Name your poison

Doc, I'm really looking forward to the oppritunity, in using that 405 gr. (2nd from left) on elk. Then again, I might go with the 425 gr., not pictured, but it's just a lighter clone of that 465 conventional lube groove. That's if 20 more grains isn't too controversial :wink:
 
Of course, I wll take the .375-JDJ/444 with me as well.
100_4231.jpg

OMG,, :shock: better not use that either, I forgot that bullet weighs 100 grs. more than the .30/165 gr.
 
I really don't think that elk have gotten any harder to kill over the years. In 58 my dad and I had a similar experience to OT3's however with a brighter outcome. He placed 3, 180gr. Sierra bullets into a mature Roosevelt at about 150 yards. When we recovered the bull many shots and several miles later we also recovered the 3 bullets, with a perfect mushroom up against the "near" un-broken shoulder. Not many years later my grandpa raked the side of a young bull with a 150 gr. Winchester Silvertip out of a .300 Savage. Little of the meat was salvaged on that side. Elk are not made of iron but with poor shot placement they can go a remarkable distance, leave little blood and disappear in a few minutes. If in addition your bullet fails to adequately do its job an elk may not be recovered.
Its not our job to kill elk, its to kill them cleanely and ethically and to salvage the meat for our use. Like Charley I have been in the elk business for almost 60 years now. Many of us have heard stories of someones favorite rifle/caliber that has killed deer after deer and elk after elk without any problems. In my experience I would say they are lucky or that their shot presentation and distance was in their favor. I say that because if they were following in my footsteps with the same cartridge bullet combination that there would have been elk not recovered. I gave up on the 06 in 1967 after killing 13 elk and a particullary dismal shooting experience which led to a dead elk after several rounds. Several of the elk I have killed since, probably would not have been taken effeciently and effectively with an 06, or a lessor cartridge.
my .02
 
Thanks Bill, that was my point. The reason that I really like the .338 WM for elk is that it always settles their hash quickly with any decent angle shot through the vitals. However, a .300 mag will do the same job with Partition 180 or 200 grain bullet. Put a 200+ grain, .30 cal or bigger bullet through an elk at 2500 or more fps and hit them through their vitals and you have a dead elk nearly 100% of the time, PDQ. After 50 years, that is all that I know which counts about this game of shooting elk.

It was always that way and elk have not changed.
 
Getting back to these, as I kind of by-passed them for my personal preference.

The bullets debated are (Not listed in any priority order):
Nosler AccuBond
Hornady Interbond
Swift Scirocco
Sierra GameKing

Here's my personal experience or knowlege of them.

I only have experience with the Nosler AB in 25 cal. Not having any other comparable weight, I intitially check this gun's accuracy with 100 NBT's, as I have yet to shoot something that didn't shoot BT's well. With the BT's I got accuracy in the low .2's, with very little load work. The 110 gr. AB's proved for me at least a tad less accurate, and more loads in developement, but still only 33 rounds at that, with accuracy in the .4's. I would still prefer the 180 gr. however in a 30 cal..

I have zero experience with Hornady's on game, and most likely it will stay that way.
Why?
I have a good friend that use's Hornady anything exclusively. He is very happy with both the IL and IB's performance on game when weight is matched to animal. But Dang, the load developement we have had to go through to find the sweet spot, is way beyond my tolerence.
Good bullets I believe they are, just way too fickle for me. My bud is relatively new to reloading, but being a former Marine SS, I question his shooting ability none. But often we are 2-300 rounds in load developement. A lot of tinkering with .1 gr. variation incharge weight, and .001" seating depth changes, has been our findings. I'm sure other's find differently, but this what I know in his 3 rifles. I would have changed bullets long before he does, and if I couldn't find a load then, it would be down the road.

I only have experience with the original Scirocco in a 7mm with the 150 gr. Shoots well, not overly fickle to load for, just a little more costly than the Nosler AB is all. If the newer Scirocco II shoots as well, I don't have a problem using them, if for some reason the same rifle didnt like the AB's, and I wanted a bonded rather than the Partition.

I don't use Sierra's either! My brother shoots them exclusively, with finding the load, and accuracy, is not an issue. I have just seen and heard of, way too many core separations/failures. That don't seem to bother him, but that's his prerogative. I won't tolerate that kind performance. I know Partitions have never failed me.

I know Partitions cost more, but when figuring the total cost of a hunt, their extra expense is relatively minor in my opinion. And, I generally have little trouble finding 1 moa or better loads with them in my rifles.
 
Oh Doc,,,, Had I mentioned this .359" 275 gr., paper patched up to .367" loaded in the 9.3x74R, also intended for Elk. :twisted:
Knowing what this barrel does with 250 AB's and 286 gr. PT's. I'm confident I can get 2500 fps out it, with this cast. Have to see what the accuracy is like however. As of yet, with all the other irons in the fire, I haven't had time to cast and shoot them. But that will come not too far off.
AM453-460029.jpg


I believe I had posted on this before, but had to tease you alil more :p

P.S. to Nosler,,,I sure wouldn't mind a 260 gr. Partition in a .366". But I realize the .366"/9.3 have a rather thin market. But I thought I would throw that request in, just in case I'm not the only one, and you are keeping track.
 
I would be happy to get the .338 caliber, 200 grain Ballistic Tip bullet back. I sure shoot a lot of them in my .338 Federal and they are getting hard to find.
 
Oldtrader3":251zi0vz said:
I would be happy to get the .338 caliber, 200 grain Ballistic Tip bullet back. I sure shoot a lot of them in my .338 Federal and they are getting hard to find.

Charlie, keep your eyes open for 200gr BST 2nds. They don't make tons of runs. but when they do, they are Lubalox free and usually very inexpensive.

Dave, I am with you on the rest. I haven't had that kind of issue developing loads for Hornady's, but again, I shoot ton's of Nosler PT's and a fair amount of BT's and AB's. AB's are the only ones that have given me some issues. Scotty
 
I know Scotty,,,,I seriously doubt the trouble we had in finding loads for his rifles, is the norm! More so, likely very rare happening, but 3 out 3 rifles having that, is beyond my limit on odds,,,, even though a very miniscule sampling, it's just more headache I don't want to chance for my own use.
I am more than satisfied with Nolser's products, as I been using them from the start. I have strayed on ocassion, but only to return!
 
onesonek":2mhfxjsr said:
efw":2mhfxjsr said:
"Elk- Today's Brown Bear"

When did these things evolve steel skeletal systems and carbon fiber skin?

My buddy's dad has been killin' elk year after year w/out issue using a 165 gr Interlock SPBT through his '06-chambered BAR longer than I've been alive. My uncle shoots 'em w/ 160 gr NBTs through his 7 RM. Both those guys skip ballistic gack faster than I'd walk by a Remington 700 ADL chambered in .270 (read: PRETTY FREAKIN' FAST) but they bring home the venison and never have issues w/ their "incorrect bullet selections".

Any of those 165s would do fine... even the Sierra, assuming you're talkin' the BTHP model.

Let the rifle choose, pick your shot as you would ought with any cartridge/bullet combination, go forth and kill your elk!


I don't know or see where anybody claimed elk are armor plated. Also nobody said 165 gr. .30 cal., even with a conventional C&C wouldn't kill an elk, or was an incorrect choice.

But I'm trying to figure out your logic of the apples to oranges comparision in the first paragragh.
With the .30/165gr. being 12.7% lighter than the .284/160 gr., and the .30/180 gr. being 4.2% lighter than the .284/160 gr.,,,your point is?
Apparently, you feel the 30/180 gr. is far too much for elk, yet the heavier for caliber .284/160 gr. totally acceptable??
Must be that new school logic :?

Go back and re-read keeping in mind that I'm not arguing with you or any body else, just making an observation that is expressed rather nicely in the "green boxes" thread as well. That is that there is a presumption that one needs a premium bullet to kill a lot of stuff that has been dying nicely for a long time without them.

That having been said, there is no "too much for elk". I've got a commercial Mauser action on my workbench right now and I'm contemplating a .375 Taylor or 9,3x62 and you better believe those 270s/286s aren't "too much" for elk. Whatever floats your boat. Again, I'm not arguing with your choice because we live in a free country and I love it.

What I am arguing is the presumption that a premium bullet is "necessary". Note that my citation of the two gentlemen pointed to their unwillingness to engage in discussions of ballistic gack... that was the point I was making regarding their choices in bullets... quite the opposite of debating you and your advanced mathmatic equations regarding how my Uncle's 160/.284 compares to a 180/.308.

I obviously struck a nerve with you, but honestly wasn't necessarily engaging you or what you'd said. I was just pointing out a tendency I seen not just in discussions of elk bullets but all the way around. Monometals for deer, premiums and anything else suspect for elk, etc.

If you've decided based upon your experience that you like a premium 180 gr 30 cal for elk more power to ya! Go forth and kill stuff; I'm positive that they'll do everything you need 'em to do, just like my choice in bullets will.
 
efw":uerp8se7 said:
onesonek":uerp8se7 said:
efw":uerp8se7 said:
"Elk- Today's Brown Bear"


What I am arguing is the presumption that a premium bullet is "necessary". Note that my citation of the two gentlemen pointed to their unwillingness to engage in discussions of ballistic gack... that was the point I was making regarding their choices in bullets... quite the opposite of debating you and your advanced mathmatic equations regarding how my Uncle's 160/.284 compares to a 180/.308.

I am not sure what the point of this comment is? I guess also in my old age, that I will have to also learn what "Gack" means, but in the meantime, forgetting the illiterations: all that we were saying is that we have had some failures to kill quickly with smaller calibers and cheap bullets. However, this is a free country and you can use what you want for elk hunting. However, I prefer my elk dead-right-there and not wandering the hills wounded because of some ego fantasy or some guy who I do not know, dictates that I use a pea-shooter for elk. I respect these animals more than that. So, you go your way and I will go mine, that is the bottom line in this discussion!
 
Oldtrader3":1cps4wxv said:
I am not sure what the point of this comment is? I guess also in my old age, that I will have to also learn what "Gack" means, but in the meantime, forgetting the illiterations: all that we were saying is that we have had some failures to kill quickly with smaller calibers and cheap bullets. However, this is a free country and you can use what you want for elk hunting. However, I prefer my elk dead-right-there and not wandering the hills wounded because some ego fantasy or some guy who I do not know, dictates that I use a pea-shooter for elk. I respect these animals more than that. So, you go your way and I will go mine, that is the bottom line in this discussion!

I think we are all in the same chapter of the book, maybe not the same page. I do believe, bottom line is that you need to pick a bullet that is going to work for your hunting and style of shooting. I really believe alot in bullet testing and seeing what that bullet is going to do. I am a huge fan of putting bullets into jugs up close and seeing what they are really made of. If they can hang in there for that kind of medium, then they are probably decent bullets. I don't subscribe to the notion that "once they slow down" they will be fine. Doesn't cut it to me. Bullets have to perform up close and as far as I plan on shooting. Until you have ran them into something, you are just kinda guessing. As all have said, most any bullet will kill deer. Elk and larger game really stress the heck out of bullets, so I play towards what I can control, which is bullet construction. It has been said alot in the past, bullets are the cheapest part of any hunt. Whether going into your back yard or going to Alaska. Everything else is 2nd fiddle to that bullet. That is what does the killing.

Eric, Charlie and David, you all have great points, but we as hunters have to trust in our equipment and become ultimately proficient in their use. If you trust your gear and can take the shots needed with confidence, your probably in the right. Again, I have a 1/10th of the elk hunting experience of guys like Bill, Charlie and a slew of you all that get to live and mix it up with elk, but after chasing them over a few mountains, wounded, I carry the best I have to bring to bear. Bill said it best, two drain holes makes for much better tracking, even if it was a great shot. I like easy blood trails. Hope I didn't step on any toes writing this, we all have some great experiences in the hunting grounds, so its hard to dismiss anyones experiences (except Joels :shock: ). Scotty
 
Back in 1971 I had my custom Remington 721 300 H&H rebarreled to 300 Weatherby. My thought process at the time was - I wanted the flattest shooting elk rifle then available, with the power to turn a less than perfect shot into a successful ending. The Bee was all this and more, and even with its freebore it would print into less than an inch with just about anything I fed it. It has no equal as a long range elk rifle, in my opinion.

However, I was also an avid shooter, and spending time at the range with this rifle degraded my ability to shoot it well. Recoil... even to a stout young man, has a way of slowly creeping into your subconsious when slowly adding pressure to a finely tuned trigger.

I began developing reduced loads a few years later - for deer, I told myself. The Bee would print into less than 1" with Sierra 150gr flatbase spitzers and 60gr of IMR4895. About 308 Win velocities and recoil. I killed a large bull elk and several deer with this load.

Confidence in a rifle and your shooting ability come through dedicated practice. The Bee was too much. Though the custom Remington 300 Wby was passed on to my son several years ago, I did shoot it again about a week ago. It'll still print into less than 1" with full power 165gr Nosler BT bullets, and it still bruises shoulders... My son bought a Sako recently in 300 WSM. It's a near ballistic twin to the Wby, yet in this lightweight rifle, it kicks even harder. He'll learn...

I've been shooting a Rem 700 stainless in 7 Rem Mag for nearly 20 years. The recoil is tolerable, which improves my confidence in both the rifle and shooting ability...
 
I really do not have much sensitivity to recoil. In fact, I probably enjoy shooting my .340 Weatherby more than I do most of my rifles. Additionally, that 225 gr Partition smacking the dirt berm behind the target at 3100 fps on the range is a fine illustration of why I use a .340 for elk hunting! It hits with authority and does the job all the time, everytime! Everybody gets to pick their own poison while on this earth and I am not going to use a .270 Win on elk after 50 years of hunting them and trailing-up wounded animals for friends who shot them too far back, badly or with a bullet that did not do the job.

Opinions are rampant and cheap online. I do not think that anyone is going to convince either me or Bill that we should stop using our magnum rifles with Partition bullets for elk, here on a forum. Certainly not from someone I do not know and who refers to other's ballistic discussions as "gack" (vomit)!
 
Gentlemen you're missing the point altogether. The "gack" comment had to do with how my Uncle and my friend's dad view what WE are engaged in here. "Gack" is technical "insider" lingo like what a bunch of software nerds might engage in over a few 2 liters of MD after a healthy game of D&D. It wasn't a criticism of these discussions which would be pretty dumb since I'm participating.

Instead of debating cartridges and projectiles, they just go out and kill stuff. I personally envy them in a sense. They're happy with their individual (rather bland by my standards) rifles and don't really care much about ballistics and all that. They buy what works for their friends who kill what they kill, and they all kill more and more and more. Pretty cool... as a rifle loony I wish I could settle upon just one and put the money I spend on rifles into trips!

Finally, and again, I'm not trying to convince you gentlemen to leave what works. I tend to think that magnum cartridges drive the need (read John Nosler's story that caused his development of the NPT in the first place) for a premium bullet more than the animal chased because of the stresses of magnum speeds. That IS NOT a negative comment against magnums cuz I have 'em and hunt with 'em, but just a statement of my opinion that informs why I have come to the conclusions I have come to.

Again, just like you explaining my thoughts on the topic. My advice is worth roughly what you paid me for it and I don't pretend to think any more of it.
 
Oldtrader3":2a2s0he1 said:
I would be happy to get the .338 caliber, 200 grain Ballistic Tip bullet back. I sure shoot a lot of them in my .338 Federal and they are getting hard to find.

Great bullet. I know an elk guide who swears by 'em in his 338-06.

The Combined Tech Ballistic Silvertip is the same bullet w/ that black lube stuff stuck to it. There were some regular 200 gr NBTs available through shooter's pro shop a while back and they were CHEAP (Like $8.95/50?) but I ended up getting a boatload of 180s instead for deer.

So now you can give me a ribbin' for talking about 180s for elk but running 338 cal 180s for whitetails... soy fed does being culled no less :oops: !!!
 
I, nor anybody else said that premiums were a necessity. Only that generally speaking, they most often provide the benefit added penetration, when compared their standard counterpart's of same weight. And that more weight for caliber, adding the possibility of more penetration, generally don't hurt a thing. Whether it's needed or not,,well that's more just a personal thing. Unless of course, one is using it beyond the design envelope.

No, you didn't touch any nerves, nor did I take what you said as a direct statement at me. However, your statement did show some sarcasm or some insinuations, toward a group as a whole, that chooses to use premiums or heavy for caliber. I was just returning it.
That, I shouldn't have done the more I think about it, and I apologize to all.

As for the advance math,,,,,not so advanced. Just simple percentages base on the sectional densities, of the bullets you mentioned, then too, compared to the 180 gr. that seems of questionable merit or excessive, to you in your statement. If all else is equal, the .284/160 is more than the .308/165 was my point. I was merely pointing out the discrepancy your statement, of which seemed to have been based on the rational of similar weight. As I said in the earlier post, when comparing bullets of different caliber, you can only use the SD numbers, at least for a base line. Beyond that, other factors can impart some differences.
The percentages I given just quantify the discrepancy. Similars weights of different calibers mean little, unless weight retention of said bullets is offset, favoring the larger bore. There again, there are other factors of course with effect, some of which have been touched on.
But I agree with you, that everybody can use whatever they feel comfortable with. Just when I'm given a choice of 2, one being good, and the other better, (at least in my mind), I'll take better, needed or not. But you use your choices, and I'll use mine, and then we'll both be happy.

"So now you can give me a ribbin' for talking about 180s for elk but running 338 cal 180s for whitetails... soy fed does being culled no less !!!"

Here again, a 180 in a .308 is a whole different bullet then the same weight, in a .338. Of which I would say be about a normal weight for deer,,,, albeit, maybe just a tad light for my taste. Even so,, it should work well in that caliber for deer.
Remember the apples to oranges comparison when looking at weight, rather than sectional density, so you can get apples to apples :wink:
 
I'm with you on the math... you're right on and I understand the distinction you're pointing toward.

I've got a sherbert container full of 250 gr Barnes O bullets that I intend to run through my 33806 AI as elk bullets when I get the barrel back. Those and the 225 NABs that JD338 gave me.

I plan to take that rifle and my lightweight '06 with me. If I had 180 NPTs for that rifle I'd run those, but I have 165 NABs & NPTs of the same weight so I'll run those.

Again, I don't think we disagree at all. I wasn't arguing with you; just pointing out what BeeTee illustrated when he relayed his experience above. If all I had were 215 gr Game Kings for the 338 & 165 gr Interlocks for the 30 I'd not hesitate to run those.

As a loony, I stockpile all kinds of crap "just in case". My Uncle... he just grabs that beat-up box of Federal Premium factory loads before hunting and kills stuff. Two approaches to the same end...

I apologize to you and others if my hyperbole came off as abrasive. That was not my intent at all.
 
I understand Eric,,,,and we all agree, that we can disagree at times, as there are no absolutes. With all that has been said, I have to say,,, my hat's off to all the bullet manufacture's. It has to be one hell of a task, to meet what is asked of them, when one considers all the different firearms they are expected to shoot out of, perform at velocities that were not even dreamed of when jacketed bullets came about, be accurate with wide range of launch speeds, and handle impact speeds varing from mild to wild.
Stating it to be a challenge for them, would be a huge understatement! They have my utmost appreciation and admiration!!
 
onesonek":24z42y3o said:
my hat's off to all the bullet manufacture's. It has to be one hell of a task, to meet what is asked of them, when one considers all the different firearms they are expected to shoot out of, perform at velocities that were not even dreamed of when jacketed bullets came about, be accurate with wide range of launch speeds, and handle impact speeds varing from mild to wild.
Stating it to be a challenge for them, would be a huge understatement! They have my utmost appreciation and admiration!!

Amen, amen.
 
Back
Top