What is the max range of my elk hunting load?

[DirtyOldTrix3006]

Compare the velocity and energy for 1000 yards to that of a 357 magnum at 50 yards, then take into account the angle the bullet is hitting at 1000 yards making the amount of flesh available for the transfer of energy more damaging.
If the shooter makes a good shot with that .257, the bull elk is dead.

 

[500mag_guy]

Compare the velocity and energy for 1000 yards to that of a 357 magnum at 50 yards, then take into account the angle the bullet is hitting at 1000 yards making the amount of flesh available for the transfer of energy more damaging.
If the shooter makes a good shot with that .257, the bull elk is dead.

Highly unlikely with a 25-06 both hitting it at that distance and having enough knock down power for a dead bull elk.

 

[MHO]

800 yards. You get below a thousand FPE and your playing with a nightmare. People who any different have been lucky or havent taking a lot of elk. Very tough critters.

 

[Buano]

Compare the velocity and energy for 1000 yards to that of a 357 magnum at 50 yards, then take into account the angle the bullet is hitting at 1000 yards making the amount of flesh available for the transfer of energy more damaging.
If the shooter makes a good shot with that .257, the bull elk is dead.

A .357 at 50 yards is NOT elk medicine, at least not if you want to kill the elk quickly enough that you might recover an edible carcass. Same for a .25-06 at 1,000 yards. At 1,000 yards a .25-06 has enough energy to kill a coyote (if you can hit it well), but a coyote is NOT an elk!

 

[ff6602]

I also feel that's far under gunned, I'm not comfortable shooting beyond 500yrds at deer with my .270 win. However, till recently that's all I had for an elk gun as well.
Haven't had an oppertunity to harvest an elk yet, but set my max personal range at 350 yrds, possibly 400 with perfect conditions.
In your poll I voted 500yrds, but I feel that would have to be a perfectly placed shot with perfect conditions.
Only you can know your personal limitations and abilities, as well as the performance limitations of your equipment. With alot of practice and a well thought out smart decision you'll know what to do when a shot presents itself.gun)

 

[Jake Levi]

I definitly wouldnt use a ,357 mag at 50 yards ! I carry a 1911 .45 ACP as a bear gun , for up close and personal, I wouldnt carry anything less then my .45 and am considering a .44 mag for that, the jury is still out for me on that.

I wont use my 30-06 beyond 400 yards on an elk and would prefer more like 200 or under. The US Army has proven that the 30-06 can reach out and touch a man at a 1,000 yards, and more, I know it does it well at ~ 800 yards, but a man isnot an elk.

I would much rather pass up a shot then take one too long. If I was positive I could make a high neck shot at over 500 yards I would say fine, kill it or miss it, but why do it?

 

[ejones338]

I have always had an opinion that if I bought I should use it. I have killed big game animals with just about every caliber under the sun and I have witnessed some very strange things. I once shot a mule deer with a 7mag. and the bullet entered just behind the left front shoulder quartering away. The belly of the deer split open spilling intenstines and the bullet came to rest just under the hide near the front of the right rear quarter. I cannot explain it, but it happened and it does not mean that the 7 mag is inadequate for mule deer.

I have never had a deer run away wounded with .223, .44mag, .243, .270, 30-30, and the goes on. The only deer that I did not recover was shot with a 12 gauge slug, but I hear strong opinions against anything smaller than the .243. As for elk around here most people will say nothing smaller than the 7mag., but again I know of just as many people that the 25-06, .270, .260, etc.. I know an elk guide that has a personal opinion that he would rather guide a hunter using a 6mm and be comfortable shooting than to guide a hunter using a .338 and have a flinching problem.

I would have no problem using a 25-06 and setting my "MAX" range at around 400 yards. Meaning I would do my level best to get closer if I could. It is capable of further, but I always leave room for error. I also have the opinion that you cannot kill something too dead, so for me I would prefer to use a 300WSM using 180 grain bullets or something with even more energy/velocity, but that is just me.

 

[ejones338]

It is my opinion that too many people underestimate the smaller cartridges while at the same time overestimating the larger ones. There are just too many variables to consider. I know by experience that a 55 grain bullet from .223 will drop a deer as if struck by lightning at 100 yards and that a .454 casull at eighty yards is less effective, but it will get the job done. I also wouldn't carry a .45 ACP as a bear defense gun, because if I needed to use it that would mean my life is on the line and a .45 ACP only produces between 350 and 500 ft lbs at the muzzle, heck I would want more than that if I was defending myself against a deer attack. I used to carry a .454 casull as a bear gun, but an up close experience with a grizzly that was over six hundred pounds convinced me to start carrying a 12 guage when in grizzly country.

We all have had experiences that have molded our opinions and it is up to us to listen to others about theirs, because most likely somewhere in the middle of all of those opinions is the reality. I once saw a guy on one of the popular "gun" shows that was just ripping the "long range" hunters. It was his opinion that the .300 win had a MAX energy capability of 400 yards for deer, yes he said 400 yards. This guy is supposed to be a firearm pro and he was telling his viewers this rubbish. That is why we need to support and help the uninformed people that come to us for information without hammering them for what they think is right or for being completely off base with their ideas, because odds are they have been given poor advice in the past that formed those ideas.

 

[FUBAR]

I picked under 250 but agree that this would not be my choice of weapons for Elk....

However one of the most famous PH of all time, F.C. Selous used a now very famous 6.5x53R with 156 grain FMJ's to take elephants, cape buffalo and many other "dangerous" game animals.

No the only country in Africa that allows that today is Mozambique....

I seem to recall that Teddy Roosevelt did a few things with his 30-06 that were amazing.....

____________________________________________________

"cut the concubines head off" Sun Tzu

 

[Alan Griffith]

I chose 650 yds. Your 115 gr VLD is running at or above 2200 fps @ that range. The bullet will penetrate and will expand at that velocity.

For the record, an acquaintance of mine whom used to post here and was very well respected for his LR shooting/hunting emailed me the following a year or so back. His initials were GG and when it comes to this stuff, I'll accept his word as gospel.

"I have killed several spike elk with around 900 ft/lbs of energy. I have also taken the shoulder blades and hips of some of my cow elk and shot them at varying distances with different calibers. 800 ft/lbs broke them very easily. Of course, there was no hide on them and only a little meat.

I think I'd limit a big bull to 1000 ft/lbs, especially if he was in the rut. It would also boil down to where you hit them. I always shoot for the shoulder/spine area with the intent of smashing structure up. IF you believe in the heart/lung shot, much less energy is required. A friend of mine killed a bull on the Monroe last year with a 95 grain Berger VLD from a 243 improved at 850 yards. He hit it in the middle of the lungs and it blew them up like a bomb. Bull was chasing cows and filled up his lungs with blood very quickly and died within 50 yards.

Also, kinetic energy is only half the quation of terminal performance. You must also consider bullet construction. A Barnes x bullet and a Nosler Accubond could have identical kinetic energies but will have vastly different effects once inside the animal."

Just saying....

Alan

 

[meatyrem]

I chose 650 yds. Your 115 gr VLD is running at or above 2200 fps @ that range. The bullet will penetrate and will expand at that velocity.

For the record, an acquaintance of mine whom used to post here and was very well respected for his LR shooting/hunting emailed me the following a year or so back. His initials were GG and when it comes to this stuff, I'll accept his word as gospel.

"I have killed several spike elk with around 900 ft/lbs of energy. I have also taken the shoulder blades and hips of some of my cow elk and shot them at varying distances with different calibers. 800 ft/lbs broke them very easily. Of course, there was no hide on them and only a little meat.

I think I'd limit a big bull to 1000 ft/lbs, especially if he was in the rut. It would also boil down to where you hit them. I always shoot for the shoulder/spine area with the intent of smashing structure up. IF you believe in the heart/lung shot, much less energy is required. A friend of mine killed a bull on the Monroe last year with a 95 grain Berger VLD from a 243 improved at 850 yards. He hit it in the middle of the lungs and it blew them up like a bomb. Bull was chasing cows and filled up his lungs with blood very quickly and died within 50 yards.

Also, kinetic energy is only half the quation of terminal performance. You must also consider bullet construction. A Barnes x bullet and a Nosler Accubond could have identical kinetic energies but will have vastly different effects once inside the animal."

Just saying....

Alan

I happen to agree with you statement about the same energy from two different bullets are going to have different terminal effects. I don't really buy into all that "energy" talk that some talk about. I think it plays a minimal part to the equation. I think if a bullet is going fast enough to expand and do its job "tissue destruction" in the vitals, then energy has little effect.

 

[elkaholic]

I happen to agree with you statement about the same energy from two different bullets are going to have different terminal effects. I don't really buy into all that "energy" talk that some talk about. I think it plays a minimal part to the equation. I think if a bullet is going fast enough to expand and do its job "tissue destruction" in the vitals, then energy has little effect.

Agree!.......Rich

 

[FUBAR]

Terriminal bullet performance is something we should all be aware of....the maker can provide specific information on a particular bullets classification (how many fps it needs to be traveling to expand) then it really starts to get interesting....

A little research will provide guidelines for penetrating the different animals we are planning on shooting. And of course the EXP Factor for each type of bullet....

Everyone has an opinion on how "hard" it is to penetrate an elk vs a whitetail, but we all should know the minimum expansion velocity of the projectile we are shooting, as best we can.

It's an interesting subject, provides another level of challenge to round selection and/or our load work-up's & makes us more responsible hunters....One shot one kill.

 

[Buano]

Bullet "energy" matters!

I happen to agree with you statement about the same energy from two different bullets are going to have different terminal effects. I don't really buy into all that "energy" talk that some talk about. I think it plays a minimal part to the equation. I think if a bullet is going fast enough to expand and do its job "tissue destruction" in the vitals, then energy has little effect.

You obviously haven't studied a lot of wound channels. A 12-gauge slug will tear a hole through an animal that is slightly larger than the slug. That is penetration damage. Expect a similar wound channel from a .375 H&H magnum at 400-500 yards. A 7-mm Rem magnum with an expanding bullet fired into a deer's chest at close range will often leave an exit-wound 6-8" across. That exit wound does not mean the bullet expanded to the size of a cannonball. It means the hydrostatic shock caused by the energy of the projectile was enough to liquify tissue. Likewise, I have shot woodchucks in the head with a high-speed bullet & had the shockwave split open the belly & gut the animal. Once again, this does not mean the bullet deflected & cut open the belly, it means the shock was enough to blow out the critter's guts. That shockwave is purely a result of the energy of the projectile. Energy levels undoubtedly matter. If I shoot a deer in the chest with my .25-06 inside 150 yards, I expect the lungs to be liquified — purely a result of the rapid energy transfer.

What I have never seen is a formula that correlates energy of a projectile directly into "kill-power". There are simply too many variables. A .22-.250 has lots of energy due to its speed but little kill-power on large game because of the light bullets and limited penetration. Fragile bullets transfer energy faster than solids but don't penetrate as well. Obviously, energy is not everything, but dismissing "energy" is silly.