300 win mag at 1000 yards for elk

[huntforfood]

are the 200 gr ABs the regular or long range versions? reloads or factory ammo?

 

[Calvin45]

The 200s are regular accubonds.
there are 190 and 210 grain long range versions.
The general consensus I've been seeing on this forum is that the original accubond performs better at closer ranges and at longer ranges a truly frangible heavyweight is better (Berger, hornady eld).
That and the original accubonds and ballistic tips are the easiest bullets to tune a load around. Seating depth doesn't even seem to matter with them.

 

[Idaho Hunter1]

We have shot that exact bullet from a 300wm on elk out to 1000yds on several occasions with almost all making nice exit wounds. We always, always, always shoot lungs. Our specifics are about 3050-3100fps, altitude is 5k-8k. We have however gravitated to the 200gr AB because it gave better groups.

I know Berger's are a fan favorite but we have never needed to try them. I'm sure they are excellent but we were happy with the AB because we are just as likely to get a shot at 50 yds as we are outside 500yds. In fact, we have killed many more elk in the 50-200yd range.

Good luck with your choice and your hunt!

 

[vancewalker007]

Okay guys question.... I am pretty sure I'm over thinking this but I have been told my 300 win mag with a 180gr nos AB moving at 3128 FPS at the muzzle will kill an elk at 1000 yards I have shot this gun to 1000 yards before and am confident that I can make a shot like that if I wanted to not saying I will but it's kind of fun to think about I suppose but looking at the ballistic tables it shows maybe 600-800 yards is max for elk any body want to help me out on this

This is simple. You need a minimum velocity # to ensure the bullet will open and do its job, which is mushroom symmetrically and travel in a straight line. With most flat based copper and lead bullets this is usually 2000-1800 fps. Nosler likely has very solid data on this point. Make that distance your max and stick to it in the field. If it doesn't match your desire to shoot a 1000 yards then use a bullet that can. Then go out and shoot on field rests a lot to prove to yourself you can get the job done at your desired ranges. Shooting at a game animal at that distance is not and easy task with a lot of factors like wind and the ability to get a rock solid rest. Good luck I hope you find a combination that works.

 

[bigngreen]

AB is a far better bullet up close than a Berger, and will kill any elk that walks easily from muzzle out to 800, and you dont have to worry about them blowing up on shoulders inside 100 yards or trying to shoot one up the *** running away from you in the timber. Its ultimately up to you, still is no perfect bullet today. I keep a few partitions in my pocket when I know I'll be walking through the brush/timber where theres a chance of busting one out up close. Then I'll slide my ELDMs back in once I get to the open ridges and canyon country. Although most of my hunting is done in very open country with 300+ yard shots.

I switched to Berger's in part because of the up close performance of the AB on elk shoulders, we'd see a way higher percentage stop just breaking the shoulder and the reason is they open very big creating a huge amount of frontal area and they don't have the momentum to keep driving, when we tested bullets that would shed weight and none tipped we saw 100% penetration of elk shoulders into the vitals, they don't open as fast and when open and are in a shoulder shot situation they stay narrow in the front and maintain the momentum long enough to get through. That was from watching over 500 elk hit in two years where we could track what was being shot.

 

[remingtonman_25_06]

So you're telling me a berger that sheds 65-70% of its weight holds up better up close on elks shoulders, versus a bullet that actually 65-70% of its weight?! Not sure I can believe that, but your sample is a bit higher than ours. I'll still pick the 200g AB up close on elk over any target bullet that holds 35% of its weight. Weve had much better reliable terminal performance from the 200g AB than what any berger ever gave us.

 

[bigngreen]

So you're telling me a berger that sheds 65-70% of its weight holds up better up close on elks shoulders, versus a bullet that actually 65-70% of its weight?! Not sure I can believe that, but your sample is a bit higher than ours. I'll still pick the 200g AB up close on elk over any target bullet that holds 35% of its weight. Weve had much better reliable terminal performance from the 200g AB than what any berger ever gave us.

It's timing when it sheds, remember a Berger doesn't open up till the tip hydraulic opens which takes some amount of penetration, an AB starts opening immediately and is large in front before hitting the bone, the Berger does often shed more total weight but it's not in the first few inches so it's hitting that shoulder with most of the bullet if not all and it's a small frontal area with large mass which gets through at a higher percentage than a bullet with a huge front especially if they are lighter. Took a lot of elk to figure out what was doing this but it was an eye opener, many guys don't know how many elk they've lost because of just breaking a shoulder, it's thee most common wound when the elk migrate on to the pivots.

 

[Plinker147]

My experience with both AB's and Bergers has been the exact same as Bigngreen . We have seen many AB blow up at closer ranges when they hit hard bone. A 180 AB blew up out of a 30-378 ( it was smoke'in fast) so bad it almost blew the entire shoulder off of an Oryx. It did die from that. I had a 250 gr out of 338 RUM blow up at 300yds on the spine of a mule deer (shooting down angle between shoulder blades). I still like AB and still use in 1 gun (200gr 8MM) but they are just not the best bullet for 1K shooting and due have some flaws. Berger are better all around IMO. I have had good results with the LRABs and I would recommend those for the 1K over the traditional AB's

 

[orifdoc]

In WWII the navy did a study to find out why their planes were so vulnerable to enemy fire. They studied the patterns of the bullet hits on returning fighters and determined that the wings, body, and tail had an enormous number of holes. They set out to reinforce these areas until someone realized that the areas that really needed reinforcing were the areas where they rarely saw bullet holes - the engine & cockpit. Planes hit there weren't available for study.

I guess my point is that, scientifically, it's easy to draw incorrect conclusions from incomplete data sets. Pretty much everything said in this thread, so far, is anecdotal evidence. That's OK, and sometimes it's the best we can do, but there isn't much room to be so sure about what we think we're seeing. Probably the truest statement is that there isn't a bullet that is perfect for all situations. The whitetail hunter in heavy timber draws different conclusions than the elk hunter hunting high, open ridges.

 

[MZmoose]

We had good luck with several of the ABLR's this year on elk at 50 yds to 400yds. They worked well at those ranges, we broke a few shoulders and recovered some bullets. They're designed to open at longer ranges than the AB. There is no magic bullet or cartridge that can do it all at all ranges. That's where the hunting part comes in, get closer if you're not sure of your long range shot, or worried about your bullet performance.

 

[Mustang72]

Tag

 

[del2les]

So you have no idea if the bullets are opening. I will put money on not opening but tumbling which kills the heck out of things BUT you'd be just as good as shooting solids.

Not to derail the thread, but this reminded me of an old vet who swore by his 03A3 using the 173FMJ-BT match load. He killed the heck out of a lot of game with that rifle and load, and the internal damage was always impressive.

Now, back to the discussion.

 

[VLD Pilot]

No, your ballistics do not support that shot, your well, well below the opening threshold of the 180 Accubond. I will not let them drop below 2200 fps impact to maintain good performance. Accubonds are ballistic bricks, better than a partition but not going to set the barn on fire!!

2000 impact velocity is a good number. All rifle hunting bullets perform in that velocity impact range. Nosler recommends 1800 at the lowest velocity.

 

[Plinker147]

I guess my point is that, scientifically, it's easy to draw incorrect conclusions from incomplete data sets. Pretty much everything said in this thread, so far, is anecdotal evidence. That's OK, and sometimes it's the best we can do, but there isn't much room to be so sure about what we think we're seeing.

I switched to Berger's in part because of the up close performance of the AB on elk shoulders, we'd see a way higher percentage stop just breaking the shoulder and the reason is they open very big creating a huge amount of frontal area and they don't have the momentum to keep driving, when we tested bullets that would shed weight and none tipped we saw 100% penetration of elk shoulders into the vitals, they don't open as fast and when open and are in a shoulder shot situation they stay narrow in the front and maintain the momentum long enough to get through. That was from watching over 500 elk hit in two years where we could track what was being shot.

If 500 elk isn't a conclusive sample size, I don't know what is. You can chose not to listen.

I think we make too big of deal about bullet selection anyways (most good bullets work) but the the evidence is there if you want to select the best bullet for the job