2 lost elk and conclusions.

[Ucsdryder]

It wasnt Me.

LOl.

I somewhat agree with what your saying.

BUT there isnt a hunter on this forum that hasnt made a bad shot, wounded an animal or lost an animal.

ANYONE that makes thst "claim" is 100% full of kaka.

IF you dont have a strong blood trail, and the Elk is on another trail with fresh tracks...

You can easily lose a blood trail.

They tend to die in thick stuff.

I shot my Elk this year in Archery and I followed the blood trail for 250 yards...in the rain.(towards the end). I was lucky to find him.

As far as the "guys" in my camp that lost the Elk.

One was a hunter with 40 years in the field.

The shot was double lung.

WHY he didnt find it? I wasnt there.

He thought he missed. He checked the spot where the Elk was standing and didnt find blood, or hair.

I do know he would have followed a blood trail IF there was one....he has the patience of Job.

The area we hunt has lots of water and they will cross it. Mix that in with a "Black" Elk path and no blood?

Getting back to the point I was trying to make.

A 270 will definitely work.

IS it the best choice?

Probably not... especially if the shot is high in the lungs....as the chest cavity will hold most of the blood in.

I would suggest a 300 mag with a Barnes , E-Tip, A-Frame or Partition.

A bullet/cartridge combo that if shot into the ribs has at least a chance making an exit hole....which makes for a better blood trail.

 

[sndmn11]

I have seen an elk and two mule deer shot with 300wby, 300wsm, and 300win respectively, and not one 180gr accubond exited. They all sure as bananas make bread died pretty quick.
Impact velocity, and bullet design probably played the biggest parts in that result before bullet caliber and grain weight.

The most recent had a beautiful path of 3' wide splash for the 20yard run. Screen shot from my video below.


Oddly enough, I have seen the same types of horror movie splash trails from 6.5creedmoor, 7-08, and 30-06 with e-tip/gmx/ttsx when things get hit in the vitals. None of those bullets were caught though.

 

[204guy]

I never once said the 270 would not work?

please quote me where I said that?

I said that a 300 win mag class cartridge has a better chance at making an exit hole....and therefore a better chance at a blood trail....and it DOES?

Is there anyone that questions that?

 

[Stalker69]

I have seen a good amount of elk lost with 7mm mag, 300 wm, and 338 win. All claimed perfect hits, little to no blood trails, but animals not recovered. A few we have found at later dates, they did have two holes, but it didn’t seem to help in those cases. High chest shots, don’t leak much no matter what you punch the holes with. If your having problems try from a tree, so your shooting down on them. Or shoot lower in the chest cavity. If your still not sure you can do that, a high shoulder shot with your magnums, should take both shoulders out of play, and they won’t go no where. Still not sure, why stop at the 300 magnums, if it’s that thick and shots are not long, why not 458 win, 338 lapua, 570 nitro.? By your way of thinking bigger holes, make more blood on the ground, why not make the biggest holes you can ? And those “ real men’s” calibers will surely take out both shoulders, if you or any body with 40 years of experience behind them should know. It’s not only two holes, and yes two holes are great. But it’s where those two holes , (and what is destroyed between )are located that REALLY TRULY matters.

 

[AZ_Hunter_2000]

One thing about the intermet....theres no shortage of guys that are perfect hunters....

NEVER wounded, or lost an animal ever....1 shot kills all the time

I am DONE splaining....

Every situation is different....

It wasnt me....

Its funny how 1 comment..

"270 is a womens gun"...which was kinda ment as a joke....got so many riled up?

So many on the defensive?

WHY?

Your posts didn’t convey that you were joking.

It was a combination of less than ideal shot placement, lack of concerted effort to find the animal, and a bit of bad luck. Was never the caliber and never the bullet. Not the first time. Not the second time.

But it’s easier to blame an inanimate object rather than blame the shooters.

Maybe your fellow hunting partners should start to wear panties since they cannot accurately shoot a feminine 270 Win. They can then stay in camp and cook and clean for the real men. << Just playing around >>

See, that conveys a joke.

If I said “you guys are a bunch of poor shots who are lazy as hell when it comes to finding a downed animal”, without saying that I’m joking, it conveys exactly what I wrote.

 

[Stalker69]

Well said. Looking down on a caliber that is very capable, ( I don’t shoot a 270 by the way) to cover poor shooting, and calling it a women caliber I s childish. The 270 has killed much bigger animals then elk, and for many people with less then forty years experience. Forty years of doing it the wrong way, don’t make it right either.

 

[corey006]

Your posts didn’t convey that you were joking.

It was a combination of less than ideal shot placement, lack of concerted effort to find the animal, and a bit of bad luck. Was never the caliber and never the bullet. Not the first time. Not the second time.

But it’s easier to blame an inanimate object rather than blame the shooters.

Maybe your fellow hunting partners should start to wear panties since they cannot accurately shoot a feminine 270 Win. They can then stay in camp and cook and clean for the real men. << Just playing around >>

See, that conveys a joke.

If I said “you guys are a bunch of poor shots who are lazy as hell when it comes to finding a downed animal”, without saying that I’m joking, it conveys exactly what I wrote.

When I said it was a "womens gun".... you think I was serious?

Lots of over-sensitive hunters on here.

If there is so much love for the
270....why no love for
280...which has a far better selection of bullets available?

 

[CoStick]

When I said it was a "womens gun".... you think I was serious?

Lots of over-sensitive hunters on here.

If there is so much love for the
270....why no love for
280...which has a far better selection of bullets available?

Not a lot of .280 factory ammo options would be my guess.

 

[AZ_Hunter_2000]

When I said it was a "womens gun".... you think I was serious?

Lots of over-sensitive hunters on here.

If there is so much love for the
270....why no love for
280...which has a far better selection of bullets available?

You gave zero impression that you were joking. This is one of the limitations of text-based communication; can miss out on body language or other tell tale signs that a person is just playing around.

Lots of great options out there. This is especially true if you hand-load. But lots of folks are limited to commercially available ammo which does reduce the number of great options.

 

[3325]

If there is so much love for the
270....why no love for
280...which has a far better selection of bullets available?

Okay, .270 v .280…….

Let’s say I was convinced that ballistic perfection manifested itself at 140 grains of .284 caliber bullet. I’d launch it out of something besides a .280 Remington. I’d go handy with a 7-08, classic with a 7x57, or high performance with a 7 mag. But what I wouldn’t do is choose .280.

Why? Because .270/130 v .280/140 is a wash in the field but the .270/130 came first and has more history.

Some will point out BC this or SD that as a perceived advantage for .284 over .277. That’s a paper argument with zero field application for .270 v .280. Not only have I never seen a rifleman that could turn it into an advantage on game from a field position, I’d bet there’s not one rifleman in a thousand that can make it mean anything on a paper target from a bench.

The .280 works fine. But the above is why I won’t bother owning one. And I made the above argument using a .270/130 v .280/140 example. But a .270/150 v .280/160 is essentially the same argument.