ELK Rifle, best calibre

I get a huge kick out of this stuff. 303 British has probably killed more game in Canada from ground squirrel to Grizzly than anything else. Your goal should be exceptional shot placement and to minimize meat, hide etc damage to your animal to make clean up as neat as possible and yield weight as high as possible. If you are a reloader any of the listed cartridges will work. You can load up or down and use the best components you can get and all will be well. Realistically a 600m clean kill with any of these will be just over 1MOA and chances are you won't take that shot. I shoot a fee thousand rounds a year at that range with everything from irons to decent quality long range gear and there isn't a chance in hell I'd take that shot with my own ability. Inside of that range the magnum doesn't hold a benefit to a traditional case in the same bullet diameter. And if you miss your animal is dog food if they will even eat it.

I nearly made this mistake recently. I wanted a 300 mag really bad. Then I went hunting with a fellow who had one. We shot a pair of does, his had it's entire right rear leg blown off and didn't die for nearly 1/2 hour by the time we got on her. Mine had a neat little hole behind one ear and out just below the opposite eye and was dead before it hit the ground. He had a very nice Browning with good optics. I had an original condition Lee-Enfield No4 with original aperture sights. I would go with a 30-06 and buy two boxes of ammo for the price of one for the mags and shoot it until you have utter confidence in it. That will make all the difference.

I'm not trying to belittle anyone with my opinion, that's all it is and everyone has one.
 
Over the years I have shot elk with everything from the 6.5x55 up through the 338 Win mag.

Many great suggestions on here, and as stated, a decent bullet in the right place will get the job done.

If you pinned me down, I would take my 308 Norma Mag with the 200 Partition as my top choice. A 200 Grain Partition at close to 3000 fps MV does wonderful things to Elk.
Obviously, the 300 Win Mag is ballistically identical, so it would do the same.

The 338 is a great Elk chambering, but not everyone shoots it well, due to substantial recoil, particularly with bullets from 225 grains and up.

The 210 TTSX would be a great Elk bullet in the 338 if it will shoot it well.

I've shot 3 Elk with my 7x57 and the 160 Partition, one at 270 yards, and the result has been meat in the freezer, so doesn't take a cannon if you place that bullet correctly.

Whatever you feel comfortable with. One Caveat though. If you are hunting Elk where grizzly bears are common, I would opt for the heavier hammer. :)

Regards, Dave.
 
My Elk have been shot with the following

6.5X55. 140g partition
.270 Wthby 150g Barnes X
.338 win mag. 225g Barnes X
300 win mag. 180g Accubond
6.5X55. 130g Accubond and,
6.5 X55. 130g Accubond.

Full circle right back to old reliable after trying some of the big guns. I honestly can't say one "killed" any better then the other but I clearly have a favourite.
 
As a wilderness guide and outfitter I have to answer that no, this guide does not allow the .270.

As a guide and outfitter I strongly recommend the .270 Winchester for the following reason:

Low recoil
High velocity
Something Unknown
My experience
Click to expand...

http://montanaelkhunting.########.ca/2009/12/270-winchester-for-elk-hunting.html
 
maple_leaf_eh said:
Ditto. Whatever shoots a heavy enough bullet (ie more than 150gr, and more like 175gr minimum) and that you can quickly shoulder is the one to carry.

Aim for the double brown line and hammer low in the chest!
Click to expand...

Bullet construction is far more important than bullet weight. My current go to big game rifle is a 7mmstw shooting the 140gr or 150gr TTSX, and those bullets kill elk just fine.
 
flying pig said:
I get a huge kick out of this stuff. 303 British has probably killed more game in Canada from ground squirrel to Grizzly than anything else. Your goal should be exceptional shot placement and to minimize meat, hide etc damage to your animal to make clean up as neat as possible and yield weight as high as possible. If you are a reloader any of the listed cartridges will work. You can load up or down and use the best components you can get and all will be well. Realistically a 600m clean kill with any of these will be just over 1MOA and chances are you won't take that shot. I shoot a fee thousand rounds a year at that range with everything from irons to decent quality long range gear and there isn't a chance in hell I'd take that shot with my own ability. Inside of that range the magnum doesn't hold a benefit to a traditional case in the same bullet diameter. And if you miss your animal is dog food if they will even eat it.

I nearly made this mistake recently. I wanted a 300 mag really bad. Then I went hunting with a fellow who had one. We shot a pair of does, his had it's entire right rear leg blown off and didn't die for nearly 1/2 hour by the time we got on her. Mine had a neat little hole behind one ear and out just below the opposite eye and was dead before it hit the ground. He had a very nice Browning with good optics. I had an original condition Lee-Enfield No4 with original aperture sights. I would go with a 30-06 and buy two boxes of ammo for the price of one for the mags and shoot it until you have utter confidence in it. That will make all the difference.

I'm not trying to belittle anyone with my opinion, that's all it is and everyone has one.
Click to expand...

This^^^^^
If I can't stalk or call the critter to within 100 yds., then I'll just take it's picture.
 
I agree shell but obviously your shot was luck as we all know that a head shot that is off by a couple of inches would lead to a blown off jaw and a slow painful death.....Vitals or high shoulder otherwise refrain and wait for an ethical shot.
 
I've never gone for elk myself, but my roommates, fathers, uncles second cousin twice removed says anything short of a 155mm howitzer with RAP rounds is unethical... He even went on to say that anything less than MACS high charge 6 was extra unethical...
 
Maybe it was, but out of the 8 elk and two deer I've seen harvested in the last two years seven elk and one deer were headshots. The one elk that wasn't was a shoulder shot and he lost close to 25lbs of meat (300win mag at 100m). The other was the deer with the missing rear leg (different 300 win mag). The rest were 30-06 headshots at 100m AND LESS and one 303 headshot. I'd never take a head shot further, but up that close then absolutely. Of the animals i saw shot at in the last two years none got away or were wounded except the deer with the bad shot placement, and she had to be shot twice. Just my opinion but there is nothing unethical about turning the lights off with a clean sure thing headshot like that.
 
flying pig said:
Just my opinion but there is nothing unethical about turning the lights off with a clean sure thing headshot like that.
Click to expand...

Except that I can't even begin to recount how many "sure thing headshots" have resulted in miles of tracking and lost animals... whenever our sports took headshots against our strong advice, they caught "heck."
 
hoytcanon said:
Except that I can't even begin to recount how many "sure thing headshots" have resulted in miles of tracking and lost animals... whenever our sports took headshots against our strong advice, they caught "heck."
Click to expand...

Yup, the only time a headshot is a sure thing is at "blood on the shoes" ranges; even then it takes a cool hand, as the tendency is to shoot low. More often it results in a crippling injury, with no blood trail to follow, and dooms the animal to a slow painful death, ultimately from starvation and an inability to drink. Although many claim to prefer it, even a neck shot can be a poor choice, as the spine is tough to locate on a big animal, and then its a small target. IMHO, the shoulder is the surest target. It's density will cause even the toughest soft point to open up, and with sufficient velocity at impact, it will take out the heart, lungs, and the autonomous plexus, which causes the lightning fast, pain free kill we all prefer to see.
 
.270 Win., with 150 grain Nosler Partitions:)

Headshots:( Animals don't do well, when their lower jaw is missing. Lack of water and food, plus the infection, makes for a terrible ending.
 
Boomer said:
Yup, the only time a headshot is a sure thing is at "blood on the shoes" ranges; even then it takes a cool hand, as the tendency is to shoot low. More often it results in a crippling injury, with no blood trail to follow, and dooms the animal to a slow painful death, ultimately from starvation and an inability to drink. Although many claim to prefer it, even a neck shot can be a poor choice, as the spine is tough to locate on a big animal, and then its a small target. IMHO, the shoulder is the surest target. It's density will cause even the toughest soft point to open up, and with sufficient velocity at impact, it will take out the heart, lungs, and the autonomous plexus, which causes the lightning fast, pain free kill we all prefer to see.
Click to expand...

Too many hunters think that since they can put 3 shots into 2" off sand bags at 100 yards that a head shot should be a "slam dunk..." They neglect to take into consideration that animals are not two dimensional, body posture, skull angle come into play, as do shooter adrenalin (and the inability to focus at peak capacity), shooter body posture and stance, target and shooter movement, etc... etc...

Head shots go wrong more than they go right IME with friends and clients... I have never taken a head shot on an animal personally... and desperately regretted the one neck shot that I took against my better judgement and personal code... I am not projecting that standard on anyone, it was a personal decision which I breeched in a moment of adrenalin.
 
I've taken elk with 338WM, 300 WM and 280 rem.

My last 2 were with the 280 shooting 140s.

I've taken moose with 270, 300WM and 338-06.

Personally, my "bush" gun is a 338-06 pushing 250's @ 2550 fps.

My "open country" gun is a 280 pushing 140's @ 2950fps.

I wouldn't hesitate to use either one on any game in NA.

YMMV.
 
back in the cup n core days guys wanted heavy bullets with large sectional density to penetrate the big stuff. I think better bullets change that a little.

I've killed elk with calibres ranging from 25-06(120 grain partitions) to the 300 weatherby.

I agree with others - the choice of calibre is less important than some other considerations. How are you with recoil? I know my 300 wby can loosen your fillings if you are not hanging on. I shoot it enough to be competent, but don't enjoy it at the range.

I have a couple friends who shoot smaller calibres - and for them I am much more confident they put a smaller bullet in the kill zone, rather than spray an pray with a uber magnum like a cat crapping razor blades....

All that said I own a 308 Norma mag, a 30-338 and a 300 wby, so you know what I favour lol.
 
Two of my sons killed their moose this year with our .243 and worked excellent with the 80 grain Barnes, but only because they're disabled and can't shoot anything with a recoil. I have seen more one shot kills with the .338 WM than anything else, and I've been hunting elk for 25 years now. Shoot the 200 grain Winchester Ballistic Silvertip and you'll have an almost perfect combination......and as for recoil, my youngest shot his first elk at the age of 12 with this combo, and he only weighed 120, and a slender built. Many people who have never shot a .338 WM are very quick to condemn them, but find a friend who uses it, and give it a shot yourself....Just be sure to use the 200 grain, not the 285.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom