Lowest recoil caliber for elk hunting??

I know a 6.5x55 /140gr Partition is appropriate as I've cut up several elk and moose that died from it.Harold
 
Plus according to my Nosler manual this .338 Fed 180gr .372 BC bullet at about 2650 FPS at the muzzle is only doing about 1800 fps at 400 meters with 1200 flbs of energy compared to 2200 fps and 1500 flbs of energy at 400 meters for my quoted 6.5x55mm load, mainly because the 6.5x55mm round is far more efficient at longer ranges than the .338 Fed.
 
jjohnwm said:
Cartridges don't have ethics...but hunters should. You could keep dropping down further and further on the performance pole, and at each stop there would be someone waiting to say "Oh, you don't need that much power/recoil...I use a ### and it's plenty!" Has the .243 been mentioned yet? I bet that it will be if the thread runs long enough. But the more performance you sacrifice, the more cautious you need to be in choosing your shots, and the more willing you should be to pass up marginal shots...and of course the term "marginal" becomes broader and encompasses more and more shot opportunities the further down the performance ladder you move. A lot of easy 100 yard shots become marginal at 400 yards.

In other words, no free lunch. Have you considered altering your 7Mag to reduce felt recoil? Better pad, muzzle brake (can't believe I said that!), and/or simply adding a couple pounds of lead shot into the stock to increase the weight would all help...at the expense of weight, muzzle blast, etc. If you want a cartridge that is well-suited to the game, and not merely a barely-adequate choice, this might be your best option. Certainly your least expensive one.
Click to expand...

Appreciate your write-up here. I WISH i could use a 243, but even a 100 yard shot on an elk would be marginal at best. I do want something i could confidently kill an elk with.
I appreciate your suggestions of what i could do with the 7mm rem mag. they are good suggestions and what i will do to whatever rifle i do get, minus a brake. But the 7mm is my dads and i dont have my own rifle to hunt elk and deer with yet, iv been a primitive weapons guy so far.

The options as i see them are:

6.5 swede or creedmore
7mm-08
270 (then reduce the loads to be around the same kick as the first two??)
7mm rem mag ( use a 40gr bullet an reduce the loads to the same degree also??)
Maybe a 30cal if you can convince me that theyre better than the previous choices. ballistically, i doubt that

I originally wanted a 6.5 but finding ammo and components (i do plan to reload) proved difficult. so then i learned about the 7/08, but then finding the rifle i wanted is tough, which made me start to think about the final 2 options. Is 7/08 the best pick for what im looking for?? or are reduced loads of the last two calibers better?
Of the last two options i dont know if its worth it or how much i could really reduce them.

what do yall think
 
For low recoil I'd go with the 6.5x55, for a minimum. With just a touch more recoil, the 7mm-08 has the ability to use slightly heavier bullets, which for large, heavy game can be beneficial. With that said, 400y is a longish stretch. At 400y for large game I would be looking at something with more powder behind it.

I just recently acquired a .338-06 for my upcoming moose hunt. It's not a light rifle by any stroke, and it has a muzzlebreak. I had both it and my Remington 788 in 7mm-08 at the range. Firing some 225gr bullets in the .338 and some 120gr bullets in the 7mm, both bordering on too hot of a load, and I swear the recoil was very similar! Granted I noticed the recoil pad on the 788 has basically dried up and is really hard.

I guess what I'm saying is if the gun isn't a featherweight, then don't be turned off by more powerful cartridges.
 
Anything that is at least 25 caliber such as the venerable 25-06 rem , .257 weatherby are both nice rounds and with 120 gr bullets, can drop anything. I've seen a 25-06 drop a moose at 450 yards with a 100gr X-bullet so I know it is underappreciated. Anyhow, the .260 Rem (although I've never used it) or the 7mm-08 Rem are also easy on the shoulder while delivering nice wind bucking bullets.
 
Not to be a smart ass, but have you considered that a lot of Elk are killed with Flintlock & percussion cap muzzle loaders, longbows etc. 400 yards is a long way and it isn't hard to close that distance to a more reasonable one where caliber choice is not a concern. Do some cow calling or get down and crawl on your belly to close the distance .
 
mkrnel said:
But, if you read the OP's first post the OP says he does not like recoil and wants something that kicks like a .270 with reduced loads.

Your quoted load has over double the recoil of the 6.5x55mm quoted one and well over what I am sure the OP wants!

I hardly would consider a 180gr .338 Fed as a light recoiling rifle for a recoil sensitive shooter. :)
Click to expand...


Fair enough I wouldn't think it'd be too far off though the 180gr 338 fed and the 140gr 270 is only a couple pound's apart on the recoil tables so if the OP is really recoil sensitive just replace the 180gr AB with a 160gr TTSX problem solved:)
 
I've killed two elk with my 6.5X55. A 6X6 bull in Golden, B.C. in about 1994. He dropped in his tracks at 260 paces with a 140g partition. The bullet was recovered on the far side of a high chest shot. My last Elk was a huge cow (bigger then my bull actually) and she was taken at 330 yards with a single shot. I was shooting a 140 Accubond and that bullet was not recovered as it passed clean through the chest. She made it about 60 yards.

I'm a fan of the swede and will not hesitate to use it again on elk, but 400 yards would certainly be on the extreme end of my comfort zone on a large boned animal like an elk.
 
After 25 years of hunting moose with a belted magnum, I chose to move to a caliber with less felt recoil. My search for a replacement caliber ended up with a 270WSM (in a Browning A Bolt Mountain Ti). The 270WSM, using 150g Nosler Partitions, has lots of velocity and energy to take moose/elk out to my shooting limit of +/- 300 yds. The recoil feels similar to the 270 Win's I have owned and is certainly less than my belted magnum and my 30-06. Personally, I'd say the recoil is very close to my 308 BLR Lightweight. Within the distance limits I impose on my shooting, I have found the 270WSM to be the perfect compromise to the belted magnums for longer range shots at the big ungulates. If you can find one to shoot give it a try, I believe it is every bit as effective as a 7mm Mag, will hurt your shoulder less and cause less flinching.
 
kykamo said:
So i have an opportunity to hunt some elk in a new spot that requires longer shots since they're in wide open fields. So it might be necessary to reach out to 400 yards. I don't like recoil. i think my dads 7mm rem mag scarred me as a kid. i still cant tame that thing, but still try every year :p So whats the lowest recoiling caliber that can ethically take an elk at 400 yards if need be? Lets assume the rifle is 8 lbs and getting ammo must be very easy. btw im also partial to anything not 30 cal. i don't like 30 cal ballistics.

I originally wanted a 7mm-08, but finding the rifle i want in it is really difficult and finding ammo is proving to be a beach. So i started thinking about a 270 with reduced loads. What do you guys think the best caliber option is?
Click to expand...

You are fighting a bad experience that might not end well for the elk. I don't hear gunshots or feel recoil in the field; maybe not your experience, but this is my mine. I would suggest you need a better fitting stock instead of grimacing and flinching. By that I mean length of pull when wearing hunting clothes. A reasonably high cheekrest so your face is supported on the scope. A pistol grip that lets you set your thumb away from the nose or the back of the bolt. Buttplates are only as good as the force you use to pull the rifle against your shoulder.

Recoil is a function of weight and mass in motion. Despite logic, I prefer plastic stocks for field shooting. Yup, injection molded black Ramline jobbies. Call be a Philistine in the hardwood crowd, but I believe they flex on recoil and that helps my felt recoil.

I had to learn field shooting. It isn't bench or belly shooting. Like shotgunning, lean into the shot and keep both eyes open. When the shot requires, take a knee and rest the left elbow. If there is more time, sit and rest both elbows. The old time writers yak and bluster about slings, but I've never had time to get into one for a field shot.
 
The moderate middle ground cal's, 2506, 6.5 x 55, ,260, 7-08 and 7 x 57 are were you should be, a heavy for cal bullet from any off these give sensible recoil and enough energy for elk. With the 6.5 x 55 & 7x 57 both having factory heavy for cal loads available.
You might also find the likes of .270 and .308 managed recoil loads, suit you purposes.
I would pick with the 6.5 x55 or 7 x 57 myself, and seen as I have a M70 in 7x 57 that would be it.
 
Alright so ill either go with a reduced load in 270 or 7mm rem mag. Id rather a short action so if I see a 7mm08 i might go for it. 270 wsm in a reduced load looks interesting, but im worried about jamming since theyre fat?

So whats best, reduced 270 or 7mm rem mag?
 
I have a pachmayer pad on my model 70 featherweight in .270win. I've always loved the caliber after reading jack Oconnor stuff. .270win always gets my vote.
Huge fan of 6.5x55 as well But I'm not a reloaded and the ammo too hard to find.
 
I think I have developed a few standard answers for this exact question.........which is asked here about 2 times a month.

1) IF YOU HAVE TO ASK WHICH CARTRIDGE WOULD BE THE BEST FOR DEER/ELK/MOOSE/CARIBOU OUT TO 400 YDS...........YOU SHOULD NOT BE SHOOTING AT GAME AT 400 YDS !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

2) IRON SIGHTED 30-30 MOD 94.........THAT WAY EVERYTHING OVER 200 YDS IS SAFE !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

3) ANY RIFLE/CARTRIDGE COMBO YOU CAN HIT A 6" CIRCLE WITH EVERYTIME AT 400 MTRS AND IT ARRIVES ON TARGET WITH AT LEAST 1500 FT/LBS AND A BULLET THAT WILL UPSET ENOUGH TO TRANSFER THIS ENERGY TO THE ANIMAL !!!!!!!
 
kykamo said:
Alright so ill either go with a reduced load in 270 or 7mm rem mag. Id rather a short action so if I see a 7mm08 i might go for it. 270 wsm in a reduced load looks interesting, but im worried about jamming since theyre fat?

So whats best, reduced 270 or 7mm rem mag?
Click to expand...

How many different larger?(more recoil) guns have you shot? Maybe your dads 7mm Rem Mag just doesn't fit you properly and that cartridge in a gun that fits you would not be a problem. My fathers PH 30-06 felt like getting kicked by a mule but the Savage 30-06 I used to own and my TC Encore with the 30-06 barrel on it feel like nothing and they are both way lighter than the PH was. If you go to a gun range maybe see if some of the people there would let you try their guns in similar or larger calibers. Also try not think that it will kick because for sure it will if you go in with bad thoughts.
 
FoymountFarm said:
After 25 years of hunting moose with a belted magnum, I chose to move to a caliber with less felt recoil. My search for a replacement caliber ended up with a 270WSM (in a Browning A Bolt Mountain Ti). The 270WSM, using 150g Nosler Partitions, has lots of velocity and energy to take moose/elk out to my shooting limit of +/- 300 yds. The recoil feels similar to the 270 Win's I have owned and is certainly less than my belted magnum and my 30-06. Personally, I'd say the recoil is very close to my 308 BLR Lightweight. Within the distance limits I impose on my shooting, I have found the 270WSM to be the perfect compromise to the belted magnums for longer range shots at the big ungulates. If you can find one to shoot give it a try, I believe it is every bit as effective as a 7mm Mag, will hurt your shoulder less and cause less flinching.
Click to expand...

I have always found it odd how the 270 and 30cal have such different felt recoil. I had a 300WSM (Sako A7) that kicked like a mule. Parted with it after noticing serious pressure issues. To clarify, returned to manufacturer.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom