168gr NBT vs Elk

[HeathSexton]

Guys a feller I know is going out west next year in hopes of an elk and he has chosen the 168 NBT for elk from a 300WSM. I tried to talk him into a AccuBond or a Partition but he has been assured that the Combined Technology BT is plenty strong enough for elk. I know there are a few elk hunters here plus the Nolser guys, what is your take on the 168 NBT for elk? I think he is looking for some more feedback from people that have actually hunted them because the guys who talked him into the NBT have never elk hunted and I have never elk hunted.



Thanks!

 

[FOTIS]

If he is set on using it tell him to pick and choose his placement carefully. I mean the thing ain't gonna bounce off but placement will be the key.

 

[JD338]

Elk are tough and getting the perfect broadside shot may not happen.
For those reasons, I would go with a 180 gr AB or PT .
Yes, the 165 gr will work, but the 180 gr will work better. :wink:

JD338

 

[HeathSexton]

The guy says he is recoil sensitive, so sensitive a 180 anything is unbearable while a 168 is tolerable. The whle may not be broadside at 200yds with a bullseye painted on it was my whole reason for suggesting a 180 AB or PT.

 

[JD338]

I'm with ya.
The fact is, in the field come show time, your friend will never notice the recoil.
Maybe he should consider a Past Magnum recoil shootiing pad for his range time.

JD338

 

[YoteSmoker]

+1 on 180 AccuBond or Partition. Most definitely better designed for big boned animals than a ballistic tip for both penetrating and expanding. The ballistic tip might work, might not. Why take a chance, all things considered? Each year, I hunt deer and elk in the same season and although I prefer a ballistic tip on deer I go with either an AccuBond or Partition dependent on which shoots most accurate in my gun of choice and that way I am confident whether a deer or an elk steps out the bullet will most definitely do the job and do it well with proper shot placement.

 

[Colin]

I can't tell a lick of difference shooting the 165gr BT's or 180gr Accubonds out of my .300 Win Mag from the bench. He shouldn't either.

 

[Charlie-NY]

The guy says he is recoil sensitive, so sensitive a 180 anything is unbearable while a 168 is tolerable.

This seems a little unbelievable, the difference in recoil between the two is small. However, if this is accurate I'd suggest using a brake. It will probably improve the accuracy for such a recoil sensitive shooter.

Why the 168 BT? Why not a 168gr premium bullet of one flavor or another. Unless he has a problem with the Barnes TSX, I'd suggest trying it in his WSM. It would provide MUCH better penetration than a BT.

I agree with the previous posters regarding the 180 Part. or Accb but if he must go lighter than definately go premium IMO.

 

[TBASTIAN]

I've hunted elk for years, here in Oregon, and I would personally never use a ballistic tip. Nosler Partitions, the old CT Fail-Safe, Barnes X and TSX are the only bullets I've ever used on elk. If this is his first hunt for elk, why question the bullets integrity, or worse yet, lose an animal by picking the wrong bullet?!? The critter deserves more than that. Pick a stout bullet in the 180 grain size, and have a great hunt!

After seeing a buddy almost lose a nice whitetail this year after hitting him squarely in the front shoulder, with a .308 Win, 165 grain, Hornady SST in their factory Light Magnum cartridge, and after losing a decent mule deer myself, with their 165 grain SST, I won't be using or recommended the SST or BT for anything but perfect, broadside shots, on pronghorns or similar sized animals.

Again, just my opinion, but if you have to question the bullet, you better use something you're sure of.

 

[HeathSexton]

Thanks guys. I showed him the thread and he said he had already been thinking he had the wrong bullet and was looking at the 165 Partition, still no way with the 180. He is shooting a Styer 300 WSM, we chrono'd it today, 168gr NBT @ 2767 average. He has a recoil reducer in the gun, it has a rubber pad and he puts a Simms slip on recoil pad over that and still doesn't like the kick. Sad, yes I know. Anyways, thanks again.

 

[Guy Miner]

It will certainly work, if well placed, but I'd be a lot more comfortable with a Nosler Partition or some other bullet designed more for penetration, rather than quick expansion. That's just me. I did use a 175 Nosler Partition on my hunt for a big bull elk and it worked great - complete through and through penetration and a very dead elk. I deliberately chose the Nosler Partition even though other bullets were more accurate from my rifle. Terminal ballistics trumped absolute accuracy.

You regulars have seen the photo before - but maybe this guy with the .300 WSM needs a look at it. Elk are big. This one barely qualifies for the SCI minimums according to my crude home-measurements. It's a big elk as far as I'm concerned, but nowhere near as big as they come... This 6x6 bull measures 51" tip to tip and likely weighed around 700+ pounds alive.

I'd rather use more bullet and less gun if I was particularly recoil sensitive - like I'd rather use a .308 w/180 gr Partitions than a .30 magnum with that particular 168 grain bullet. It does seem like a very good choice for deer though. Or it would work fine on a nice broadside shot at elk.

There are two BIG species of "deer" here in the U.S.

Elk and Moose. They're big and tough. Although they can be taken with ridiculously small cartridges and lightly constructed bullets - in hunting conditions where the shot may not be perfectly placed, I'd greatly prefer a bullet that is more likely to penetrate to the vitals. Heck, they've been killed with .243's, but that hardly makes it an ideal elk rifle! :grin: Heck, my 7mm Rem mag was the smallest rifle in camp, and considered too small for comfort by the veteran hunter!

Regards, Guy

 

[Greg Nolan]

If you think he is convinced a 165 Partition is ok then you've done your friend a good favor indeed. We (who have a lot of choice and opinions on what rifle, caliber and bullet we shoot) look for the perfedt combo but a 7mm Rem Mag with a 160 grain partiton would be looked on as a very wise choice by most hunters. It is the second most used combination in all elk hunter surveys. In fact one of the top five combos is a 270 win with 130 grain bullets and as one major writer states "knocks off elk with monotonous regularity" I agree bigger is better and my 375RUM is used for a reason but not so very long ago a 300wm with 165 partitions was considered a pretty wise choice. I'm just happy he's going elk hunting and I wish him all the luck.
Good Hunting
Elkhunt :grin:
PS
Post pictures of his elk when he gets it! :grin:

 

[nomosendero]

I'm with Guy concerning the cartridge, or another way to look at it is I would rather load the existing WSM down to '06 levels with a 180 AccuBond or Part than load up to WSM with the 168 & recoil then would not be more. I saw first hand what a 180GR. would do to a Cow Elk &
it was most impressive!

 

[HeathSexton]

Guy, great bull! Here is a direct quote from a conversation bewteen he and I.

Me, "well the 168 NBT would probably be a great deer bullet."
Him, "well, is there really any difference between a deer and and elk?"
Me, "................... well, about 500-700lbs............."
Him, "yeah, but besides that, and how does that make one harder to kill."


Greg, I do believe he will be trying out the 165 PT pretty soon. He is totally against a 180 at any velocity, why I do not know.

If he gets a bull I will post some pics.


Thanks again

 

[Alaska]

The CT 168 ST is a good bullet @ 308 Win vel.......but when pushed at 3000 fps becomes a small bomb.

The Sierra Gameking BTHP 165 is a tougher bullet and would work great in the 300 WSM. Good Lung shots are a must with either bullet.

In my 300 WSM for Moose I favor the 180 gr Fail Safe..........and W760 with WLRM primers . for smaller game the 165 BTHP Sierra.

The 165 Barnes TSX would be a excellent Elk Load!

 

[jmad_81]

This guy reminds me of one of my friends. He has "the worst kicking 300 win mag in the world". He puts less than a box of shells through it a year just before the season. Last fall he shot a spike elk four times with 165 gr. PT and lost it, and blamed it all on the bullets!!!!! I swiftly corrected him, and told him that they have been killing elk with those "crappy" bullets longer than his age and mine combined, that he just needed to practice more . . . He tells me he is getting a 30-378 weatherby now. My point is that if this guy wats to kill elk he needs to be able to kill paper at a couple of hundred yards first. The PT and or AccuBond will do their job every time if they are put in the right place.

I use one of the Past Magnum recoil pads for my .375 Ruger at the bench and it helps alot and doesn't cost much.

PRACTICE PRACTICE PRACTICE!!!

 

[fredj338]

No offense, but your buddy hasn't hunted much beyond deer size game. An elk is not bullet proof but does require a stout bullet to get to vitals from any reasonable angle. His 2750fps load is barely above a good .308win loading & will do for any reasonable shot (read that out to 250yds, broadside or 1/4 to/away). He needs mor triggger time w/ that rifle to overcome the moderate recoil.

 

[HeathSexton]

Fred, none taken. He has not hunted anything beyond deer and does not , but is starting to understad an elk is tougher.



180gr Partitions have been ordered, he did some research and realized that would be a better idea.



Thanks

 

[JD338]

Heath

Happy to hear that your friend is going to go with the 180 gr PT.
Good job!

JD338

 

[FOTIS]

Fred, none taken. He has not hunted anything beyond deer and does not , but is starting to understad an elk is tougher.



180gr Partitions have been ordered, he did some research and realized that would be a better idea.



Thanks

+1