16" suppressed elk gun

Marbles

WKR
Classified Approved
Joined
May 16, 2020
Messages
3,564
Location
AK
@Formidilosus I all ready dropped from a 30-06 to a 308, now you have me wondering if I should get over the need for an extra 0.04 inches.

The question that does matter, will the recommend bullets bust through heavy bone? In other words, if I can keep it together well enough to both crap my pants and place a well aimed shot, will the bullet do its part on a charging brown bear?
 

Grant76

FNG
Joined
Nov 17, 2022
Messages
21
@Formidilosus I all ready dropped from a 30-06 to a 308, now you have me wondering if I should get over the need for an extra 0.04 inches.

The question that does matter, will the recommend bullets bust through heavy bone? In other words, if I can keep it together well enough to both crap my pants and place a well aimed shot, will the bullet do its part on a charging brown bear?
 

Marbles

WKR
Classified Approved
Joined
May 16, 2020
Messages
3,564
Location
AK
Nothing in that entire thread gives me the warm fuzzies about betting my life on a TMK holding together well enough to go through 1 inch of flat bone at an angle. If you can point to a frontal headshot on a moose that would make me feel better.

Scapula's are pretty thin. Hollow bones (humerus) shatter more easily and don't have the surrounding structure to reinforce them. I will not say it will not work, I might even bet half a paycheck that it would, half a paycheck is a fare cry from betting my life.

Edit: looks like the frontal section of a bear skill may not be as thick as I have been told.
 
Last edited:

DaleW

Lil-Rokslider
Joined
Dec 10, 2022
Messages
280
To the guys advocating for "smaller" cartridges for elk, humor me for a sec.

If you could only take 1 shot at an elk, would you choose a larger cartridge?
 

DaleW

Lil-Rokslider
Joined
Dec 10, 2022
Messages
280
No. Because that one shot has a much larger probability of landing exactly where I want it to with a lighter recoiling cartridge.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Let's say you have a 12"(1.5 moa) target you want to hit at 800 yards. You have a 300 prc shooting 215s at 2950 and a 223 shooting 77 grain at 2800. The wind is variable up to 15 mph. In what world are you more likely to get a fist round impact with the 223?
 

Formidilosus

Super Moderator
Joined
Oct 22, 2014
Messages
7,629
Let's say you have a 12"(1.5 moa) target you want to hit at 800 yards. You have a 300 prc shooting 215s at 2950 and a 223 shooting 77 grain at 2800. The wind is variable up to 15 mph. In what world are you more likely to get a fist round impact with the 223?

Who has advocated for using a 223 at 800 yards?
 

Formidilosus

Super Moderator
Joined
Oct 22, 2014
Messages
7,629
What is the maximum range a 223 shooting 77 grain is effective on elk?

Also didn’t someone(I think it was you) shoot a cow at 800+ with a 223?

Yes I’ve killed past 800y with it. That doesn’t mean people should be. Quite frankly the amount of people that should be shooting at animals at 800 yards is ludicrously low.

As for the 223/77gr TMK, 1,800fps impact is a solid baseline. That’s generally somewhere between 450 and 600 yards depending on barrel length and load. Without question at those ranges I would rather shoot the 223/77gr TMK versus a 300 PRC and 215gr.
 

DaleW

Lil-Rokslider
Joined
Dec 10, 2022
Messages
280
Yes I’ve killed past 800y with it. That doesn’t mean people should be. Quite frankly the amount of people that should be shooting at animals at 800 yards is ludicrously low.

As for the 223/77gr TMK, 1,800fps impact is a solid baseline. That’s generally somewhere between 450 and 600 yards depending on barrel length and load. Without question at those ranges I would rather shoot the 223/77gr TMK versus a 300 PRC and 215gr.
I'm sure for you it'd be fine. I'm not doubting it will kill them.

Even a 6.5 creed shooting 140 berger hybrids at 2750 will move around 10" more than the 300 prc at 600 yards in a 15 mph wind. I'm not saying a guy that can very effectively call wind wouldn't be fine, I just think there's a point where these smaller rounds can definitely start to be limiting. And that point where it starts to make a difference isn't as far out as people on here make it sound. Alot of guys are killing at those 6-800 yard ranges.

And also, it seems that you put alot of weight on follow up shots. But if we're talking about elk on public land(not culling whitetail does in a cow pasture) in my expression they run like hell as soon they hear a gun shot and there usually isn't a chance for a follow up shot. Of course being able to spot hits is very important, but in this context I'd absolutely take more recoil for even slightly higher first round hit rate.
 

Formidilosus

Super Moderator
Joined
Oct 22, 2014
Messages
7,629
I'm sure for you it'd be fine. I'm not doubting it will kill them.

Even a 6.5 creed shooting 140 berger hybrids at 2750 will move around 10" more than the 300 prc at 600 yards in a 15 mph wind. I'm not saying a guy that can very effectively call wind wouldn't be fine, I just think there's a point where these smaller rounds can definitely start to be limiting. And that point where it starts to make a difference isn't as far out as people on here make it sound.

Recoil matters. People do not shoot more recoil better than less. That cross over has consistently shown to be about 12-15ft-lbs of recoil. Above that performance drops significantly and quickly. Muzzle blast has similar effects on the shooter- so braking a gun doesn’t make up the difference most.


Alot of guys are killing at those 6-800 yard ranges.

A lot of people are missing and wounding animals at 6-800 yards. The amount of people that are consistently and on demand with a high percentage, killing animals past 600 yards is laughably small.


And also, it seems that you put alot of weight on follow up shots. But if we're talking about elk on public land(not culling whitetail does in a cow pasture) in my expression they run like hell as soon they hear a gun shot and there usually isn't a chance for a follow up shot. Of course being able to spot hits is very important, but in this context I'd absolutely take more recoil for even slightly higher first round hit rate.

I kill lots of elk on public land. In closing in on a hundred or so of them, when elk take a bullet past about 200’ish yards, they do not “run like hell” when shot- they stand there or slowly walk. I am sure some do, but they are not whitetails and do not react like them.
 

Marshfly

WKR
Joined
Sep 18, 2022
Messages
738
Location
Missoula, Montana
Let's say you have a 12"(1.5 moa) target you want to hit at 800 yards. You have a 300 prc shooting 215s at 2950 and a 223 shooting 77 grain at 2800. The wind is variable up to 15 mph. In what world are you more likely to get a fist round impact with the 223?

Why are you adding elements to the original question? What percentage of people can hit that plate with their first shot under those conditions with that 300PRC?

The answer is well under 1%.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 

Marshfly

WKR
Joined
Sep 18, 2022
Messages
738
Location
Missoula, Montana
Likely because a 300 PRC is a more reasonable/common elk cartridge than a 6.5 PRC.

Sent from my SM-G986U using Tapatalk

No it’s not. It’s totally and utterly overkill unless you plan on killed at more than 1000yards all the time.

But keep telling yourself that it takes 40 pounds of recoil to kill an elk.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 

Whitey375

FNG
Joined
Jul 18, 2018
Messages
74
No it’s not. It’s totally and utterly overkill unless you plan on killed at more than 1000yards all the time.

But keep telling yourself that it takes 40 pounds of recoil to kill an elk.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


Sent from my SM-G986U using Tapatalk
 

DaleW

Lil-Rokslider
Joined
Dec 10, 2022
Messages
280
Recoil matters. People do not shoot more recoil better than less. That cross over has consistently shown to be about 12-15ft-lbs of recoil. Above that performance drops significantly and quickly. Muzzle blast has similar effects on the shooter- so braking a gun doesn’t make up the difference most.




A lot of people are missing and wounding animals at 6-800 yards. The amount of people that are consistently and on demand with a high percentage, killing animals past 600 yards is laughably small.




I kill lots of elk on public land. In closing in on a hundred or so of them, when elk take a bullet past about 200’ish yards, they do not “run like hell” when shot- they stand there or slowly walk. I am sure some do, but they are not whitetails and do not react like them.
Recoil certainly does matter. But why is it when someone says "shoot the biggest cartridge you can accurately shoot for elk" so many immediately say that's dumb and to use a 6mm? I'm not saying a 130 pound woman(or anyone) has to use a 300 prc, it just seems smart to have the most effective set up for achieving a first round vital hit. That will be different for everyone, but the "223 or 6 creed for everything" thing that is parroted so much is simply not good advise.

As far as follow up shots I agree if they get hit they usually just stand there and wait to get shot again. I was more speaking to a miss. Even with a can it seems like what actually spooks them is the bullet cracking past them and impacting the surrounding area. In that situation IME they blow out before another shot can be taken.
 

DaleW

Lil-Rokslider
Joined
Dec 10, 2022
Messages
280
Why are you adding elements to the original question? What percentage of people can hit that plate with their first shot under those conditions with that 300PRC?

The answer is well under 1%.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
If we're talking about people who hunt out west and are interested in lr shooting I don't think it's 1%.

My example, while a bit extreme, was just to illustrate the point that a smaller round that is more affected by wind will have a lower first round hit rate at long range. Period. The shooter's ability to handle recoil is the X factor. And that is different for everyone. Obviously if you're shooting too big of a gun, you aren't gonna hit anything.
 

Marshfly

WKR
Joined
Sep 18, 2022
Messages
738
Location
Missoula, Montana
If we're talking about people who hunt out west and are interested in lr shooting I don't think it's 1%.

My example, while a bit extreme, was just to illustrate the point that a smaller round that is more affected by wind will have a lower first round hit rate at long range. Period. The shooter's ability to handle recoil is the X factor. And that is different for everyone. Obviously if you're shooting too big of a gun, you aren't gonna hit anything.

You didn’t say people that are interested in long range shooting. You said any person. You also didn’t say long range. Not a steel plate. You said an elk.

And your last sentence tells me you agree that a smaller caliber is easier to hit stuff with.

You guys sure do talk in circles a lot.

Just stop being so adamant about huge calibers being better and actually think about this stuff.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
Top