Elk Caliber with Particular Rifle Considerations

[Q_Sertorius]

Ahhhh there it is! I have found the new way! Y'all are bunch of reactionary Fudds stuck in the past!

Bunch of magnumitis small ego dudes that think you need a cannon and bruised shoulders!

Nice elk pictured btw. Never seen one that small in hunting season. Get a calf? I thought the whole benefit of shooting .22s were they were magically more accurate? Why the poor shot placement?

Honestly, will shooting an elk, breaking its shoulder and dooming it to a slow death change your mind?

It’s not an elk. And the shot placement was right through both lungs. And it’s not a .224 caliber. But *you* couldn’t tell any of that from a picture of a dead animal.

 

[BuckSmasher]

It’s not an elk. And the shot placement was right through both lungs. And it’s not a .224 caliber. But *you* couldn’t tell any of that from a picture of a dead animal.

I can show you youtube videos that demonstrate a 77 tmk cannot penetrate a elk hide, two inches of ballistic gel, and a steer elbow. Doest that help? Or since a steer is much bigger than an elk it is invalid. Honest question?

Also, I have shot, as I have stated ad nauseam. Dozens and dozens of critters with a 223, mostly pigs and one deer. I often, with a 62 ttsx would not get an exit wound on a smallish 100 ish pound pigs from broadside shots if I hit both shoulders. Why would you shoot an elk from an oblique angle with a more frangible bullet, at longer range when it weighs 6-8 times as much?

Or you just don't believe I ever lived in Texas, never shot any pigs with an ar-15 and just want to argue?

 

[glock233]

I can show you youtube videos that demonstrate a 77 tmk cannot penetrate a elk hide, two inches of ballistic gel, and a steer elbow. Doest that help? Or since a steer is much bigger than an elk it is invalid. Honest question?

Also, I have shot, as I have stated ad nauseam. Dozens and dozens of critters with a 223, mostly pigs and one deer. I often, with a 62 ttsx would not get an exit wound on a smallish 100 ish pound pigs from broadside shots if I hit both shoulders. Why would you shoot an elk from an oblique angle with a more frangible bullet, at longer range when it weighs 6-8 times as much?

Or you just don't believe I ever lived in Texas, never shot any pigs with an ar-15 and just want to argue?

That BS video. Yes a steer knuckle at point blank range is not a valid comparison to anything we’re hunting. Elk shoulders are not nearly as strong.

You need to just read the 223 thread and see the damage.

 

[BuckSmasher]

That BS video. Yes a steer knuckle at point blank range is not a valid comparison to anything we’re hunting. Elk shoulders are not nearly as strong.

You need to just read the 223 thread and see the damage.

Granted true. But you always gonna wait for a broadside shot? If I show you a pic of a 100 pound pig, from that thread, that didn't have an exit wound will you believe that?

 

[BuckSmasher]

Page 665 of said thread.

Says he was using a 77 AAC is that more frangible than a TMK?

 

[Q_Sertorius]

I can show you youtube videos that demonstrate a 77 tmk cannot penetrate a elk hide, two inches of ballistic gel, and a steer elbow. Doest that help? Or since a steer is much bigger than an elk it is invalid. Honest question?

Also, I have shot, as I have stated ad nauseam. Dozens and dozens of critters with a 223, mostly pigs and one deer. I often, with a 62 ttsx would not get an exit wound on a smallish 100 ish pound pigs from broadside shots if I hit both shoulders. Why would you shoot an elk from an oblique angle with a more frangible bullet, at longer range when it weighs 6-8 times as much?

Or you just don't believe I never lived in Texas, never shot any pigs with an ar-15 and just want to argue?

I definitely believe you lived in Texas.

I’ve also shot completely through both shoulders on a cow with a Mini-14. Now, they were 55-grain FMJs, not modern TMKs. And through femurs, backbones, skulls, you name it. The bones shattered. The bullets kept going. My brother and I were testing the movie theory that a dead body, or a dead horse, could be good cover. Our target subject was an otherwise healthy cow that ate stagger weed and died. Unfortunately, the tool we had to test the theory was far more effective than the typical 19th-century technology. Not every bullet went right through. But enough did that I wouldn’t take cover behind a person, cow, horse, or elk and expect it to go well for me. And the full stomach did better at stopping the bullets than the shoulders did.

People mythologize these animals to make killing them more of an accomplishment than it really is, but for most animals, the accomplishment is in locating and closing with them, not in the destruction phase. Modern rifles are just that good.

I don’t care about exit wounds. I care about dead and recovered animals. If the animal is too far away for the chosen weapon, then we have to get closer. If the angle is bad, we have to pick a better angle. If the recovery will be too difficult, whether because of terrain or available light, we have to consider that. Letting the animal walk, unharmed, is always an option.

My usual jurisdiction doesn’t allow .224 caliber for deer. It’s been that way since the 1960s. So, I haven’t ever shot a game animal with a .224 bullet. But, I have yet to encounter a situation where I couldn’t have killed the animal just as dead with a .223 as whatever cartridge I was using. And every time I have used a muzzleloader, I have laughed at the idea that a .223 is unethical or inhumane.

Most modern center fire cartridges with good bullets are powerful enough to do the job further out than most people should be shooting. And using more powerful cartridges - in my experience - leads to more rodeos because they cause users to overestimate their own and their rifle’s ability. People expect the larger caliber to compensate for their shortcomings. A gut shot animal is gut shot whether you hit it with a .300 WM or a 6.5 CM or a .223. And an animal with a 2” hole through its lungs is as dead as one with a 2.5” hole through its lungs.

 

[BuckSmasher]

I definitely believe you lived in Texas.

I’ve also shot completely through both shoulders on a cow with a Mini-14. Now, they were 55-grain FMJs, not modern TMKs. And through femurs, backbones, skulls, you name it. The bones shattered. The bullets kept going. My brother and I were testing the movie theory that a dead body, or a dead horse, could be good cover. Our target subject was an otherwise healthy cow that ate stagger weed and died. Unfortunately, the tool we had to test the theory was far more effective than the typical 19th-century technology. Not every bullet went right through. But enough did that I wouldn’t take cover behind a person, cow, horse, or elk and expect it to go well for me. And the full stomach did better at stopping the bullets than the shoulders did.

People mythologize these animals to make killing them more of an accomplishment than it really is, but for most animals, the accomplishment is in locating and closing with them, not in the destruction phase. Modern rifles are just that good.

I don’t care about exit wounds. I care about dead and recovered animals. If the animal is too far away for the chosen weapon, then we have to get closer. If the angle is bad, we have to pick a better angle. If the recovery will be too difficult, whether because of terrain or available light, we have to consider that. Letting the animal walk, unharmed, is always an option.

My usual jurisdiction doesn’t allow .224 caliber for deer. It’s been that way since the 1960s. So, I haven’t ever shot a game animal with a .224 bullet. But, I have yet to encounter a situation where I couldn’t have killed the animal just as dead with a .223 as whatever cartridge I was using. And every time I have used a muzzleloader, I have laughed at the idea that a .223 is unethical or inhumane.

Most modern center fire cartridges with good bullets are powerful enough to do the job further out than most people should be shooting. And using more powerful cartridges - in my experience - leads to more rodeos because they cause users to overestimate their own and their rifle’s ability. People expect the larger caliber to compensate for their shortcomings. A gut shot animal is gut shot whether you hit it with a .300 WM or a 6.5 CM or a .223. And an animal with a 2” hole through its lungs is as dead as one with a 2.5” hole through its lungs.

I am constantly repeating myself but shot placement is the most important aspect of shooting at big game animals. Everyone should agree on that. That doesn't mean it is the only!

Regardless of whether you care about exit wounds not getting one on a 100 pound pig pretty much proves a given bullet can not make it to the vitals of an elk.

 

[BuckSmasher]

Should anyone shoot this combo at an elk?

 

[Ozarkansas]

I am constantly repeating myself but shot placement is the most important aspect of shooting at big game animals. Everyone should agree on that. That doesn't mean it is the only!

Regardless of whether you care about exit wounds not getting one on a 100 pound pig pretty much proves a given bullet can not make it to the vitals of an elk.

What? That’s not the case at all, The hide is tougher than meat, elastic l, and tends to trap expanded bullets under the offside. A bullet that only penetrates through 8” of small pig might still penetrate through 12” of large pig and 16” of elk, and end up under the offside hide of all three.

Think back to how many bullets you’ve recovered under the offside hide vs how many you’ve recovered inside the body cavity. Personally, I’ve only recovered pneumonia bullet that wasn’t under the hide and that one was under the far side shoulder on a quartering away shot

 

[Q_Sertorius]

I am constantly repeating myself but shot placement is the most important aspect of shooting at big game animals. Everyone should agree on that. That doesn't mean it is the only!

Regardless of whether you care about exit wounds not getting one on a 100 pound pig pretty much proves a given bullet can not make it to the vitals of an elk.

Is the elk using the pig as a shield in this scenario?

Lots of bullets get caught in the offside hide (it stretches without breaking). I’ve recovered .30 caliber partitions from the offside hide of a whitetail. Does that mean they wouldn’t have killed an elk?

 

[BuckSmasher]

Is the elk using the pig as a shield in this scenario?

Lots of bullets get caught in the offside hide (it stretches without breaking). I’ve recovered .30 caliber partitions from the offside hide of a whitetail. Does that mean they wouldn’t have killed an elk?

No. A mature bull is 8 times bigger roughly.

Not going through a 6 inch wide pig doesn't give you concern that it will not make it to the vitals on all but the closest and most broadside shots on an elk?

 

[43.6N]

@BuckSmasher @DLSJR
You guys shoot whatever you want, but don’t imply anybody who doesn’t agree with your choice is unethical.

@EdMN22 OP, sorry your well intentioned question post got taken way off the rails. I hope you tune back in and update us with what you chose to get

 

[BuckSmasher]

@BuckSmasher @DLSJR
You guys shoot whatever you want, but don’t imply anybody who doesn’t agree with your choice is unethical.

Unless, of course, it is right?

 

[Ozarkansas]

No. A mature bull is 8 times bigger roughly.

Not going through a 6 inch wide pig doesn't give you concern that it will not make it to the vitals on all but the closest and most broadside shots on an elk?

8 times heavier doesn’t mean 8 times thicker, unless you’re shooting 48” thick elk. How thick is a big bull elk at the vitals?

And you’re still disregarding the offside hide aspect of catching bullets. Have you EVER had a bullet reach the vitals but fail to make it to the far side ribcage, on any animal? I have not. I’d also bet that the majority of the bullets you do recover are under the far side hide, as has been my experience.

 

[Q_Sertorius]

No. A mature bull is 8 times bigger roughly.

Why does being 8x bigger matter?

It doesn’t matter how big the animal is in pounds on the hoof. All that matters is how much you have to penetrate to get into and through the vitals. And I have yet to see an elk thick enough that 16-18” of penetration wouldn’t do that. Anything wider than that sounds like a real BOAL.

 

[BuckSmasher]

8 times heavier doesn’t mean 8 times thicker, unless you’re shooting 48” thick elk. How thick is a big bull elk at the vitals?

And you’re still disregarding the offside hide aspect of catching bullets. Have you EVER had a bullet reach the vitals but fail to make it to the far side ribcage, on any animal? I have not. I’d also bet that the majority of the bullets you do recover are under the far side hide, as has been my experience.

You wanna go hunting elk and only take close range, fully broadside shots?

Yes/No

 

[BuckSmasher]

Why does being 8x bigger matter?

It doesn’t matter how big the animal is in pounds on the hoof. All that matters is how much you have to penetrate to get into and through the vitals. And I have yet to see an elk thick enough that 16-18” of penetration wouldn’t do that. Anything wider than that sounds like a real BOAL.

So you realize that the picture of the pig, on the thread you take as gospel is less than 16" wide right?

 

[Ozarkansas]

You wanna go hunting elk and only take close range, fully broadside shots?

Yes/No

No- although that is how I bowhunt, are you saying that bows are unethical because they limit your shots to only close-range, broadside opportunities?

Regardless, your premise- that if something doesn’t exit on a 6” pig it won’t get to vitals on an elk- is flawed.

For me personally I want something that consistently gets through the vitals-even through the shoulder- and I prefer an exit. I’m not a .223 fanboy, I’d use my 6.5x55 if I drew a rifle hunt.

But there are clearly .223 bullets that can reliably get to the vitals from any reasonable angle and do enough damage to kill humanely, and are therefore ethical.

 

[Q_Sertorius]

You wanna go hunting elk and only take close range, fully broadside shots?

Yes/No

Define close range? For me, from a bullet performance perspective, there’s only a maximum range (how far out does it go below 1800 FPS).

From a shooting perspective, today, my maximum range is 300 yards. After that, it’s a matter of further practice, particularly in wind, before I can say I would take a longer shot on a game animal. I have more confidence in my bullet’s ability to perform than I do in my ability to put it where it belongs. But that’s why we practice… in a couple of months, it will be further than that.

As long as I only have to penetrate 16-18” inches of animal to get through the vitals, it’s game on as long as the bullet will be going 1800 FPS and it’s at a range where I know I can put every shot into the vitals. Broadside is ideal, of course, but quartering angles can be acceptable under the right circumstances.

 

[Q_Sertorius]

So you realize that the picture of the pig, on the thread you take as gospel is less than 16" wide right?

There’s only one set of gospel and it ain’t on RokSlide.