Elk .243 or 25-06

[KurtR]

Go watch the Eastman’s video with 30 elk kills. A lot of non reaction to larger caliber bullets than 6mm and .257. Take note of poor shot placement and shitty follow up shots, animals lost in recoil, poor bolt manipulation... I was having kittens watching it.

watching most hunters drive a rifle will make you want to peel your eye balls out with a rusty spoon. I always love the jerk your head off the stock as fast as you can to see if you hit it technique.

 

[Indian Summer]

Back a couple decades ago when I watched hunting shows Christensen Arms had a show and they missed and wounded all the time. I gave them credit for airing it but it sure didn’t sell me one of their rifles. I don’t think the caliber or bullet had anything to do with it and the same goes for Eastmans.

 

[Woodrow F Call]

Back a couple decades ago when I watched hunting shows Christensen Arms had a show and they missed and wounded all the time. I gave them credit for airing it but it sure didn’t sell me one of their rifles. I don’t think the caliber or bullet had anything to do with it and the same goes for Eastmans.

I see some of the modern shows miss and appreciate the fact that they show it, but after learning from Formidilosus I kinda figure a big part of the problem is that scopes don't hold zero.

As far as this thread is concerned, Form also showed that using the right bullet, .223 will make a 2" hole and go through elk bone. If that won't kill the critter, what will?

 

[Formidilosus]

Back a couple decades ago when I watched hunting shows Christensen Arms had a show and they missed and wounded all the time. I gave them credit for airing it but it sure didn’t sell me one of their rifles. I don’t think the caliber or bullet had anything to do with it and the same goes for Eastmans.

So when it’s magnums that miss and wound, it has nothing to do caliber or bullet? But if it’s smaller rounds that miss or wound it does…?

 

[Indian Summer]

So when it’s magnums that miss and wound, it has nothing to do caliber or bullet? But if it’s smaller rounds that miss or wound it does…?

You guys! Lol Any gun can miss the mark far enough to not get the job done at all. Obviously. I’m sure they were most likely not shooting smaller calibers. The Eastman’s are some fairly successful & knowledgeable hunters. Very experienced elk hunters. So yes they probably were using heavier calibers.

 

[Formidilosus]

You guys! Lol Any gun can miss the mark far enough to not get the job done at all. Obviously. I’m sure they were most likely not shooting smaller calibers. The Eastman’s are some fairly successful & knowledgeable hunters. Very experienced elk hunters. So yes they probably were using heavier calibers.

You didn’t answer the question. If one is not about caliber or wounding, then neither is the other. You don’t get it both ways.

 

[MTWop]

All of these arguments against using larger calibers assumes the shooter can’t shoot them as well as lighter calibers. I have a break on my .338, but not the .270. I can’t tell the difference in recoil between the two, and I wear ear plugs regardless of whether I’m hunting with a break. Just because an elk can be killed with a 22 rimfire doesn’t mean it’s a good idea. Every shooter has a different recoil tolerance. For me, I recognized that and have a break on my .338. The 270 is a also a fine choice and has killed several bulls just as dead, the shot distance and placement limitations just need to be taken into account

 

[260madman]

i want to know what chambering can fling a 200gr Accubond at 3600fps as was claimed 2 pages back. Nothing gets away from it, nothing.

 

[Formidilosus]

All of these arguments against using larger calibers assumes the shooter can’t shoot them as well as lighter calibers.

Because it is a fact. Every single person shoots better with less recoil than more given all other constraints are equal. Every single shooter shoots a rifle with less muzzle
Blast better than one with more even when both have the same recoil.

 

[35WhelenAI]

So when it’s magnums that miss and wound, it has nothing to do caliber or bullet? But if it’s smaller rounds that miss or wound it does…?

I don't see that's what he said. He is saying the shooters had much to do with it.

 

[Formidilosus]

I don't see that's what he said. He is saying the shooters had much to do with it.

He has said that when smaller calibers have created non instantaneous kills it was the result of smaller calibers. But now that he’s referencing a group that misses and wounds quite a bit using larger rounds- it’s not the round being too small?

 

[35WhelenAI]

Because it is a fact. Every single person shoots better with less recoil than more given all other constraints are equal. Every single shooter shoots a rifle with less muzzle
Blast better than one with more even when both have the same recoil.

I agree with that in technical terms. In practicality, at what point is a smaller group with a .243/25-06 with a 1/3" group at 100 yards gonna make a damn bit of difference in the field (where the OP has said he's going to limit himself to 300 yards) than a heavier caliber and bullet that shoots 1/2" groups at 100 yards. I've got 200 gr of TTSX from 35 Whelen AI that shoots 1.75 inch groups at 300 yards. And 1/2' groups at 100 yards. All. Day. Long. Gun weighs 8 lbs. 3 oz. all up and no muzzle brake, heaven forbid, lol. A shooter would have to close their eyes and yank the trigger on the larger caliber round for it to be anything of significance. Count me in for the larger caliber any day of the week.

 

[Formidilosus]

I agree with that in technical terms. In practicality, at what point is a smaller group with a .243/25-06 with a 1/3" group at 100 yards gonna make a damn bit of difference in the field (where the OP has said he's going to limit himself to 300 yards) than a heavier caliber and bullet that shoots 1/2" groups at 100 yards. I've got 200 gr of TTSX from 35 Whelen AI that shoots 1.75 inch groups at 300 yards. And 1/2' groups at 100 yards. All. Day. Long. Gun weighs 8 lbs. 3 oz. all up and no muzzle brake, heaven forbid, lol. A shooter would have to close their eyes and yank the trigger on the larger caliber round for it to be anything of significance.

Except that the reality is in field shooting off of a pack (see equipment or skill thread), the hit rate on the two moa dot is low anyways, and the hit rates for magnums is abysmal. It isn’t the difference between between 1/3rd moa. It the difference between a 2 moa shooter and 4-5 moa shooter.


Will you please shoot this drill Hunting rifle drill with your 35 Whelen AI, cold no warm up exactly as it is laid out and post the target and results? No one on the board has shot it with the large of a rifle.

 

[Stu]

I prefer 9mm over .40/.45 cal.









Faster splits and better accuracy during timed and structured shooting stages. The gun doesn’t shoot faster or more accurately. I do.

 

[MTWop]

You didn’t answer the question. If one is not about caliber or wounding, then neither is the other. You don’t get it both ways.

Because it is a fact. Every single person shoots better with less recoil than more given all other constraints are equal. Every single shooter shoots a rifle with less muzzle
Blast better than one with more even when both have the same recoil.

It’s still a balance and physics matter (on both ends). You need enough energy to ethically put down the animal and this includes having enough energy with an inadvertent shot though the shoulders like I said earlier. You also don’t want to sacrifice accuracy because you’re afraid to shoot a larger caliber. I agree a bull gut shot with a 243 or 338 is a bad deal regardless of caliber, but I want something that will reliably penetrate through the front shoulders because this has happened to me more than a couple times

 

[Formidilosus]

It’s still a balance and physics matter (on both ends). You need enough energy to ethically put down the animal and this includes having enough energy with an inadvertent shot though the shoulders like I said earlier. You also don’t want to sacrifice accuracy because you’re afraid to shoot a larger caliber. I agree a bull gut shot with a 243 or 338 is a bad deal regardless of caliber, but I want something that will reliably penetrate through the front shoulders because this has happened to me more than a couple times

Tell me exactly how much “energy” it takes to get through the “shoulders”?

 

[sndmn11]

It’s still a balance and physics matter (on both ends). You need enough energy to ethically put down the animal and this includes having enough energy with an inadvertent shot though the shoulders like I said earlier. You also don’t want to sacrifice accuracy because you’re afraid to shoot a larger caliber. I agree a bull gut shot with a 243 or 338 is a bad deal regardless of caliber, but I want something that will reliably penetrate through the front shoulders because this has happened to me more than a couple times

This rambling about energy is where elk and other animals grow their mythical armor. A bad shot with a mag and the conclusion is that elk are amazingly tough. A bad shot with a "kid's" cartridge and it's not enough gun.

Put either in the vitals and things die. Heck a relatively miniscule amount of "energy" is in a broadhead tipped arrow, and those kill. Folks used lesser weapons for ages to kill things.

 

[MTWop]

Tell me exactly how much “energy” it takes to get through the “shoulders”?

More than a what any 243 bullet packs at 300 yards. Nobody is arguing that a 243 can’t kill elk. Of course it can (and does every year). I’ve also taken bulls with 450 grain arrows. There are plenty of people on this site that have killed more animals than I have. However, I’ve taken well over a hundred game animals including antelope, deer, elk, moose, and mountain goat. My experience tells me a 243 is the not the gun to place a shoulder shot on an elk (intentional or not). Period. I think you’re just arguing for the sake of arguing at this point. We both know there are compromises

 

[jfs82]

More than a what any 243 bullet packs at 300 yards. Nobody is arguing that a 243 can’t kill elk. Of course it can (and does every year). I’ve also taken bulls with 450 grain arrows. There are plenty of people on this site that have killed more animals than I have. However, I’ve taken well over a hundred game animals including antelope, deer, elk, moose, and mountain goat. My experience tells me a 243 is the not the gun to place a shoulder shot on an elk (intentional or not). Period. I think you’re just arguing for the sake of arguing at this point. We both know there are compromises

Are you really saying that a mono out of a 243 or 6mm cm at 300 yards (2400-2500 fps) won't get through an elk shoulder??? because saying "more than what any 243 bullet packs at 300 yds" is asinine. Are we really talking about energy still regarding animals that gore each other to death whipping their heads around at each other? Are these the creatures that are too tough for metal at supersonic speed to kill?

 

[Formidilosus]

More than a what any 243 bullet packs at 300 yards. Nobody is arguing that a 243 can’t kill elk. Of course it can (and does every year). I’ve also taken bulls with 450 grain arrows. There are plenty of people on this site that have killed more animals than I have. However, I’ve taken well over a hundred game animals including antelope, deer, elk, moose, and mountain goat. My experience tells me a 243 is the not the gun to place a shoulder shot on an elk (intentional or not). Period. I think you’re just arguing for the sake of arguing at this point. We both know there are compromises

No. I am stating facts. There’s a picture in this thread of a “243” totally separating an elks shoulder at 708 ft-lbs of energy.

Please show me all the “shoulder shots from 6mm’s that didn’t make it through on those well over a hundred game animals. Please state what bullet each was used and the impact energy. I am legitimately curious about all the stated shoulders that stop bullets.