What's your minumum

[SJB358]

I won't be at all surprised if I'm doing more hunting with my .308 & .30-06 rifles in the future. Why not? :grin:

I don't think you could go too wrong with either really. Pretty nice all arounders... Seems like I have heard that before. My wife shoots a 308. Little Ruger Hawkeye. Great rifle, shoots well. I will keep hammering away with the WSM's... Just love those little fat cases. Scotty

 

[wildgene]

I won't be at all surprised if I'm doing more hunting with my .308 & .30-06 rifles in the future. Why not? :grin:

I don't think you could go too wrong with either really. Pretty nice all arounders... Seems like I have heard that before. My wife shoots a 308. Little Ruger Hawkeye. Great rifle, shoots well. I will keep hammering away with the WSM's... Just love those little fat cases. Scotty

...seems like yer still short one, Scotty [cough.325cough]

 

[Polaris]

I think the debate comes down to this... a well placed rock will kill a deer when everything goes right. The question is what will work the least bad when things go wrong. My answer is something relatively slow, well constructed and heavy that will leave an exit wound (these all relate to SD, not KE). EG 6,5mm 140 gr, .270 140, 7mm 150, and 30 cal and up 150 or heavier. Seems to be something magic about 150 gr 30 cals at .308 velocity even though they are relatively light for caliber. They go through and anchor deer.

Also deer are not the same across the country. WT deer in the northern fringe of their range are tough, well insulated critters. A full grown doe up here might outweigh a texas trophy buck. No .243 for me thank you. I'll take my .280 with a 160NP or my 7,62X54r with the old 174 RN in the thick stuff. If I were ever recoil shy I'd "downsize" to a 260 rem or a 300 sav. boltgun.

 

[FOTIS]

I like a 243 win as a minimum for deer and a 264 win mag for elk. A 140 Partition at 3100 fps is no slouch.

I know many elk have been killed with a 243 but I do not agree with that choice.....on a personal level.

 

[baltz526]

Deer minimum for me is a 223 using a 60gr plus hunting bullet. 60gr nosler, 64gr winchester power point, 70gr speer semi pointed. Under 200yds with a perfect shot. Elk the 6mm/243 using a 100gr bullet. Again under 200yds with a perfect shot. I choose not to have to wait for a perfect shot on deer or elk. So you will not often see me packing my 223 for deer or my 243 for elk. Would i if that is all i had? with a tag in my pocket, yes.

 

[onesonek]

Ok I almost forgot about this. I wanted to give it some time anyhow, but not quite as many responses as I figured, although everybody that did reply, I almost figured on.

Anyhow,,,,,I'm not going back to the deer, as it wasn't part of the original poll. I added that just for my own personal curiosity.
As for the Elk, out of the 20 polled, 13 said the .30-06, 2 for the .300 win mag, 2 for the 7mm rem mag, 1 each for the .280 rem, .270 win, and .338 win mag.. With range stipulations on the .280 and .270 of no more than 200 yds. And those came from professional outfitter/guides, with even the Mag users, said max of 400 yds.
Now I suspect and agree, todays mono's can change things a bit, helping the smaller bores.
I still pretty much agree with the above poll, even though it was polled before the mono technology. That's not saying I wouldn't use my 6.5X57 AIR, but that would be limited to some pretty tight parameters and conditions.
For Elk, my go to is still the .30-06 loaded with a 180 gr. NPT. And I hunt so my shots are 300 yds. or under. Most all have been under that however.

 

[Kodiak]

+1 what Hardpan said.

As I have outfitter friends in the west, they will tell their hunters to bring a .30 caliber rifle that shoots a 165 grain premium bullet as a minimum. They also like the 2000f/lbs numbers.

For those of us that DIY, it's my opinion that we respect the game we are hunting and use enough rifle.

 

[bullet]

Minimum for Elk, .257 Weatherby with 7mm cartridges as personal choice to start with.

Minimum for Deer .243 with .25-06, 257 Roberts, .257 Weatherby and 7mm cartridges as personal choice to start with.

 

[IdahoCTD]

I think the .270 is a good minimum for elk. My feelings are that most all of the .270 bullets were designed for the .270 Win. originally (before the WSM and Weatherby) and that is why it performs well on elk size animals. Now most all of the bullets are just better. I've witnessed quite a few shot with .270's and while they don't typically drop on the spot they don't make it far. I personally like big calibers for the bang flop scenario. I shot my cow last weekend with my .30-8mm and 210gr Matrix bullets @ 400yds. It was in really open country so I took it instead of my .416 but the shot was only 400yds. She didn't drop at the shot. She stood there for a few seconds then took a few steps and fell over. With the .416 it would have most likely been bang flop as all the others have been. The massive holes and shock the big caliber inflict is impressive on elk.

 

[FOTIS]

I like a 243 win as a minimum for deer and a 264 win mag for elk. A 140 Partition at 3100 fps is no slouch.

I know many elk have been killed with a 243 but I do not agree with that choice.....on a personal level.

But some do it

http://youtu.be/hY0w1c-gf18?hd=1

 

[Guy Miner]

I enjoyed that video. Quite a discussion on it over at 24 Hour Campfire. A fair bit of acrimony as well.

To me - it's just different. Not necessarily bad - that cow dropped like a hot rock from one well placed shot. I've seen game wounded at shorter ranges flop around, run, and even get away. This was a very clean, quick kill.

I suspect some of the ill feelings about Kasandra's one-shot, 688 yard kill with the little .243 Win, is because it's so out-of-step with the experiences of other veteran elk hunters. Granted, it is that.

FWIW, Guy

 

[SJB358]

I enjoyed that video. Quite a discussion on it over at 24 Hour Campfire. A fair bit of acrimony as well.

To me - it's just different. Not necessarily bad - that cow dropped like a hot rock from one well placed shot. I've seen game wounded at shorter ranges flop around, run, and even get away. This was a very clean, quick kill.

I suspect some of the ill feelings about Kasandra's one-shot, 688 yard kill with the little .243 Win, is because it's so out-of-step with the experiences of other veteran elk hunters. Granted, it is that.

FWIW, Guy

It was a perfect set up. Elk in the open, her prone, on a bipod, ranged exactly where the elk was and all the time in the world to make the shot. I can see that. Nothing wrong with that. I think had she been in the timber and jumped an elk at 50 yards, it might have been different. Two totally different styles of hunting. I have never seen elk in country like that, so I ahve no opinion on the matter. Scotty

 

[DrMike]

It is perhaps important to note that because of the distance, the trajectory would dictate a dorsal shot that has a high probability of hitting the spine. In fact, the manner in which the elk dropped would indicate precisely such a hit, which is the best possible shot from a prolonged distance.

 

[onesonek]

I enjoyed that video. Quite a discussion on it over at 24 Hour Campfire. A fair bit of acrimony as well.

To me - it's just different. Not necessarily bad - that cow dropped like a hot rock from one well placed shot. I've seen game wounded at shorter ranges flop around, run, and even get away. This was a very clean, quick kill.

I suspect some of the ill feelings about Kasandra's one-shot, 688 yard kill with the little .243 Win, is because it's so out-of-step with the experiences of other veteran elk hunters. Granted, it is that.

FWIW, Guy

I'm not judging right or wrong here, although I do feel like Pop in the matter.
Now with that said, heres how I look at it. If the cow had taken a step, just as the bullet cleared the muzzle, there's a good chance it would have impacted outside the kill zone.
Now you have a rather low mass bullet with low energy that may or may not exit, leaving a likely small entrance hole with little blood trail a possibility. Sounds or looks like a good chance she would have gtten out of sight over that saddle the rest headed for. And by the time the party had gotten the 700 yds., she could have gotten anywhere and lost.
Just sounds like to many too many high risk possibilities. Not that any always comes easy and without risk!

 

[Elkman]

I am one of those responsible for the "acrimony" on the 24 hour Campfire, it has been very spirited at times. I usually stay out of those but could not keep my keys quiet this time. Here is one of my earlier posts.

Quote:
"A hunter should not choose the caliber, cartridge, and bullet that will kill an animal when everything is right; rather, he should choose ones that will kill the most efficiently when everything goes wrong." - Bob Hagel

In my opinion after 50 years hunting elk in 4 different states. I believe that Bob Hagel says it well, the 243 is at best a minimum cartridge suitable for elk. As I posted last week in another subject the energy recommended by many for elk is 1800 ft lbs., the minimum is 1500 ft. lbs. , the 243 barely reaches the mininum recommended at 100 yards. I have dug several .243 caliber bullets out of elk and deer both, one elk had 4 in him and was still on his feet moving when I killed him. With proper animal presentation and good shot placement one can kill an animal with most anything fired down a peice of gavalinized pipe. But as Hagle said our goal is to have enough gun when things go wrong. I believe those whom have developed the 1800, and 1500 ft lbs. guideance also believed the same way. As do I, and why for the last 40 years have been carrying a 300 Win Mag., (and I don't flinch) in case you wonder.

This post was after another gentleman was essentially stating that if you can kill elephants with a 6mm, then elk should be easier. I believe his reference was to Bell, in Africa.

 

[Elkman]

oneselk
Now with that said, heres how I look at it. If the cow had taken a step, just as the bullet cleared the muzzle, there's a good chance it would have impacted outside the kill zone.

That happened to me last year shooting a 300 Win Mag. If the bull had not been in a old glacier basin and hadn't stopped before he went into the timber for the cow call, it could have been real messy. My ballistic calculator shows .818 of a second prior to impact at 600 yards. If an animal spooks thats probably better than a couple of feet. Small bullet, realitively low impact, no leak hole, timber or canyon and a set up for a disaster.

 

[onesonek]

Quote:
"A hunter should not choose the caliber, cartridge, and bullet that will kill an animal when everything is right; rather, he should choose ones that will kill the most efficiently when everything goes wrong." - Bob Hagel


Pretty much how I look at it as well,,,,,,and even then I will limit my range regardless of the cartridge capability

 

[Elkman]

Some one mentioned the mono bullets as perhaps changing the playing field. My limited experience with the TSX (two elk) gave me the impression that they were not as good as the Nosler PT which has been around for ever. I have spent a couple of hundred dollars trying to find a hunting bullet that my STW likes better, accuracy wise but the jury is still out on that search. I have the the Nosler 175 down to about 1" for most groups. The 160 AB slightly smaller and the TSX half that size. I am reshooting some of last summers data now to make up my mind.

 

[SJB358]

Some one mentioned the mono bullets as perhaps changing the playing field. My limited experience with the TSX (two elk) gave me the impression that they were not as good as the Nosler PT which has been around for ever. I have spent a couple of hundred dollars trying to find a hunting bullet that my STW likes better, accuracy wise but the jury is still out on that search. I have the the Nosler 175 down to about 1" for most groups. The 160 AB slightly smaller and the TSX half that size. I am reshooting some of last summers data now to make up my mind.

I will give up "some" accuracy in order to have a known good performer, as I know you do as well. It is great to shoot them little one holers, but I don't actually need a rifle to shoot 1/2" groups. 1" is way more than enough out to my designated ranges. I usually get better, if I am a little lucky! Scotty

 

[onesonek]

And I would give up some energy, given enough frontal area and momentum.
(think shorter to modest range, with .40 cal and above)