16" suppressed elk gun

[WRO]

Please show me where I said I was an authority. You asked a question, and I provided threads with the answers. If you aren't able to process that, there isn't anything more I can do for you.

If you haven’t done it yourself, why do you feel it responsible to recommend to others a sub optimal caliber for the given quarry that 99% of guys who kill elk for a living would vehemently disagree with you on?

 

[NateTP38]

If you haven’t done it yourself, why do you feel it responsible to recommend to others a sub optimal caliber for the given quarry that 99% of guys who kill elk for a living would vehemently disagree with you on?

If you are able, please explain why it is suboptimal. There is plenty of evidence here that shows it is more than adequate, and in many situations is superior to other options. As of now, there is zero evidence to show why it wouldn't work, other than feelings. To paraphrase a well known member on this site, I don't do feelings.

 

[Formidilosus]

I asked a specific question, there’s a lot of dead deer, cows, couple moose, and antelope on there, all of which die a lot easier than a mature bull elk.

Maybe you can answer, how many elk have you killed with a 22 center fire or 6mm?

I’ve killed several deer, antelope, and caribou with a 243 so I’ll plenty aware of how well they work. I’ve also killed 25 elk and watched at least 5 times that amount get killed personally.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I am closing in on 100 elk now, 20 last year, 14 or 16 the year before- quite a few were bulls. I have seen nothing that says bull elk are harder to kill or take longer to die. Quite the opposite. Cow elk tend to try and stay with the herd which seems to make them move more- bulls don’t. Everything I have seen is that people think elk are hard to kill because they want them to be hard to kill. I’m still waiting for the magical elk, but so far the seem to die about like everything else.

PNWGATOR can speak for himself, however he was on the spotter last year when an elk got turfed by a 223/77gr TMK at 803 yards in a couple of seconds. He was also the shooter or spotter for an elk 330 yards, one at 408, and one 360’ish on the same trip. The year before, 628 yards, 373 yards, 644 yards, and 910 yards. The largest cartridge/caliber for any of those was a 6.5 PRC. Most were 6.5cm, 6mm, and 223’s.

 

[WRO]

I am closing in on 100 elk now, 20 last year, 14 or 16 the year before- quite a few were bulls. I have seen nothing that says bull elk are harder to kill or take longer to die. Quite the opposite. Cow elk tend to try and stay with the herd which seems to make them move more- bulls don’t. Everything I have seen is that people think elk are hard to kill because they want them to be hard to kill. I’m still waiting for the magical elk, but so far the seem to die about like everything else.

PNWGATOR can speak for himself, however he was on the spotter last year when an elk got turfed by a 223/77gr TMK at 803 yards in a couple of seconds. He was also the shooter or spotter for an elk 330 yards, one at 408, and one 360’ish on the same trip. The year before, 628 yards, 373 yards, 644 yards, and 910 yards. The largest cartridge/caliber for any of those was a 6.5 PRC. Most were 6.5cm, 6mm, and 223’s.

I figured you might chime in. Comparing your skill set to the average elk hunters or the newbie elk hunter is like comparing my basketball skills to Michael Jordan’s.

I’m guessing that you shoot more center fire rounds in a month than the average hunter does in a decade or even a life time.

A properly placed round will kill, there’s no argument to that. That being said I’ve seen enough shit go wrong that I wouldn’t recommend that the average guy shoot the smallest legal caliber for elk. I’ve been apart of some shitty recoveries due wrong bullets, marginal hits, etc. I’ve also seen a few marginal hits with big enough bullets that I fully feel that it made a significant enough difference to ensure recovery.

As far as bulls go, I’ve seen several eat lead, even with well placed shots and make it far enough that it sucked significantly more than it could have on recovery.

 

[atmat]

A properly placed round will kill, there’s no argument to that.

Then why are you arguing? An elk’s vitals are huge. It’s not particularly tough to make a “properly placed shot” — it’s easier than a smaller bodied animal such as deer, for example.

People are significantly more accurate with smaller calibers. It’s much easier to make a properly placed round with one.

I would bet that the “bad shots but grateful it was a big caliber” you’ve seen were actually “bad shots because it was a big caliber.”

 

[Formidilosus]

I figured you might chime in. Comparing your skill set to the average elk hunters or the newbie elk hunter is like comparing my basketball skills to Michael Jordan’s.I’m guessing that you shoot more center fire rounds in a month than the average hunter does in a decade or even a life time.

I see lot of new hunters/shooters take quite a few animals each year. I was not a small caliber/cartridge person at all. Very much was taught and believed that real cartridges for game started at 300WM. However, everything I have seen, and I mean everything- killing that few could fathom, has shown unequivocally that everyone shoots less recoil, less noise, and less blast better than more; and the .224 with good bullets has by far the highest success rate and lowest screwup rate of any combination regardless of angle or presentation.

A properly placed round will kill, there’s no argument to that. That being said I’ve seen enough shit go wrong that I wouldn’t recommend that the average guy shoot the smallest legal caliber for elk. I’ve been apart of some shitty recoveries due wrong bullets, marginal hits, etc. I’ve also seen a few marginal hits with big enough bullets that I fully feel that it made a significant enough difference to ensure recovery.

I log and have logged the results of animals being killed for quite a while. That is type of animal, presentation, range, location of shot, bullet and impact speed, animal reaction, and results including distance traveled, and tissue damage. A few major things stand out like blinding lights-

- distance traveled after the hit has about zero correlation with caliber. It has almost everything to do with what is hit.

- as recoil goes up, the amount of gut shots, wounds, and misses skyrocket. 30cal mags average 1 to 3 animals out of every 10 that have a major screwup. 223/77gr TMK is about 1 in 150 animals- from antelope to moose.

- very few bullet/cartridge combinations make any difference at all in poor shots. Those that do, almost no one wants to use due to meat loss. Even still, using them the percentage of bad shots skyrockets compared to others.

- Projectiles matter greatly, caliber almost not at all. There is a very real difference in time to incapacitation, distance traveled, overall success between deep penetrating, narrow wounding projectiles, and heavy for caliber rapidly fragmenting projectiles.

As far as bulls go, I’ve seen several eat lead, even with well placed shots and make it far enough that it sucked significantly more than it could have on recovery.

So have I, though cow elk more than bulls. The first bull I killed took 4 rounds of 300WM. The only reason it wasn’t more is because I severed the spine in the neck with the 4th round. I’ve seen elk take between 1-7 rounds with .224, .243, .257, .264, ,277, .284, .308, .338 caliber rounds. We do not shoot and then sit back and watch the animal for 30 seconds until it falls over. If it is still on its feet, it keeps getting shot- quickly.

 

[WRO]

Then why are you arguing? An elk’s vitals are huge. It’s not particularly tough to make a “properly placed shot” — it’s easier than a smaller bodied animal such as deer, for example.

People are significantly more accurate with smaller calibers. It’s much easier to make a properly placed round with one.

I would bet that the “bad shots but grateful it was a big caliber” you’ve seen were actually “bad shots because it was a big caliber.”

You’d be betting wrong.

The two that immediately come to mind we’re quick shots on elk walking through the timber, one of which was mine.

I shoot all my guns the same, big or small caliber. I don’t buy the argument that smaller equals more accurate, they’re typically cheaper to shoot but that’s about it. That being said, it does not change the fundamentals of shooting accurately whether it’s a 300 ultra or a 223.

If you’ve been in the game long enough, shit happens. Never once have I heard someone say I wish I had a smaller bullet.

 

[atmat]

I shoot all my guns the same, big or small caliber. I don’t buy the argument that smaller equals more accurate

It really doesn’t matter what you “buy.” It’s a certain observable fact that lower recoil results in greater accuracy (all other things aside).

they’re typically cheaper to shoot but that’s about it.

Another great point that argues for smaller calibers. You can shoot much more practice for same price.

That being said, it does not change the fundamentals of shooting accurately whether it’s a 300 ultra or a 223.

Post a 30-round group with a 300 ultra and with a 223. Include all the flyers. Let us see that you do both equally well.

 

[Brontosaurus]

You’d be betting wrong.

The two that immediately come to mind we’re quick shots on elk walking through the timber, one of which was mine.

I shoot all my guns the same, big or small caliber. I don’t buy the argument that smaller equals more accurate, they’re typically cheaper to shoot but that’s about it. That being said, it does not change the fundamentals of shooting accurately whether it’s a 300 ultra or a 223.

If you’ve been in the game long enough, shit happens. Never once have I heard someone say I wish I had a smaller bullet.

Yeah but nobody shoots a bigger gun better. I don't. So if 77tmks and 130 tmks are creating wound channels similar to 30 cals why wouldn't you take the free recoil reduction?

 

[rcook10]

Are the new velocities WITH the can attached? Similarly, were the previous data for the 22" barrel W or W/O the suppressor?

All velocities are with the ultra 7.

 

[WRO]

I see lot of new hunters/shooters take quite a few animals each year. I was not a small caliber/cartridge person at all. Very much was taught and believed that real cartridges for game started at 300WM. However, everything I have seen, and I mean everything- killing that few could fathom, has shown unequivocally that everyone shoots less recoil, less noise, and less blast better than more; and the .224 with good bullets has by far the highest success rate and lowest screwup rate of any combination regardless of angle or presentation.





I log and have logged the results of animals being killed for quite a while. That is type of animal, presentation, range, location of shot, bullet and impact speed, animal reaction, and results including distance traveled, and tissue damage. A few major things stand out like blinding lights-

- distance traveled after the hit has about zero correlation with caliber. It has almost everything to do with what is hit.

- as recoil goes up, the amount of gut shots, wounds, and misses skyrocket. 30cal mags average 1 to 3 animals out of every 10 that have a major screwup. 223/77gr TMK is about 1 in 150 animals- from antelope to moose.

- very few bullet/cartridge combinations make any difference at all in poor shots. Those that do, almost no one wants to use due to meat loss. Even still, using them the percentage of bad shots skyrockets compared to others.

- Projectiles matter greatly, caliber almost not at all. There is a very real difference in time to incapacitation, distance traveled, overall success between deep penetrating, narrow wounding projectiles, and heavy for caliber rapidly fragmenting projectiles.





So have I, though cow elk more than bulls. The first bull I killed took 4 rounds of 300WM. The only reason it wasn’t more is because I severed the spine in the neck with the 4th round. I’ve seen elk take between 1-7 rounds with .224, .243, .257, .264, ,277, .284, .308, .338 caliber rounds. We do not shoot and then sit back and watch the animal for 30 seconds until it falls over. If it is still on its feet, it keeps getting shot- quickly.

I agree with you on bullets, out of the last 10 I’ve shot, 9 have been drt, that being said I believe in breaking them down with the center of the front shoulder being my preferred shot. I’ve been running the eldms and Bergers.

I haven’t noticed a correlation between caliber and accuracy among my clients. I have seen guys who I know are great shots make poor shots in the heat of the moment.

The average guy doesn’t reload, from a factory ammo perspective and even using recoil, there’s no reason to not start at a 6.5 creedmore with recommendation on a new elk rifle.

I don’t tell guys coming that they need an ultra mag to kill elk, but I don’t think recommending a small caliber for the average guy is the best option.

 

[WRO]

Yeah but nobody shoots a bigger gun better. I don't. So if 77tmks and 130 tmks are creating wound channels similar to 30 cals why wouldn't you take the free recoil reduction?

Really what’s so inherently harder about applying 2lbs of pressure to trigger to a 300 vs a 223?

1) because I don’t reload so those are not options. (The only reloads I shoot i have loaded for me)

2) my broke 300 Norma kicks no worse than anything else in my safe. A 225 eldm breaks bone and creates devastating results. I get noticeably bigger wound channels than than the 147, 108, and 100 grain bullets that I’ve killed with.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[WRO]

It really doesn’t matter what you “buy.” It’s a certain observable fact that lower recoil results in greater accuracy (all other things aside).


Another great point that argues for smaller calibers. You can shoot much more practice for same price.


Post a 30-round group with a 300 ultra and with a 223. Include all the flyers. Let us see that you do both equally well.

Really? I have the same .5 in groups in my rifles across 5 shots.

I have actual tags to fill and scouting to do, so I’ll pass on the internet dick measuring contest for the current time being.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Brontosaurus]

225 eldm breaks bone and creates devastating results.

6mm breaks shoulders too. Just saying

 

[atmat]

Really? I have the same .5 in groups in my rifles across 5 shots.

I’m sure you do buddy. I’m sure you do.

 

[WRO]

View attachment 605384
6mm breaks shoulders too. Just saying

Would you feel comfortable with the same penetration on a full sized elk or moose at over 400 yards?


No judgment on killing yearlings either, they’re great eating, December calves don’t suck either.

 

[NateTP38]

View attachment 605384
6mm breaks shoulders too. Just saying

But that's a cow. Don't you know that bulls have thicker, armor plated shoulders and thus require much bigger calibers?

 

[WRO]

But that's a cow. Don't you know that bulls have thicker, armor plated shoulders and thus require much bigger calibers?

That’s about half the weight of a mature bull maybe, probably similar in body size to a mature mule deer buck.

I’ve got plenty of log books off hanging dead weights.

The average mature bull has hung in the 400 to 450 range depending on the time of the year with the biggest being a Rosie that hung over 600.

The average winter cow has been 225 hanging with the biggest I’ve weighed being 305. Those are all skin, no head no legs.

That’s a yearling or first year cow that probably hung around 160.


The last mature bull I killed, the front shoulder weighed 76 lbs (we weighed all the quarters) hams were over 90. That scapula and front leg bone were easily twice the size of a cows and instead of being and at least twice the muscle thickness.

 

[Montana Slim]

If you haven’t done it yourself, why do you feel it responsible to recommend to others a sub optimal caliber for the given quarry that 99% of guys who kill elk for a living would vehemently disagree with you on?

Have you shot anything personally with smaller cartridges and the bullets advocated for on the posted threads?
I have not personally, I like what I like, but the results are pretty hard to argue with...

 

[WRO]

Have you shot anything personally with smaller cartridges and the bullets advocated for on the posted threads?
I have not personally, I like what I like, but the results are pretty hard to argue with...

Yup, I’ve shot probably 25 animals with a 243. Never an elk, some elk sized caribou which don’t die particularly hard. First elk I ever saw die was killed with a 243, great shot, ran 300 yards in to a reprod patch at the bottom of a unit died in the black berries. Seen a few others killed with anemic 6.5s and killed a couple with a 6.5 prc that I wasn’t overly impressed with the results.

Not a huge sample size with my 6.5, but I have no urge to continue it when I have better tools in the safe.

Ill probably shoot a cow with my 6 creed next week just to see, but I’m not going to tell anyone it’s the best choice with a sample size of one.

Everyone wants to post what happens when shit goes right, no one wants to post when shit goes wrong.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk