Elk .243 or 25-06

[Zappaman]

If youre using the holdover method at 600 yards you’d be 22” low at 600 yards with a 500 yard zero. That requires you to be about 10” high at 100 yards. So are you dialing or not? Says up above need to dial more often.

Way back then (1978 or so), I wasn't dailing my 1960 made Nikor scope Scopes didn't "dail" back then.

 

[sndmn11]

But I also know I need enough gun (and energy at range) to to the job. The 223 can do it at shorter range (without doubt- I read the 223 post and all those shots killed well- NOT arguing that). But not out to the range MANY (including myself) shoot elk.

I never said anything about lobbing bullets or taking any certain cartridge out hunting. You have said a few times that enough energy is needed and you know you need enough of it.

I am asking how energy relates to killing, and how much is needed? I am not arguing one bit. I am asking a simple one sentence question based on your expertise and experience so that I, as well as others without those two E's, can learn from you.

 

[Tmac]

I have seen numerous elk taken with these. I already limit my shots to 300 yards and home some neck/shoulder issues. Thinking about retiring my .270/muzzle brake and carry a 25-06 or .243. Anyone else have experience with these rounds?

They will both kill elk. I’ve used my 25-06 on several cows, 115-120 grain bullets at broadside elk. Have not used a 243, but know an outfitter that keeps one as a loaner for his cow hunts, one shot in the lungs and down they go, 100 gr cup and core bullets. To me my 25-06 recoils about the same as my 270’s. Good luck!

 

[Zappaman]

And... as a kid I witnessed Pappy Yoste kill a deer at 1100 yards (while with my dad) off the hood of his truck with a 7mm WM (no dailing). THAT man grew up on (and never left) the ranch he knew his ranges at... he taught my dad how to load in the 60s.

 

[260madman]

And... as a kid I witnessed Pappy Yoste kill a deer at 1100 yards (while with my dad) off the hood of his truck with a 7mm WM (no dailing). THAT man grew up on (and never left) the ranch he knew his ranges at... he taught my dad how to load in the 60s.

Time to sober up. Put down the bong and bottle and lay by your dish.

Trollin trollin trollin

 

[sndmn11]

But I also know I need enough gun (and energy at range) to to the job.

One of these has a lot more energy than the other. Does that translate into a better wound channel to make things die better?

Muzzle Velocity (fps)	1235
Muzzle Energy (ft lbs)	535

Muzzle Velocity (fps)	1050
Muzzle Energy (ft lbs)	98

 

[Zappaman]

I never said anything about lobbing bullets or taking any certain cartridge out hunting. You have said a few times that enough energy is needed and you know you need enough of it.

I am asking how energy relates to killing, and how much is needed? I am not arguing one bit. I am asking a simple one sentence question based on your expertise and experience so that I, as well as others without those two E's, can learn from you.

But I AM saying you ARE lobbing a 223 at that range. I KNOW THAT IS hard to hit target doing it that way (again... for the average hunter, but with a "dailer" AND experience- I'm agreeing it can be done).

You and I both know the "energy" suggested by bullet makers, etc. But I'm more about FLAT shooting rounds that I ALSO know are easier to hit with-- the farther out you go due to the "flight" path of the bullet AND it's energy to both get there AND kill. At any given range, a larger bullet holds more energy over-all (please don't start a BC argument here)-- we all know this. And so I GET WHY the 223 guys ARE using 77g bullets to do what they do. Yes, better ballistics than the 55g!!!

To sum it up... shoot whatever you want (I keep saying this). If it has the terminal "energy" to kill, AND you can get it there, AND you can hit a target... way out there-- that's your choice. - not mine. And from my own experience in the field with MANY very average shooters I'd suggest nothing short of a 243 for elk... and if over 500, I'd step it up again. Thank you.

 

[Zappaman]

Time to sober up. Put down the bong and bottle and lay by your dish.

Trollin trollin trollin

That's quite rude of you...

 

[sndmn11]

But I AM saying you ARE lobbing a 223 at that range. I KNOW THAT IS hard to hit target doing it that way (again... for the average hunter, but with a "dailer" AND experience- I'm agreeing it can be done).

You and I both know the "energy" suggested by bullet makers, etc. But I'm more about FLAT shooting rounds that I ALSO know are easier to hit with-- the farther out you go due to the "flight" path of the bullet AND it's energy to both get there AND kill. At any given range, a larger bullet holds more energy over-all (please don't start a BC argument here)-- we all know this. And so I GET WHY the 223 guys ARE using 77g bullets to do what they do. Yes, better ballistics than the 55g!!!

To sum it up... shoot whatever you want (I keep saying this). If it has the terminal "energy" to kill, AND you can get it there, AND you can hit a target... way out there-- that's your choice. - not mine. And from my own experience in the field with MANY very average shooters I'd suggest nothing short of a 243 for elk... and if over 500, I'd step it up again. Thank you.

Once again, a lot of the word energy. How does energy kill, and how much is needed?

 

[Zappaman]

View attachment 373111

View attachment 373112

One of these has a lot more energy than the other. Does that translate into a better wound channel to make things die better?

Muzzle Velocity (fps)	1235
Muzzle Energy (ft lbs)	535

Muzzle Velocity (fps)	1050
Muzzle Energy (ft lbs)	98

I know your VERY concerned with energy here, I already read the 223 post. And if you can get your 223 to elk range where some of us do, hit the target, and kill it... name your energy and caliber

 

[sndmn11]

I know your VERY concerned with energy here, I already read the 223 post. And if you can get your 223 to elk range where some of us do, hit the target, and kill it... name your energy and caliber

I am asking how energy numbers on paper kill? How much energy is needed? That is all, are you able to help me with my questions?

 

[Zappaman]

I originally posted to a father here with lots of kids and a 223. I put forth my opinion that I would HOLD a young, new shooter to a shorter limit if he did that without the extra expense of time and a "better" scope to LEARN how to make the longer shot the 223 guys have done- without question. I explained that the further out the shot, the harder for the (basic) 223 to make a good, longer shot--again...given a basic set-up.

I didn't suggest a 300 win mag. and I furthermore explained myself in many posts as to my thinking. This is my opinion, I'm not "trolling" and I have not been rude with my opinions-- while I ALSO agreed with much of the 223 post results.

I shoot a 40g in one of my coyote/sage rat rigs in my 223. I shoot a 69g in my 22-250ai. The 69g makes it further out, bucks wind better-- just like the 223 posts correctly says. I do know I don't need a lot of energy to kill a prairie dog way out there- but I wouldn't shoot an elk with it that far.

If most here pulled THE tag and went out on an expensive bull hunt, IT IS MY experienced OPINION... that they would not choose a 223 for that hunt for the reasons I'm giving here. You are certainly welcome to disagree with me. But no... I will not argue about energy (or give more advice than the experts in the industry already has).

 

[KurtR]

Wow this got good over night. Sheep ranching range finding busting deer at 1100 .

I would also like to know how energy equates to wound channels

 

[jjohnsonElknewbie]

@jjohnsonElknewbie that was a question for you.

I agree that the goal is a fast death of the animal, I don't understand why it matters what device caused that. In this case, the bullet. The commonality between big bore and small bore kills are that an adequate bullet at an adequate velocity destroyed something vital to that animal's life. Why have angst over hunters doing that in a way different than yours and/or telling them they are wrong, rather than ignoring it or telling them good job?

I have no problem with various methods of take at all. I've stated my disagreement on the advocacy for a single load out of the .223 that is capable of killing big game at extended ranges. One load, published by a guy that shoots 1,000x number of rounds as the average hunter. @Formidilosus is an expert in this field and has taken the time to hone his load and skill with specific equipment. On the bell curve of shooting, he is so far to the right as to be an outlier.

In comparison, and as an example only, there are probably a dozen or more factory .308 (non-magnum, non-big bore) loads from various manufacturers that are designed specifically for elk and big game. Hell, the entire .30-06 family of cartridges are capable of killing deer and big game. So, if my mission is to advocate a big game hunting load, I'm going to go with well known calibers that are easily available that have earned their reputation.

 

[jjohnsonElknewbie]

Ruger uses the accutrigger?

Their version….

 

[sndmn11]

So, if my mission is to advocate a big game hunting load, I'm going to go with well known calibers that are easily available that have earned their reputation.

Ok, HOW does caliber translate to killing? Are you able to help me understand how energy translates to killing also?

I tend to think there is nothing magical about the experience of those you tagged allowing them to use certain cartridges other than a firm grasp on how things are killed.

 

[jjohnsonElknewbie]

You have had little experience with rifles but argue with guys with decades. With all that internet research you did should have found just to buy a tikka.

I said shooting high powers for deer is a recent treat for us in Iowa. I never said I don't have experience with rifles. For your information I'm soon to be 47 years old and I've been hunting small game, upland birds, and deer for most of my waking and walking life.

The first high power I bought was a Ruger M77 in .243 back in the 90's. Nice little gun and shot pretty good. Sold that one and bought a Savage 110 in .25-06 in 2000. This was a phenomenal rifle and the one that I still regret selling years ago. It was and still is the most accurate rifle I ever owned, easily shooting clover leafs at 100 yards. I shot more than a dozen coyotes at various ranges out to 400 with that gun, and again, I wish I'd kept it. Since then I've owned a .44 mag CVA scout that met Iowa's straight wall requirements for whitetails. As you know i have a .308 in the gun case as well as a .35 Whelen which is a new addition due to changes in Iowa's game laws. I also own a couple .223s in various configurations and several .22lr including a Marlin lever action, 10/22, Crickett, etc... A host of handguns in various calibers have also lived at my place over the years, and a half dozen shotguns get shot and cleaned every year. Add to that the .30-06, 7mm-08, .22-250, and 7.62x39 rifles my father and brothers let me borrow/shoot, I'd say that I'm familiar with rifles and in general a well rounded shooter. Maybe not as familiar as you @KurtR, but familiar nonetheless.

Regarding my elk rifle, I didn't want a Tikka. Different strokes for different folks.

 

[Indian Summer]

I cannot fathom, outfitter or not, anyone recommending to another hunter that cannot shoot a small caliber well… to make up for the deficiency by bringing a larger one. Mind blown

Who said that? Nobody!

With all that said, how far can a person miss the vitals by, but still kill? Does that distance the vitals are missed but still gets a pat on the back get bigger as the powder charge increases?

So, genuinely, how much further can I miss vitals with a 300win vs 243win and still kill that elk?

No… powder is just a factor. It’s creates more energy. You stand 20 feet from me and let me throw a ping pong ball at you. Ok now a baseball. I bet the results are different. Now back up. I’ll have to aim higher with the ping pong ball because it doesn’t retain the energy that the heavier ball does. It runs out of gas. If it hits you you might not even feel it. I shoot at a 1000 yard range. The guys with the 6.5 CMs can outshoot me all day on paper. But down at the end of the range they literally pick their bullets up off the dirt.

And this scenario is about killing on the first shot. It’s about getting a follow up shot when the first one didn’t hit vitals. To answer the question which some people can’t seem to do, if you hit a bull in the hind with a .233 you will not find it. If I hit one there with my unnecessary overkill .300 RUM I’ll be getting another shot. He might drop right there although not dead for me to finish the job. Fact!

So asking how far can a person miss by and still kill is an incomplete question. The answer is simply further which means more margin for error. That heavier bullet will keep on going and smash through leg bones, pelvis, whatever and maybe even exit but it’s not that bullet that will do the killing. It’s the next bullet that the first one gave me enough time to use.

The fans of light guns seem to think there’s no reason to use anything heavier. But although I shoot a big mag I an by no means recommending it. I don’t recall anyone else steering new hunters in that direction either. For every elk killed with a light gun or big one there are 1000 killed with something in between. I’m suggesting looking into those ones.

 

[Indian Summer]

I had a friend kill a small bull with a .22. True story. Thought I’d give you pea shooter guys something to use on the next best gun thread. Placement is everything! 5 shots in the eye and down he went.

If you have to ask what energy has to do with killing we cannot go have a beer together!

This reminds me of the threads back in the early 80s when we all had overdraws on our bows and were shooting short skinny arrows because “placement is everything”. They were awesome at the range! But it didn’t take long for hunters to remove those things and go back to real hunting setups. We realized that killing animals is better done with spears than darts!

 

[KurtR]

Who said that? Nobody!

No… powder is just a factor. It’s creates more energy. You stand 20 feet from me and let me throw a ping pong ball at you. Ok now a baseball. I bet the results are different. Now back up. I’ll have to aim higher with the ping pong ball because it doesn’t retain the energy that the heavier ball does. It runs out of gas. If it hits you you might not even feel it. I shoot at a 1000 yard range. The guys with the 6.5 CMs can outshoot me all day on paper. But down at the end of the range they literally pick their bullets up off the dirt.

And this scenario is about killing on the first shot. It’s about getting a follow up shot when the first one didn’t hit vitals. To answer the question which some people can’t seem to do, if you hit a bull in the hind with a .233 you will not find it. If I hit one there with my unnecessary overkill .300 RUM I’ll be getting another shot. He might drop right there although not dead for me to finish the job. Fact!

So asking how far can a person miss by and still kill is an incomplete question. The answer is simply further which means more margin for error. That heavier bullet will keep on going and smash through leg bones, pelvis, whatever and maybe even exit but it’s not that bullet that will do the killing. It’s the next bullet that the first one gave me enough time to use.

The fans of light guns seem to think there’s no reason to use anything heavier. But although I shoot a big mag I an by no means recommending it. I don’t recall anyone else steering new hunters in that direction either. For every elk killed with a light gun or big one there are 1000 killed with something in between. I’m suggesting looking into those ones.

If follow up shots are what we are talking about proper recoil management is going to become more paramount. I have little faith in some one shooting one in the ass and then composing them self enough to all of a sudden hit the vitals with the pressure on.