What is OVERKILL for Elk?
- Thread starter Redlich
- Start date
I have taken my fair share of Elk over nearly 50 years of hunting them. While I have owned 338s, I have never shot an Elk with one. The majority of Elk I have taken have been with 7mm and 30 cal magnums. However, I shot one with the 7x57, one with a 270, a couple with the 264 Win Mag, several with the 30-06. all seemed to die just like they should. I would not say the 338 is overkill, though. As has been stated, if you can handle it, the 338 should be great Elk medicine, since the Elk is a large, solid animal, with a will to live well above that of a Moose. I believe though, that one should always use a well-constructed bullet on Elk. [I prefer the 200 Partition in the big 30's, and the 160 Partition out of a 7mm Mag. The barnes TSX should be just fine as well.] If you do use a good bullet, you do not have to pass on the angle shots that can get you into trouble with elk using a conventional cup & core type of bullet. JMHO, Eagleye.
John Spartan
CGN frequent flyer
- Location
- Just a little more to the right...
Overkill for me is shooting any cartridge one cannot comfortably and competently shoot well for the big game in question.
You are using figures for energy, that don't translate to killing power anyways, bullet weight/length/diameter/shape over trump paper energy when it comes to killing power. For Elk I would consider a 500grain .45 cal. bullet at 2000+ fps as overkill, just under this is a heavily loaded 45/70 which tops the list in killing power.
Good answers 
for the person who was asking for a definition of overkill, I was referring to excessive meat damage, or excessive recoil, whichever comes first. I was under the impression that many people felt that the 338wm was "perfect" while the 375H&H was "overkill"... meaning too much recoil and/or meat damage to be worth it. Looking over my reloading manuals, I'm starting to think that there is not as much of a difference between the recoil of the two as people think. Yes the 375 has more, but it looks like there is less of a difference between the recoil of the 338wm and 375H&H than there is between the 300wm and 338wm.
Food for thought!
Red
for the person who was asking for a definition of overkill, I was referring to excessive meat damage, or excessive recoil, whichever comes first. I was under the impression that many people felt that the 338wm was "perfect" while the 375H&H was "overkill"... meaning too much recoil and/or meat damage to be worth it. Looking over my reloading manuals, I'm starting to think that there is not as much of a difference between the recoil of the two as people think. Yes the 375 has more, but it looks like there is less of a difference between the recoil of the 338wm and 375H&H than there is between the 300wm and 338wm.Food for thought!
Red
Redlich,
My .375s seem to recoil less my .338s, and are a lot more fun than a few .300s I've shot as well. I'm not the only one to feel this way.
Meat damage is more a function of bullet choice and velocity than cartridge. I'll bet that a .270 with cup and core bullets will do more meat damage than a .375 loaded with 270 grain TSXs. I've shot some things that make a coyote look big with .375, then turned around and shot another that was around 3500 pounds with same cartridge and bullet. It didn't bounce off the big one, or dismantle the little guy.
The best way to avoid meat damage is don't shoot them in the meat.
My .375s seem to recoil less my .338s, and are a lot more fun than a few .300s I've shot as well. I'm not the only one to feel this way.
Meat damage is more a function of bullet choice and velocity than cartridge. I'll bet that a .270 with cup and core bullets will do more meat damage than a .375 loaded with 270 grain TSXs. I've shot some things that make a coyote look big with .375, then turned around and shot another that was around 3500 pounds with same cartridge and bullet. It didn't bounce off the big one, or dismantle the little guy.
The best way to avoid meat damage is don't shoot them in the meat.
Jamie Black R/T
CGN Regular
- Location
- God's Country, AB
this the best quote of this thread.
Agreed!! haha
I'm a stingy guy and I hate wasting meat, but 'waste' is a relative term. So far I've had to throw away the front shoulder on the exit side on every Deer I've shot even when I didn't hit the shoulder (yet to get an Elk, as I said before) but I gather that's pretty normal... can't save it all right?
You're right Dogleg, it does seem like more of a velocity thing. I'm planning to use my 8x57mm with 195gr interlocks next year for 150m or less, and my 300wm with 180gr interbonds for anything over that or anything from a stand. My group is still trying to work this whole 'elk' thing out, but at the moment we look like bumbling fools.
I don't know why but I don't like the idea of a 338wm. Far as I know it never did anything to me, maybe I had a case burst on one in a past life
On the other hand I really DO like the idea of a 375H&H! And yet I don't 'need' either of them! Haha I have too much time to think about hunting and think about buying guns right now. Curse you hunting 'season'!
When I go for yearly Elk camp with my two sons we try to take guns that would complement each other, they are all Sako 75 SS so they function and feel same way.
30-06, 300 Win Mag, 338 Win Mag last one is my gun and is set up as long range gun with 225 TTSX (shot elk at about 520 y another at 400 y.)
Is 338 overkill I don't think so, but it would be to much gun for both my sons as they don't shoot enough.
Andrew
30-06, 300 Win Mag, 338 Win Mag last one is my gun and is set up as long range gun with 225 TTSX (shot elk at about 520 y another at 400 y.)
Is 338 overkill I don't think so, but it would be to much gun for both my sons as they don't shoot enough.
Andrew
- Location
- In lalaland, that is Ottawa.
SOF's thoughts on Elk
Francis Sell, a great gunman, 50 years ago, when he wrote the classic book, 'Advanced Hunting on Deer & Elk Trail" said that the lever action Winchester ('86 & M71) in .348 was perfect. Now Sell was a walker of the side hills and bedding areas, when a careful stalker could get into the center of a bedded harum of cows, all hell breaking loose when they rose up and the Boss then appeared. With the hammer rifle coming up as all hammer levers do, he was on target, no scope.
The .338 WM came out after Jack O'Connor wrote 'The Rifle Book' in which he praised the .348, 1964 edition.
We all know that with proper bullet placement, every thing from 6.5s up through the 7mm, X 57 and RM, .270, 280, .30-06, up to .358 etc. will do the job. Jack O'Connor was a great booster for the .270 but Jack hunted with a guide and had the time to be selective. Today, it is a lucky hunter who can spend the time O'Connor did. Thus, there might only be one chance for a shot.
Today, I believe that the .338 WM is available in not just in bolt actions but in semi such as the Browning. And we have now the shorter magnums with the same power.
My Winchester post 1964 M70 in .338 WM was my favourite rifle. 225 grain Hornadys for point blank shots out to about 360 yards, 300 grain Winchester bullets for the tail light, and cast gas checks for deer.
My M70 in .338 WM was lighter weight and easier to carry then my Ruger 77 7mm RM as well as my Ruger 77 in .30-06.
Any I must agree with those who say that you must be able to handle the recoil, fortunately, I could although working up the loads for the 300 gr. Winchester bullets was no fun. My weight then was about 185# and I had no great problems with the rifle, certainly no flinching, even at the bench. But too many go for the 'magnum' when if the truth were told, they would have a problem in not flinching with a .270! I have a friend, 225# who feels that a .270 is all that he can handle.
Decision, decisions....
The above, for what it is worth.
Francis Sell, a great gunman, 50 years ago, when he wrote the classic book, 'Advanced Hunting on Deer & Elk Trail" said that the lever action Winchester ('86 & M71) in .348 was perfect. Now Sell was a walker of the side hills and bedding areas, when a careful stalker could get into the center of a bedded harum of cows, all hell breaking loose when they rose up and the Boss then appeared. With the hammer rifle coming up as all hammer levers do, he was on target, no scope.
The .338 WM came out after Jack O'Connor wrote 'The Rifle Book' in which he praised the .348, 1964 edition.
We all know that with proper bullet placement, every thing from 6.5s up through the 7mm, X 57 and RM, .270, 280, .30-06, up to .358 etc. will do the job. Jack O'Connor was a great booster for the .270 but Jack hunted with a guide and had the time to be selective. Today, it is a lucky hunter who can spend the time O'Connor did. Thus, there might only be one chance for a shot.
Today, I believe that the .338 WM is available in not just in bolt actions but in semi such as the Browning. And we have now the shorter magnums with the same power.
My Winchester post 1964 M70 in .338 WM was my favourite rifle. 225 grain Hornadys for point blank shots out to about 360 yards, 300 grain Winchester bullets for the tail light, and cast gas checks for deer.
My M70 in .338 WM was lighter weight and easier to carry then my Ruger 77 7mm RM as well as my Ruger 77 in .30-06.
Any I must agree with those who say that you must be able to handle the recoil, fortunately, I could although working up the loads for the 300 gr. Winchester bullets was no fun. My weight then was about 185# and I had no great problems with the rifle, certainly no flinching, even at the bench. But too many go for the 'magnum' when if the truth were told, they would have a problem in not flinching with a .270! I have a friend, 225# who feels that a .270 is all that he can handle.
Decision, decisions....
The above, for what it is worth.
Ardent
CGN Ultra frequent flyer
Close to same experiences with the .375 here just topping out lower in weight, have taken dogs to Cape Buffalo and a bunch of stuff in between with the .375 H&H. Frankly, there isn't anything on the planet .375 is too much gun for. Does less damage to dogs than .243, and would kill T Rex used properly too if there was a season. The limitation for a gun is what the shooter can handle, an Elk doesn't know the difference between .338 and .375. In Africa using one gun for a huge range of game is very common, and there's almost nothing .375's viewed as overkill for, but in Canada you'd think you need a different gun for every species. No such thing as overguned for Elk, just overgunned for shooter. .375's my comfort zone, and the .400's the upper end of what I'll shoot casually, it differs from shooter to shooter.
Johnn Peterson
CGN Ultra frequent flyer
- Location
- Chemainus B.C.
Francis Sell, a great gunman, 50 years ago, when he wrote the classic book, 'Advanced Hunting on Deer & Elk Trail" said that the lever action Winchester ('86 & M71) in .348 was perfect. Now Sell was a walker of the side hills and bedding areas, when a careful stalker could get into the center of a bedded harum of cows, all hell breaking loose when they rose up and the Boss then appeared. With the hammer rifle coming up as all hammer levers do, he was on target, no scope.
The .338 WM came out after Jack O'Connor wrote 'The Rifle Book' in which he praised the .348, 1964 edition.
QUOTE]
*********************************************It's been a while since our last PM's
In addition to picking up an old box of Winchester 250gr Silvertips
which I'll probably keep just for photo ops, I have a line on some of the newer/present production Silvertip ammo by Winchester. I was fortunate enough to also pick up a couple of old boxes of Winchester 200gr Silvertips bullets.
I also have a good supply of Hornady 200gr FP bullets and Barnes Originals in 220gr and 250gr. I believe Keith was convinced a 250gr bullet was the best weight choice.
