Smallest reliable cartridge for Elk sized game to 400 yards

[Koda94]

Originally Posted by HiBC

I am interested in what constitutes a "proper bullet" for shooting elk at 600 yds with a 243.

Sectional density?
I'm not certain, but the dilemma with lighter bullets at longer distance on larger game is penetration. If the smaller diameter doesn't matter then it still needs to penetrate and stay intact. Not deflect off bone, or disintegrate. I'm curious too what bullet in a smaller diameter that we know is going to dissipate velocity and energy at 400yds would hold up to penetrate properly on a elk?

[HiBC]

My opinion:

The bullet manufacturers will usually recommend an impact velocity for their bullets to perform properly. That's one of the factors I consider in limiting range.

Generally around 1900 to 2000 fps is not far off for the applications I'm aware of.(Centerfire cup and core spitzer copper jacketed bullets)

I know there are other bullets besides Noslers. Great bullets. I just have my trusty Nosler load book at hand.Its not a new one.

The heavier 6mm bullets are 100 gr.They have a BC of about .380 .The 243 will launch them about 3100 fps. The chart says 1748 fps at 600. Altitude will help.

And there re other bullets that may be better.

Still,it seems 600 yd bullet terminal performance will be pretty marginal.

As would be my 600 yd shot placement. I don't need an elk that bad. I would not pull the trigger.

Some folks regard elk as reactive targets. Ballistic experiments."If it goes wrong,coyotes got to eat too" Poke and hope. If you nail it,the narcissist ego gets to brag. If you make a mess....well,we don't talk about that one.

It works for some folks.

It does not work for me. I've let some magnificent animals walk away.Gone home empty handed. Without regret.

[jimbob86]

More elephants were hunted/killed with the 6.5 MS sized cartridge than any other caliber.

What has the killing of an elephant at 40 paces using a FMJ small bore mauser round have to do with the subject at hand, which was, IIR, after 3 pages of reading, hunting elk to 400 yards......

.... I've never hunted elk ..... my G'pa did, with the rifle I hunt with now .... he used factory 150gr Nosler Partions, and took a cow elk ..... range was short, as it happened. It was not his usual load, but he could shoot ...... I doubt he would have taken a shot at an elk that he did not think he could make.

600 yard shots at elk with a .243? Yeah, I've seen the video, and opined about that stupidity, here, before. Do a search. I did dumb stuff in my youth ..... back then, there wasn't anyplace to make it public, thank God.

[Koda94]

Originally Posted by HiBC

The bullet manufacturers will usually recommend an impact velocity for their bullets to perform properly. That's one of the factors I consider in limiting range.

Generally around 1900 to 2000 fps is not far off for the applications I'm aware of.(Centerfire cup and core spitzer copper jacketed bullets)

Is there a way to find out this information? Ive never seen this on any mfg website.

[HiBC]

In the past,I've found it on both Sierra and Nosler sites.

You can also call and ask for a tech rep. That's what they get paid for

https://www.sierrabullets.com/resour...let-selection/

https://www.nosler.com/partition-bullet/

Looks like 1800 fps min. I'd call for specific applications

[Koda94]

Originally Posted by HiBC

In the past,I've found it on both Sierra and Nosler sites.

You can also call and ask for a tech rep. That's what they get paid for

https://www.sierrabullets.com/resour...let-selection/

https://www.nosler.com/partition-bullet/

Looks like 1800 fps min. I'd call for specific applications

this is perfect, thank you.

[reynolds357]

Originally Posted by Dufus

I shot a white tail with my 460 the first season after I bought it. It wasn't anything spectacular. Personally, I think one of my 30-06s knock 'em down better, although dead is dead.

I have viewed a video of a young lady shoot an elk at 600+ yds using the proper bullet with a 243 Win. and the cow just laid down and that was it.

Would I have done it? Not only no, but hell no.

All the 458 Win did was punch a hole. Looked about like a muzzleloader wound. 460 Wby was loaded with light bullets. It made a mess.

[Dufus]

Probably 500-600 fps difference in velocity to add more damage. I shoot a lot of cast bullets in my 460 at modest velocity. I tried a 600 gr Woodleigh out of it, but they are almost uncomfortable to shoot. Quite a push after the trigger is pulled. I do not shoot it off a bench.

[GeauxTide]

400 yards? 280 Remington with 154 Interbond or 160 Accubonds.

[Nathan]

Typical cup and cure bullets tend to need 1800 FPS to expand. Bullets like Nosler Accubond or Hornady ELD-X. The Accubond LR is good down to 1300fps. The all copper bullets need 2000 fps.

That said, this is really minimal expansion....I like to add 200-300 FPS to these numbers.

I also think 1500 ft lbs was the old stand by number for enough energy to kill/pass through. Some how newer rounds have reduced this to 1000 ft lbs on deer.

That in mind, I’m focused on 280 ai, 30’06 ai and 7mm Rem Mag.

[Wyosmith]

I agree with much of what Nathan said above, but I have to point out the failure of the "foot-pounds theory" of energy for killing classes of game. I have been very successful killing elk (and buffalo too) with a 44 mag handguns and I have gotten exits on 100% of the game I have killed with 44 mags 45 colt, 454 Casull and even 357 mags and I have also had one shot kills (So far) on 100% of the game I have killed with 357s, 44s 45s and the 454 handguns. 100% of the had died with 1 shot apiece and none of them have gone more then about 50 yards after a hit with the largest majority of them dropping within about 2-3 seconds of the shot. One buffalo, 2 elk and about 5 deer have dropped as I was still in recoil. Instantaneously! None of these guns have the "foot pounds" of energy the above formula.
It's the bullet hole that kills, not actually the bullet. If a bullet will go through your game in fairly straight line and if you shoot them where you need to, even solids kill well. We use them in Africa all the time. But when a bullet comes apart it can penetrate poorly and often veer off course badly, or both. The 2 longest trialing jobs I ever had in my life with elk were one shot with a Sierra Game King from a 7MM Rem mag at about 30 yards and another shot with a 338 Win mag at about 120 yards with an old Nosler 210 grain Ballistic tip Solid Base. The elk shot with the 7MM went about 3/4 of a mile and the one shot with the 338 went about 1-1/4 mile. I found both but both took tracking of about 7 hours. Both hits had way more "foot pounds" of energy then the above formula demands, but neither was hit with a bullet that held together. If those bulls were shot and hit where they were, but had been hit with my 44 mag handgun I know both would have been found in a very short time because the 44 with a 320 grain LBT bullet will go clear through them. I know ----- because I have done it a lot (some on big game and a lot more on domestic cattle and a few horses too) and the results have been 100% every single time.

But most of what Nathan says is spot on, and even the idea of measuring power in foot pounds will get you pretty close as long as the bullet doesn't break up.

[old roper]

Nathan, pretty good selection of bullets.

CAUTION: The following post includes loading data beyond or not covered by currently published maximums for this cartridge. USE AT YOUR OWN RISK. Neither the writer, The Firing Line, nor the staff of TFL assumes any liability for any damage or injury resulting from the use of this information.

I understand and my 280AI with 160gr AB is mid 2000fps almost 2400 ft lb @ 400yds. I haven't had to track bull elk yet with that load or recover bullet.

I build 30-06AI and used some of Nosler data and wished I still had it now that you can get Lapua brass.

I took my first bull elk here in Co 1977 with 7mag thru 1986. That would also be good choice. If I get cow tag public land I use 30-06 and most shots pretty close.

[Scorch]

I also think 1500 ft lbs was the old stand by number for enough energy to kill/pass through. Some how newer rounds have reduced this to 1000 ft lbs on deer.

When I was a teenager, back in the 1970s, I read an "authoritative" article in either Outdoor Life or Field & Stream or Sports Afield about the amount of energy required to cleanly kill game animals. The number for deer was 600 ft/lbs, and elk needed 900 ft/lbs. Fast forward a few years and deer require 1000 ft/lbs and elk require 1500? If that were true, the pioneers and early settlers would not have killed off the deer and elk using black powder flintlock rifles (many of those didn't have 600 ft/lbs of energy at the muzzle, let alone 100 or 200 yds away). Yes, more energy can sometimes give cleaner kills. Yes, faster cartridges give flatter trajectories. But hitting what you're shooting at kills them better than lots of foot/pounds of energy a few inches off target.

Back in the 1970s, there were still a lot of hunters using iron sights on older rifles chambered for milder cartridges, and many scopes were relatively low power, so people shot game at closer range making hits a bit more certain and eliminating the effects of wind and drop on our aim. I remember very few people saying their rifles weren't powerful enough to take a deer. I also meet quite a few people in my shop that are moving back to lower powered cartridges for game hunting, realizing that they will have to be more careful in their choice of shots taken.

[reynolds357]

Originally Posted by Scorch

When I was a teenager, back in the 1970s, I read an "authoritative" article in either Outdoor Life or Field & Stream or Sports Afield about the amount of energy required to cleanly kill game animals. The number for deer was 600 ft/lbs, and elk needed 900 ft/lbs. Fast forward a few years and deer require 1000 ft/lbs and elk require 1500? If that were true, the pioneers and early settlers would not have killed off the deer and elk using black powder flintlock rifles (many of those didn't have 600 ft/lbs of energy at the muzzle, let alone 100 or 200 yds away). Yes, more energy can sometimes give cleaner kills. Yes, faster cartridges give flatter trajectories. But hitting what you're shooting at kills them better than lots of foot/pounds of energy a few inches off target.

Back in the 1970s, there were still a lot of hunters using iron sights on older rifles chambered for milder cartridges, and many scopes were relatively low power, so people shot game at closer range making hits a bit more certain and eliminating the effects of wind and drop on our aim. I remember very few people saying their rifles weren't powerful enough to take a deer. I also meet quite a few people in my shop that are moving back to lower powered cartridges for game hunting, realizing that they will have to be more careful in their choice of shots taken.

Even though I am personally a fan of WBY and RUM, I realize they are overkill for 99% of the things I do with them. I dont shoot anything without hearing protection. Everything I shoot has a brake. My 7 RUM kicks like a 270 Winchester. Why not shoot it. Its much more forgiving on range estimation.

[tahunua001]

I would probably say 308 but that is really pushing it at 400 yards. I took an elk calf with a 6.5 grendel at point blank range once, took 3 shots to keep the poor beast down. would not recommend a 6.5 swede or any other 6.5 at the range specified short of the 264 weatherby mag. a 30-06 using 180gr bonded ammo would be my go to for up to 400 yard hunting but my own personal lack of marksmanship skills in the field typically limits me to 200 yard and closer shots.

[reynolds357]

Originally Posted by tahunua001

I would probably say 308 but that is really pushing it at 400 yards. I took an elk calf with a 6.5 grendel at point blank range once, took 3 shots to keep the poor beast down. would not recommend a 6.5 swede or any other 6.5 at the range specified short of the 264 weatherby mag. a 30-06 using 180gr bonded ammo would be my go to for up to 400 yard hunting but my own personal lack of marksmanship skills in the field typically limits me to 200 yard and closer shots.

264 Weatherby mag?? That's a new one on me.

[tahunua001]

it's sometimes called 6.5-300 wtby... it pretty much never left wildcat status.

[reynolds357]

I have a 6.5x300 Wby. Definitely not a wildcat. Sometimes called? Always been called is more like it.

[Scorch]

it's sometimes called 6.5-300 wtby... it pretty much never left wildcat status.

6.5-300 Weatherby has been a SAAMI chambering for a long time.

[reynolds357]

Back on a serious note and off of elephants, I would not feel in the least bit undergunned with a 25-06 at 400 for Whitetails. With a bonded or monolithic bullet, it will handily and reliably dispatch Elk at 400 as well.

[mxsailor803]

I’m not a elk hunter at all. Courtesy of living in the south eastern part of the states. I’ve got a buddy of mine in Oregon though that is a avid elk hunter. I was just asking him this a couple days ago since I’m about to retire in a couple years and plan on making a trip out there to go for a elk. Pretty much he said quite a few people use a .243win but he rather use a 7mag. I asked about my .270win. He’s saying with a good heavier bullet, I shouldn’t have any issues. Plus he knows I’m not going to take a 400yds shot on a game animal. Granted, come out at 300yds, I’m taking a shot.

[Paul B.]

Well, the lightest I would hunt elk with would be the 7x57 with a stiff hand load and I will add I won't try a shot at 400 yards. The longest shot I ever took at a deer was 426 paces. Sorry, rangefinders didn't exist back in the early 70's. Longest shot on an elk was 530 yards with a .300 Win. Mag. laser measured. I'm a lot more comfortable with 200 yards and under, preferably under.

"I asked about my .270win. He’s saying with a good heavier bullet, I shouldn’t have any issues. Plus he knows I’m not going to take a 400yds shot on a game animal. Granted, come out at 300yds, I’m taking a shot."

One of my hunting partners uses the .270 Win. and runs the Sierra 150 gr. Game King. He's one hell of a shot and I've sen him drop a cow elk at 450 yards with his .270. Personally, if I take my .270 I'll use a Nosler Partition but the Sierra GK will work just fine. Whichever your rifle likes best. Usually I take a .35 Whelen.
Paul B.

[Sure Shot Mc Gee]

Just a opinion:
Seeing those free range majestic animals we hunt in real time the suggestion of small in size cartridge use? I really have to wonder is there one particular cartridge I can promote?
Not marginal not the smallest in size by any means but one I know will indeed dispatch a Bull Elk humane-ly.
25-06 Rem tipped w/a bullet I have in a bench draw and sparingly use > 122 gr.S-Point Hornady.
Use too medium distance such 1/4 bore cartridge removes the underpinning of a Elks ability to stand like a monument bullet wounded beyond necessary.
I assume those who hunt Bull Elk yearly have witnessed such Elk behavior?

[BBarn]

Many of the lesser calibers can be used effectively on elk, but through both shoulders @400 yds or complete penetration on one quartering away at the same distance requires more if you want a nice size exit hole. I would want something in the 30-06 class or perhaps one of the 7mm mags, minimum.

Reduce the distance and/or avoid bad angle shots and get by with a 25 Cal.

[Don Fischer]

Originally Posted by TXAZ

How good is your aim to precisely hit a vital organ?
Most 6.5 rounds will drop anything on the North & South American continents if you can place the shot.

Conversely a .50 BMG round won’t stop many animals With a poorly placed.

If necessary read this twice. Great call TXAZ!