.03-06 bullet selection - elk out to 500 yards

[eyeguy]

168 ttsx or 180 accubond would be top 2 on my list

 

[SDHNTR]

The bullet doesn’t matter in this case. Accuracy does. Shoot the one that’s most accurate. I’d be more concerned about having a good scope and mounting system for shooting at that range.

 

[apieceofwork]

The bullet doesn’t matter in this case. Accuracy does. Shoot the one that’s most accurate. I’d be more concerned about having a good scope and mounting system for shooting at that range.

Scope is zeiss conquest v6 3-18x50 mounted with m-brace American rifle company rings.

 

[sndmn11]

Thank you, everyone. A lot of great info here. Also came across the Buffalo Bore iteration of the Barnes TTSX which has some great performance:

If you really intend to shoot past 300yds, any of the Barnes will be a disappointment. There isn't enough velocity carried to create the wound channel other bullets accomplish.

 

[wind gypsy]

Numbers on a 180 partition at federals listed 2700 FPS mv, 4000' elevation, 10 mph 90 degree wind. They suck. My less than "rokslide standard" load in an 18" 223 is significantly better on drop, drift, and retained velocity. And it gets a little sporty at 500 if there's wind.


In factory ammo I'd probably look at the 178 ELDx if you're intent on being prepared for 500 yard shots.

 

[SDHNTR]

I’ve killed between 4 and 550yds several times with Barnes LRX, hammer HHT‘s and hammer hunters out of 20 inch barrel 308 and 260 rifles. Zero problems. Even further with monos out of magnums. IMO, the minimal velocity obsession. This website has with bullets is largely overblown. Be reasonable, don’t take stupid shots, put the bullet where it belongs and stuff dies quite easily.

With an accurate rifle, and a quality proven scope, within reason and under the right conditions, I don’t think there is a bullet out there that would stop me from taking a 500 yd shot with a 3006.

 

[Coopsdaddy]

Partitions are all I have used for 20 years.
Proven to get the job done.
Never shot 500 though.

 

[Aviator]

Don’t overthink it, stick with the partitions or Accubond.

 

[Mackey]

I’ve never killed an elk with one but 178 gr terminal ascents shoot extremely well in my Merkel k3. Under an inch.

Mackey

 

[06 SB]

For factory ammo, I would be looking at Barnes Vortex in 150 or 168gr and never look back.

Be ready for a 500 yard shot means practicing A LOT.

 

[Ringbill27]

Thank you, everyone. A lot of great info here. Also came across the Buffalo Bore iteration of the Barnes TTSX which has some great performance:

I have been using coppers for a few years now and have had good luck with them. I contacted Barnes inquiring about minimum expansion velocities for the following bullets:
30 cal 175 LRX = 1600 fps
30 cal 168 TTSX = 1800 fps

This was with reloading bullet and was told the bullets in loaded ammunition from Barnes are different as least from Barnes. Those tend to be a little slower yet but have a hard time believing that. These speed are to achieve 1.5x expansion and to add 200fps for 2x expansion. I’ve never recovered a bullet so I can speak to actual expansion but I’m always happy with the exit hole and how little blood shot meat there is.

I started loading the 168gr for my 30-06 and found a good fast and accurate load very quickly. Between the 130, 150, and 168 TTSX, the 168gr seemed to be the easy button.

If it were me I’d have the choice between the bullets you listed. I’d shoot 175 LRX, 168gr and the 175gr term assent(still wouldn’t scoff at the others mentioned just trying to keep speeds up) to see which one shoots tightest and maintains velocity above its minimum expansion velocity rating for the distance you are looking for.

FYI the TTSX vs LRX
The TTSX is a tougher bullet and the LRX is made softer of long range expansion. This is seen in the expansion velocity rating. At close range the LRX will loose petals due to being softer.

Most of what I’ve said is information I’ve gathered through communications with Barnes.

But at the end of all that what do I really know?

 

[qmalone64]

sorry to hijack a thread but does anyone have any experience or opinions on the 165 grain Sierra Tipped Gameking (gamechanger) on elk? my .30/06 wouldnt group the usual suspects of Accubonds or terminal ascent. it seems to love these TGK's in the sierra factory loading. just curious of their performance on elk. info I can find online varies from them being too soft and frangible to them being too hard and not expanding...

thanks!

 

[Bluumoon]

sorry to hijack a thread but does anyone have any experience or opinions on the 165 grain Sierra Tipped Gameking (gamechanger) on elk? my .30/06 wouldnt group the usual suspects of Accubonds or terminal ascent. it seems to love these TGK's in the sierra factory loading. just curious of their performance on elk. info I can find online varies from them being too soft and frangible to them being too hard and not expanding...

thanks!

Keep them above 2000fps and put in vitals

 

[Mike D Texas]

The mono bullets are going to give the smallest wound track (tract?) by far.

At the parameters you described it would be very hard to talk me out of the partition with the Accubond as a second choice out of those options presented.

The front of the partition is very soft so I have a hard time believing they would pencil through at any velocity at 1800 and above.

I’ve killed whitetail with my Grendel where impact velocity was estimated to be 1750-1800 and had plenty of expansion with a 125 grin Partition bullet.

If you were handloading I would recommend the 175TMK over any of the others you mentioned.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

 

[Q_Sertorius]

As far as I know, the same bullet type doesn’t necessarily mean the same exact performance as you change diameters and sizes. For instance, I have read that the jacket on the .264 123-grain SST is thicker than on SSTs of other sizes and diameters. I think this may account for some of the range of performance between different bullets of the same type.

The other possibility is that as humans we are apt to form conclusions from very small sample sizes. I don’t have great confidence in my 6.5 Grendel using the 123-grain SST, but my sample size is ludicrously small (two). I can only aggregate that with other hunters’ subjective reports to try to decide whether I should keep using it. The whole point of the bullet threads on Rokslide is to try to get enough data from which to draw statistically significant conclusions.


____________________
“Keep on keepin’ on…”

 

[buckshot516]

Eldx or accubond. Whichever your gun likes best


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Djahnsen]

If you’re happy with the accuracy of the partitions in your rifle, I’d go with that.

Agreed!!

 

[06 SB]

I would be doing the 175gr LRX at that range as long as your rifle likes it. Of course the Partition is a good one too. I just cannot do an ELDX or SST. I just do not trust Hornady's sales pitch. The LRX would work from the end of the barrel to way out there. That is what I prefer.

 

[06 SB]

They’ll all work. Terminal range should be determined for each. For the LRX I believe you want to keep above 2200fps and it will still have the narrowest wound channel. The others keep above 2000fps at impact. Shoot more (practice) from varied positions, worry about this less.

The LRX is not a TTSX. It is designed to open down to 1600 according to Barnes testing but recommend to keep the bullet velocity at 1700-1800. The TTSX is 1900-2000fps minimum.

Source: Barnes Hunting Bullets

 

[solarshooter]

For box ammo:

Federal Premium 30-06 Springfield Ammo 168 Grain Berger Hybrid Hunter

Federal Premium is quality hunting ammunition designed for maximum performance and reliability. Premium hunting bullets are matched with select powders,...

www.midwayusa.com

Appears to hold 2k fps to 500, just:


If you were to reload, I would probably pick the 180gr Elite Hunter.