New Turd in the mail box

snake284 · March 2020

I have been going to another forum now and then that both Teach and MHS turned me on to. It's a pretty interesting place with a very high volume of posters. It has its differences from this forum in that there's lots of .270 Winchester fans but there's a lot of nay sayers about Leupold scopes. Today there was a thread on the elk hunting forum about the cartridges that take the most elk. This might surprise some here or piss some off.

Here's the list from most successful cartridge on elk to least, number one being most successful. Well over 100 hunters contributed to this list. Here's the turd in the mail box, read it and weap, LOL!:

1. .270 Winchester
2. .30-06
3. .300 Win mag
4. (tie) .338 Win mag
4. 7 mm Rem mag
6. .300 Weatherby
7. (tie) .45-70
7. .35 Whelen
7. .308 Winchester
7. .243 Winchester
11. (tie) .338-06
11. .375 H&H
13. (tie) 7X57
13. .340 Weatherby
15. (tie) .300 H&H
15. .300 WSM
17. (tie) 7mm STW
17. .280 Remington
17. 7 mm Weatherby
17. 7mm-08
1. .270 Winchester
2. .30-06
3. .300 Win mag
4. (tie) .338 Win mag
4. 7 mm Rem mag
6. .300 Weatherby
7. (tie) .45-70
7. .35 Whelen
7. .308 Winchester
7. .243 Winchester
11. (tie) .338-06
11. .375 H&H
13. (tie) 7X57
13. .340 Weatherby
15. (tie) .300 H&H
15. .300 WSM
17. (tie) 7mm STW
17. .280 Remington
17. 7 mm Weatherby
17. 7mm-08

orchidman · March 2020

Where is the 204 and 222...........?

zorba · March 2020

No 303 brit?

Jayhawker · March 2020

They ignored the fact that historically, there have been boxcars full of dead elk that were killed with .30-30s

earlyagain · March 2020

I've read that the 303 British and Savage cartridges were very popular in Canada. I think I also read that aboriginals in Alaska like 22 centerfires.

I've never been a .270 hater. I didnt think the. 243 was legal for elk here, but I just looked and it is.

I'm surprised to see the .375 H&H.. Those ones must be about the nicest rifles in field.

I don't see any of European designation.
Edit
Except the 7×57

snake284 · March 2020

Damn, I don't see one. But If it makes you feel better, I'd probably try the .222 if you'd agree to try your .270. But you gotta like this list because it did include the .243 and your favorite the .7-08 along with another favorite of mine the 7x57.

Accipiter · March 2020

Snake’s dedication to the cartridge convinced me. I went out and bought my kid his first .270.

GunNut · March 2020

Accipiter said:

Snake’s dedication to the cartridge convinced me. I went out and bought my kid his first .270.

I just laughed out loud and my wife is staring at me... 🤣

snake284 · March 2020

earlyagain said:

I've read that the 303 British and Savage cartridges were very popular in Canada. I think I also read that aboriginals in Alaska like 22 centerfires.

I've never been a .270 hater. I didnt think the. 243 was legal for elk here, but I just looked and it is.

I'm surprised to see the .375 H&H.. Those ones must be about the nicest rifles in field.

I don't see any of European designation.
Edit
Except the 7×5 l

Mike I've always appreciate your opinions, you're a straight up guy. This was meant as a little light hearted fun. I stayed on this forum soley for years. Teach told me about the 24 hour camp fire about 8 years back and I went there feeling it out for about a week and never went back. Then farely recently MHS told me he had been going there so I went back about 6 months ago and have been going there in between here and there for a few months now. There are a bunch of 270 lovers there but there's haters tyoo. Also, what blew my mind was the hate for Leupold scopes there. It's a big forum and lots of posters and many opinions, You haven't seen arguments. But there's a faction that dispises Leupolds. To hear some of them tell it they're the sorriest scope out there. There's many expensive scope lovers there. They seem to buy Schmidt and Bender, Swarovsky, Leicha, Night Force, Zeiss Etc. like they're growing on trees. It's an interesting place. But I'm in the Leupold column. No way I can afford that stuff. There's a lot of those long range shooters on there that claim they need the clarity of that expensive glass. I leave that stuff to Ernie and Zee. When most people get to talking about their 400-500 yard shots I want to throw the BS flag. That's a long way.

earlyagain · March 2020

I figure anyone that can shoot good at long distance has earned their prerogatives.

Ernie Bishop · March 2020

A lot of cartridges can take elk well. What the majority uses, is nothing more than the majority of those that posted or participated.

In glass, I want reliability and the ability to see in low light condition.

For distance, I want a good reticle and reliable turrets.

I wouldn't automatically disbelieve those who say they have killed elk at 400-500 yards...I also don't automatically believe it either.

snake284 · March 2020

earlyagain said:m

I figure anyone that can shoot good at long distance has earned their prerogatives.

earlyagain said:

I figure anyone that can shoot good at long distance has earned tTht

There's some that are capable, but I think many on that forum have just been caught up in the sniper thing because they bring it up a lot nd they don't sound professional about it and they sound like they think it's easier than it is. First of all I think a range finder should me mandatory. Secondly you need to know your gun and have a drop chart for your cartridge. In my opinion drops are easy compared to wind. Drop doesn't change, wind can change in a second. That's why I don't attempt anything beyond 400-Maybe 500 yards and then only if I think I can pull it off. On a dead calm day I might try a long shot. But I don't have a range finder. Where I used to hunt I had a sendero I shot down and had land marks down it where I knew the range. But if I was hunting an unfamiliar area I would need a range finder before I attempted any shot much over 200 yards actually. Now shooting at paper, I'd be all over that if I had a place with enough Real Estate. I love reading Zees write ups when he's shooting his .308 at 1600-1700 yards. I wish my range had a 600 yard berm. Maybe if I could shoot paper at distance I would be more open to long shots at game.

snake284 · March 2020

Ernie Bishop said:

A lot of cartridges can take elk well. What the majority uses, is nothing more than the majority of those that posted or participated.
In glass, I want reliability and the ability to see in low light condition.
For distance, I want a good reticle and reliable turrets.
I wouldn't automatically disbelieve those who say they have killed elk at 400-500 yards...I also don't automatically believe it either.

I understand a lot of cartridges can take elk, That's evident with the number I read that have taken them with a .243. And as for Jayhawker's comment about the .30-30 there may not have been many that said they had taken game with a .30-30 but if you frequent that forum you see a good number of hunters have taken elk with it. Also, that list was contributed by a lot of hunters. That forum is much larger than this place. You can start a thread there and in no time, like 3 or 4 hours it might have 3 or 4 pages or more.

Freezer · March 2020

I went to 24 hour about 15 or 20 years ago, too many angry people looking for a fight and one that brag about things they never could have done.

Coming to think of it I think I saw HvyMax there.

earlyagain · March 2020

I got this in the mail a couple weeks ago Snake. I thought you might get a kick out of it.

Its the 3×9 Widefield off my old .270.. My Dad bought him one a them new high pallutin' scopes

Its heavy. Built hell for stout. Not as clear or precise as modern quality products. But after decades of hard use its still serviceable and likely to stay that way longer than me. Should go from quaintly antiquated to vintage in a few more years.

Bigslug · March 2020

My personal disdain for and puzzlement over the very existence of the .270 aside, I am a little puzzled by its appearance at the top of a list of elk-killers.

Not that the round can't do it and well. But it's a round you'll want to be loading GOOD, deep--penetrating projectiles in for the task; Partitions, Barnes, and the like.

The life of the .270 covers a time period where there was plenty of iffy soft-point bullet construction, and then there's the simple reality that for every guy that carefully researches his ammo choice, there are at least 50 Bubbas who just go to the local dry goods store and say "Gimme a box of whatever". Seems like that would put a lot of relatively fragile 130 grain deer bullets in the field, making it a natural for creating a lot of "bad day of elk hunting" stories.

Uncle Fester · March 2020

snake284 said:

Damn, I don't see one. But If it makes you feel better, I'd probably try the .222 if you'd agree to try your .270. But you gotta like this list because it did include the .243 and your favorite the .7-08 along with another favorite of mine the 7x57.

Most any modern cartridge will get the job done with a good bullet assuming the shooter does his/her part.

The idea that all these new cartridges really have a material advantage over the 30-06 and 270 exists to sell magazines and rifles.

(Full Disclosure: I bought a new Savage in 6.5 Creedmore recently to go with my ‘06, .308, and .243. I felt it would be a nice host for my Dead Air Nomad when the ATF eventually free’s it.)

My main theory - buy rifles chambered in cartridges that can easily be found in any place that sells ammo. That usually means lots of options to pick from.

Ernie Bishop · March 2020

I understand the size of the 24 Hr Campfire group and the amount of posting that takes place there. I have been there since 2005. I am also aware of how mean or hateful some in that group can be. My user name there is "xphunter," which is my old username. I just never updated it. I have typically posted more in the LR hunting section, but I post in other areas as well. It can be volatile at times, but I have not been attacked there.

snake284 · March 2020

Ernie Bishop said:

I understand the size of the 24 Hr Campfire group and the amount of posting that takes place there. I have been there since 2005. I am also aware of how mean or hateful some in that group can be. My user name there is "xphunter," which is my old username. I just never updated it. I have typically posted more in the LR hunting section, but I post in other areas as well. It can be volatile at times, but I have not been attacked there.
of

I haven't been attacked there either, Yet. They do get nasty don't they. I do like some things there, but there's a bunch of different factions. I go there because there's more talk of rifles. I'm a rifle shooter mainly. Here I get tired of all the Pistol threads. Not like what you shoot, I'm just not into a bunch of hand guns. I like hunting guns whether they're long range pistols or rifles. I don't mind some one like Weatherby and his S&Ws but I don't get off on all the mechanics of hand guns and constant talk about them. So I go to the fire and there's never a shortage of rifle talk.

snake284 · March 2020

Bigslug said:

My personal disdain for and puzzlement over the very existence of the .270 aside, I am a little puzzled by its appearance at the top of a list of elk-killers.

Not that the round can't do it and well. But it's a round you'll want to be loading GOOD, deep--penetrating projectiles in for the task; Partitions, Barnes, and the like.

The life of the .270 covers a time period where there was plenty of iffy soft-point bullet construction, and then there's the simple reality that for every guy that carefully researches his ammo choice, there are at least 50 Bubbas who just go to the local dry goods store and say "Gimme a box of whatever". Seems like that would put a lot of relatively fragile 130 grain deer bullets in the field, making it a natural for creating a lot of "bad day of elk hunting" stories.

You're right on. If you use a .270 for elk you need a good substantial bullet. But on that forum there's a lot of guys that use it as it should be. A lot of 150 grain Partitions and Swift A Frame and Barnes TTSX and TSX bullets used by the elk hunters. For a deer rifle the .270 is right at home with 130 grain Nosler Ballistic Tips and Sierra Game Kings. I've been using them for years and they work just fine. However, I've never been elk hunting in my life and if I ever go I'll take my .300 Weatherby with a 180 or .200 grain Nosler Partition. I don't want to spend a lot of money on a hunt and drive two days to get there and blow it by being under gunned.

Zee · March 2020

I might have to go check it out. This place has lost its shine on the firearms and hunting related topics that drew me to it.

Ernie Bishop · March 2020

Zee,

It is quite active there. I thought you knew about it

Zee · March 2020

Heard of it. But, the horror stories deterred ever looking it up.

Ernie Bishop · March 2020

You will not like that they have so many sub-groups and some of the drama. You will like the amount of activity there is on guns and hunting. It's a trade off. If you don't want to see posts of certain user, just go into their profile and click on "ignore user."

ojr · March 2020

I am a little suspicious about this list, there is no 6.5x55 nor 9.3x62 but the 270 is featured on no less than 3 occasions.

tennmike · March 2020

Don't have anything particularly against the .270 Win. except ONE thing. I have a few .30-06 rifles, and there is no reason to have a .270.

I also have a couple of 7x57 Mauser chambered rifles built on 98 Mauser actions that are operating on a higher pressure than the old 96 Mauser reloading data. I hunt in Eastern TN brush country where a shot of over 100 yards is the EXCEPTION, as most shots are 70 yards or less. And the ability of a .30-06 to chamber a .270 Win. cartridge creeps me out.

I've also never had a dead deer shot with a .30-06 complain about inadequate power when used with properly reloaded ammo and bullets of good construction, so there's that to consider, also.

earlyagain · March 2020

Still.
No one coming out to tout their 375 H&H.. Heck I'd give up part of days hunt just oggle one of those.

CHIRO1989 · March 2020

tennmike said:

Don't have anything particularly against the .270 Win. except ONE thing. I have a few .30-06 rifles, and there is no reason to have a .270.
I also have a couple of 7x57 Mauser chambered rifles built on 98 Mauser actions that are operating on a higher pressure than the old 96 Mauser reloading data. I hunt in Eastern TN brush country where a shot of over 100 yards is the EXCEPTION, as most shots are 70 yards or less. And the ability of a .30-06 to chamber a .270 Win. cartridge creeps me out.
I've also never had a dead deer shot with a .30-06 complain about inadequate power when used with properly reloaded ammo and bullets of good construction, so there's that to consider, also.

You can put a .243 in a .308 too, just ask my uncle

snake284 · April 2020

tennmike said:

Don't have anything particularly against the .270 Win. except ONE thing. I have a few .30-06 rifles, and there is no reason to have a .270.
I also have a couple of 7x57 Mauser chambered rifles built on 98 Mauser actions that are operating on a higher pressure than the old 96 Mauser reloading data. I hunt in Eastern TN brush country where a shot of over 100 yards is the EXCEPTION, as most shots are 70 yards or less. And the ability of a .30-06 to chamber a .270 Win. cartridge creeps me out.
I've also never had a dead deer shot with a .30-06 complain about inadequate power when used with properly reloaded ammo and bullets of good construction, so there's that to consider, also.

I've never had a deer complain about any I use. I have 3 7mms, 3 .30s and one .270, because that's all I need is one. It does the job.

snake284 · April 2020

CHIRO1989 said:

tennmike said:

Don't have anything particularly against the .270 Win. except ONE thing. I have a few .30-06 rifles, and there is no reason to have a .270.
I also have a couple of 7x57 Mauser chambered rifles built on 98 Mauser actions that are operating on a higher pressure than the old 96 Mauser reloading data. I hunt in Eastern TN brush country where a shot of over 100 yards is the EXCEPTION, as most shots are 70 yards or less. And the ability of a .30-06 to chamber a .270 Win. cartridge creeps me out.
I've also never had a dead deer shot with a .30-06 complain about inadequate power when used with properly reloaded ammo and bullets of good construction, so there's that to consider, also.

You can put a .243 in a .308 too, just ask my uncle

I've done it with the .270 and 06. It doesn't build enough pressure to hurt anything. It makes a weird sound but you can't hit a bull in the butt with a bass fiddle than with it, you couldn't hit an elephant with that at 50 yards with it. It doesn't hardly grab the rifling. Now if you could get a .280 in a .270 that might be a problem, but they made the .280 Remington's case .050 longer than a .270 just for that reason. And no way you're getting a .30-06 bullet to chamber in a .270, it's just too big. The bolt won't close.

Guns and Ammo

Forums

New Turd in the mail box

Replies

MORE YOU MAY BE INTERESTED IN

Forums

New Turd in the mail box

Replies

GET THE MAGAZINE Subscribe & Save

MORE YOU MAY BE INTERESTED IN

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