Bullet proof elk

[BigNate]

Yet again a writer makes comments suggesting elk are bullet proof.

"On large game like elk, light, weak bullets can deflect off of bone so a heavy, strong projectile is important." Brad Fitzpatrick

While I actually agree with a lot of what he said, this statement does him no favors. His comments on energy prove only that he lacks some perspective on effectiveness, and makes less clear the effects of velocity combined with bullet choice.

He is right about careful choice of bullet.

Shouldn't choice of projectile be based on consideration of velocity, and wound channel characteristics?

 

[Clark33]

Shot placement would be number one in my book.

 

[FLATHEAD]

Use enough gun.

 

[zrodwyo]

I imagine a lot people reading stuff written by gun writers are not interested in hearing anything but that.

 

[a_noob_hunter]

I shot my elk with a 127 grain LRX at 580 yards. Shot placement is king. Id rather shoot a light bullet accurately that deal with a hard kicking rifle that i cant shoot as good.

Sent from my LM-G850 using Tapatalk

 

[MTHunter1321]

I shot my elk with a 127 grain LRX at 580 yards. Shot placement is king. Id rather shoot a light bullet accurately that deal with a hard kicking rifle that i cant shoot as good.

Sent from my LM-G850 using Tapatalk

Curious, what caliber? 6.5 RPM?

 

[One-shot]

Agree with others who said ”…shot placement is everything.” Even an elephant caliber can wound an animal and leave the hunter tracking a blood trail. Shot placement with any decent game rifle and round = meat in the freezer.

 

[Tobe_B]

The difference between a .338 Lapua and a .223 is .115 inches in diameter. If that tenth of inch made a difference in shot you hit it in the wrong spot. Bullet construction and penetration matter more than caliber. The entire .223 thread made that abundantly clear for anyone that reads it with an open mind.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[PathFinder]

Gun writer? In 2023? Is that just a nice way of saying "unemployed?"
I'm not sure gun writers were competent and experienced enough in any age for anyone to be listening to what they had to say. It took the internet age to reveal their lack of knowledge and give a platform to people with real world competence. Hard to imagine a more irrelevant group than "gun writers" in 2023.


Sent from my Pixel 6 using Tapatalk

 

[Marble]

The difference between a .338 Lapua and a .223 is .115 inches in diameter. If that tenth of inch made a difference in shot you hit it in the wrong spot. Bullet construction and penetration matter more than caliber. The entire .223 thread made that abundantly clear for anyone that reads it with an open mind.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

It is also 50% larger in diameter. Just another way to look at it.

Caliber performance was discussed in the article below. It's a pretty long read and the guy covers all aspects of terminal ballistics.

Some very interesting information concerning all the topics and claims that will be made as this thread goes on.

Effective Game Killing

Effective game killing- How bullets kill and where to aim to ensure a fast clean kill.

www.ballisticstudies.com

Sent from my SM-G986U using Tapatalk

 

[Elkangle]

I've never had bullets bounce but I've had them blow up, shot placement is king but unfortunately hunters are terrible shots...nothing about a typical hunting situation yields to excellent shooting from the average hunter...its just not that simple....poor decisions will be made....shoulders are gona get hit...hind hams are gona get hit on follow up shots...guts are going to get hit on windy days...heck the dang rifles aren't even sighted in proper alot of times ....having alittle insurance isn't the worst idea

Hope this helps

 

[Ryan Avery]

450 yards

646 yards

.300, .284, .264 or .243?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

 

[Rob5589]

We can rule out .284, since you don't .284. I'd guess .243. The new 6um specifically.

 

[a_noob_hunter]

Curious, what caliber? 6.5 RPM?

26 Nosler

Sent from my LM-G850 using Tapatalk

 

[a_noob_hunter]

450 yards

646 yards

.300, .284, .264 or .243?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

Naturally id guess a .300 but im more curious what brand bullet you used? Nosler Accubond? Ive seen Accubond leave fist sized exit wounds from 26 Nosler but then the lrx hardly leaves any exit signs. I could see a .264 or maybe a .243 with and expanding bullet leave that kind of a hole

Sent from my LM-G850 using Tapatalk

 

[Ryan Avery]

Naturally id guess a .300 but im more curious what brand bullet you used? Nosler Accubond? Ive seen Accubond leave fist sized exit wounds from 26 Nosler but then the lrx hardly leaves any exit signs. I could see a .264 or maybe a .243 with and expanding bullet leave that kind of a hole

Sent from my LM-G850 using Tapatalk

It’s from a 6UM with a 115 Dtac Noseringed

Would anyone say they want more damage?

Accubonds that I have shot past 500 yards with 300 Rums have narrow deep would channels like a mono. No thanks.

 

[Elkangle]

It’s from a 6UM with a 115 Dtac Noseringed

Would anyone say they want more damage?

Accubonds that I have shot past 500 yards with 300 Rums have narrow deep would channels like a mono. No thanks.

What velocity? Did you cut the nose ring yourself ?

 

[WCB]

No one aspect is the key to performance IMO. Accuracy is a given...energy is simply a result of mass and velocity. proper velocity for bullet function and bullet construction for what you are hunting is #1 IMO. (again with accuracy a given)

Also...gun writers are in general bottom of the barrel and have spewed the same old boring views for long enough...stick a fork in them already....let me guess the article right after this was "Why the 30-06 is the Best Do It All Cartridge" ,
"Jack O'Connor's () .270 Still Lives" "6.5 Creedmoor May Be King But It Wasn't The First" Then goes on for two pages about moose hunting in Europe.

 

[35WhelenAI]

Yet again a writer makes comments suggesting elk are bullet proof.

"On large game like elk, light, weak bullets can deflect off of bone so a heavy, strong projectile is important." Brad Fitzpatrick

While I actually agree with a lot of what he said, this statement does him no favors. His comments on energy prove only that he lacks some perspective on effectiveness, and makes less clear the effects of velocity combined with bullet choice.

He is right about careful choice of bullet.

Shouldn't choice of projectile be based on consideration of velocity, and wound channel characteristics?

Agree with you. You are right on the money with the wound channel and velocity for expansion.

With that said, I don't see anything with respect to energy in that quote. A well constructed bullet that can penetrate to the vitals from broadside to hard angles and do it reliably is top priority in my book.

To my mind, it is a given shot placement is by default the top priority. When discussing what bullet to use it goes to what shots a hunter can take advantage of based on ability for said projectile to reach the vitals and put them out of order.

 

[Dos XX]

Hard to imagine a more irrelevant group than "gun writers" in 2023.


Sent from my Pixel 6 using Tapatalk

Super Pig writers.