Help me select my first Elk/Moose/Bear rifle.

[ORfish]

Or a .375 H&H/.270. Then you have 2 gun battery for anywhere on Earth including Africa

 

[handwerk]

Tell us more about your .270, wood stocked or Synthetic? What scope do you have on it? Weight?

 

[raferalston]

Funny you mention Jack O'Conner. My .270 is a Jack O'Conner Tribute.

 

[Jimbob]

I carry a 30-06 or .308 and spend all my time in grizzly country. My brother spent the last 25 yrs hunting moose with a .270 and just moved to a .308 (6 or 7 moose killed). My Dad has used a .303, .308, and a 30-06 to kill 51 moose.

The only reason I would choose a larger calibre is if I wanted to shot long range. If you want to kill elk at 500+ yds then I think you need a stronger caliber.

 

[KHntr]

Thanks for the info. The caliber selection is indeed maddening. If you had to pick one caliber that was theoretically designed with more "killing power" than the .270 what would it be? I plan on really only having three rifles. .17 HMR, .270 and x.

My understanding of "killing power" is:
Energy (in foot pounds) x Sectional Density x cross-sectional Area = Killing Power Score

That said, I am new to all of this so any advice is welcomed.

You are looking at this incorrectly. (And right off the bat sectional density means less than nothing in this day and age with the differences in modern bullet construction. It had possibly some meaning when all bullets were constructed the same, but not any more. It is however a pretty popular buzz term with people who want to sound like they have some knowledge on the subject.)

Bullets matter more than headstamps. That is quite possibly the most important aspect of killing that you could ever read on the internet. Bullets are the ONLY interaction that you have with an animal that will be directly responsible for success or failure.

Your 270 is more than adequate for killing elk, especially if you stuff it with a good bullet.

Moose are easier to kill than elk, they are just bigger is all. A moose more often when shot will jump a few steps and stop to think about what is going on, and give you ample opportunity to poke another hole in him.
An elk is more likely to try and put some ground between whatever hurt it and where it is standing. That can be problematic if you didn't put the first one in the right place. A lightweight 300win mag can be more than an inexperienced shooter will learn to shoot properly.

How much do you shoot? How well do you shoot your 270? From the bench under controlled circumstances or in the field shooting rocks from improvised rests at varying distances? How much are you willing to spend on ammo to learn how to shoot, and how often? If you are realistically going to go out and shoot a new 300wm 3 or 4 times in a year and plan on shooting it at least 20 or 30 rounds in an afternoon off the bench, you will NOT be shooting it at the level you should be if you are thinking that the "more power" will make a difference on animals.

Learn your 270 until it is second nature to get snuggled in behind it and send bullets where they need to go, every time. Spend the new rifle money on a 223 (preferably a fast twist 223, but at the very least one that is similar to your 270) and go wander around shooting stuff (safely of course, minding your back stop, etc) and run a couple thousand rounds through it before next September.

And most importantly, every time you squeeze the trigger on that 223, think about where the bullet landed. Analyze why it landed where it did. Spent primers are the only way to get better at shooting, but if you aren't thinking about why the bullets land where they do, then you aren't learning anything.

 

[brsnow]

Unusual, but if that is your choice- more power to you..

Personally I would use a Barnes copper like a TSX.

Last elk I shot was with my .257 Weatherby, so I would argue shot placement is more important than energy. Of course, I limited the shot to 200 yards and broadside. Would not have taken a more marginal shot with my .257.

Barnes .270 129 LRX has over 1500ibs at 500 yards. I am more concerned with velocity, but I can’t see how 1500lbs at 500yards is not enough

 

[raferalston]

This is interesting. Thank you for all that replied. With all that has been said about my .270 being adequate for Elk and Moose. I have to ask...if that is the case, why are larger calibers so popular? Based on what I'm hearing the .270 will do everything short of stopping a Brown Bear in one shot.

 

[brsnow]

This is interesting. Thank you for all that replied. With all that has been said about my .270 being adequate for Elk and Moose. I have to ask...if that is the case, why are larger calibers so popular? Based on what I'm hearing the .270 will do everything short of stopping a Brown Bear in one shot.

Same reason trucks get lifts and big tires but never leave the pavement. Their cool.

 

[Elkhntr08]

Beware the man with one rifle, he probably knows how to use it.
IMO, being able to hit them well is more important than what you hit’m with.

 

[raferalston]

I think I'm more confused than before I started this thread lol.

 

[Trr15]

I’d definitely give the .338 win mag a look as a dedicated elk/bear/moose rifle. Ideal caliber for the purpose IMO.

 

[KHntr]

This is interesting. Thank you for all that replied. With all that has been said about my .270 being adequate for Elk and Moose. I have to ask...if that is the case, why are larger calibers so popular? Based on what I'm hearing the .270 will do everything short of stopping a Brown Bear in one shot.

Because bigger must be better, isn't it.....?

1) gun nuts like variety.
2) old myths die slowly
3) lots of people can't wrap their minds around bullets being more important than case capacity
4) lots of people don't get a lot of opportunity to kill stuff with lots of different cartridges and bullets, so they try and offset that with what they think they know because thats what their wifes cousins uncle used on his once in a lifetime moose hunt and his 2 point moose absorbed 19 "well placed" rounds from his 338 Ultra Mag and kept going....
5) not everyone who looks at something will draw the same conclusion as to what happened.

 

[CApighunter]

Youre 270 is just fine. Pick a well constructed bullet and you’ll be fine. Practice as much as you can. I wouldn’t put too much stock in kinetic energy alone, my 22 creed retains 1500 foot lbs at 650 yards but I’d never shoot an elk with it at any distance.

 

[762 ULTRAMAGA]

This is interesting. Thank you for all that replied. With all that has been said about my .270 being adequate for Elk and Moose. I have to ask...if that is the case, why are larger calibers so popular? Based on what I'm hearing the .270 will do everything short of stopping a Brown Bear in one shot.

A 270 is definitely adequate with the right bullet and inside 500 yards.
For long range elk I like a 7mm to about 700 yards, beyond that the heavy 30's are the way to go.
I've killed 3 bulls with my 6.5 saum, and my wife has killed two more.
I use 140 partitions and sent one through both shoulders of a bull at 200 yards, it actually broke the offside leg bone.
I'd shoot partitions or Barnes LRX bullets and you'll be set.
If you just really want a magnum I'd go for a Tikka 7mm RM or a 300 wsm.

 

[EmperorMA]

"A commonly accepted threshold for the minimum amount of kinetic energy needed to kill an elk is 1500 ft-lbs. For whitetail deer, the minimum amount of kinetic energy is 1000 ft-lbs"- Colorado Parks & Wildlife.

If making marginal shots with a .270, I would want to keep ranges short and use a mono-metal bullet that won't fragment.

Soooooo, if you WANT a new gun, use the Colorado argument of the .270 being underpowered. Go get that .300WM (or 7RM, or 300WSM, or whatever). If you DON'T WANT to get a new gun, dont. Just limit your shots and use a quality bullet.

Energy numbers are useless. They shouldn't be included in any discussion. Anyone who does shows their inexperience and lack of knowledge.

There is not bullet made that has enough energy to "knock down" and elk. It is 100% about placement, bullet construction and impact velocity.

There is no way in hell that a bad shot with a .300 Win Mag is more effective than the same bad shot with a .270.

 

[raferalston]

I'm new and all but it seems like getting shot in the leg or shoulder or stomach or whatever with a .300 Win Mag would do a lot more damage than the same shot with a .270. That said, I have zero experence...which is one of the reasons this thread is so entertaining and informative/confusing.

 

[handwerk]

I would continue enjoying that Model 70 .270 as is and add a synthetic stocked .270 or 30'06 of your choice. It would be a nice, lighter, all weather rifle, cheap to shoot and won't kick you into next week....and will kill elk just fine.

 

[brsnow]

I'm new and all but it seems like getting shot in the leg or shoulder or stomach or whatever with a .300 Win Mag would do a lot more damage than the same shot with a .270. That said, I have zero experence...which is one of the reasons this thread is so entertaining and informative/confusing.

If you make a bad shot on an elk, regardless of .300 or .277 it likely won’t turn out well. If you are new , practice with your rifle and take shots you are comfortable with.

 

[raferalston]

I understand that. Just referring to the posts in this thread that say there would be no difference between the two when it comes to shots that aren't in the bread basket. Again, maybe this is true...I just find it confusing.

 

[Silentstalker]

I will toss in my 2 cents for whatever they are worth!

If you want a new rifle, get one! Nothing wrong with that plan at all!

If you would rather use that money for better boots or gear, use your tried and true 270 that you already know inside and out.

I started out my elk career with a factory rifle in 7mm mag. I needed a magnum! I killed a few elk with it. But I never enjoyed shooting that rifle.

I sold it and bought a 270 Win. I worked up a load for it using 150 gr. Nosler Partitions. It is a pleasure to shoot and carry. In a pinch I can find comparable ammo almost anywhere! Components are relatively cheap and easy to find (except election year lol.)

I have killed multiple elk with it including mature bulls. My last mature bull was killed just shy of 600 yards. He was standing still and broadside. That Partition passed completely thru him and he tipped over stone dead within 30 yards.

My load carries well over 1200 ft lbs of energy to 600 yards. I shoot a lot and have complete confidence in my rifle. I pass all shots that are not broadside and stationary. I shoot for the heart/lungs and avoid heavy bone.

Elk are not tough to kill if you hit them in the vitals. If you don’t, it matters not what cartridge you’re shooting. You’re in for a very long tracking job and likely lost elk.

Good luck in your choice and on your hunt!