Elk Rifle Setups...School me

[AaronMColeman]

Also, every time ballistics come up the 1500 ft/lb or 1600 ft/lb numbers come up. Where did those come from and why are we all stuck on these numbers? Will a bullet that expands at 1600fps not still expand and kill at 1200 ft/lb? Is it gonna get stuck in the fur? Is it going to not exit on the other side and make for a longer kill? I just think we throw around numbers but we don't know what they mean or where they came from (maybe someone here does, I'm here to be schooled too).

Again, all mostly a moot point since good hunting skills and good shooting skills should go hand in hand in long range hunting. I'll shoot further if I have to...I've never had to shoot an elk past 250y. I think most of us are like this.

 

[Olympics777]

Also, every time ballistics come up the 1500 ft/lb or 1600 ft/lb numbers come up. Where did those come from and why are we all stuck on these numbers? Will a bullet that expands at 1600fps not still expand and kill at 1200 ft/lb? Is it gonna get stuck in the fur? Is it going to not exit on the other side and make for a longer kill? I just think we throw around numbers but we don't know what they mean or where they came from (maybe someone here does, I'm here to be schooled too).

Again, all mostly a moot point since good hunting skills and good shooting skills should go hand in hand in long range hunting. I'll shoot further if I have to...I've never had to shoot an elk past 250y. I think most of us are like this.

I always assumed people throw around 1600 ft pounds because here in Idaho a caliber has to have that much energy minimum at the muzzle to use it to hunt elk. But I’m not certain

 

[Sobrbiker]

I’m just over here wondering where I can get a 357 that runs 1800ft/lbs...

Thanks for sharing OP, glad you found your bull. I’d recommend that your rifle/load is fine, but that in choosing a 600yd shot on elk do so where you have a stable position to manage recoil and a clear enough target zone to allow for follow up shots. As you’ve found, elk are tough and everyone I know regardless of caliber will keep putting rounds in until they are on the ground.

 

[wapitibob]

I think one lung is the problem, not ballistics.

 

[Outdoorsman12b]

This thread is amazing. It would have been better if you shot it with a 6.5 CM though…

To the OP congrats on your first bull and locating your animal under challenging circumstances. When you located did he require a finishing shot? Just curious if he did expire from that single lung.

If I understand your question correctly you are seeking information on how to better setup for elk shooting scenarios. If this is correct there are a few real solid hunters that have lots of videos/articles/podcasts out like Randy Newberg, Paul Medel, and Cory Jacobsen. Learn what you can and get out in the woods to apply.

I’m no elk God but manage to keep the freezer full every year by catching them feed to bed or vice versa. Still working on the calling thing.

 

[fmyth]

Always appreciate a good factual discussion! My point is simply that, as many others have alluded to, terminal ballistics are much less impressive than most people think at distances past 600 yards even if you assume a perfect shot. That's probably why the OP had an involved tracking job.

For a little ballistic perspective, people would laugh if anyone suggested hunting elk with the little 16" Winchester '94 Trapper carbine in .357 mag I'll be using for deer with this weekend... but it's moving faster than the tables you show above at 600 with a similar weight bullet.

Are you are saying your .357 is shooting over 2,079 fps?

 

[CoStick]

Just make a better shot. If it has to be at shorter yardage so be it. It is okay to pass up a shot.

 

[Ralphie]

Glad you stuck with it and that luck was on your side. Elk are tough but well Hit elk do not travel for a couple miles. They die pretty quick. I think you do need a caliber and bullet that is reasonable but you still have to hit them right.

 

[OXN939]

Are you are saying your .357 is shooting over 2,079 fps?

Yes I am:


My comparison was in reference to the second chart shown, which is presumably the .30-06 that gentleman mentions. But either way, the point is the same... a .300 WM at 600 yards is close to being in the ballistic ballpark of a pistol caliber carbine that some would say is too light for deer.

 

[fmyth]

Yes I am:

View attachment 341549
My comparison was in reference to the second chart shown, which is presumably the .30-06 that gentleman mentions. But either way, the point is the same... a .300 WM at 600 yards is close to being in the ballistic ballpark of a pistol caliber carbine that some would say is too light for deer.

You are comparing your .357s muzzle velocity with the OP's 300WM velocity at 600 yards. At 8k feet in elevation the OP's .300wm is still going 2,000+ fps at 600 yards and delivering over 1,700 ft lbs of energy. Here's the published ballistics data for rifle chambered in .357 Mag w factory 180g hunting ammo: 1550fps and 960 lbs of energy at the muzzle.

 

[fmyth]

Always appreciate a good factual discussion! My point is simply that, as many others have alluded to, terminal ballistics are much less impressive than most people think at distances past 600 yards even if you assume a perfect shot. That's probably why the OP had an involved tracking job.

For a little ballistic perspective, people would laugh if anyone suggested hunting elk with the little 16" Winchester '94 Trapper carbine in .357 mag I'll be using for deer with this weekend... but it's moving faster than the tables you show above at 600 with a similar weight bullet.

The .357 Mag isn't legal to use for elk in CO as it does not meet their minimum of 1,000 ft lbs of energy at 100 yards.






To legally hunt elk with a rifle in Colorado, you must use a rifle that fires expanding bullets with a minimum caliber of . 24 cal. or 6mm, a minimum weight of 85 grains that delivers at least 1,000 ft. lbs. of energy at 100 yards. https://cpw.state.co.us/learn/Pages/EHU-CH2-L09.aspx

 

[Jrodanapolis]

Awesome work OP! I'm just now getting into hunting and wish I had more experience. I have a "starter" mountain rifle setup, but no experience and have a lot to learn. CO native, and lots of experience hiking for 12+ hrs a day, but no experience hunting/tracking.
Thank you all for the knowledge - great thread.

 

[OXN939]

You are comparing your .357s muzzle velocity with the OP's 300WM velocity at 600 yards.

That is not correct. If you look at post #19, you will see that what I compared was the 600 yard velocity shown on ericwh's dope chart (1853) to the velocity of my .357 mag. A stout load with 2400 will get 158 grain pills to or above 1900 FPS in many .357 rifles.

Speaking of factory ammo, here's the data for a factory .300 WM load:



By 600 yards, it's moving ~1750 FPS with about 1150 foot pounds of energy. That's less than the 1267 foot pounds of energy produced by a 158 grain round from the .357 I mention going 1900 FPS.

I'll reiterate my original point. By 600 yards, .300 WM is not that impressive from the perspective of terminal ballistics- so much so, in fact, that there is overlap between its effectiveness and that of .357 mag carbine.

 

[Ross]

Good work sticking with it and finding your bull Hunting is hunting things happen, you plan, you learn, you adapt, you do your best, you refine things as the decades go by, learning what worked and what did not……all country is not equal and you take the first good shot you can within yours and the equipments abilities….elk are super tough and will humble us all at some time if we hunt them long enough…..good luck on the future hunts

 

[Ucsdryder]

Good work sticking with it and finding your bull Hunting is hunting things happen, you plan, you learn, you adapt, you do your best, you refine things as the decades go by, learning what worked and what did not……all country is not equal and you take the first good shot you can within yours and the equipments abilities….elk are super tough and will humble us all at some time if we hunt them long enough…..good luck on the future hunts

Very well said.

 

[fmyth]

That is not correct. If you look at post #19, you will see that what I compared was the 600 yard velocity shown on ericwh's dope chart (1853) to the velocity of my .357 mag. A stout load with 2400 will get 158 grain pills to or above 1900 FPS in many .357 rifles.

Speaking of factory ammo, here's the data for a factory .300 WM load:

View attachment 341632

By 600 yards, it's moving ~1750 FPS with about 1150 foot pounds of energy. That's less than the 1267 foot pounds of energy produced by a 158 grain round from the .357 I mention going 1900 FPS.

I'll reiterate my original point. By 600 yards, .300 WM is not that impressive from the perspective of terminal ballistics- so much so, in fact, that there is overlap between its effectiveness and that of .357 mag carbine.

According to the ballistics data I can find for your 158G .357 mag the estimated muzzle velocity with factory ammo is 1740 and energy is 1050. At the muzzle! You are comparing your claimed .357 Mag MUZZLE velocity and energy to the .300WM at 600 yards. You are also posting ballistics data from a 180G .300WM Core Lokt bullet which was designed and introduced in the 1930's. I don't know any sane hunter launching Core Lokts at elk 600 yards away. Why don't you compare your .357 Mag ballistics to any .300 WM ballistics at the same distance? It's not even close at the muzzle. There is no comparison at all with any load at any distance. You can load your .357 Mag with magic dust and depleted uranium bullets and it will still never compare to a .300 WM measured at the same distance. .357 Mag and .300 WM should never been mentioned in the same sentence.

 

[WRO]

This was my 2nd time tagging along for an elk hunt. Both were with rifle, 1st time was OTC for 2nd season and this year was limited 1st season. How do you setup for elk during 1st rifle season? I know weather/snow play a big part of the game, but what are your preferred setups?

We tried to find high spots to glass grassy open areas in the mornings/evenings and then glass the north sloped timber during the day. We either seen elk or heard elk every day scouting a few days prior to season opener. On opening day, we had a spike run through our lane, but was pretty quiet afterwards. About 11a across the ridge I glassed up a few bulls bedded in the north slope. It was about 650yards to the other side. We made our way down but could only cut off about 50 yards before we got into the thick stuff on our side of the ridge and had to shoot up, through it. My buddy and I practiced this summer/fall shooting long range, so we felt comfortable with the shot of 600 yards. Shot was perfect and I watch through the binos as elk take off after the shot. We walk back up the ridge, collect out things, eat some lunch and talk about what just happened and how we could have done it differently. We then make a gameplan on how to get to where the elk were and head that way. Sure enough, there were multiple elk bedded and the shot was good, as we have blood. We tracked for a good while, but he kept going and going. So after a couple hours we decide to back out and come back the next morning, and surely we would find him dead after the long cold night. We get back to our last known location and sure enough, we find blood and tracks, but no elk. WTF. So we make a game plan and track the elk through the snow. We tracked for another couple of miles up and down, over and under blowdowns and along the ridges. We finally caught up to him and luckily for us, was right off a trail now! Ended up only being a 3/4 miles pack out. Man these things are tough animals, to travel so far after a well placed shot! Much respect. BTW, this is our first elk.

What bullet?

I'm guessing that's the issue. Hard bullets like partitions, accubonds, and Barnes suck at any real distance and do very little damage.

A berger, eldm, amax etc will perform much better at long range and work just fine at short range.


Sent from my SM-G991U using Tapatalk

 

[WRO]

Here you go...there's a 356 bull bedded in the shade of the hill in the center of this photo:

Here's zoomed in with the camera I was carrying that day, he's 440 yards away.

I was carrying my 7 RM that day and 440 is within my shooting range, but if you notice in the first picture, there's a ridge in front of that bull, meaning I could get closer.

Rather than blast away at 440, which I'm sure I could have made that shot, I chose to get to the ridge in front of the bull.

The worst thing can happen if you try to get close is you blow the stalk, the bull could move, or something along those lines. The bull may get away, it may suck to work hard and not capitalize. Worse thing about shooting 4-5-6-7-1k hundred yards is you wound a bull that you never recover. Sucks for the hunter, and sucks even worse for the elk that has to die a slow death hours, days, or weeks later.

As it turns out I stalked that bull to about 50 yards, he sensed I was there and got up from his bed and started to move off. I took a knee and killed him with a single bullet at 55-60 yards...I like my odds wayyyyyyyy better at 55-60 yards than 440. Didn't have to worry about tracking a bull all over the place, didn't have to think about doping wind, didn't have to worry about spinning a turret, only had to worry about getting him back to the truck. I could have killed that bull with my 6mm, 243, 338, 7 RM, 7-08, 30-06, 300 win, 25/06...hell even my 22-250 just as easily, rifle set up meant nothing.

Lots of calibers, really most ANY caliber is fine when you're shooting sane distances. As range increases variables creep in, don't care how much you shoot or how much you think you "know" about your rifle, wind, etc...just a fact. I've shot 2 elk at what I consider long range, and they both worked just fine but I don't like to do it. Not that I don't know HOW to make it happen, just not my bag. Judging by the amount of shooting I hear each year, I'd suspect there's a lot more that shouldn't be shooting LR at elk.

Knowing when, and more importantly when NOT to shoot, at any range, is what makes the difference between packing dead elk and chasing wounded elk. I'd rather pack dead elk.

Rifle set-ups DO NOT make up for poor decision making or poor performance at long range...period.

I've seen more dumb stuff happen with off hand shots sub 250 than a well set up extended range shot.

Sent from my SM-G991U using Tapatalk

 

[BuzzH]

I've seen more dumb stuff happen with off hand shots sub 250 than a well set up extended range shot.

Sent from my SM-G991U using Tapatalk

Right, that's why I knelt and shot off my knee...if only obviously. I haven't shot but maybe 25 out of the 350ish big game animals I've killed offhand. The ones I have were just about all less than 100 yards.

 

[OXN939]

At the muzzle!

It's not even close at the muzzle. There is no comparison at all with any load at any distance.

You can load your .357 Mag with magic dust and depleted uranium bullets and it will still never compare

357 Mag and .300 WM should never been mentioned in the same sentence.

I've noticed it always gets really emotional when someone brings up how ballistic performance degrades at distance. Just to be clear, this isn't a personal attack on anyone- simply a comparison backed up by numbers that are factual and not anyone's opinion. If it makes you uncomfortable, perhaps consider why that is. This is just for the benefit of the readers of this site- OP mentions he made a perfect shot but had to leave an animal overnight and then perform a difficult track job... maybe someone reads this, does an assessment of what's really going on ballistically past 500 yards, and decides to come to a more conservative MER. Or not. That's what this forum is for. Best of luck with the rest of your hunting season.