6.5 Creedmoor on Elk?

[CoStick]

Lots of Goliaths out there, nothing wrong with being David either.

 

[GSPHUNTER]

As mentioned, shot placement is the key. But I'm old school and very particular about my choice of firearm. My first Elk was bagged with 30-06, my brother gave me, using 180 gr. Barnes TTSX. Second elk was bagged with a .300 Win. Mag, my other brother willed me, using same bullet. Free firearm and Shot placement is the key.

 

[chadlove]

Are the 143gr the largest for 6.5 cm

 

[Sled]

I haven't heard of them excluding 7mm RM. Seems silly if they did. But basically giving a caliber window trying to keep out several of the short action guns.

Sent from my SM-G986U using Tapatalk

Some did back in the 80s. The 284 got a bad rap due to poor projectile construction that had a tendency to pencil. Newer projectiles make the 7mm rem mag a very effective tool for elk.

 

[Marble]

Headed to the range with my new RUM. Loaded up some 220 Grainers to try out and see if it likes them. I should be pushing those at around 3000 fps.

Good luck! We don't even shoot the RUM anymore. It's just too nasty. The recoil isn't so horrible, but combined with the brake, the two just leave me shell shocked.

We have several other very suitable guns to shoot that are lighter, as or more accurate and are actually enjoyable to shoot.

Sent from my SM-G986U using Tapatalk

 

[justin davis]

All you big gun guys are 1/2 deaf from your brakes. I'd rather shoot my 6.5 or .243 and still hear the Elk crash when he drops. All while your ears are still ringing from your brAke.

I Run a suppressor on our 300 WM. No brake needed. I’m a Bowhunter and don’t rifle
Hunt but my Wife is the rifle hunter in the family.

 

[AngryIdahoan]

I own a 7mm and a 25-06 to hunt with. I’ve killed elk with the 25-06. It’s all about shot placement

 

[Flyjunky]

Wow, what a cluster of a thread, but to be expected.

First off, like many have said shot placement and knowing the limits on range are the key to using a creed on elk.

Even though I've been hunting elk for 3 decades I tend to listen to those who have been around way more elk kills than I have. Broz, Avery, and Furman did a podcast on whether the creed was an elk cartridge. They all agreed that a creed definitely can kill an elk but there are limitations such as distance and shot angle, which many have stated here. Broz alone has been there for 100's and 100's and 100's of elk kills with many different guns and bullets. First hand experience is better than any bc, ft/lbs, etc written on paper. Btw, I've talked with several guides in several different states and as an elk cartridge, the creed, is not looked upon with favor by these guys who make their living putting elk on the ground.

It seems people on here are either ignorant or just stirring the pot but there is a great margin of error with a bigger caliber and larger bullet whether some want to believe that or not. A hard quartering shot on an elk, especially at distance is a tight window and if you are off a little, I'd rather have something larger hitting that elk. Not all elk are going to stand there broadside or slightly quartering away waiting for you to shoot them.

Elk are big, tough creatures and a lot of guns will get the job done but some are just better suited to that job than others. If it was just about bullet placement then we would see people using the creed to hunt big bears, but you don't. Average grizzly is right around 700lbs and a mature bull elk is that big and bigger. So, are you taking your creed to chase a grizzly? From my friends who are in Alaska around bears every single day for 4 months say that an elk can be just as tough to kill as a big bear....the difference being on more marginal shots a bear becomes no fun. Several people have commented that energy doesn't matter and while I can/do follow that logic to some extent there is something to be said about a large bullet traveling at high speed that flat out gets it done better than a smaller bullet traveling slower or as fast.

Long thread made short.......make a good shot within the limitations of the rifle and you should have a dead elk. More difficult angles and distance, there are better tools for the job.

 

[Formidilosus]

Really man???

Don’t you think there’s something missing from that story? It’s pretty obvious he didn’t make a very good shot and you did. 2 miles…. Yeah he nearly missed.

Hold on- I thought the reason for big guns was “margin of error” on bad shots? So if a bad shot from a magnum results in the elk traveling a long ways, just like a bad shot with a smaller bullet does the same- what exactly am I getting from the big gun?

 

[Formidilosus]

I have ran into two people in 20+ years in the woods (where I hunt elk) that were not carrying a rifle in that magnum range. Point being, this discussion needs a little context on how far people expect they would shoot their animal at.

I have killed every single bull elk I’ve shot at with a 6.5cm (not that cartridge really matters) in some of the nastiest country that people reference at ranges longer than 600 yards- 666, 801, 676 without issue. They all died quickly and went 0 feet, 69 yards, and just over 100 yards in irder from the first shot. Only the bull shot with a “bonded” bullet traveled a hundred yards . I’ve been the spotter for quite a few more out to 910 yards with 6.5’s, and a bunch under 600 yards. There are no angles or shots that I would not take with the 6.5’s that I would with a big 30cal- and yes, I’ve used big magnums extensively.

I am comfortable shooting a couple of my guns to 600 under the proper conditions. Others I am not. I have made acouple marginal shots at long distance to where if it was a 6.5 creedmore, or another smaller caliber, we would not have recovered the animal. This is why I shoot a big magnum.

I see no down side.

How do you know that you wouldn’t have recovered the animal with a smaller caliber?

 

[Formidilosus]

Even though I've been hunting elk for 3 decades I tend to listen to those who have been around way more elk kills than I have. Broz, Avery, and Furman did a podcast on whether the creed was an elk cartridge. They all agreed that a creed definitely can kill an elk but there are limitations such as distance and shot angle,

You might be surprised if you ask Ryan what his new elk rifle is….

It seems people on here are either ignorant or just stirring the pot but there is a great margin of error with a bigger caliber and larger bullet whether some want to believe that or not. A hard quartering shot on an elk, especially at distance is a tight window and if you are off a little, I'd rather have something larger hitting that elk. Not all elk are going to stand there broadside or slightly quartering away waiting for you to shoot them.

What exactly is the “great margin of error” that higher calibers give you? Be specific please.

Elk are big, tough creatures and a lot of guns will get the job done but some are just better suited to that job than others.

By the vast majority of standards, I have killed and seen killed quite a few elk with “small” guns. I’m still waiting for the “tough” elk. They are big animals and therefore it takes more time for the lungs to fill with blood and suffocate, or bleed out- but they are not armor plated and I have found them no different than deer. I think this “elk are so tough” is because very few people get to shoot enough of them to form any kind of realistic view, and even fewer experiment on them with cartridges and bullets and actually log what happens.

Shoot them in the front half and they die. Shoot them in the back half and it is a guess as to what will happen with any cartridge/bullet.

So, are you taking your creed to chase a grizzly?

Happily and without hesitation. A 6.5 cm with any of the heavy for caliber, rapidly fragmenting bullets creates a significantly larger wound channel than the 338+ calibers with deep penetrating, bonded or monolithic bullets. Take those same big bear guns and shoot 50 whitetails and log what happens- they’ll run 50 to 100 yards with shots just like they do with smaller guns.




I get it. What I and others are writing above about bullets, not headstamps is so polar opposite from almost everything written by famous hunters and writers, that there’s just no way it’s possible…. Except that it is. Your bear guide friend may have lots of experience killing bears; how much experience does he have with “small” guns on those bears? The few grizzlies and brown bears that I know of that were killed with 6.5’s died without issue.

 

[woods89]

You might be surprised if you ask Ryan what his new elk rifle is….

Ok, I'm interested in this!

 

[Formidilosus]

Ok, I'm interested in this!

Haha it’s started…

 

[woods89]

Haha it’s started…

He tried to swear you to secrecy, didn't he.......

@Ryan Avery

 

[grappling_hook]

Are the 143gr the largest for 6.5 cm

The 130s to low 140s are most popular, but there are 144, 147, 153/153.5, and even 156gr that come factory loaded.

 

[Flyjunky]

You might be surprised if you ask Ryan what his new elk rifle is….






What exactly is the “great margin of error” that higher calibers give you? Be specific please.




By the vast majority of standards, I have killed and seen killed quite a few elk with “small” guns. I’m still waiting for the “tough” elk. They are big animals and therefore it takes more time for the lungs to fill with blood and suffocate, or bleed out- but they are not armor plated and I have found them no different than deer. I think this “elk are so tough” is because very few people get to shoot enough of them to form any kind of realistic view, and even fewer experiment on them with cartridges and bullets and actually log what happens.

Shoot them in the front half and they die. Shoot them in the back half and it is a guess as to what will happen with any cartridge/bullet.





Happily and without hesitation. A 6.5 cm with any of the heavy for caliber, rapidly fragmenting bullets creates a significantly larger wound channel than the 338+ calibers with deep penetrating, bonded or monolithic bullets. Take those same big bear guns and shoot 50 whitetails and log what happens- they’ll run 50 to 100 yards with shots just like they do with smaller guns.




I get it. What I and others are writing above about bullets, not headstamps is so polar opposite from almost everything written by famous hunters and writers, that there’s just no way it’s possible…. Except that it is. Your bear guide friend may have lots of experience killing bears; how much experience does he have with “small” guns on those bears? The few grizzlies and brown bears that I know of that were killed with 6.5’s died without issue.

I’m a frangible bullet guy myself, it’s all I use in all of my rifles. I meant to say greater margin of error. What I mean by that is on let’s say a quartering to you shot. A larger bullet has more lead/jacket to throw around inside an animal after it “explodes”. Similar effect to a shotgun pellet spread, not a great example but you get the point. You can find people talking about finding lead or pieces of jacket a decent distance from their shot placement. I don’t know if that makes sense.

With the bear thing, go ahead and shoot a 6.5. Shoot that bear at 75-100 yards in the vitals and he can easily cover that ground before he bleeds out. In situations like that they will tell you a shoulder/break them down shot. I don’t know if I’d advise a shoulder shot with a creed, but don’t worry your guide will be backing you up with a bigger gun.

Like I said, a creed will kill elk but in my opinion there are limits. To each their own and I’m not going to tell people how to hunt or what to use.

Good luck this year.

 

[Formidilosus]

I’m a frangible bullet guy myself, it’s all I use in all of my rifles. I meant to say greater margin of error. What I mean by that is on let’s say a quartering to you shot. A larger bullet has more lead/jacket to throw around inside an animal after it “explodes”. Similar effect to a shotgun pellet spread, not a great example but you get the point. You can find people talking about finding lead or pieces of jacket a decent distance from their shot placement. I don’t know if that makes sense.

That is true, the larger the bullet the more fragments are possible. The error in thought, in general comes from the idea that a 215gr 30cal Berger fragmenting leads to faster death than a 156gr Berger 6.5 fragmenting. It doesn’t really work that way- the wound from the 215gr isn’t larger enough than the wound from the 6.5 in elk to have any great effect if large numbers animals are killed with both. In deer, yes, it is possible to create a wound larger enough that the temporary stretch cavity effects the spinal cord from a true chest shot. But not in elk.

With the bear thing, go ahead and shoot a 6.5. Shoot that bear at 75-100 yards in the vitals and he can easily cover that ground before he bleeds out. In situations like that they will tell you a shoulder/break them down shot. I don’t know if I’d advise a shoulder shot with a creed, but don’t worry your guide will be backing you up with a bigger gun.

I’m not worried, I’ve killed a lot of animals in a lot of places. And I don’t mean 10-20. I mean 100+ a year for almost two decades.

As for the shoulder on a bear, have you ever killed one and butchered it? It’s a predator, like all predators it’s bone structure is extremely light and fragile. You can literally hold a a brown bear scapula up to the sky and see your hand through it.

Like I said, a creed will kill elk but in my opinion there are limits. To each their own and I’m not going to tell people how to hunt or what to use.

Good luck this year.

To you too. To be clear, people should shoot what they want, I’m not trying to convince anyone to shoot elk with 6.5’s. I am trying to get people to stop thinking in “I like/I think/I believe/I feel”; and start discussing reality and facts. The 6.5’s aren’t “marginal”. With good bullets they destroy the chit out of animals.


What is marginal about this-




That is the thickest bone in an elks front half shattered and sticking out from a quartering too shot with a 130gr 6.5 at 594 yards.

 

[Flyjunky]

That is true, the larger the bullet the more fragments are possible. The error in thought, in general comes from the idea that a 215gr 30cal Berger fragmenting leads to faster death than a 156gr Berger 6.5 fragmenting. It doesn’t really work that way- the wound from the 215gr isn’t larger enough than the wound from the 6.5 in elk to have any great effect if large numbers animals are killed with both. In deer, yes, it is possible to create a wound larger enough that the temporary stretch cavity effects the spinal cord from a true chest shot. But not in elk.



I’m not worried, I’ve killed a lot of animals in a lot of places. And I don’t mean 10-20. I mean 100+ a year for almost two decades.

As for the shoulder on a bear, have you ever killed one and butchered it? It’s a predator, like all predators it’s bone structure is extremely light and fragile. You can literally hold a a brown bear scapula up to the sky and see your hand through it.






To you too. To be clear, people should shoot what they want, I’m not trying to convince anyone to shoot elk with 6.5’s. I am trying to get people to stop thinking in “I like/I think/I believe/I feel”; and start discussing reality and facts. The 6.5’s aren’t “marginal”. With good bullets they destroy the chit out of animals.


What is marginal about this-

View attachment 459266


That is the thickest bone in an elks front half shattered and sticking out from a quartering too shot with a 130gr 6.5 at 594 yards.

I don’t want to derail this thread….sent you a pm

 

[prm]

Is a difference in bullet diameter of .044” really going to make much of a difference? The bullet design make a bigger difference than the starting diameter. After shooting an elk with a 6.5, and previously only with .338 bullets (other animals with .30 cal), I looked hard at the wound channels and decided I wasn’t sure I could visually tell the difference. There was as much difference between a 6.5 139 Scenar and a 140 Berger in 6.5, as there was to the .338 holes from memory. No elk is surviving either through the vitals. I love my .338, but I’m not convinced the outcome is all that different. Dead. Bullet design, handling wind, recoil, are likely more important factors.
Here’s a collection of bullets ranging from 6.5 to .338. Hard to always tell what the starting diameter was.

 

[280Ackley]

That is true, the larger the bullet the more fragments are possible. The error in thought, in general comes from the idea that a 215gr 30cal Berger fragmenting leads to faster death than a 156gr Berger 6.5 fragmenting. It doesn’t really work that way- the wound from the 215gr isn’t larger enough than the wound from the 6.5 in elk to have any great effect if large numbers animals are killed with both. In deer, yes, it is possible to create a wound larger enough that the temporary stretch cavity effects the spinal cord from a true chest shot. But not in elk.



I’m not worried, I’ve killed a lot of animals in a lot of places. And I don’t mean 10-20. I mean 100+ a year for almost two decades.

As for the shoulder on a bear, have you ever killed one and butchered it? It’s a predator, like all predators it’s bone structure is extremely light and fragile. You can literally hold a a brown bear scapula up to the sky and see your hand through it.






To you too. To be clear, people should shoot what they want, I’m not trying to convince anyone to shoot elk with 6.5’s. I am trying to get people to stop thinking in “I like/I think/I believe/I feel”; and start discussing reality and facts. The 6.5’s aren’t “marginal”. With good bullets they destroy the chit out of animals.


What is marginal about this-

View attachment 459266


That is the thickest bone in an elks front half shattered and sticking out from a quartering too shot with a 130gr 6.5 at 594 yards.

What 130Gr bullet was that?