Good hunting bullets for elk

shotgunshooter3shotgunshooter3 Senior MemberPosts: 5,385 Senior Member
There is a definite trend in my forum postings as of late, I'm brainstorming for what I need to do IOT prepare for the potential Elk hunt next year. You guys have been a GREAT wealth of information thus far, so here I am again.

If I don't borrow a rifle for this hunt, I WILL be handloading the ammo. With this in mind, what are some good elk bullets. Cartridge will be either a 7mm-08, or one of the magnums (7RM, 300WSM, 300WM, 338WM).

I'm thinking Barnes X, Nosler Partition, Nosler Accu-bond, etc... Any other suggestions? Can I push a 160grs 7mm bullet with a 7mm-08?

Also, is there a magic/minimum Ft/lbs suggested for Elk? I have heard 1500 ft/lbs from Dad and online, which I can easily attain out to 400 yards with the 140gr 7mm-08...

Thanks for any input!
- I am a rifleman with a poorly chosen screen name. -
"It's far easier to start out learning to be precise and then speeding up, than it is having never "mastered" the weapon, and trying to be precise." - Dan C
«1

Replies

  • shotgunshooter3shotgunshooter3 Senior Member Posts: 5,385 Senior Member
    I'm thinking, worse comes to worse, I just get 2 boxes of this:

    http://www.hornady.com/store/7mm-08-Rem-139-gr-GMX-Superformance/
    - I am a rifleman with a poorly chosen screen name. -
    "It's far easier to start out learning to be precise and then speeding up, than it is having never "mastered" the weapon, and trying to be precise." - Dan C
  • JerryBobCoJerryBobCo Senior Member Posts: 6,511 Senior Member
    I'm going with Speer Grand Slams. In my 338x284 it will be 225 grain bullets. In my 7mm Remington Magnum, it will be 175 grain pills. I have considered the 160 grain Accubond in my 7mag, but I don't know if I will get around to trying them. My guess is that they would work well in a 7mag on elk. I think that Luis (SixGun) tried some 160 grain bullet in his 7mm-08 for his Africa hunt, and decided not to use them. I'm sure he will be glad to give you details.

    However, I think that the ones you have listed above are good, too. I just happen to get good accuracy from the Grand Slams. The Nosler Partitions have been the gold standard for a long time. If your rifle will shoot them accurately, they're as good as any. Also, ask Ernie about the Hornady A-Max. I know he likes them, but I don't know if he would use them on elk.

    FWIW, I'm using 139 grain Hornady Interbonds in my .284. I'm not sure I would want to use them on elk, but they have worked well on antelope and mule deer.

    As for ft-lbs of energy needed, I too have heard the 1500 number thrown around. It's been dismissed and put down in this forum more times than I can count, though. Still, as a general rule of thumb, it's probably as good as any. Someone will undoubtedly tell you that energy doesn't kill, and they will be right. However, it's a factor, so I wouldn't dismiss it altogether.

    One thing you might do is to contact the individual bullet makers and ask them what they consider the minimum velocity for their particular bullet to do what it's designed to do. Then, use an online ballistics calculator to see at what range your load drops below that velocity. That would be your max distance with that particular load/bullet combination.
    Jerry

    Gun control laws make about as much sense as taking ex-lax to cure a cough.
  • wildgenewildgene Senior Member Posts: 1,036 Senior Member
    ...honestly, looking @ "Infinity" it looks like you would be better off w/ the 140's, just not enough powder cap. to push the 160's, the 140's will be delivering more Vel/ energy out to 400yds. in most cases. HSM offers 145gr. GrandSlam loads @ a pretty attractive price. If you go to a larger case, go to a heavier bullet. I use GrandSlams or Sierra HPBT GameKings for most of my hunting loads, because I trust 'em to do what they're supposed to do over a wide range of velocities. Loaded ammo, the Federal Fusion is very good...
  • MileHighShooterMileHighShooter Senior Member Posts: 4,768 Senior Member
    7-08 has trouble pushing the 160gr to its potential. Something to keep in mind if you are using a stronger bullet is impact velocity. Too slow and it might not perform right, and I think this would be my biggest concern using 160-175's in the 7-08. On top of that, most of the strong premium bullets tend to be rather long, so a 160gr Accubond is going to be longer then a 160gr Grand Slam or Partition, which again, is more of a bad thing in this particular case. Barnes are even longer. Barnes are seriously long, which is why they say in their manuals to step DOWN 1 weight size to what you are used to. Example if you normally load 180's in a 30-06 step down to a 165/168. If using 165 step down to 150.

    Otherwise, the bullets you listed are fine. People use basic cup and cores too, and they kill elk, I just prefer that extra deadness lol. More then anything its a confidence thing...although I did see a 7mm Mag with 150gr Corelokt's take 4 bullets into the boiler room on an elk to finally kill it. Bullets were damn near flattened, one that hit the shoulder was in pieces and couldn't have weighed more then 70 grains final weight.

    In the 300's I prefer a stronger bullet period, just due to the fact of a possible close range shot. Some of the combos can get fast enough to totally destroy a bullet if you hit bone and not do sufficient damage (this is why I used Barnes TSX in my 300 this year since I was using such a light bullet, a 130gr "soft" bullet up close at 3600fps would have blown a huge hole, possibly just on the on side of the goat, may or may not kill it quickly)

    In the 338...you have more give and take. Its a bigger bullet, and most of them are well constructed. NP's, GS's, heck even Interlocks would probably all work just the same. With the 338, though, you really have a LOT of options for bullet choices suitable for elk. I'd have no problem using the med-light end of the spectrum like the 210's, personally I'd probably end up shooting a 225gr of some kind, but hey the 250's are tried and true.

    Man all your talk of a new rifle, and the Jerm/BP Fed thread is giving me an itch for a 338 lol.
    Wambli Ska wrote: »
    Once again, please refrain from cutting short any baseless totally emotional arguments with facts. It leads to boring, completely objective conversations well beyond the comprehension ability of many.
  • MileHighShooterMileHighShooter Senior Member Posts: 4,768 Senior Member
    On the link you provided, personally so far from what I have shot, I am a fan of the Superformance! I think they're being pretty honest about the performance and you DO notice a slightly different recoil, but its not noticeably heavier like their old Light/heavy Magnum line used to be. Those were just MORE powder, using fancy machines to really pack in as much powder as possible, the superformance was a special blend of powders. That, is what I would pick if I were using a 7mm08 for elk hunting, and out to 400 yards I think I'd be fairly confident.
    Wambli Ska wrote: »
    Once again, please refrain from cutting short any baseless totally emotional arguments with facts. It leads to boring, completely objective conversations well beyond the comprehension ability of many.
  • jbohiojbohio Senior Member Posts: 5,507 Senior Member
    .

    Man all your talk of a new rifle, and the Jerm/BP Fed thread is giving me an itch for a 338 lol.
    :that: You and me both!
    As for bullets, I'll be working up a load with 200 gr Accubonds in my RUM. Hopefully they shoot.
    Otherwise, maybe SGK's, or Interbonds. Premium bullet, with high a high BC.
  • JerryBobCoJerryBobCo Senior Member Posts: 6,511 Senior Member
    jbohio wrote: »
    :that: You and me both!
    As for bullets, I'll be working up a load with 200 gr Accubonds in my RUM. Hopefully they shoot.
    Otherwise, maybe SGK's, or Interbonds. Premium bullet, with high a high BC.

    Regarding the high BC bullets in a short action, you're almost limited to the lighter weights. In my .284, using 139 grain Hornady Interbonds, I have to seat the bullet very deep to get it to load into the magazine and chamber from the magazine. I suspect one would have the same problem with the 7-08.
    Jerry

    Gun control laws make about as much sense as taking ex-lax to cure a cough.
  • MileHighShooterMileHighShooter Senior Member Posts: 4,768 Senior Member
    JerryBobCo wrote: »
    Regarding the high BC bullets in a short action, you're almost limited to the lighter weights. In my .284, using 139 grain Hornady Interbonds, I have to seat the bullet very deep to get it to load into the magazine and chamber from the magazine. I suspect one would have the same problem with the 7-08.

    I think JB meant the long high BC's in his 300 RUM. I think there is a bit of room in those haha
    Wambli Ska wrote: »
    Once again, please refrain from cutting short any baseless totally emotional arguments with facts. It leads to boring, completely objective conversations well beyond the comprehension ability of many.
  • jbohiojbohio Senior Member Posts: 5,507 Senior Member
    I think JB meant the long high BC's in his 300 RUM. I think there is a bit of room in those haha

    Yes, I did. Jerry has a very good point, one I frequently overlook. (the magazine in my 6.5-284 is 3.48":yikes:) Gotta watch out for magazine length.
  • Six-GunSix-Gun Senior Member Posts: 7,264 Senior Member
    JerryBobCo wrote: »
    I'm going with Speer Grand Slams. In my 338x284 it will be 225 grain bullets. In my 7mm Remington Magnum, it will be 175 grain pills. I have considered the 160 grain Accubond in my 7mag, but I don't know if I will get around to trying them. My guess is that they would work well in a 7mag on elk. I think that Luis (SixGun) tried some 160 grain bullet in his 7mm-08 for his Africa hunt, and decided not to use them. I'm sure he will be glad to give you details.

    You are correct: I actually settled the 140 gr AccuBonds in the 7mm-08 because the 160 grainers just wouldn't shoot worth a lick in the 7mm-08. That cartridge just doesn't have the gas to push that big pill accurately. The "groups" looked like proverbial patterns with those heavier bullets. With the 140 grainers, however, they were 1 MOA capable. The bullet is definitely tough enough to handle elk, but I don't know that the 140 grainers will be what you want to use if you plan on shooting out to long distances on those beasts. I hit a gemsbok (oryx) with the 140 gr AccuBond at 347 yards and it didn't fully penetrate the far side hide. I want the best chance of a blood trail on a critter that might take cover in the heavy stuff. For me, that's two holes. Keep the distances inside of 275 yards and I think you'll be able to get just that.
    Accuracy: because white space between bullet holes drives me insane.
  • beartrackerbeartracker Senior Member Posts: 3,116 Senior Member
    140gr Accubond or Partition in the 7mm08 will do the job and still allow you to reach out there.
  • Ernie BishopErnie Bishop Senior Member Posts: 6,979 Senior Member
    Agreed.
    Back in the day I used the 140 Partition (pre-Accubond days). Today with a 7-08 rifle, I think I would start with the Accubond. I believe they have a minimum of 1800 fps impact velocity to perform well.
    At 400 yards at 8500 feet elevation your velocity is way over 1800 fps (2220 fps), and energy,since it was brought up is 1531 @ 400 yards.
    This was figured with a MV of 2750 fps--Your mileage may vary.
    With a 10 mph crosswind at 400 yards your bullet will drift 2 MOA or 8.7 inches.
    140gr Accubond or Partition in the 7mm08 will do the job and still allow you to reach out there.
    Ernie

    "The Un-Tactical"
  • wolf049wolf049 Member Posts: 217 Member
    You cannot go wrong with Nosler Partition bullets. It's a well proven bullet and it's my #1 choice for more than 30 yrs. I would go with the 140 gr. or the 150 gr pills for that 7mm-08.
    "To preserve liberty, it is essential that the whole body of the people always possess arms, and be taught alike, especially when young, how to use them."
    - Richard Henry Lee
  • snake284snake284 Senior Member Posts: 21,825 Senior Member
    JerryBobCo wrote: »
    I'm going with Speer Grand Slams. In my 338x284 it will be 225 grain bullets. In my 7mm Remington Magnum, it will be 175 grain pills. I have considered the 160 grain Accubond in my 7mag, but I don't know if I will get around to trying them. My guess is that they would work well in a 7mag on elk. I think that Luis (SixGun) tried some 160 grain bullet in his 7mm-08 for his Africa hunt, and decided not to use them. I'm sure he will be glad to give you details.

    However, I think that the ones you have listed above are good, too. I just happen to get good accuracy from the Grand Slams. The Nosler Partitions have been the gold standard for a long time. If your rifle will shoot them accurately, they're as good as any. Also, ask Ernie about the Hornady A-Max. I know he likes them, but I don't know if he would use them on elk.

    FWIW, I'm using 139 grain Hornady Interbonds in my .284. I'm not sure I would want to use them on elk, but they have worked well on antelope and mule deer.

    As for ft-lbs of energy needed, I too have heard the 1500 number thrown around. It's been dismissed and put down in this forum more times than I can count, though. Still, as a general rule of thumb, it's probably as good as any. Someone will undoubtedly tell you that energy doesn't kill, and they will be right. However, it's a factor, so I wouldn't dismiss it altogether.

    One thing you might do is to contact the individual bullet makers and ask them what they consider the minimum velocity for their particular bullet to do what it's designed to do. Then, use an online ballistics calculator to see at what range your load drops below that velocity. That would be your max distance with that particular load/bullet combination.

    You know, I still have 35-40 of those in .277 150 grains. My son gave em to me. He said on these white tail around here they're not worth a damn because they go right through the deer without hardly expanding. They sound like they would be an excellent Elk bullet. I was thinking of buying 100 for the Colorado Forum elk hunt. For smaller not so tough game, I use either Hornady Interlock or mainly Sierra Game Kings. They kill.
    Daddy, what's an enabler?
    Son that's somebody with nothing to do with his time but keep me in trouble with mom.
  • shotgunshooter3shotgunshooter3 Senior Member Posts: 5,385 Senior Member
    I hunt deer with 140gr "Fusions" by Federal (bonded core brand of loaded cartridges). I just bought a box when they first came out because I was curious, and when I got a .348" group out of them I just kept using them. Would that work?

    Charts on their website show 1200 ft/lbs at 400 yards.

    http://www.fusionammo.com/ballistics/rifle.aspx?id=613
    - I am a rifleman with a poorly chosen screen name. -
    "It's far easier to start out learning to be precise and then speeding up, than it is having never "mastered" the weapon, and trying to be precise." - Dan C
  • wolf049wolf049 Member Posts: 217 Member
    I hunt deer with 140gr "Fusions" by Federal (bonded core brand of loaded cartridges). I just bought a box when they first came out because I was curious, and when I got a .348" group out of them I just kept using them. Would that work?

    Charts on their website show 1200 ft/lbs at 400 yards.

    http://www.fusionammo.com/ballistics/rifle.aspx?id=613

    If you go back and click on the Fusion Tech button, you'll see that that bullet was designed for deer sized game.
    So, to answer your question. No, I wouldn't try it. :nono:

    With the 140 gr Nosler Partition;
    http://www.hornady.com/cgi-bin/ball10.cgi?firearm=Rifle&desc=&wght=140&coef=.485&vel=2850&sight=1.5&temp=59&barom=29.53&zero=0&wspd=0&calcbutton=Calculate
    "To preserve liberty, it is essential that the whole body of the people always possess arms, and be taught alike, especially when young, how to use them."
    - Richard Henry Lee
  • wildgenewildgene Senior Member Posts: 1,036 Senior Member
    wolf049 wrote: »
    If you go back and click on the Fusion Tech button, you'll see that that bullet was designed for deer sized game.
    So, to answer your question. No, I wouldn't try it. :nono:

    With the 140 gr Nosler Partition;
    http://www.hornady.com/cgi-bin/ball10.cgi?firearm=Rifle&desc=&wght=140&coef=.485&vel=2850&sight=1.5&temp=59&barom=29.53&zero=0&wspd=0&calcbutton=Calculate

    ...that's a pretty good leap to take that one "blurb" that mentions "deer bullets" as a general term, & turn it into a blanket comdemnation. I've shot a number of deer & elk w/ Fusion ammo & good results.

    ...SS3, the 140gr. Fusions will work fine on elk, they are plenty tough enough, keeping in mind the limitations already discussed. I'd prefer "more" (energy/velocity/bullet wt), but the Fusion will get the job done, up to a point, & assuming you do your part...
  • BigslugBigslug Senior Member Posts: 6,993 Senior Member
    I don't live in the "Condor Zone", but California is squirrely enough with its gun legislation that I figured I should have lead-free ammo loaded and sighted in before they pull some last minute nonsense just prior to the start of some future hunting season.

    I've started loading Barnes TTSX's (Tipped TSX)on the recommendation of my "Huntin' Fool" coworker, who typically fills two deer tags himself and usually assists in the filling of about half a dozen more every year. The consensus seems to be that these bullets penetrate like bullets several weight classes higher - in the .30 cals, the 150's act like 180's; the 168's like 200's, etc... For a smaller capacity case like your 7-08, the 140 grain TTSX should give you performance similar to a 160 grain lead slug without killing your trajectory.

    To my knowledge, the Huntin' Fool has been in on at least two deer kills with these bullets - one with a 140gr. out of a 7RSAUM in a large Colorado buck that due to peculiarities of hilly terrain was a back-to-sternum shot; and the other a California mulie with a 150 grain .30-06 on a quartering broadside shot. In both cases, penetration was reported to be straight-line, with 1"-2" exit wounds, with insides satisfactorily scrambled.

    Thus far, I am liking the high BC of my 168 grain .30-06 load a lot - on paper at least. Zeroing at 250Y, I'm basically point blank to about 325, and the mil-dots work out to almost exactly a 1 mil holdover for 400, 2 mils for 500, and 3 mils for 600. Gonna need to get out to a longer range and verify, but it's nice when things end up simple. . .
    WWJMBD?

    "Nothing is safe from stupid." - Zee
  • JerryBobCoJerryBobCo Senior Member Posts: 6,511 Senior Member
    snake284 wrote: »
    You know, I still have 35-40 of those in .277 150 grains. My son gave em to me. He said on these white tail around here they're not worth a damn because they go right through the deer without hardly expanding. They sound like they would be an excellent Elk bullet. I was thinking of buying 100 for the Colorado Forum elk hunt. For smaller not so tough game, I use either Hornady Interlock or mainly Sierra Game Kings. They kill.

    I've killed several mule deer and pronghorns with the Grand Slam bullet. Some were with the 150 grainers from my .270, and others the 175 grain offering from my 7mag. I even shot one very small pronghorn with the 145 grain bullet from my .284.

    I don't recall any of them going anywhere after the initial hit.

    I don't really see the need for a premium bullet for Texas whitetail, but it's hard for me to imagine that the Grand Slam would not be a good choice, either. But, as they say, your mileage may vary.
    Jerry

    Gun control laws make about as much sense as taking ex-lax to cure a cough.
  • wildgenewildgene Senior Member Posts: 1,036 Senior Member
    :that: yeah, what he said...

    ...this scares me...

    http://i87.photobucket.com/albums/k129/GuyMiner/hunting%20photos/equipment/IMG_0505.jpg

    ...not my idea of how a super premium elk bullet should perform...

    ...why???, because regardless of what you see on TV about 600-800-1200yd. shoots w/ supermags & extreme BC, super more deader bullets against A.C.E. (Armor Coated Elk), the majority of elk are shot & killed @ under 300yds., w/ a goodly number of them taken under 100yds., & I personally have never seen an elk in body armor, even tho I know they put on squirrel suits for camo...

    ...I picked up the "Elk Edition" of a hunting mag a few days ago, & everyone of them took their "monster bull" w/ the same brand rifle using "premium bullets" "right thru the point of the shoulder"...

    ...why???:uhm:, were they scared the elk was gonna eat 'em??? My granpa would come back from the grave & open a double serving can of Whupaz on me for blowing up quarters like that. I guess that's better than the pundits in the '80's who professed a going away shot to the pelvis so you could get up on 'em & finish 'em & anything less than a .338 was not enough gun for elk. I've shot lots of elk, have never lost one (knock on wood), & have never had to track one more than a quarter mile after a good heart/ lung shot using a reasonable caliber w/ a well constructed bullet...
  • MileHighShooterMileHighShooter Senior Member Posts: 4,768 Senior Member
    Gene what caliber is that TSX? Do you know what cartridge it was fired from?

    I have seen a few pictures of TSX's doing that, but from what I have seen they were always fast magnums very close. However, I have seen many, many more pictures of the picture perfect barnes after going through game. Any bullet can and eventually will fail. Even with the pic you put up, I bet that "solid" that is left over is still going to penetrate, hell probably penetrate even better, and go through and kill something. I'm assuming that bullet right there was recovered from a dead animal?
    Wambli Ska wrote: »
    Once again, please refrain from cutting short any baseless totally emotional arguments with facts. It leads to boring, completely objective conversations well beyond the comprehension ability of many.
  • wildgenewildgene Senior Member Posts: 1,036 Senior Member
    .25 into water @ 50yds, I agree any bullet will fail, I've seen lots of pics of "perfect Barnes". How much are you willing to bet something like this is going to penetrate, I've had better results w/ GrandSlams, Fusions, & Sierra HPBTs. Shoot what you feels necessary, I don't believe performance like this is worth 2-3X more...
  • BigslugBigslug Senior Member Posts: 6,993 Senior Member
    Even with the pic you put up, I bet that "solid" that is left over is still going to penetrate, hell probably penetrate even better, and go through and kill something. I'm assuming that bullet right there was recovered from a dead animal?

    +1. I would have to ask "At what point during the death of that deer did this bullet "fail"?
    WWJMBD?

    "Nothing is safe from stupid." - Zee
  • Ernie BishopErnie Bishop Senior Member Posts: 6,979 Senior Member
    My guess would be they are putting them through the shoulder to drop them on the spot, so to speak.
    I think they are willing to lose some meat in order to ensure the animal goes down quickly.
    I have killed elk with NBT's, Partition's, and SGK's.
    Oh, and a 100 grain Rage broad-head:angel:

    wildgene wrote: »
    :that: yeah, what he said...

    ...this scares me...

    http://i87.photobucket.com/albums/k129/GuyMiner/hunting%20photos/equipment/IMG_0505.jpg

    ...not my idea of how a super premium elk bullet should perform...

    ...why???, because regardless of what you see on TV about 600-800-1200yd. shoots w/ supermags & extreme BC, super more deader bullets against A.C.E. (Armor Coated Elk), the majority of elk are shot & killed @ under 300yds., w/ a goodly number of them taken under 100yds., & I personally have never seen an elk in body armor, even tho I know they put on squirrel suits for camo...

    ...I picked up the "Elk Edition" of a hunting mag a few days ago, & everyone of them took their "monster bull" w/ the same brand rifle using "premium bullets" "right thru the point of the shoulder"...

    ...why???:uhm:, were they scared the elk was gonna eat 'em??? My granpa would come back from the grave & open a double serving can of Whupaz on me for blowing up quarters like that. I guess that's better than the pundits in the '80's who professed a going away shot to the pelvis so you could get up on 'em & finish 'em & anything less than a .338 was not enough gun for elk. I've shot lots of elk, have never lost one (knock on wood), & have never had to track one more than a quarter mile after a good heart/ lung shot using a reasonable caliber w/ a well constructed bullet...
    Ernie

    "The Un-Tactical"
  • MileHighShooterMileHighShooter Senior Member Posts: 4,768 Senior Member
    I do what Ernie just pointed out. I like to break bones, smash joints, and destroy shoulders of elk. I did that for all but 1 elk I ever shot, and wouldn't you know it, with a fatal shot, she still ran quite a way into the thickest, darkest, most pain in the butt parts of the area to die. She died in a small bowl, that was uphill in every direction, with blow down all around it, and fresh snow. Even getting the quarters out was a PAIN because it was tough enough just to walk with your gear let alone the extra weight. Everyone kept saying put it in the lungs, why waste the meat? Ya know lol that extra 30lbs of meat I got back (averaging by what I've lost before on a breaking shoulder shots) it was NOT worth it for me personally.

    So, I'll continue to aim for bone and put elk down THERE, where I shoot them. I don't have a family of 5 to feed, I'll sacrifice a roast and some burger meat to not have to repeat that performance again lol
    Wambli Ska wrote: »
    Once again, please refrain from cutting short any baseless totally emotional arguments with facts. It leads to boring, completely objective conversations well beyond the comprehension ability of many.
  • beartrackerbeartracker Senior Member Posts: 3,116 Senior Member
    I like to put them right through the shoulders on the big stuff I shoot and that includes elk. I like them down and not taking off somewhere that creates more work like MileHighShooter's example of that cow. Break bone, disrupt the skeletal structure of a big animal and it will go down quick.
  • snake284snake284 Senior Member Posts: 21,825 Senior Member
    There is a definite trend in my forum postings as of late, I'm brainstorming for what I need to do IOT prepare for the potential Elk hunt next year. You guys have been a GREAT wealth of information thus far, so here I am again.

    If I don't borrow a rifle for this hunt, I WILL be handloading the ammo. With this in mind, what are some good elk bullets. Cartridge will be either a 7mm-08, or one of the magnums (7RM, 300WSM, 300WM, 338WM).

    I'm thinking Barnes X, Nosler Partition, Nosler Accu-bond, etc... Any other suggestions? Can I push a 160grs 7mm bullet with a 7mm-08?

    Also, is there a magic/minimum Ft/lbs suggested for Elk? I have heard 1500 ft/lbs from Dad and online, which I can easily attain out to 400 yards with the 140gr 7mm-08...

    Thanks for any input!

    You might try what I did. I came out smelling like a dozen roses. I put in a bid on a Savage 7mm Mag through Gun Broker and got the rifle for $205 + $25 shipping. Cost me $230 plus 20 for FFL fee. He doesn't charge me but I always give him $20 for his trouble. Stil I got a deal for $250 and I'm about ready for a hunt.
    Daddy, what's an enabler?
    Son that's somebody with nothing to do with his time but keep me in trouble with mom.
  • Ernie BishopErnie Bishop Senior Member Posts: 6,979 Senior Member
    I know a number of guys who use the high shoulder shot for elk for the reasons mentioned above.
    One cow I shot bedded at 660 yards (Corrected to 655 yards because of the angle) with my 7mm Dakota XP-100. It was far from a typical prone shot, but it was real steady none the less. I do not hesitate to shoot a shoulder on elk as you want to put them down, so it is part of my kill zone and it gives me a little fudge room to boot. The elk that Steve directed me to shoot was bedded. Steve was spotting with his Weaver portable Big Eyes mounted on a portable tripod which made spotting easier. At the shot he immediately called a hit and told me she was down (at the shot she never even got up). I was frankly a little surprised and asked if he was for sure.

    Elk can be quite tough and even act as if they have not been hit even when the shot is lethal.
    The cow’s head was going back and forth some so Steve said, he thought I may have hit her in the neck and to send another one.
    I made some corrections wind and favored right about a one and half minutes.
    As Steve continued to watch her was going to tell me she was dead, but before he could speak, “Puff” spoke again.
    By the time we made it over to her it was getting late and we quartered her but did not de-bone, as we were just too tired.
    The first shot was a high shoulder shot and the second shot was perfectly centered and was just behind the shoulder.

    Not much loss of meat with a high shoulder shot.
    This has been my only high shoulder shot on a elk.
    At least with this bullet at an impact velocity around 2160fps, Energy 1815 ft pounds at impact
    MV was 2706 fps.
    IMG_0099-1.jpg
    IMG_0102.jpg
    Ernie

    "The Un-Tactical"
  • BPsniperBPsniper Banned Posts: 1,961 Senior Member
    Nice shooting, Ernie.

    Did I miss what bullet you used?
    "....the true general purpose big-game cartridges used in this country come in but two calibers, .30 and 7mm. (the .270 Win. is merely a slightly aberrant 7mm whose bullets are .007" undersize.) -Finn Aagaard - American Rifleman, December 1986
«1
Sign In or Register to comment.
Magazine Cover

GET THE MAGAZINE Subscribe & Save

Temporary Price Reduction

SUBSCRIBE NOW

Give a Gift   |   Subscriber Services

PREVIEW THIS MONTH'S ISSUE

GET THE NEWSLETTER Join the List and Never Miss a Thing.

Get the top Guns & Ammo stories delivered right to your inbox every week.