Pages: 1
Posted by: okiedude
Quote
Originally posted by: ShadyRascal
Okay you must have a lot of elk in minnesota. Way more than we have right here in the Montana rockies, so I guess that makes you an expert. If you take a .5 second shot with a bunch of snow in your scope and figure shooting a 50 BMG is going to make up for it, you're a hack. I've knocked them down just fine with my 270 and many of my acquaintances take their elk with "pea shooters". If you have to take a bad shot and just hope to blow the whole back end of it off to anchor it, get a new hobby.
ROFL....good point Shady
Posted by: okiedude
Why is a .270 a peashooter? I bet there are plenty of hunters to say that a .270 is enough rifle for alot of North American game. If your reasoning is correct, then why not hunt deer with a 50 cal BMG?
Posted by: cammoman
.300 wsm all the way.
Posted by: trailburner
I am looking at the winchester partition golds because that is the best all around ammo I can find without loading it myself. Do any of you have experience with the new federal Barnes ELS coated X bullet? It sounds sweet but I can't seem to find much info on it.
Thanks.
Other than these, what are your favorite 30-06 ammo for hunting elk?
Posted by: BushWacked
Remington and Winchester ammo has been around a long time and is inexpensive to shoot. What a lot of hunters are unaware of with all the advertisments in all the shooting and hunting mags showing Nosler is this Hornady is that, Barnes is great, Berger is better crap, after it is all said and done standard Win and Rem factory ammo will cleanly kill any big game animal just as dead, just as fast.
An expensive bullet will NOT make up for a bad shot placement.
My suggestion is test a couple of the factory loads and find which one will shoot the MOST CONSISTANT out of your rifle and go with that. Hunting elk I prefer at least 165 grain bullet and have put down two bull elk with one shot using 165 grain loads from a 30-06.
Posted by: carver
i use sierra bullets for everything. i used sierra gameking 150gr spbt. for my first elk hunt. i took a young 5x5 bull at around 150 yds. don't let people tell you that the /06 aint enough, it's plenty. i don't use 180 grain bullets & never will unless i hunt moose. you really need to start reloading. you will save money & shoot more.
Posted by: carver
oh yea, the barnes x is one of the best stopping bullets that money can buy. the nosler partition is one of the toughest ever. sierra is better known for accuracy, this is the single most important factor to me.
Posted by: carver
Wow, you just opened up a three year old post. That's cool though, it's been almost that long since I've visited here. Time to catch up now, btw, I'm still an /06 fan but that shoulder fired canon your using is a killing machine.
Posted by: carver
All of the cartriges I mention used a 24" barrel. The .270 Win can fire a 140 gr. bullet at up to 3000 fps. This equals between 1885- 2129 fp of energy @ 200 yds. depending on bullet brand & design.
The 7 mag can fire a 140 grain bullet at up to 3100 fps. This equals between 2020 - 2270 fp of energy @ 200 yds. depending on bullet brand & design.
The .338 Win. mag can fire a 225 grain bullet at up to 2850 fps. This equals between 2700 - 2800 fp of energy @ 200 yds. depending on bullet brand & design.
An experienced handloader can tweak all these to safetly shoot faster but not by much. These velocoties would better represent premium store bought ammo. such as Hornady light magnum & Federal premium. The biggest advantage that I see is the larger hole that the .338 will make.
Any of these rounds will do the trick on elk & do it well. The Win. 30/30 was used with confidence in taking deer & elk when it was factory loaded with black powder way back when. IMO, a responsible shooter/hunter can down elk size game humanely with as small a round as .243 & up.
Posted by: carver
Quote
Originally posted by: carver
Quote
Originally posted by: tencubed
Been watching this thread here and reading the same thing in gun magazines and hearing it in barber shops and coffee counters for well over the a half century. Been on my share of hunts and have a good selection of rifles in calibers ranging from pre civil war to very modern. I have probably sent as much lead downrange over the years as the majority here. The arguments and opinions never change and never will. Lots of the new calibers with WWS or other designations behind or ahead of the numbers have been done by wildcatters several times in years past but were not picked up by the factories. Big bore, small bore or something in between. What it really comes down to is the ability to shoot and shoot well. The commitment to the game we are hunting requires we take a shot that is reasonable and within our abilities. The safety of others in the field requires we know the terminus of the lead we launch. We need to be skilled in our tracking abilities to be able to follow the animal which, for whatever reason, keeps going even after a well placed shot, or two. It happens and if you think otherwise you have not taken much game.
There is an old saying, "beware the man who has but one gun for he will shoot it well". This may be true but having a selection to choose from allows the hunter to take afield a rifle that is suited to the terrain and game he will be around. The 270 Winchester is a fine rifle but I wouldn't use one in heavy brush just as I would prefer it over a 45-70, which is a great heavy brush gun, on an open plain where the ranges would exceed a couple of hundred yards.
To say I use just this or that for Elk and this or that for Deer indicates a limited choice for the game or a propensity to hunt in just one kind of country.
Fellows, I'm not trying to give anyone a bad time here and I have enjoyed the many well thought out comments and ballistic comparisons that have been made. It's always interesting to see how little the opinions change as people become involved with a particular caliber or velocity range. I personally went thru a phase where if it was below 4000 FPS it wasn't worth shooting. Even went to the edge and had a one-off 6MM wildcat built up on a belted '06 case. Lots of speed and accuracy but not so great on barrel life. That rifle will kill elk or groundhogs very dead with one well placed shot. Have learned that a selection of calibers is lots more fun and gives you way more options in your hunting. Even when I go after big game anymore where I have to hunt near a road and tend to sit and watch open areas a lot I take a big bore rifle as well as something with some range to it.
Keep the discussion going, this topic has filled many a night around a campfire and is really what keeps gun magazines going.
.
Posted by: carver
/06 belted case?
Posted by: carver
Somewhat understood but an /06 based cartrige is beltless.
Posted by: carver
Well said Tencubed.
Posted by: carver
Quote
Originally posted by: carver
Quote
Originally posted by: carver
i use sierra bullets for everything. i used sierra gameking 150gr spbt. for my first elk hunt. i took a young 5x5 bull at around 150 yds. don't let people tell you that the /06 aint enough, it's plenty. i don't use 180 grain bullets & never will unless i hunt moose. you really need to start reloading. you will save money & shoot more.
Since this reply a few years ago, I have come to the conclusion that the 165g. bullet is probably the best bullet weight for this cartrige. From small deer to large elk, the 165 will hit a little harder & in some cases fly flatter. Through experimenting, I have found a load that is "wickedly accurate" @ 200. I also added that you will "save money reloading & you will shoot more". I take that back but in a good way. You will shoot more, chances are a lot more to the point that you will spend a small chunk buying various bullets, weights, powders & what not.
Don't get me wrong, reloading saves "bucu dolla" over store bought ammo. You just tend to shoot a lot more!
Posted by: Mort
I&39;ve tried about every ammo brand there is but always seem to come back to Remington and Winchester for my centerfire high power stuff. Remington cor-lokt or scirocco would be pretty good bets. I&39;ve dropped deer instantly with Winchester failsafe loads and wouldn&39;t hesitate to use them or the nosler partition tipped rounds for elk. The Barnes X bullet is an outstanding bullet. I use these in a couple of handloads
I take a few boxes of each brand and loads to the range and shoot them for accuracy to see which my particular rifle likes best. One load that shoots great in one of my rifles doesn&39;t in another. The only 30/06 rifles I have currently are a Remington Model 7400 and an M-1 Garand. The Garand doesn&39;t get shot too much but it seems to like the Winchester 180 grain ballistic silvertips about as well as anything besides FMJ match ammo. The 7400 seems to shoot the best with the Remington 180 grain scirocco loads.
Posted by: Mort
Savage makes a damn good rifle.
I shot one of the new Savage models with their “accu-trigger” and it was an outstanding rifle. It had the best trigger I have ever seen out of the box. The thing can be adjusted to anywhere you would like between 1 ½ and 7 pounds simply by adjusting the trigger with a little supplied tool. The rifle (a 7mm rem mag) was extremely accurate too. We put a nice swarovski scope on it and it was a real tack driver. Combine that with a crisp light trigger and the thing shot like a dream.
The next centerfire rifle I buy will probably be a Savage with an accu-trigger. I have almost exclusively been a Remington and Winchester man when it comes to bolt action centerfire rifles but that Savage trigger is addictive. Remington and Winchester had better develop a similar system quick. Once shooters get a taste of a good out of the box trigger they will be flocking to the Savage. Plus the Savages are generally cheaper than Winchesters and Remingtons.
Posted by: Hossblur
I had to get in.
1st, why are you in montana hunting elk if minn. has so many?
2nd, where, and better yet why are you shooting elk at YOUR effective range(400yds). Let me speak for all of us who live in the places your hunting, if your shooting 300-400 yds, your most likely shooting over our heads because we can hunt and are in range, 200yds or less.
3rd, don't you find it funny that the guys who live where the elk are, myself included(06') are .270, .06', and 7mm shooters, and the guys who "know" about the elk where we live are .300, .338. and every wildcat you can think of guys. The .338, and.300 are so loud you wake the whole forest, and scare your horse. They kick like mules, and are too big for deer. Remember, some of us still EAT what we kill so blowing holes and blood brusing are not wanted.
4th, the 30-30 and .243 really are too small, lets be honest, in a pinch they will do but so will that fat girl in the bar at last call, but would you want her to start with?
5th, please for the love of god, you eastern guys need to know, we have squirrels out here that are bigger than whitetails, so what you use for them has NO meaning to western hunters.
Shady is right, you get one gun, mine is a A-bolt, .30-06 that I got for christmas when I turned 16 some 17 years ago. I will match my horn collection to any Minnesotan with his MANLY .338, . I still have that gun because it kills, generally because I can hunt. Any elk spooked and running scarred has enough adrenaline flowing that a 3/4 truck might not do the job. However if you can hunt, and put in your preseason time, you can be within 200yds and not be chasing elk, you can be hunting elk!
Posted by: Hossblur
Shady, I didn't mean you can only own a single gun, but you usually hunt with one gun. Like you I "need" a bunch more guns, but also like you I have a sand habit. I wasn't ripping Minn. as an eastern state. What I meant was, I watch a lot of shows on the outdoor network and the whitetail guys usually sit on a food plot, shoot inside of 150 yds, generally out of "blinds"(cabins) with dead rests, shooting smaller deer(non canadian whitetails), and yet it seems they rarely kill dead, telling me they either can't shoot, or are not using enough gun. So my point was to these types of guys, if you can't dump a little whitetail, you have no buisness talking about elk guns. I shoot a a-bolt 30-06, shooting 165 boattails, on public land, no guides, no "blinds", in order to get your elk you have to be a hunter. Your also after opening morning hunting spooked bulls, which means you will not get a 300+ yd shot, more than likely your in tight cover shooting 75yds or less so long range ballistics mean nothing.
Posted by: Hossblur
Catterman, I do have to give it up, I have no moose(9 bonus points) and no caribou. I meant no real disrespect, just having some fun anyway!! Damn good looking kid, love the camo!!!
Posted by: ShadyRascal
If you're handloading, I've seen some great results with the Nosler Accubond. In that '06 any good 150 grain pill will work on an elk if you do your part. The partition bullets are good insurance for penetration and weight retention. The Accubonds hold together very well too.
Most importantly, know your rifle and what you can do with it. A couple buddies of mine just put down a pair of bull elk at 478 yards with 140 grain accubond bullets in a 270 Winchester and a 280 Remington. They know how to shoot, one shot kills. Elk and deer don't read gun magazines or carry around ballistics charts, you put one in the engine room and they are going down.
SR
Posted by: ShadyRascal
Okay you must have a lot of elk in minnesota. Way more than we have right here in the Montana rockies, so I guess that makes you an expert. If you take a .5 second shot with a bunch of snow in your scope and figure shooting a 50 BMG is going to make up for it, you're a hack. I've knocked them down just fine with my 270 and many of my acquaintances take their elk with "pea shooters". If you have to take a bad shot and just hope to blow the whole back end of it off to anchor it, get a new hobby.
Posted by: ShadyRascal
Some numbers for grins and giggles.
The 338 with 230 grain bullet shows in my Speer reload manual the hottest load at 2980 fps. That computes to 4534 ft lbs muzzle energy, and with BC .484 at 300 yards still packing 2941 ft lbs. Big time power there.
The 7 mag shooting a 160 grain at 2970 has 3133 ft lbs muzzle energy, and 2220 at 300 yards.
My 270 peashooter with 130 grain at 3050 has 2685 ft lbs muzzle energy and 1732 at 300 yards.
My partner knocked his bull down last year with his 7 mag right at (rangefinder) 500 yards. It took a couple hits in the lungs and wandered around a bit then dropped within about 50 yards. I don't know if I'd take that shot with the 270 just on diminished energy, although I know elk have been taken at that range with that caliber. I shot a bull at about 100 yards with said 270, broke through front shoulder blade (oops shot a bit forward he was moving) took out lungs and the bull ran a short ways and piled up.
I know guys who've dropped them with 257 Roberts and 243. I would only take perfect shots with those calibers, broadside standing close etc. But my original comment on putting one in the engine room still stands: If you hit the lungs that elk is going down whether you have a .338 sized hole or .277, he don't know the difference, when blood oxygen drops he's hitting the dirt.
I see in Guns & Ammo mag the gun writer Craig Boddington comments the longest elk shot he ever made successfully was at 400 & some odd yards,,,,, his caliber? 270 Winchester.
Posted by: ShadyRascal
I like these kinds of discussions and don't personally get too worked up over it. If I had my druthers I'd have about a half dozen more rifles than I do now (for starters) but Mrs Shady tends to be quite logical and forces a pretty well justified reason for new gun cabinet additions. Hence the 270 which does everything I really need.
If I had one rifle I used purely for elk, yes it would be something with more zap, for in these mountains here you get shots at 100 yards and under, or 400 and up it seems. Steep and timbered.
The 270 is great on deer as is my new 260 Remington. The 260 is everything the 243 always wanted to be; it doesn't kick the kids too hard, doesn't make that unpleasant roar of a magnum, and kills the crap out of the deer. It took a whitetail and a muley this year, both drop-in-the-tracks kills with handsome exit holes at the hands of my 2 sons. 120 grain 2800fps handload.
One of my friends hunts elk with a 340 Weatherby. He doesn't like to track. That thing plants em hard but it's an anti-tank weapon, not exactly fun to shoot.
I had good training, my dad was All Army Rifle Team, Master Class. And I tend to not pull the trigger unless I know what's (probably) going to happen when I do. So far I've been lucky and haven't had to be a big time tracker, haven't lost an animal yet.
The elk my buddy's kid dropped a couple weeks ago at 478 yards with his 270 shooting 140 grain accubond at 3000 is just as dead as if it had a bigger hole, and will taste just as good.
Mr Tencubed does make a very wise quote: Beware the man who shoots only one rifle, for he will shoot it well.
I like that one, and like to spend much time with a rifle I can stand to shoot over and over in the off season, so I know what it does and where the boolyet goes. Used to have a 7 mag and it just wasn't fun, so I didn't shoot it, and likely never would have been that good with it.
Posted by: ShadyRascal
One gun theory is very good and very sound, but of course we need to keep that to ourselves guys. Mrs Shady needs to know how much I still need that 243 Cooper Montana Varminter, 22-250 Remington 700 Varminter, Winchester 94 for around camp, Kimber bolt 17 HMR, 700 CDL 7 mag, buncha hot rod parts for one of my 10-22's, and another trunkload of handguns.
Stuff I really do need.
Posted by: ShadyRascal
I read about this in one of my gun magazines. As usual, my first reaction was "All right, new lever action performance!" But once I settle in, read and contemplate, I get to the same conclusion as usual, and here is my humble opinion.
Yes the new 308 is faster and more effective than the old thuddy-thuddy. The Marlin lever achieves this with a longer barrel. The Marlin levers are bigger and heavier than a Winchester in the first place. Now you put a scope on it to maximize your work with the extended range capability.
Okay, now rather than a 5 pound lever gun you carry in one hand with quick reaction capability you have a big, heavy, scoped rifle that can shoot longer yardage. Well for me, when I want that I have Remington 700's which shoot faster, farther, more accurately. The whole idea to me of the lever action therefore is diminished through these improvements.
So again when they try to make a lever gun something it's not, they make it less of what it was and not as good as what you can get otherwise.
Now that's just me, in my area of hunting in Montana, where I'll use bolt guns for open spaces and desire a lever gun to be light, handy, quick, and in the woods. Other people perhaps in the midwest and east may find this new Marlin to cover all their needs very well.
SR
Posted by: KodiakOwner
180 grain for moose? my father has shots moose (.308) with a 150gr, or 160gr. Works for him. A moose in the freezer every fall. I love the 30-06 savage I have. Model 1300C. I can load it up or down for whatever i want to shoot. Seems to be a great all around rifle.
Posted by: textrout
I have a Browning Boss '06 that shoots great, and it likes the Horn. Light Mag ammo. I've downed two elk without a problem but that was with both shots being double lung shots. I agree with shot placement being No. one consideration, but you don't want your bullet falling apart before it gets to the vitals either! All of the loads mentioned so far can to fine on elk, within their (and your) accuracy limits. Looks like I won't be chasing the elk this season, but the bucks better beware!
Good luck!!
Textrout
Posted by: twin88
My buddy uses barnes-x on elk and loves them, I like hornady 190 bt, most accurate out of my gun 300 win mag abolt ss with boss. Also have A303 springfield 30-06 for deer, it also loves the horn 190bt, it blows nice holes in anything, I reload my own.
Posted by: twin88
I also shoot a a-bolt stalker in 300 win mag and use the hornady 190 bt with 72 gr. mrp powder. Shoots better than anything else in this gun.Could not get barnes x to shoot worth a sxxx in my browning. I use this same load for deer and elk. DEAD IS DEAD !
Posted by: twin88
Yes I have heard the accu bond is a great bullet, but I have not tried them. My work buddy shoots an stw with barnes x on elk and loves them.Ihave used the green tip nosler and really liked them on deer, man they blow a big hole and are very accurate.
Posted by: Catterman
Quote
Originally posted by: Chinchgub
Why is the .270 a peashooter? A 7mm has nearly 1000 ft. lbs more energy than a .270 at 200 yards....
Umm, no it doesn't. The 270 is a powerful caliber, super fast too. YOu will have to show me your balistic chart that has the 7mm that much ahead of the 270 at only 200 yards.
By the way, I use a 270 WSM for deer, and a .300 Win mag for caribou and moose.
Posted by: Catterman
On another note, this is the 100 year anniversary of the 30-06!
Posted by: Catterman
I think the whole world would agree that a well placed shot will kill almost anything yada yada yada.
I have seen, several times, a big rifle bad a deer that a smaller one probably wouldn't have. For example, we had a deer running and my cousin shot it in the gut area with the .300. This caused enough of a blood trail where we could find the deer and finish it. However, we have lost deer with what we though were gut shots with a .243. So there, a big bore rifle saved us a deer. Maybe everyone here is a marksman shooter, but the reality is it is very hard to hit a deer running and jumpin in the hogwallows.
Posted by: Catterman
Quote
Originally posted by: Hossblur
I had to get in.
1st, why are you in montana hunting elk if minn. has so many?
2nd, where, and better yet why are you shooting elk at YOUR effective range(400yds). Let me speak for all of us who live in the places your hunting, if your shooting 300-400 yds, your most likely shooting over our heads because we can hunt and are in range, 200yds or less.
3rd, don't you find it funny that the guys who live where the elk are, myself included(06') are .270, .06', and 7mm shooters, and the guys who "know" about the elk where we live are .300, .338. and every wildcat you can think of guys. The .338, and.300 are so loud you wake the whole forest, and scare your horse. They kick like mules, and are too big for deer. Remember, some of us still EAT what we kill so blowing holes and blood brusing are not wanted.
4th, the 30-30 and .243 really are too small, lets be honest, in a pinch they will do but so will that fat girl in the bar at last call, but would you want her to start with?
5th, please for the love of god, you eastern guys need to know, we have squirrels out here that are bigger than whitetails, so what you use for them has NO meaning to western hunters.
Shady is right, you get one gun, mine is a A-bolt, .30-06 that I got for christmas when I turned 16 some 17 years ago. I will match my horn collection to any Minnesotan with his MANLY .338, . I still have that gun because it kills, generally because I can hunt. Any elk spooked and running scarred has enough adrenaline flowing that a 3/4 truck might not do the job. However if you can hunt, and put in your preseason time, you can be within 200yds and not be chasing elk, you can be hunting elk!
1) he never said MN has so many elk, just that we have some. Getting a license is very hard, that is why we go out to other states.
2) I agree
3) My .300 kicks no more then my .270WSM or my .308, and all are plenty loud. Any centerfire will pretty much scare your horse.
4) I would pass on the fat chick and go home alone BR>
5) I don't know if your reference was still to Chinchgub, but MN is not an eastern state. Don't give us that talk about your game in Utah is so much bigger then everything out here too. I spent several years living and hunting in Alaska and had a blast, but I love MN hunting just as much. Please show us a picture of your horn collection so we can see how it compares to ANY Minnesotan. I don't think you realize how big of a hunting state MN is. btw, you can see some of my kills in my profile, nothing monsterous, but good for me I too agree that one gun is best, however what is the fun in that???
Posted by: Catterman
Interesting, thanks for the info.
I am a big fan of the lever action, and own a Model 94 30-30, a Marlin 30-30, and previously owned a BLR in both .308 and .243. Once my kids start getting to hunting age I am going to start them on the lever actions.
Posted by: tencubed
Been watching this thread here and reading the same thing in gun magazines and hearing it in barber shops and coffee counters for well over the a half century. Been on my share of hunts and have a good selection of rifles in calibers ranging from pre civil war to very modern. I have probably sent as much lead downrange over the years as the majority here. The arguments and opinions never change and never will. Lots of the new calibers with WWS or other designations behind or ahead of the numbers have been done by wildcatters several times in years past but were not picked up by the factories. Big bore, small bore or something in between. What it really comes down to is the ability to shoot and shoot well. The commitment to the game we are hunting requires we take a shot that is reasonable and within our abilities. The safety of others in the field requires we know the terminus of the lead we launch. We need to be skilled in our tracking abilities to be able to follow the animal which, for whatever reason, keeps going even after a well placed shot, or two. It happens and if you think otherwise you have not taken much game.
There is an old saying, "beware the man who has but one gun for he will shoot it well". This may be true but having a selection to choose from allows the hunter to take afield a rifle that is suited to the terrain and game he will be around. The 270 Winchester is a fine rifle but I wouldn't use one in heavy brush just as I would prefer it over a 45-70, which is a great heavy brush gun, on an open plain where the ranges would exceed a couple of hundred yards.
To say I use just this or that for Elk and this or that for Deer indicates a limited choice for the game or a propensity to hunt in just one kind of country.
Fellows, I'm not trying to give anyone a bad time here and I have enjoyed the many well thought out comments and ballistic comparisons that have been made. It's always interesting to see how little the opinions change as people become involved with a particular caliber or velocity range. I personally went thru a phase where if it was below 4000 FPS it wasn't worth shooting. Even went to the edge and had a one-off 6MM wildcat built up on a belted '06 case. Lots of speed and accuracy but not so great on barrel life. That rifle will kill elk or groundhogs very dead with one well placed shot. Have learned that a selection of calibers is lots more fun and gives you way more options in your hunting. Even when I go after big game anymore where I have to hunt near a road and tend to sit and watch open areas a lot I take a big bore rifle as well as something with some range to it.
Keep the discussion going, this topic has filled many a night around a campfire and is really what keeps gun magazines going.
Posted by: tencubed
Quote
Originally posted by: carver
/06 belted case?
Been several versions of this over the years. Involves annealing the brass, running it thru a series of dies to progressively form the belt. This gives better headspace control and allows repeated neck sizing only when reloading. Not uncommon to get over 100 loadings from a piece of brass. Proper reheating and tempering of the brass is critical to avoid having blown primers at normal pressures. Believe this was covered in a book by Col. Townsend Wheelen in the '40s and touched on by P. O. Ackley in one of his must read books. Undoubtedly many other reference sources out there as well. Good for a specialized rifle but way more trouble than it's worth in most cases.
Posted by: tencubed
Quote
Originally posted by: carver
Somewhat understood but an /06 based cartrige is beltless.hr>
The '06 cartridge is an improvement over the '03 which had a few flaws. There have been many, perhaps hundreds, of good, bad, worthless and dangerous wildcats built on this basic case design.
This case has been modified in about every fashion you can imagine and a lot you can't. It has had rims added, been straightened out, tapered severely, necked up, down and shortened. Reshaping it by belting is just another modification as is center ignition or rebating the rim. To my knowledge there has never been a basic cartridge that has been used for as much experimentation and research as the venerable '06 and the cartridges it has parented.
And you are absolutely right, the '06 is beltless as manufactured.
Posted by: tencubed
"Effective Range"? According to which chart and whose scope sighted typewriter or word processor are we referring? There are so many variables that can enter into this as to make these two words nearly an oxy-moron. Comment was made about a 450 Marlin being a calibre bigger than needed for black bear and the '06 being preferable. The 450 Marlin is nothing more than a 45-70 being loaded to the higher pressures that the more modern firearms can handle. Well familiar with the calibre and know it is a bear stopper very usable for close in work. The '06 also falls into this class, but with the right bullet and not in as heavy brush. Same bullet would not be that effective at the longer ranges the '06 is capable of. Not picking on this poster just using an example.
Another poster talked about "blood trail" from a gut shot deer. Again, bullet placement! A big bore will drill a hole that makes a blood trail in almost all cases. Even the old, and slow, 50-70 makes for big blood trails. Rather this trail is long or short (we had to track it for 50 yards - - - I have personally followed elk shot thru the heart with an '06 farther than that) a big hole makes for a bigger leak. High velocity does not guarantee a large exit wound and blood trail.
Prior to some committee of experts deciding the calibre was too small I used a 25-35 Model 94 Winchester as a saddle rifle for years. Took deer, elk, bear, cougar, coyote and all manner of small game with this rifle. Very light recoil and moderate muzzle blast made it perfect for shooting from a horse. Moved up to the powerful 30-30 but never managed to kill anything any deader. Even going to a Model 95 Winchester in 30-40 Gvt. failed to kill them deader than dead. The big thing comes down to knowing your capabilities and those of the rifle you carry.
No rifle, and I do mean no rifle no matter the calibre will replace a bit of skill gained from practice and ability of the person behind it. If you can't be sure where the bullet is going then don't touch off the shot. I would never take a raking shot from the rear quarter thru the lungs and heart on a bear with a 25-35. This same shot can be confidently made with a 30-40. A deer in heavy brush can be meat on the table with a 45-70 and have to be a passed shot with a 270 Win. If you don't know why you need to do some more reading or ask the questions of people that have spent the time in the field and at the range.
I mentioned before about how many of the "new" ideas and calibers have been around for years in wildcat form. The cases may be slightly different in appearance but the loading density vs case capacity to bullet weight and calibre will be so close as to make the ballistics virtually identical. These cartridges have been tested in the field and many have shown excellent results. The big difference now is there are actions being made to take advantage of these new, shorter cartridges. Just how much of an advantage this is depends on how much money you are willing to spend in order to have a rifle that is a few ounces lighter and a bit shorter. As far as the external ballistics go there is very little new under the sun.
Where some real advances have been made is in the construction of the bullets themselves. Many of the new bullets have a much wider range of effective use than most of the older ones. Some of the new designs will function is a reasonable fashion over a broad range of velocities. This is where the real advantage of todays rifle lies. The new bullets, when used in many of the older calibers has brought new life to them.
Perhaps having a "new" rifle for many folks would be as simple as doing a little research on the bullets available to them now and spending all that money not spent on a new rifle on ammo to really learn to shoot rather than sighting in a keyboard.
Posted by: tencubed
Quote
Originally posted by: carver
Quote
Originally posted by: carver
Quote
Originally posted by: carver
i use sierra bullets for everything. i used sierra gameking 150gr spbt. for my first elk hunt. i took a young 5x5 bull at around 150 yds. don't let people tell you that the /06 aint enough, it's plenty. i don't use 180 grain bullets & never will unless i hunt moose. you really need to start reloading. you will save money & shoot more.
Since this reply a few years ago, I have come to the conclusion that the 165g. bullet is probably the best bullet weight for this cartrige. From small deer to large elk, the 165 will hit a little harder & in some cases fly flatter. Through experimenting, I have found a load that is "wickedly accurate" @ 200. I also added that you will "save money reloading & you will shoot more". I take that back but in a good way. You will shoot more, chances are a lot more to the point that you will spend a small chunk buying various bullets, weights, powders & what not.
Don't get me wrong, reloading saves "bucu dolla" over store bought ammo. You just tend to shoot a lot more!hr>
It's interesting that you posted this. When I read the original post, as brought forward here, I considered posting about the effectiveness and efficiency of the 165 to 168 grain bullets in the '06. Many tests have been done with the bullets in this caliber and cartridges of this general case capacity. Most have come to the same conclusion you did. The old 30-40 and the 308 Win. also do well with this bullet but both of the latter do a bit better with a few grains less weight to push.
Like you I have found the Sierra bullets perform very reliably on game and target. The 165 you refer to, in both the HPBT and SPBT versions, has proven to be extremely consistent over the years. Targets fired many years ago can be consistently duplicated today using the same components and rifle. Sierra's 85 grain HPBT 6MM bullet is one of the very few that will not leak lead when pushed above 4200 FPS and still give good terminal performance at velocities in the mid 2000 FPS range.
Your comments about the cost savings when reloading are interesting as well. Apparently you have discovered the "savings" can be eaten up by a lot more shooting. This is just what is needed to improve a persons ability to make the shot of a lifetime when the opportunity presents itself. The hours spent at the loading bench and on the range as well as the time educating oneself about the internal and external ballistics involved simply add to the overall enjoyment of the sport.
Glad to see younger shooters are still doing the field testing and experimenting that help make the shooting sports what they are. As long as we continue to support organizations such as Ducks Unlimited and the NRA, to name just a couple, we have a fair chance of being able to continue to pursue our sport. Needless to say, I am very concerned about the recent elections and the outcomes.
Posted by: tencubed
Quote
Originally posted by: tencubed
I mentioned before about how many of the "new" ideas and calibers have been around for years in wildcat form. The cases may be slightly different in appearance but the loading density vs case capacity to bullet weight and calibre will be so close as to make the ballistics virtually identical. These cartridges have been tested in the field and many have shown excellent results. The big difference now is there are actions being made to take advantage of these new, shorter cartridges. Just how much of an advantage this is depends on how much money you are willing to spend in order to have a rifle that is a few ounces lighter and a bit shorter. As far as the external ballistics go there is very little new under the sun.
Where some real advances have been made is in the construction of the bullets themselves. Many of the new bullets have a much wider range of effective use than most of the older ones. Some of the new designs will function is a reasonable fashion over a broad range of velocities. This is where the real advantage of todays rifle lies. The new bullets, when used in many of the older calibers has brought new life to them.
Perhaps having a "new" rifle for many folks would be as simple as doing a little research on the bullets available to them now and spending all that money not spent on a new rifle on ammo to really learn to shoot rather than sighting in a keyboard.
I was just browsing thru the Marlin web site and see they have introduced, in conjunction with Hornady who has the new ammo on it's site, a new cartridge called the "308 Marlin Express" and a couple of lever action rifles chambered for it. Apparently both will be available in early 2007.
I thought I would bring this old thread forward and make a few comments on this "new" cartridge Marlin and Hornady have made available to the general public.
This round is described in the Marlin site as a rimmed cartridge. The Hornaday site shows a picture of the new round and it appears to be a semi-rimmed rather than a fully rimmed case. The velocities listed are over 2600 FPS with a 160 grain bullet. Not bad for a lever action for sure but just how "new and different" is this offering.
The velocities are just slightly above those of the 30/30 Improved (Ackley version) about the same as the .30 Lever Power (by Fred Ward) and something below the 30/40 Improved (Ackley).
Can't give you the dates that each of these wildcats were first developed but the first two were made for use in, besides various hi-walls and custom rifles, the Model 94 Winchester and the latter in the Model 95 Winchester. All were, I've been told, used successfully in various other lever guns. This information from a book printed in 1962. Once again, nothing really new under the sun just factories coming out with what the experimenters and custom shops have been doing for years. BR>
This cartridge will bring to the lever action shooter another option in a reasonably priced rifle that will have factory ammo available.
The Winchester model 88 chambered for the Winchester 308 is more powerful than this new round but marginally so. I never cared for the 88 as a saddle rifle, it just didn't come out of the scabbard easily perhaps because of the pistol grip stock, and suspect these new Marlins may be a bit unhandy as a boot gun as well.
Again, just my opinions on all this and I encourage constructive comments, criticisms and observations.
Posted by: tencubed
Quote
Originally posted by: ShadyRascal
I read about this in one of my gun magazines. As usual, my first reaction was "All right, new lever action performance!" But once I settle in, read and contemplate, I get to the same conclusion as usual, and here is my humble opinion.
Yes the new 308 is faster and more effective than the old thuddy-thuddy. The Marlin lever achieves this with a longer barrel. The Marlin levers are bigger and heavier than a Winchester in the first place. Now you put a scope on it to maximize your work with the extended range capability.
Okay, now rather than a 5 pound lever gun you carry in one hand with quick reaction capability you have a big, heavy, scoped rifle that can shoot longer yardage. Well for me, when I want that I have Remington 700's which shoot faster, farther, more accurately. The whole idea to me of the lever action therefore is diminished through these improvements.
So again when they try to make a lever gun something it's not, they make it less of what it was and not as good as what you can get otherwise.
Now that's just me, in my area of hunting in Montana, where I'll use bolt guns for open spaces and desire a lever gun to be light, handy, quick, and in the woods. Other people perhaps in the midwest and east may find this new Marlin to cover all their needs very well.
SR
I believe you have a handle on what is happening here. Another "new" cartridge with "new" rifles to sell thru the hunting magazines. There are a lot of folks, like me ( ), that "really need" this new rifle to fill a perceived gap in their collection. I think I will pass on this one but have ordered a stainless version of the 450 Marlin came out with. Main reason for this was to avoid having high velocity 45-70 ammo around that may get mixed into ammo loaded for the old, and weaker, Trapdoor Springfields. Don't want to take the risk of a blown up gun.
You are right about the weight and length of barrel issues, the Marlins are not the light and handy carbine the traditional Model 94 is. They are not even as handy as the heavier and longer Model 95. The Marlin Guide Gun is much closer to the feel of the 94 with it's straight grip stock and shorter barrel but you sacrifice a lot of velocity due to barrel length.
Marlin and Hornaday have used a slightly lighter bullet to build the velocity a bit, something handloaders are familiar with, and, in conjunction with a longer barrel, have extended the range of some of the older cartridges. This new 308 Marlin round is building on that theme and is really the same thing done in custom shops for years.
I still think the real advances have been in the bullets available to the reloader and manufacturers.
Posted by: tencubed
Recently found a good site that covers a lot of what has been discussed here. For your reading pleasure take a look at "GUNS AND SHOOTING ONLINE". Maybe I consider this a worthwhile site because it follows my general line of thought.
Posted by: Thunderbolt
Quote
Originally posted by: Chinchgub
Quote
Originally posted by: ShadyRascal
Okay you must have a lot of elk in minnesota.
Actually we do have native, wild in elk in Minnesota. Surprised you didn't know that....
But I do my elk hunting in Montana. Beautiful state and I always look forward to coming out there. But I also don't spend $650 on a tag and drive 18 hours just to walk around out there undergunned. I never said a peashooter like a .270 can't kill an elk! Heck, a .22 can kill an elk with a well placed shot.
I'm talking about the LESS THAN WELL PLACED SHOT. Which have a tendency to occur during true hunting conditions. No one can guarantee a perfect shot everytime. If you hunt long enough, you're going to experience the risk in carrying around deer rifles for elk. Once you trail some of these wounded critters around Montana for days you'll understand that its better to have something that will penetrate anything and get into the vitals everytime than something that will only do that on a perfect shot.
I respect elk (and their size and cunning) too much to ever risk injuring one with a peashooter.
BTW, hit any elk this year?
I only have one thing to say about the capitalized sentence in this post. To many people think a bigger firearm means they can take less than perfect shots and the high power will make up for it and I think they need a new hobby. If you are not confident that you can place the bullet where it needs to go you have no business pulling the trigger. I know things can happen, but a bigger rifle doesn't make up for it in most cases and should never be counted on. I have seen way to many people use that mentallity only to wound and never recover an animal. I have bear hunted with two guys that were using a .338 and a .450 Marlin for black bear. Overkill ? You bet it is. The guy with the .338 had to shoot his bear twice at 20 yards and the guy with the .450 Marlin had t track his bear more than 50 yards. Guess where my little 30-06 with a 150 grain core lokt put my 250 lb field dressed bear ?? Dead right in its tracks !!! So where did the higher caliber make up for poor shot placement ?? It didn't. To many people take shots at animals they should never have taken and then blame the rifle. I'll bet you as many elk have fallen dead in there tracks with a .270 or 30-06 as have fallen to a .300 or .338. Within there respected range I would put a 30-06 up against a .300 or .338 mag any day and the result will be that the elk is just as dead.
Chinchgub I wasn't trying to imply that you personally take poor shots, but I know many people do and thats why I kind of started ranting. As was stated in your other post there are many factors that come into play besides the rifle caliber. I am a firm believer in using enough gun and at the same time I also believe some people are over gunned and take risky shots thinking the power makes up for it. The .270 is a fine cartridge when used within its range as well as the .338 is a fine cartridge. I wouldn't call a .270 a pea shooter, but it as does any cartridge has its limitations. One big thing to cosider is recoil. A .338 has brutal recoil where as a .270 has rather mild recoil in comparison. A person will tend to flinch more with the heavy recoil. With that said there is just as much or more emphasis on being able to handle and shoot the rifle well. A .338 won't do any good if the shooter flinches evertime he squeezes the tigger. The bottom line there is no one answer to what caliber or what type or grain of bullet for that matter. There is definately a minimum that should be used on some game, but from there it starts with what kind of recoil the person is willing to or can endure. Then you have to be able to shoot accurately along with the fact that every rifle will shoot different bullets differently so one needs to try many in the right catagory to find which one shoots best. Sorry to rant I just get going and I can't seem to stop. What it all boils down to is making sure whatever we hunt dies quickly and humanely because we owe that to the animal.
Posted by: Thunderbolt
I am not trying to say that sometimes the bigger caliber will not make up for poor shot placement, but is definately the exception and should never be counted on as many people do. Why would anyone want to endure the recoil of a .338 on a black bear when hunting at 30 yds or less ?? As long as it can be shot accuratley fine, but there is no need to is what I am trying to say. I have shot at running deer before and actually got them, but it is a shot that should be practiced or it is pecking and hoping. I am out there to enjoy myself and getting an animal is a great bonus and If I am going to shoot it I want to make sure I put it down as quickly as possible. I have been lucky in 27 years of rifle hunting whitetails here in Minnesota I have taken many and never lost or wounded one yet. I shouldn't have said that because now I probably will. The other thing I was trying to say is that the .270 or other smaller calibers are just as effective within their effective range as a .300 would be in its effective range as yes shot placement is somewhat more critacal on the smaller caliber even at close range. A .243 isn't going to be as effective on a large black bear quartering toward you as a .300, but I wouldn't take the shot with a .243 and would prefer not to with any caliber. Nobody has poted any wrong anweres or any one right answer because there isn't one. There are just to many choices and to many variables to. The one thing that is obvious is we all like hunting and shooting. For the record I am far from a marksman and I guarantee the majority of those in this post could probably outshoot me, but I get by. I wasn't trying to argue with everyone and wasn't even implying that anyone on here takes poor shots so I hope there are no hard feelings.
Posted by: kfxandahemi
I reload everything myself, but in my 7mmSTW I shoot the Hornady Interbond for Elk, deer ect. It stays together well and is quite effective.
Posted by: flyinscrammy
PRACTICE...... I live in Utah and use a 270 Remington with 150gr Remington cor-lokt rounds for Elk hunting. Just practice with the weapon you are going to use and have the patients to take the shot. If you have to plan to shoot like crap, don't hunt.
Posted by: oldmancrash
Ok my .02 cents. I have not taken many elk just a few. And yes I do live in Montana. I started shooting around 100-200 rounds of reloaded 30-06 a month in 3 different rifles. I love the 30-06. I was out one day a few hunting seasons ago and literally walked up on a heard of 25 plus elk. I raised my scope and was looking in the trees for legs as everything I seen in the open were cows. When all of a sudden my scope went black. I lowered my rifle just a hair and about 20 yards in front of me (I was standing in the middle of an old logging road in my pretty bright orange) was the largest elk I had ever seen. You know the story, in the field it was a monster. Well I backed off the power setting on the scope and was able to get a full view, well kind of, at least enough to see the killing shot area. Squeezed the trigger and sent the first 180 grain sierra grand slam bullet flying. NOTHING. Crap what happened. I shoot all the time, even different yardages, uphill, downhill. The bull just stood there literally looking at me. Grabbed the bolt and let round #2 go and the bull fell to his front knees. Getting back up and walking over to the edge of the old logging road and walked out of site. %&**%*$@ my first elk and I just screwed up. I was shocked as I would have never imagined I could have been that poor of a shot. Well I walked over to the edge and about 20 yards down hill (of course)he was piled up. So I now have a 325 class 6x6 bull hanging on my living room wall. What happen to the first shot? Well the butcher found the bullet in the right front shoulder bone, stuck. I have NEVER taken a bull elk more then 100 yards and that might even be pushing it. I don?t take long shots although I feel very comfortable doing so, I just have never had to. Moral of the story. CARRY WHAT YOU ARE COMFORTABLE WITH, if you believe in it, it will do the best job it can for you. The rest is up to you. I use to shoot a lot but then I moved from Montana and had nowhere easy to go shoot. Sold all of my reloading stuff and now have moved home and need to get all the reloading equipment again. A real bad story, My son was pulled up on a 140-150 class mule this weekend(his first attempt at a buck) and had 2 misfires in a row using factory ammo. Missed the deer. After having my gun checked out today at a gun shop (yes 1 of my 30-06) and finding that there is more then enough firing pin pressure Remington is getting a letter from me. We burned up the rest of the box and 3 out of 20 shells in the box would not fire. No they did not get wet of moist. Oh well I just told my son it makes us better hunters.
Posted by: Chinchgub
.338 w/ 230 grain Winchester Fail-Safe
I've seen too many 150 - 165 grain loads fail on elk to ever recommend anything smaller than 180 grains. And don't give me this "put them in the boiler room and they'll go down" garbage. You obviously haven't hunted long enough for elk or shot enough of them to have learned that its just not worth the risk to carry around a little peashooter. Even expert marksman can make a marginal shot when you put them on the side of a mountain, run them 4 miles, dump snow down their back and into their rifle/scope, make them climb for hours through blowdowns and then get a .5 second shot opportunity at a bull that just jumped up out of a bed and is looking for an immediate escape route.
Go big or regret it.... At the very least, do it for your hunting partners who didn't spend thousands of dollars and drive hundreds of miles to come out and track a wounded elk instead of hunt.
Posted by: Chinchgub
Quote
Originally posted by: ShadyRascal
Okay you must have a lot of elk in minnesota.
Actually we do have native, wild in elk in Minnesota. Surprised you didn't know that....
But I do my elk hunting in Montana. Beautiful state and I always look forward to coming out there. But I also don't spend $650 on a tag and drive 18 hours just to walk around out there undergunned. I never said a peashooter like a .270 can't kill an elk! Heck, a .22 can kill an elk with a well placed shot.
I'm talking about the LESS THAN WELL PLACED SHOT. Which have a tendency to occur during true hunting conditions. No one can guarantee a perfect shot everytime. If you hunt long enough, you're going to experience the risk in carrying around deer rifles for elk. Once you trail some of these wounded critters around Montana for days you'll understand that its better to have something that will penetrate anything and get into the vitals everytime than something that will only do that on a perfect shot.
I respect elk (and their size and cunning) too much to ever risk injuring one with a peashooter.
BTW, hit any elk this year?
Posted by: Chinchgub
Elk are large, tough animals. People don't appreciate how large and strong these things are until they watch a guy unload on one with a 7mm only to see it saunter off. They stare at their gun inexplicably trying to figure out what went wrong. Then you get to where the elk was standing, notice blood, follow the blood trail and find a dead elk. 3 shots to the vitals and the elk wasn't even phased.
Why is the .270 a peashooter? A 7mm has nearly 1000 ft. lbs more energy than a .270 at 200 yards....
This is an age old debate and people get pretty hot under the collar when you question there cartridge choice for elk. People like ShadyRascal aren't going to be swayed by any of my arguments. And to be honest, he's free to use whatever cartridge he wants.
I chose a .338 because it's designed to be used on elk-sized game.
Posted by: Chinchgub
I was getting my numbers from Chuck Hawks' website. I compared the following:
.270 Win (150 gr. Sp) MV=2850, V@200 yds=2183, ME (ft lb)=2705, E@200 yds=1587
7mm Mag (150 gr. SpBT) MV=3110, V@200 yds=2751, ME (ft lb)=3221, E@200 yds=2520
Seemed only fair to compare apples to apples (150 gr vs. 150 gr).
For sake of the discussion, it is admittedly misleading to just compare "Energy" when determining the "Killing Power" of a cartridge. As agreed by all, the number one factor in killing power is bullet placement. Second most is bullet terminal performance. Let's look at Chuck's Optimum Game Weight (OGW) table which attempts to balance a bullet's weight, kinetic energy, momentum, sectional density, diameter, nose configuration and impact velocity in an attempt to fully quantify "Killing Power" in terms of animal weight. This optimal weight goes down as the range increases and energy and momentum decrease.
The (difficult to read) table that follows shows the cartridge followed by the bullet weight and muzzle velocity of the specific load (Wb@MV). The next five columns show the maximum optimal range for the five selected weight classes of game. The effective range has been calculated in yards and, in most instances, rounded off to the nearest 5 yards. The maximum range listed for any cartridge is 400 yards, since 400 yards is beyond the point blank range of every cartridge shown. Adequate killing power at longer distances is indicated by the notation "400+." The notation "n/a" means that the cartridge is not applicable (lacks adequate killing power at any range) for hunting animals of that size.
Cartridge (Wb@MV) 100 lb game - 200 lb - 400 lb - 600 lb - 1000 lb
270 Win. (130 at 3140) 400+ 400+ 290 120 n/a
270 Win. (150 at 2900) 400+ 400+ 350 160 n/a
7mm Mag. (150 at 3110) 400+ 400+ 400+ 250 10
30-06 (165 at 2800) 400+ 400+ 380 190 n/a
30-06 (180 at 2700) 400+ 400+ 400+ 225 n/a
300 Win. (180 at 3070) 400+ 400+ 400+ 400+ 170
338 Win. (250 at 2700) 400+ 400+ 400+ 400+ 290
The inclusion of the size of the animal and the range to bullet impact is crucial to a meaningful comparision of hunting rifle killing power. The thing I always find interesting about that table is how potent the .30-06 (particularly with 180 gr loads) really is on elk. A .30-06 in the hands of a proficient shooter is deadly on elk.
A more inclusive table can be accessed here:
Chuck Hawks - Optimum Game Weight Table
Posted by: Chinchgub
I noticed a couple times the phrase "within its effective range" being used to describe the killing power of the .270. I'm glad because that helps to illustrate my point.
The effective range of a .270 (150 gr @ 2900) when you balance the bullet's weight, kinetic energy, momentum, sectional density, diameter, nose configuration and impact velocity is anything inside 160 yds on elk size game (600 lbs). Outside of that range, the risk of not having enough killing power begins to increase.
The effective range of my .338 (250 gr @ 2700) is well over 400 yards on elk size game (600 lbs). (And that's not because it makes a bigger hole!)
I think we're in agreement then. You stick within your "effective range" and I'll stick within mine.
