 243 and 100gr NPt's a close second...........

Casey

You just caused a few strokes.

After recovering from the stroke/hart attack I had over using a .243 on elk, I remember two elk last year the fell to a .45 ACP. Both had broken back legs and probably other internal damage, but a .230 grain hollow point to the spine at 10 yards finished them. I suspect a .270 would be fine on elk, although I've never hunted with one. The only .270 I've shot was in an old M700 with a wood stock. It seemed pretty snappy off the bench, but I suspect the stock had a lot to do with that. Compared to my 7 pound 300 WM, the recoil is more manageable in the 300. Most likely because the stock is much better. I was also expecting no recoil in the 270....

I grew up believing the 270 was not adequate enough for Elk based off all I read. I never even considered using it. The about five years ago I witnessed several damn nice bulls killed every year with one shot from a 270 and suddenly experience replaced what I read. Imagine that.

Keep your shots realistic and ethical, take you time, use a good 270 bullet, and I wouldn't even read another post on this thread. Rock on and hunt elk with a 270.

I was shooting 150 grain NPs on the one elk hunt my 270 got to go on.

Friend of mine uses the 160 Partition exclusively, just 'cause. He knows the 150 works as well but at the shorter ranges he hunts, there's no down side to the 160 and he's learned to trust it. Confidence matters.

Thats for sure.

The 270 has always been my go-to gun for elk; if you want or feel the need for bigger, then to me, to get a real improvement, the most meaningful step up is to a 338.

All the really top notch premium bullets available today have only the 270 (and pretty much everything else) better.

MM

Picture Perfect

Great recoveries. Doesn't get much better than that.

I don't have two degrees, I have one, I never worked for Remington or on any military projects. I'm still proud of my qualifications to comment on elk cartridges.

BBA in Accounting
Great Great Grandfather was Wild Bill Cody
Great Great Grandmother was a Cherokee Indian Princess
I own a lawn tractor.
Have killed one elk and several Nilgai with a .270 and 130 grain Corelokts. I thought they worked just fine. I was quite ashamed for a number of years after I started reading forums and found out how grossly inadequate standard cup and core bullets are for elk and nilgai.

I killed a big herd bull with a 270, bearc CLaw. Never found the bullet. He went about 30 yds.

My brother killed several with his post 64 70 ftw schnable 270 using hornady interlocks.

This one caught a 257 100gr tsx and flopped.

high_country,

Good job!

Was it a Roberts or Weatherby? The elk my wife "flopped" with a 100 TTSX in 2014 was taken with a Roberts, muzzle velocity 3150 fps. I was expecting the cow to go 30-50 yards before falling, but instead it dropped at the shot. It was angling-away, and after the bullet entered the rear of the right ribs it went through both lungs, ticking the underside of the spinal column before ending up in the far shoulder.

Might also note that out friend MCMXI hasn't logged on again since March 13th. Evidently he ran out of new "evidence" of the effectiveness of his .375 H&H.

Probably just working on some Gaussian distributions.

Those things don't just grow on trees, you know.

John, this was as a Roy, but it was at 400yds......so I'm confident that the Bob would be more than plenty.

Fwiw, my pard shot a 300rum 15 feet away from me at a cow 15 feet away from my cow. He never did catch up with her.

Yeah, you gotta hit 'em right to drop 'em!

Doesn't surprise me about the .257 Weatherby. Both Eileen and I have used "both" .257's with excellent results....

Braggert. So this means others of less stature can? Ha.

I suggest those with less capability, stick with the venerable two-seven-tee.

I've shot quite a few elk with a 270 using 150 gr Speer Hotcores. They always worked great with good expansion and weight retention.

Amazing how many use 150 gr

This Michigan bull didn't seem to like the 150 grn core-lokt out of my .270. I would have used 150 grn Nosler Partitions, but at the time I was shopping I couldn't find any in stock.

I've used the 130 gr Ballistic Tips on elk for 20 years. They work.

The longer you elk hunt, the more you modify your thoughts on cartridges.

My son guided some elk hunts in Wyoming his first year out of school. When I visited with him he told me about a hunter who showed up with a 30-378 Weatherby Mag, said it was one of the most beautiful and impressive rifles he had ever seen and he intended on getting one. I asked, how well did the rifle kill the elk? My sons reply, the man shot at 3 different elk and couldn't hit any of them. I then asked, do you by chance remember the quickest kill of the hunt and what cartridge was being used? His reply, there was a man useing a 6.5X55 swede who dropped his elk in its tracks and the elk was dead. I said, don't forget that!


Trystan

I worked up a load for deer/elk for a girlfriend's .270 Win (Mountain Ascent) using a 130gr TTSX. That rifle/load combination is awesome. Here's a 6-shot group from that rifle/load.

[/quote]

But..... you missed!


You can probably fix that.

Nice group!

I have hunted elk for about thirty years now; not every year but intermittently. I started in the late 80's just before I got enamored of the 340 Wby due to a Ross Seyfried article on it in Guns and Ammo IIRC in the early nineties. In a couple of years a Rem 700 I had went through a couple interactions from a 270 to 7mm Rem Mag to 338 and finally to the 340.

My first couple of elk hunts were without punching tags and then I started to kill bills, about 11 and several cows to this point. While the majority were killed with the 340, I killed one with a 45-70; another with a 45 Colt and one with a 30-06.

I really came to appreciate not only the 340 as a cartridge but equally so the oft retooled 700 in a Brown Prec Classic stock that I believed mitigated recoil very well and that I could shoot. There is no doubt the 340 with 250-grain bullets, 225-gr NP's, and later the Barnes 210-gr TSX when placed well left no doubt as to effect. It's a masterful cartridge for large, soft-skinned big game but needs first to be mastered itself. Even at only 8.5 lbs scoped it began to get heavy.

Last year I hunted the Wind River Range with a 300 Wby and didn't get a shot. It seemed too heavy to me also.

Now, I'm in the paring down stage and while I have an elk hunt planned for 2018, I expect it will be my last... but who knows. Anyway, I will be carrying a 6.25 lb (scoped) 284 (sort of a short 270) with 140-ft TTSX's or some weight AB's or NP's. Which ever way, I have no reservations about its capability on a bull.

Now if I could just get somebody to carry some of my other stuff for me..

I agree about the 6.5 x 55 140 grain .264 caliber, being a very impressive round. Which would make me believe the 150 grain .277 bullet powered by a 30 03 case.....I.E. a 270 Winchester would be even more impressive. Except for the minutia problems of a " long action". I have recently got some 270 s and certainley enjoy shooting them.

MCMXI's writing style is very similar to LARRY ROOT.

I wonder if mcmxi has been reading elmer keith stories by the fireplace. Elmer was convinced that 32 caliber was a elk minimum. Jack oconner asked simple questions like, did 270 bullets bounce off elk like hail off a tin roof or did they pop like fireworks or roman candles. Jack also stated that everytime he heard of a 270 failure, when he ran it down, either the shot was poorly placed, or a complete miss. This guy mcmxi must be of elmer keith's bloodline....!

If bigger was better, Miss America would be far heavier than 400 pounds.

Conversely, if smaller was better we'd all be shooting needles.

The critical factor is what happens after impact, not diameter or even weight in and of themselves.

You got it right Coyote Hunter

A fellow I knew when we lived in Colorado twenty years ago shot most elk with a 6mm Gibbs. Used 75 grain hollow points (which was an illegal bullet in that State for elk), shot them in the lungs and waited for them to die. He was a three State hunter and during the time I knew him he usually got three elk a year. His was a neurosurgeon and probably knew the anatomy of elk too, and only took shots that he was able to place where he wanted them.

I used a .260 with 140 grin bullet. Bang-flop.

I've also taken upwards of 75 caribou, over 20 moose, and assorted others, with a variety of bullet weights and calibers.

Placement is everytihng, flavors not so much.

Neurosurgeon's have lots of $ they have time & $ to be able to pick a shot🤣

Las if placement is all use a 22 shot and save $.🤣

Laughing because it demonstrates a truth by examining the extreme.

All other things being equal, placement is the most important thing. .22 shot in the ear at muzzle contact range MIGHT do the trick.

But the other things are never equal and the other things are important. A bullet that pencils through without expansion may not kill where an expanding bullet with the same placement would.

I'm not so sure. The recitation of credentials, jobs and the like is reminiscent of Lee24.

Last 2 Elk I got 1 cow and 1 bull with my 270 I used a 150gr Nosler Partition, I didn,t get as much
expansion as I,d like. Think I,ll use 140gr Accubonds for the next 2 years.

I like this shot myself, and have used it on the 'edges of those bad holes" to South Africa/Namibia/Texas Exotics where if I lost the animal I still paid for it! Both saved my "bacon" many times, ha. Some say 'wait for the perfect shot"....I tend to use a bullet/load that gives me an edge on bone breaking/hard angle shots when it comes to the above scenarios. Distance travelled/money spent + trophy fees= how bad do I want him? Yes, I've passed many opportunities just because I didn't want to shoot or didn't feel confident of the shot. Other times, I poured it on him! ha. Lots of fun either way.

PS- I've only killed three elk, all cows. I used the 30-06/180 Hornady LM factory load; 375 H&H/300 SBT handload going 2600; and the 338/185XLC handload. All died, and quickly even though two took a finishing round ( the '06/375) just because I wanted to, not needed to. I felt the 338/185 load made the quickest kill...by 3 seconds, maybe. ha. Of the big guns I've shot other game with, the one rifle that made big holes with less rifle weight amd recoil was a Mod 700 Classic Whelen rechambered to 35 Ackley Improved and Barnes 250X/200X/310 Woodleigh. If I draw another cow tag, I will try one of three.....My BAR .270, Mod 700 7x57 or Ruger 77 338 Federal.
I will add that if one has a rifle/load that will shoot completely through a big hogs shoulders or from a hard angle...you can rest assured it WILL work just fine on elk, size notwithstanding. Soft, easy opening deer bullets won't do that on a hog 90% of the time, nor on elk. Heavy cup/core for caliber ( Elmer had some good ideas) or Premiums (Jack OC did too) will both "usually" do it...this is just MY 2 cents worth of Empirical Data/Observation. I have zero degrees. Just a Preacher who doesn't like to fish that much, doesn't drink or run around on his wife of 44 yrs but who has been blessed enough to hunt/shoot/handload for the past 56yrs ( since I was 8) I was always curious as to "what rifle/shotgun/load/distance/reaction, etc and what did the bullet wound look like, even as a kid with squirrels/22s! ha. I don't care what someone uses/doesn't use in the game fields as long as (a) they don't shoot ME and (b) they leave me alone. lol

270 Win 140 gr InterLock® SP American Whitetail. This bullit in 130 and 150gr have killed more Deer and Elk than all other Hornady bullits put together. The 140 gr IMO is the best all around bullit Hornady has in 270 cal.

130 TTSX

413 Measured yards.


It came with ~3' of backstrap per side. That's a metal yardstick for reference.

Not me, wouldn't even consider using such an ineffective cartridge for elk. Don't even have one.




My .280 Rem, though, is about perfect for the ranges I normally take elk at.

Stirring the pot with a .007" stick. I like it.

Other than my first elk which was shot with a .54 cal muzzle loader, all 17 of my elk have been killed with a .270 and 130 gr blue box Federal ammunition.

*Tag*

Shot my first elk with a 270 and a 150 gr. Speer Hotcor. No problem, roasted her heart cut into steaks skewered on sticks over a fire in -4 near Pinedale. Second elk with a 150 gr. hotcor out of a 30-06, roasted heart again but had salt this time. Living as a hermit in a small town that had two bars and two churches I teamed up with a guy that had no rifle but a strong back so I loaned him my 270 to hunt with. I stuck with the 30-06 and he the 270 for 6 years. We killed 12 elk with one shot apiece, him shooting the 150 Hotcor and I switched to the 180 Hotcor as I felt the 150 was too soft for elk. I don't know why but I switched to a 338 Win Mag for a couple of years and the first elk I shot with it provided the longest toughest recovery I ever experienced due to bullet failure, no expansion from a 250 gr. Sierra BTSP. The other elk hit the ground quickly. Carl still using my 270 thought my use of the scope killing and hard kicking 338 was funny, killed two more elk with one shot apiece with the 270. So then I traded the 338 in on a 300 Win mag. Two years in a row I carried the 26 inch barreled 9 pound rifle which actually was a fine elk killer but long and heavy. Sadly Carl moved back to civilization. I then started using the 270 still using the 150 gr, Hotcor and took two more elk in two years. I can't really say any of these rifles were better than the other though the 30-06 and the 270 weighed less and kicked less than the magnums. Next year I am taking a 270 loaded with 140 gr. Partitions. Moral; if you have a strong back you can carry elk off the mountain and back to the truck.

My first Elk was a nice 5 point and I took it with my 270. I use 130 grain Accubonds in mine. Two of the last three Elk I took were with my 45/70, but last years bull fell to my 270 also. I have used the Accubonds for about 10 years and don't plan on switching. Don't fix what ain't broke.

This internet Ballistic babble is fascinating......

We should be comparing running em off a cliff.....

Or harpooning them........

But it would piss the fish cops off about " party hunting"

Excellent sentence structure compared to the original post.

Took my first Elk with a 140 TTSX from a 7 Wby. Wouldn’t hesitate to use my 280 either.

Rickt300's post rings very true to me.
As someone with over 4 decades of experience in these things, I have said (for the record) a number of times that I cannot see ANY difference in the speed of killing between the elk I have killed, and seen killed, with 270s and those killed with 300 magnums and 338 magnums. In fact having looked at the wounds through and through the elk I have gutted, I can't tell much difference (if any) between the wound size of those killed with 308s, 30-06, 270s, 7MM Mags 280s, 300 magnums (H&H Winchester, Norma, Weatherby and Win Short), when we compare the best bullet used in each.

For the record, I do favor the larger bullets, but for no solid reason I can point to. 40 years ago when I had a LOT of reading under my belt and a little elk hunting, I was convinced the big guns were going to out kill the smaller ones on elk. 45 years later I have not changed my mine 100% but I have about 80%

I have learned that it's the bullet making the bullet hole, and the bullet HOLE is what's doing the killing. Any bullet of any weight that blows up and leaves the largest piece of the bullet at under 80 grains is NOT an elk bullet. I have seen a few "buffalo guns" using target/varmint bullets (even if the label on the box says different) that were not good for elk and I have written about them.
I have also seen many times a little gun (25-06, 257 Roberts, 6.5 Swede and so on) kill elk far better then the 7MM Mags and 300 mags when those magnums were loaded with target/varmint bullets.

Not all .277 diameter bullets are up to the task, any more than any bullets of any diameter are up to the task. But there are a lot that are.

I really like my big guns. I just LIKE them. But for killing elk I am not convinced any more that I need them. And I hunt where there are a LOT of grizzlies, so they act to some extent as a security blanket for me.

But until I get to the 375H&H I can't see ANY difference in the effectiveness of a 270 loaded with a good 150 or 160 grain bullet and any other gun I have ever used, or even seen used on elk. I have seen 130 grain and 140 grain bullets used too, but I have always killed them with 150s and 160s.

Yes, I can see elk drop faster when hit with my 375H&H then I have seen with smaller guns, but even that rifle is not all that much faster.

If I were offered 2 loaners for a all-expense paid elk hunt, and those 2 choices were a 257 Roberts loaded with 115 grain Barnes X bullets, or 120 grain Nosler Partitions, and a 300 Weatherby loaded with a Burger (ANY Burger) I would take the 243 without the slightest hesitation. 40 years ago I would not have taken the 257 and it's ammo, because 40 years ago I though I knew things that I later found to be untrue.

If we strip away the illogical "diameter warship" which is so pervasive in the shooting community we can start to see with open eyes.

The elk doesn't know or care what diameters the bullet started out. The wound that kills the elk is made by only 2 factors.
#1 is penetration.
#2 is cavitation.

The deepest any bullet can penetrate is 100%. Those are the ones that leave an exit wound. A deeper hole is seen with a quartering shot then a broad-side shot, but 100% is the goal.

So the only factor left (if we can get a through and through wound) is the size of the hole. That's cavitation.

Strong bullets that expand and don't come apart do both. Sure a 243" is going to leave a narrower wound then a 35 Whelen, but if both can get clear through and exit (even if bone is hit) then both will do the job. A wound from a 243 WINCHESTER WITH A GOOD BULLET IS "SMALL" BUT IT'S LARGER THAN THOSE MADE BY BIG BROADHEADS SHOT BY ARCHERS. THINK ABOUT THAT FACT.

I all likelihood the larger diameter hole is going to allow for the elk to bleed out to a degree the blood pressure drops below the point the brain can stay conscious. But if supporting bone is hit both the 243 and the 35 Whelen shot elk are going to simply drop.

My experience has shown me that a bullet from my 375H&H can be aimed at the off-side shoulder of an elk, regardless of it's body angle, and I can break that shoulder or at least exit the elk near it. That's not the case with bullets that break up no matter how big they start out. I have seen the same with 160 grain 270s and with 220 grain 30-06s

I have seen only a small handful of 243 kills on elk, but I have seen about 15 with 257 Roberts and 25-06 and with the correct bullets you can still get an exit on a big bull even when it's not broadside. That's not a Theory. It's a fact. I have seen it, several times.
The ones I have killed and seen killed with the 270s were all fast, and about half were instant.

I have seen a handful of what I'd call "poor performance hits" from 270 in my life and all were from hits on deer. Also every one was from a hit with a bullet that blew up without penetrating fully. Thinking back I can recall such failures from Sierra 130 grains (a few) the old original Nosler Ballistic Tips (pre- Ballistic Tip HUNTING labels) and every Burger I have ever seen shot to date. Now, not all the Burgers gave poor kills, but ALL (without one single exception) were total blow-ups. When you have a blow up that's perfectly placed even the worst bullets will kill dramatically.
My own Pastor had extremely poor results 2 seasons ago with his 270 shooting the Burger bullets and has now changed to 150 grain Nosler Partitions. This year he has fired 4 shots, 2 deer, 1 antelope and 1 elk. All bang-flops.

All is is a lot of words to say what I started to say way back when......
Worship or damnation of a diameter of a bore is rather stupid. It's not supposed to be a religion.

What works is deep wide wounds and good marksmanship. The tool is ALWAYS less important then the workman.

Use a bullet that weighs 80 grains or more when it stops (not when it starts) and shoot well, and you'll fill your freezer just fine.

But above all else, learn to shoot well and don't shoot at elk that are at extreme ranges where your hit is a "maybe". Shoot at the ones you KNOW you ca kill and never those you think you may be able to kill.

Big game is not the enemy. They are a blessing given by God to us all, and we ought to have a degree of respect for them as such. Brag to me about how you shot 5 shots on a milk jug at 800 yards and never missed one time. That's impressive. Telling me about your 800 yard kill on game only tells me (And everyone) you are not showing the respect of the game I believe we need to have, and you are only giving leverage to the anti-hunting crown to use against us all.

Just because you can doesn't mean you should. I can and I have, so I can't condemn those that still do, but I have grown up since then. Please listen to words of wisdom from others that made mistakes, so you don't have to make them yourself.

There are 3 kinds of people in the world.
The normal, average ones. They learn by their own mistakes.

The wise ones. They learn by the mistakes of others!


Then they are the fools. They don't learn at all.

SZIHN,
You need not be a man of few words.

+1

There are 3 kinds of people in the world.
The normal, average ones. They learn by their own mistakes.

The wise ones. They learn by the mistakes of others!


Then they are the fools. They don't learn at all.

I would add that a Wise man leans to the Right, a fool to the left.

Read the thread to right here and spit damn good, expensive whiskey all over my computer.

Elk round threads...geesh.

SZIHN, Your wisdom is blatant. Kudos.

Thank you sir.
But in all honesty I would not call my post "wisdom" It's more of a detailed report based on a lot of experience, not all of which was what it should have been.

Wisdom will be the posts written by those that learn by my mistakes.
They need not repeat them and learn the hard way as I did.


THAT'S wisdom!

I've killed approximately 35 elk with a 270 or 243 now. As I've have said on here often, if I had a choice between one of my 243's with a NPt or a 300 mag with a cup & core bullet I'd have a LOT more confidence carrying the 243.






I've gave up saying that several years ago on the 'fire--critters ain't terrorists and we ain't Marine snipers.............

That back strap is as impressive as the the antlers........!

I was one of those. I didn’t start elk hunting until in my thirties and the first jaunt was with a 300 Win mag with which I didn’t get a shot. However, full blown loonyism was upon me as I rebarreld to 338 Win and then upon a Guns and Ammo article by Ross siefried, rechambered to 340 Wby. While I would have denied the necessity of these bigger cartridges for elk, I grew to love the 340 and the rifle it was in. I believe I took some where around ten bulls (I took others with some other cartridges including the 45 Colt) with it at various angles and ranges to just under five hundred yards. I never needed a second shot on those I hit and missed one. Man, it was a hammer.

It is truly a great cartridge for large, soft-skinned game but requires some work to manage well and became a bit heavier as I grew older.

I have a friend who I invited on the elk hunt we went on two years ago. Not a big game hunter, some years previous he’d asked what CF rifle/cartridge to get to cover his needs from deer to elk. I suggested the 270 and took him out shooting over the summer before our elk hunt. As it turned out I didn’t get a shot but he slam-dunked a big six-by-six at 200 yards with Federal 150-gr Nos Part’s. I chrono’d those out of his Tikka at 2850 fps. Worked great. During the hunt and before he shot his bull I encouraged him concerning his armament and his ability with it as the outfitter had earlier told him the 270 was too small. It’s not.

Lord-willing, we go again next October; he with his 270 and the same load, and me with a custom, lightweight 284, a kind of a short, fat 270/280. I expect we’ll do ok.

Used to drive me nuts when Jim Carmicheal would advocate a 338WM as "minimum" for elk..........

Let's bump this up, as our resident elk expert, MCMXI, is posting again.

Must be taking a break from studying all those gaussian distributions. That's not normal.

At least it's not Cauchy, then you wouldn't know what to expect.

Looking at that back strap makes me hungry

Who is MCMXI?

This thread reminds me of high school.

Check out his posts earlier in this thread.

Ok,will do.

I understand now.

How far did it run to find that open area to die in.

About 6 steps.

Szhin, i wouldnt hesitate to use a 243 with a good bullet on any elk, but i would limit my shot choices as MD previously stated.

I would think a better choice would be a bigger cal and heavier bullet due to, as you say, any bullet that can break through bone and get the job done.

Do you not think a bigger, heavier GOOD bullet cant do that better?

What would do better on a big bull quartering away go7ng over a ridge at 350 yards where the, dare we say, perfect hit is not made and the hit is in a hindquarter and needs to get through the abdomen and into the chest cavity?

I will agree, a 22 or 9 mm is just as deadly as a 45, if you hit a man between the eyes. In WW2 Im glad my uncle had a 45.

Just what i figured.

You better get a bigger gun. What if it had been 5 steps from a thousand foot cliff.

Btw, beautiful pic.

At what distance was that shot taken? I bought a .270 WIN for an elk hunt and my buddy is telling me I'm an idiot for not buying a 7 mag. I may buy the exact same rifle in 7 mag later this year anyway, because why not? But I'd like to shut them up and knock one down with the 'ol 270.

270 Wins will crush Elk. Good Bullets mean way more than the actual name on the case.

Take good shot with 270 and Elk will drop. Shot placement is key with any caliber

re: the .270 Winchester for elk:

The smallest rifle I've used for elk is a 280 Remington with 160 partitions....so far that combo has resulted in two dead elk with two shots.

I loaded some 160 partitions for a friend with a .270 Winchester....same thing....dead elk.

My personal preference is for a larger bullet but one can't argue with what works.....and there's a lot of testimony here for the old .270 Winchester

There isn't a lick of difference in the performance of these two on elk at all reasonable ranges, given good shot placement and proper bullet construction in both.

If you want to eliminate the bullet construction variable, use Barnes TSX, TTSX or LRX in weights of 129-150 in the ..270 Win or 139-160 in the 7mm Rem Mag.

You'll be fine with a 270 and good bullets - emphasis on good bullets. I shot 2 in 2016 with the ole 270 at a combined 60 yards maybe. 150 grain Partition worked fine. Unfortunately my 270 belongs to some disadvantaged yute in Kansas City....... I'll be toting a 280 AI next year using 160 Accubonds or Partitions. I'll bet it will work.

BTW if you handload, buy some Re 26, load 60 - 61 grains under a 150 Partition then compare to your buddies 7 mag. Won't be a whole lot of difference.

I was given advice similar to what most of these guys are saying. The 270 can be a great elk gun with premium ammo like Barnes’s TTSX or Nosler Partitions. Especially for cow elk hunts, the 270 seems very popular and very successful. I’ve heard from more than a couple buddies who lived out west that the 7mag is overrated.

There’s no need for fancy bullets in the 270. Two of the most accomplished elk hunters I know use 270s. One uses 130 Hornady spitzers, the other whatever Federal blue box ammo is on sale. The amount of elk downed by those guys, many of which were big bulls, could no doubt fill a semi trailer or two.

The friend who thinks a 7 Mag is necessary for elk is the idiot, not the 270 buyer.

Worked up to 59 grains of H4831 pushing a 140 NAB. Pretty effective.