264 win mag for elk?

Would those of you who feel the 264 is on the light side for quartering shots feel comfortable taking them with a 7 mag and 175gr Partition? That would be my other option without starting over with a new gun.
 
I felt comfortable carrying a .270 with 140gr ABs at 2900fps but knew I had to be wise with my shot selection. I felt that I could take a broadside or quartering away shot without any concern under 250 yds. If only offered a quartering towards shot, I would limit my range to under 200 yds. I also felt that I was erring on the side of caution.

Sadly, my opportunity for a shot never appeared. My bud did take a nice bull with his 7mm-08 and 150gr PTs at 2760fps from 180yds. Quartering away with an exit thru the far shoulder.

There have a been a few moose taken throughout Scandinavia using the venerable 6.5x55. Just saying.
 
Shooters in Scandinavia do shoot moose with the 6.5x55 but they use premium 140 to 160 grain bullets at moderate velocity and extremely high sectional density. No bullet blowups with cheap bullets. These hunters also tend to be very careful about shot placement and have to pass a running moose shooting test before they can hunt. Moose are easier to kill and somewhat lethargic compared to bull elk as well. My dad used to shoot moose successfully with a 7mm Mauser 175 grain bullets in northern Quebec. They usually are not as difficult to put down as an elk.
 
mcseal2":38jglbam said:
Would those of you who feel the 264 is on the light side for quartering shots feel comfortable taking them with a 7 mag and 175gr Partition? That would be my other option without starting over with a new gun.

Yeah, I would equate a 175gr PT at around 2900 pretty danged good for elk. Your pretty much into the 300WM territory with a 180, but you are running a bullet with more SD.

Don't get too wrapped up in it MC. Your 264 will handle the long shots fine. Your getting a ton of opinions which are all based on facts of hunters hunting in different areas. I would run your 264 with PT/AB's at 3000-3100 or your 7RM with 160-175's. Either one will do it. A comfortable as you are with your rifles, I know you'll be fine. Elk are tough, no doubt, but they won't take many holes in the lungs/heart either from a 140 AB. Scotty
 
Oldtrader3":34mdjdcb said:
Shooters in Scandinavia do shoot moose with the 6.5x55 but they use premium 140 to 160 grain bullets at moderate velocity and extremely high sectional density. No bullet blowups with cheap bullets. These hunters also tend to be very careful about shot placement and have to pass a running moose shooting test before they can hunt. Moose are easier to kill and somewhat lethargic compared to bull elk as well. My dad used to shoot moose successfully with a 7mm Mauser 175 grain bullets in northern Quebec. They usually are not as difficult to put down as an elk.

I don't believe Norma was selling bonded bullets before the 70's but even then, the modest velocities of the Swede precluded the need for bonded bullets. The 264WM's bullets will have the same SD and, if stout, should penetrate as well. The AccuBond will hold up fine to the increased velocity so I don't see your point. I agree that moose do tend to expire easier than elk. You just have to convince them of that sometimes but, yes, a bull elk will almost always run further.

I just feel that MC won't have any problems with the 264WM if used within reasonable distances. He's confident in his abilities with this load and doesn't seem to be brash or flippant or he wouldn't be asking in the first place. YMMV.
 
My point is: Norma was selling a innerbelted, bonded 160 grain, thick jacketed, semi spitzer, 6.5mm bullet for the Mauser that had very high sectional density and toughness back in the 1960-1980's and that bullet would probably go through a car body, let alone a moose. It is my understanding, that particular 160 gr design was the bullet of choice for most Scandanavian moose hunters. Is that clearer now.
 
Bringing up another point but a sleek 150-160 tough bullet like you mentioned would be sweet in the 264. Scotty
 
I'm going to play with my 7 mag and 175gr Partitions to see how it likes them. If it shoots them great I'll get the chronograph out and consider building a turret to match them. If not, I'll decide between building a new rifle or using my 264.

I shot a great muley with the 264 and this load this fall and that got me thinking about using it for elk. The penetration was excellent. I shot the buck quartering away hard and hit him right at the last rib. I found the bullet under the hide in the middle of his neck. The bullet penetrated a whole lot of deer, broke a rib, and did immense damage internally. The bullet retained 60.5% according to my loading scale. The 2 whitetail I shot with it this fall both had exits, a doe double lunged at 300yds and a buck taken through both shoulders at 200.

I'd love to see a 150gr AccuBond with a BC over .600 for the 264. I had my rifle built with a 1 in 9 twist for 140's, not sure how it would handle them.
 
mcseal
Where I hunt in wyoming I haven't yet had a close opportunity. I have had time to shoot and get steady, but the way the land lays sometimes a long shot is your best opportunity. I've seen 3 elk shot by guys I was hunting with and shot one myself there. The closest shot was 330yds and mine was the longest at 468. I used a 7 mag with 175gr corelokt factory loads. That was before I started loading for everything, I used them to break in the barrel and they shot well enough I bought 200 for practice and used them on the hunt. I found it under the hide on the far side.
My experiences are similar to yours, this year the elk was an even 300, last year 320, 428, the year before 330 and 250 back there a ways is also a 165. Last years 428 decided to move at the same time my brain said now! The result was a low hit way back. If he would have been near the timber I do not know what the end rusult would have been. As it was cow calling (my partner) stopped him and so did I with a shot up front. I personaly believe that a 175 would be better choice than a 140 and my ballistic program bears that out with 1800 ft. lbs out to 350+ and 1500 a little past 450. I am currently trying to develop a 175 grain bullet in my STW rather than a 160.
beretzs
Yeah, I would equate a 175gr PT at around 2900 pretty danged good for elk. Your pretty much into the 300WM territory with a 180, but you are running a bullet with more SD.
I am sure that Scotty misspoke he "ment" 300 short magnum!
 
I've shot quite a few elk with my 7mm RM loaded with 175 grain Core Lock bullets and with 175 grain TTBC bullets. They have always performed well for me. I have no doubt that a 175 grain Partition would work just as well, and my current load is built with that particular bullet.
 
I'm running the 140 AB as well. Still hoping to get a shot with it in my hands.

That sounds like it did really well on the mulie. Nothing too shabby about that.

I am kinda surprised you haven't gotten a 300WSM yet. I thought for sure you were going to buy/build one! I'm pretty stoked to start ringing mine out. Scotty
 
I think perhaps Dr Mike could answer this question but I know there are some others with both Moose and Elk experience so please chime in. I have never killed a moose, my perception after watching others do so on tv, (a great place for information to form opinions) is that they are fairly easy to kill. Easier perhaps than elk, certainly one seems to be able to get closer to them. Is this false? I know a bad hit is a bad hit but it just seems moose just kind of lay down after a few seconds. While they are decideing to lay down an elk will cover 100 yards or more. Educate me please!!!
 
I have exactly one moose to my credit but it seems like they can cover alot of ground in a hurry. I am not sure if they are any easier to kill than elk. It with a vital zone 2ft square they are pretty easy to find something vital on.

Man, I need to hunt moose again, you know, just to refresh my memory! Scotty
 
Oldtrader3":2csx5fqs said:
My point is: Norma was selling a innerbelted, bonded 160 grain, thick jacketed, semi spitzer, 6.5mm bullet for the Mauser that had very high sectional density and toughness back in the 1960-1980's and that bullet would probably go through a car body, let alone a moose. It is my understanding, that particular 160 gr design was the bullet of choice for most Scandanavian moose hunters. Is that clearer now.

Yes. I'm not looking to argue. I just wasn't aware that Norma used any bonded bullets prior to the Oryx and they've been using the 6.5x55 since the beginning of the last century. I know the Alaska was just a cup and core RN that was fairly soft and the Vulcan was a lighter, flat-nosed bullet. Either way, they were effective at modest ranges.

Scotty - is there no load data for the Woodleigh or Oryx? I believe they both make heavier than 140gr bullets for .264. They do... I just checked.
 
Bill,

In my experience, moose are more phlegmatic than elk; they seem to give up the ghost more readily than elk. They are still big animals and should be treated with respect when shot.
 
Elkman":1i2hb9it said:
I think perhaps Dr Mike could answer this question but I know there are some others with both Moose and Elk experience so please chime in. I have never killed a moose, my perception after watching others do so on tv, (a great place for information to form opinions) is that they are fairly easy to kill. Easier perhaps than elk, certainly one seems to be able to get closer to them. Is this false? I know a bad hit is a bad hit but it just seems moose just kind of lay down after a few seconds. While they are decideing to lay down an elk will cover 100 yards or more. Educate me please!!!

Their eyesight is poor and they can be very responsive to calling so shots can be much closer than the distances you will probably encounter with elk. They will stand there and look at you and make you wonder if you hit them at all. Then take a few steps and start wobbling OR immediately turn and bulldoze there way through everything in their path for 100yds or more. Either way they're dead on their feet. They do have a tendency to run into the thickest, wettest bog within 5 miles and create a logistical nightmare when it comes to dragging them out. We continue to shoot til they drop. Especially if they're near a road or ATV trail.
 
CatskillCrawler":2ozo16xh said:
Oldtrader3":2ozo16xh said:
My point is: Norma was selling a innerbelted, bonded 160 grain, thick jacketed, semi spitzer, 6.5mm bullet for the Mauser that had very high sectional density and toughness back in the 1960-1980's and that bullet would probably go through a car body, let alone a moose. It is my understanding, that particular 160 gr design was the bullet of choice for most Scandanavian moose hunters. Is that clearer now.

Yes. I'm not looking to argue. I just wasn't aware that Norma used any bonded bullets prior to the Oryx and they've been using the 6.5x55 since the beginning of the last century. I know the Alaska was just a cup and core RN that was fairly soft and the Vulcan was a lighter, flat-nosed bullet. Either way, they were effective at modest ranges.

Scotty - is there no load data for the Woodleigh or Oryx? I believe they both make heavier than 140gr bullets for .264. They do... I just checked.

I should check them out. I've looked for a good excuse to try Woodleighs anyhow. Scotty
 
Let me see if I can get this right, this is pasted from the Woodleigh web site!

As a general rule Woodleigh RN and PP bullets generate similar pressures to conventionally constructed soft nose bullets. You can use published data from other bullet and powder manufacturers. For safety, reduce by 5% and work up. Ensure that the case neck has a good grip on the bullet

catskill, scotty, mike thanks for the info on the Moose.
 
Elkman":jhrag0r5 said:
Let me see if I can get this right, this is pasted from the Woodleigh web site!

As a general rule Woodleigh RN and PP bullets generate similar pressures to conventionally constructed soft nose bullets. You can use published data from other bullet and powder manufacturers. For safety, reduce by 5% and work up. Ensure that the case neck has a good grip on the bullet

catskill, scotty, mike thanks for the info on the Moose.

Bill, maybe we need to venture out to moose country to the North! If you haven't taken a moose yet that would be just the place to break that Whelen of yours in!

Those 160's around 3k outta the 264 would have to penetrate like crazy. They gotta have an SD of at least .320 or so? Plus, I hear they are supposed to be pretty tough. Scotty
 
There are a lot of Shiras moose in Wyoming. Tags are draw only but are not unobtainable. Might be cheaper than B.C. because you have to be guided as a non-resident alien in Canada to hunt moose. Last time I hunted deer in the Big Horn Mountains, we were tripping over nice Shiras bull moose every day. The Shiras only weigh a little more than an elk.
 
Back
Top