7mm-08 for elk?

[35WhelenAI]

Thanks, ssimo good post. I have been fortunate to have success on game with the 280 Rem and 7mm STW with respect to the 7mm bore size. They have done a good job covering the bases with deer, elk and pronghorn brought to the table.

Primarily for the elk woods, I hunt with a 35 Whelen Ackley Improved running a 200 TTSX. It's been solid elk, mule deer and whitetail medicine for 22 seasons. Worked very well to 341 yds for the longest shot on elk with the original 200X and other elk with the 225X and 250X before the TTSX was introduced. The .358 200 TTSX has accounted for 6 elk, 3 mule deer and 3 whitetails since it was introduced a dozen years ago or so, A 300 Win Mag was the choice for the 8 years before that with a 180 Barnes XBT.

 

[turbobrick]

7mm-08 is a great cartridge, no problem at all using it for elk.

 

[LaFever]

the 7-08 gets pretty close to the .270 win.( in a smaller case) which has killed lots of elk. in velocity tests on another forum , the .270 win couldn't reach it's advertised velocity without going over pressure. comparing 140 gr bulets for instance. I didn't perform the aforementioned test , though

 

[35WhelenAI]

That's interesting, the 270 Winchester went over industry established SAAMI pressure for commercial factory loads in obtaining the advertised velocity of those loads? Advertised velocity in a loading manual or from an ammo manufacturer is dependent on the chamber cut, barrel length, powder lot, etc at the time the data was taken.

Are there more specifics as to the pressure measurement method used on the other forum? Were they using bolt lift, primer appearance, a strain gauge calibrated to a known lot of ammunition that gives a baseline pressure, did they send it to a certified laboratory, that type of thing?

Would be interested to see the link for that specific posting in that forum.

 

[jonhans]

Great cartridge!

 

[LaFever]

That's interesting, the 270 Winchester went over industry established SAAMI pressure for commercial factory loads in obtaining the advertised velocity of those loads? Advertised velocity in a loading manual or from an ammo manufacturer is dependent on the chamber cut, barrel length, powder lot, etc at the time the data was taken.

Are there more specifics as to the pressure measurement method used on the other forum? Were they using bolt lift, primer appearance, a strain gauge calibrated to a known lot of ammunition that gives a baseline pressure, did they send it to a certified laboratory, that type of thing?

Would be interested to see the link for that specific posting in that forum.

I dm'd the gentleman , when/if he responds i'll elaborate .
you asked valid questions so this is is how we learn,
I've always wondered why the 7-08 wasn't as popular as the 6.5 creedmoor

 

[35WhelenAI]

Thanks LaFever. Pardon the tangent away from the 7mm-08...

In a cartridge that was introduced almost 100 years (.270 Win) and in other "high intensity" bottle neck case cartridges not of the modern era, they were loaded to the gills by the factories and many times from a long test barrel and most sporting rifles had shorter barrels. A .277 130 gr bullet was advertised at 3160 fps. Speed sold rifles. Guys didn't have chronographs like we do today to check it themselves, make drop charts, etc. I do believe the published velocity specifications from those eras had some hot air in them with respect to what an average Joe would get with factory loads.

From the reloading side of things, I have found it difficult in general in a 22" bbl Model 70 to get the velocity loading manuals claim. I would concur with those guys on the other forum in that sense. On the other hand, most factory loads and load data is developed with a minimum spec chamber, longer barrel than many hunting rifles, different case brand, different primer brand, etc. Those parameters eke out the last fps.

 

[LaFever]

Thanks LaFever. Pardon the tangent away from the 7mm-08...

In a cartridge that was introduced almost 100 years (.270 Win) and in other "high intensity" bottle neck case cartridges not of the modern era, they were loaded to the gills by the factories and many times from a long test barrel and most sporting rifles had shorter barrels. A .277 130 gr bullet was advertised at 3160 fps. Speed sold rifles. Guys didn't have chronographs like we do today to check it themselves, make drop charts, etc. I do believe the published velocity specifications from those eras had some hot air in them with respect to what an average Joe would get with factory loads.

From the reloading side of things, I have found it difficult in general in a 22" bbl Model 70 to get the velocity loading manuals claim. I would concur with those guys on the other forum in that sense. On the other hand, most factory loads and load data is developed with a minimum spec chamber, longer barrel than many hunting rifles, different case brand, different primer brand, etc. Those parameters eke out the last fps.

35whelenai: yes not wanting to hi jack the thread
when smokeless powder was invented ," the old guys" were mesmerized by velocity . the .22 high power, .250 savage and .280 ross to name a few , I agree that those cartridges must have been loaded pretty hot . the .270 win. was often called too hot , how hot was too hot? Certainly factory ammo has been severely lawyer proofed in the last 20 years

 

[35WhelenAI]

Regardless of the cartridge, newer powders do allow more velocity within SAAMI pressure specs in most cases for the reloader. Ammo manufacturers use the same benefits to stay lawyer proofed yet keep velocity at advertised specs.

7mm-08 is a very capable elk round and plays well with about every species of hooved game we would encounter.

 

[Pharmseller]

Let’s be honest, the 7mm-08 is only appropriate for kids and wimmin.

Kids



Wimmin










P

 

[35WhelenAI]

Not that it hasn't been said before...

What the 7mm-08 does a 400, the 280 Remington can do at 500, and the 7 Mag will do it at 600.

These are approximate ranges however the point being it's a fool who would shoot something at 500 yards or 600 yards with the 280 Remington or 7 mm Magnum and wouldn't be willing to do the same thing at 400 yards with the 7mm-08.

 

[Pharmseller]

I’ve killed two bucks with 3 shots at 540+.

One was dead on his feet but still standing so he got a second.





P

 

[RSather528]

7mm-08 at 500 yards 150 grain eldx

 

[itsgobe]

Killed deer and elk with my Tikka 7mm08 using 150gr ELD-X. Love this rifle.

 

[jjohnsonElknewbie]

It's not ideal because with a more powerful round you have more margin of error in most variables, especially shot placement and longer distances.

These statements have been proven wrong ad nauseum firsthand by hunters on this site. Please take the time to read the following threads:

.223 - https://rokslide.com/forums/threads/223-for-bear-deer-elk-and-moose.130488/unread
.243/6mm - https://rokslide.com/forums/threads/6mm-243-hunting-success-on-big-game.284525/
6UM - https://rokslide.com/forums/threads/the-6um.290585/-
.25s - https://rokslide.com/forums/threads...-25-creed-25-284-25-06-25-prc-25-saum.288587/
6.5s - https://rokslide.com/forums/threads...eer-elk-and-whatever-else.244973/post-3248642-

- https://rokslide.com/forums/threads...st-caliber-and-cartridges.335973/post-3371479

If you can shoot your 300 mag well, then keep doing so. However, don't believe that it provides any additional margin for error.

 

[ssimo]

These statements have been proven wrong ad nauseum firsthand by hunters on this site. Please take the time to read the following threads:

.223 - https://rokslide.com/forums/threads/223-for-bear-deer-elk-and-moose.130488/unread
.243/6mm - https://rokslide.com/forums/threads/6mm-243-hunting-success-on-big-game.284525/
6UM - https://rokslide.com/forums/threads/the-6um.290585/-
.25s - https://rokslide.com/forums/threads...-25-creed-25-284-25-06-25-prc-25-saum.288587/
6.5s - https://rokslide.com/forums/threads...eer-elk-and-whatever-else.244973/post-3248642-

- https://rokslide.com/forums/threads...st-caliber-and-cartridges.335973/post-3371479

If you can shoot your 300 mag well, then keep doing so. However, don't believe that it provides any additional margin for error.

As i wrote right in this discussion, i don't hunt with anything bigger than a 308 win. That said, that statement can't be "proven wrong" unless you make a scientific trial, based on a great number of animals shot in controlled conditions. A thread here can't surely "prove wrong" anything my friend.
Secondly, the statement that, with a faster and heavier bullet you have more margin of error on shot placement is OBVIOUS. it doesn't need to be proved in any way. The only case in which a faster and heavier projectile can be less effective at producing tissue destruction is if it is so fast that the bullet doesn't perform how it was intended, this is user error though.
Maybe you are right and for centuries hunters didn't understand anything about terminal performances and, now that you did, evrrything will change. Guides will start forcing customers to use 6mm for moose in their hunting trips and i will hunt roes with a 22lr.
I agree that you shouldn’t use a round too powerful for your applications and i put this thought in practice every time i go hunting carrying my 308, but saying that, from a terminal performances point of view, a bigger, heavier, faster projectile doesn't give you more margin is one of the weirdest theories i have ever heard. Of course a huge caliber can't compensate for very bad shot placements or wrong bullet choice.

 

[Squincher]

As i wrote right in this discussion, i don't hunt with anything bigger than a 308 win. That said, that statement can't be "proven wrong" unless you make a scientific trial, based on a great number of animals shot in controlled conditions. A thread here can't surely "prove wrong" anything my friend.
Secondly, the statement that, with a faster and heavier bullet you have more margin of error on shot placement is OBVIOUS. it doesn't need to be proved in any way. The only case in which a faster and heavier projectile can be less effective at producing tissue destruction is if it is so fast that the bullet doesn't perform how it was intended, this is user error though.
Maybe you are right and for centuries hunters didn't understand anything about terminal performances and, now that you did, evrrything will change. Guides will start forcing customers to use 6mm for moose in their hunting trips and i will hunt roes with a 22lr.
I agree that you shouldn’t use a round too powerful for your applications and i put this thought in practice every time i go hunting carrying my 308, but saying that, from a terminal performances point of view, a bigger, heavier, faster projectile doesn't give you more margin is one of the weirdest theories i have ever heard. Of course a huge caliber can't compensate for very bad shot placements or wrong bullet choice.

You have to understand what you're dealing with. The crowd here is made up largely of people with an unwarranted amount of self esteem. No other point of view could possibly compete with whatever idea pops into their head and everything that was ever done before them was automatically wrong. I have to imagine it was like dealing with the boomers decades ago, since they are the same side of the same coin.

 

[Matt Cashell]

As i wrote right in this discussion, i don't hunt with anything bigger than a 308 win. That said, that statement can't be "proven wrong" unless you make a scientific trial, based on a great number of animals shot in controlled conditions. A thread here can't surely "prove wrong" anything my friend.
Secondly, the statement that, with a faster and heavier bullet you have more margin of error on shot placement is OBVIOUS. it doesn't need to be proved in any way.

I don’t have a dog in this fight, but I appreciate the work done in the linked threads … whether it is scientific or anecdotal.

But you certainly see the hypocrisy of the above quoted statement right? Demanding scientific proof for the position you oppose, but dismissing the need to scientifically prove the position you support.

 

[Marble]

I remember in one of the threads that discussed all of these comparisons of cartridges and caliber, there was a great study that discussed the topic in depth.

It discussed all the topics and after reading it, I had to conclude there is a totality of circumstances and conditions that either make projectiles more lethal or less. I guess my point is, there are a lot of different variables. And to say definitively one caliber/cartridge is not suitable, would be difficult to prove.

I have my own opinion of what to use for elk. But that is based on my method of hunting and the distances I am comfortable shooting and will most likely be shooting, along with the animals I have seen killed and wounded. But to be fair, none of the people I hunt with shoot cartridges that are very dissimilar to what shoot.

I've always enjoyed listening/reading other people's opinions about what cartridge they shoot and why. Agree or disagree, as long as they are successful, they can shoot whatever they want.

Sent from my SM-S918U using Tapatalk

 

[wyosam]

I remember in one of the threads that discussed all of these comparisons of cartridges and caliber, there was a great study that discussed the topic in depth.

It discussed all the topics and after reading it, I had to conclude there is a totality of circumstances and conditions that either make projectiles more lethal or less. I guess my point is, there are a lot of different variables. And to say definitively one caliber/cartridge is not suitable, would be difficult to prove.

I have my own opinion of what to use for elk. But that is based on my method of hunting and the distances I am comfortable shooting and will most likely be shooting, along with the animals I have seen killed and wounded. But to be fair, none of the people I hunt with shoot cartridges that are very dissimilar to what shoot.

I've always enjoyed listening/reading other people's opinions about what cartridge they shoot and why. Agree or disagree, as long as they are successful, they can shoot whatever they want.

Sent from my SM-S918U using Tapatalk

Good points. I never understand when a particular cartridge is ruled out, but a larger cartridge in the same caliber is the cats meow. Have a friend that thinks his 7 rem mag is a 1000 yard elk gun, but also is convinced the 7-08 is inadequate at any distance. Similar thought process is pretty common. I’m thinking about getting rid of my 280ai. Since I moved to AK, I don’t have a place anywhere nearby to practice frequently beyond 300 yards, and there isn’t much need for real long shooting anyway. My 7-08ai still has plenty of velocity to 450 (and another hundred until minimum velocity required for bullet function, I just like some cushion ). The 280 adds another couple hundred to that, but I don’t really need it.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk