Questions about big game calibers

[duck911]

Hey folks,

A have some general questions and thoughts and I am looking for some feedback.

I live in Colorado and my big game hunting consists mostly of deer, antelope, and elk.

I currently own a .270 and that is my "big game" rifle. I use it primarily for deer although I wouldn't hesitate to use it for antelope. I really haven't hunted much for elk, as I bow hunt for elk while saving up "preference points" for better tags.

But I have some money burning a hole in my pocket and I have it in my mind I want a new big game gun. I figure my .270 will be reserved for deer and smaller game, and a new rifle will be used for elk.

However, I have been curious about different calibers and while looking at ballistics and numbers, I find some interesting facts.

-Most .270's has more downrange energy than most 7mm-08's

-.270's are in general, equal to the downrange energy of the .308. (give or take. Some .270's actually are better, some .308's beat the .270. But in general, it's a "wash")

-the .30-06 only edges out the .270 in downrange performance slightly in many cases. I would have figured "the most storied caliber in North America" would have better numbers, at least on paper.

-the 7MM Mag and .300 Win Mag are no contest for any of the above in terms of pure energy downrange.

So I am left wondering.....What does this all mean, and what do I need to buy?

After my research, I am convinced that my .270 will kill an elk every bit as fast as a .308 or 7mm-08, both considered fine elk rounds. And, they are so ballistically close, that it's not worth it to me to duplicate calibers that are so alike.

Next is the 7MM Mag and the .300 Win Mag. Much more energy than the .270/.30-06/7mm-08.

But can you kill an elk TOO dead? If a .270 is a good elk caliber, and a 7MM Mag is a great elk caliber, should I just use my familiar .270 for elk? Is there a real REASON to buy a 7MM Mag or .300 WIn Mag? Seems to me just one more caliber to buy ammo for, and big game ammo is not cheap. I like shooting my .270, and I am CONFIDENT where the bullet will fly when I pull the trigger. I have a lot of rounds through that gun. Is that familiarity worth the decrease in downrange energy when compared to the "magnums?"

I want to avoid the pitfall of having 1 caliber for every game animal. I do not get the range time nor the cash to be able to perfect shooting every caliber, and I am not a reloader so factory ammo availability is important to me.

I'd like to limit my big game firearms to 1 or 2 guns. As I have mentioned, the choices would be one or two of the following:

.270
7MM-08
.308
.30-06
7MM Mag
.300 Win Mag

What would you do?

--Duck911

 

[MachIVshooter]

.270 win. has been killing elk for half a century. The cartridge is suitable for all North American game, save large bears and perhaps bull moose.

The harder hitting 7mm RM and .300 WM will, however, extend your effective range by some margin and give a little more room for error. The .270 is similar to my favorite cartridge, the .25-06, in that shot placement is critical when taking larger species like elk. The 117/120 gr. .257 pills and 140/150 gr. .277" bullets will not reliably penetrate/crush the massive shoulders of a bull elk the way a 175 gr. 7mm or 200 gr. .308" bullet will. On the same note, many an elk have run for miles with .338 or .375 caliber slugs in their torso.

If you really have an itch to buy a new rifle, then by all means do so. But if you simply want to hunt elk, your .270 will be fine.

And remember, you're hearing this from someone who is not particularly fond of the .270 WIn. I'm a .25-06 and .280 guy.

Edit:
If you are set on getting a new rifle, why not make it one that is suitable for large, dangerous animals with big teeth and claws in case you decide to go after them down the road some time?

.338 Win Mag?
.338 RUM?

 

[gbran]

I prefer to '06 to the .270 because of the ability to use bigger bullets. But, in your situation, I'd keep the .270 as my all around gun and add a .300 winmag whenst hunting elk, because you'd have more horsepower and longer ranges.

 

[duck911]

You know, that is a great point. I guess I have not fully considered the possible mis-placed shot and the added insurance of penetrating heavy bones and shoulder that the 7MM and .300 afford.

I'm sure a well placed .270 will do the job just fine...

I am equally sure that a misplaced 7MM Mag will stand a better chance of a positive outcome compared to a .270.

All other things being equal, is a guy better off with a 7MM or .300?

As for .338's and and the like...

I do not have any desire to spend $3 per cartridge, and I don't see any near term need for a caliber of that size for hunting, as I am not heading to Africa anytime soon

--Duck911

 

[Jackal]

You could also consider the venerable 45-70. There isnt an elk made that wont go down quickly with a well placed shot of 45-70.

 

[Twycross]

IMHO, the .308/.30-06 type stuff doesn't do much that you can't do with the .270. If you are only going for one more rifle, then either the 7mm or .300 would be my choice.

Of those two, I would pick whichever one you can comfortably handle. Being all of 140 lb, I don't like recoil, and the 7mm magnums are about the most punch I can use well. But if you are fine with recoil, then go for the .300.

 

[Sharps Shooter]

"Is that familiarity worth the decrease in downrange energy when compared to the "magnums?'"

IMHO no, it's sure not. As much as I love my .300WM, I have to admit I killed elk and mule deer just fine with a .308 Winchester and a 30-06 Springfield for years before I decided I had to have a magnum rifle. I've also killed plenty of mule deer with a .270 Winchester and have little doubt it would have worked for elk had I had the opportunity during the 3 or 4 seasons I was carrying it.
As others have already pointed out and you acknowledged, a magnum such as the 7mmRM or the .300WM, might offer some insurance if you don't make a perfect shot on an elk. But I think a person is a lot more likely to make a perfect shot with a rifle he or she is totally familiar with. And the thing is, to become totally familiar with a rifle, a person has to shoot it - a lot. If I wasn't as passionate as I am about loading my own ammo, I couldn't afford to become as confident in my .300WM as I am. Heck, I probably couldn't even afford to shoot my old 30-06 as much as I feel I should if it wasn't for the fact I build my own ammo. But you have an advantage - you're already very familiar with your .270Win and you have confidence in it.
Have you thought about taking up reloading? It's a great hobby and the difference in cost for loading magnum rifle ammo as compared to non-magnum rifle ammo is negligible.

 

[pete f]

I would add this in addition to all the fine and reasoned answers preceding me.

A lot of it depends on what sort of territory you are going to be hunting. If your hunting deep woods, the black timber sort of places where elk are very close and yet good shots are hard to come by, I would like a 45-70 or my favorite the 348 win. in a model 71. These are great Elk rounds, with punishing hits to the animal that tend to stop them way faster than ballistics tables would indicate.

If you are hunting more sparsely wooded hillsides and open grassland, then the top choice would be the 300 winmag. It has the range, the power, the load choices and the versatility to handle what ever you might face. While noticeably stronger than the 270, the 300 is by no means your only choice. Please note that I have been with on two hunts on the more open ground where .280 rems have worked superbly with the new 160 grain partitions and I see no real difference between that and a 150 loaded 270.

I would also offer another choice, how about something dramatically smaller, maybe a 22 250 or a 243? works for antelope and would allow you to develop your shooting skills a bit more on smaller varmints

 

[mete]

"Energy" never killed anything. You have to get a good hit and the bullet has to get into the vital organs and do damage. The bullet has to have enough weight, velocity and construction to get into the vitals with even the more difficult conditions not just a perfect broadside shot.The 150 grain 270 has done it for years.

 

[duck911]

Thanks for all of the input!

Let me reiterate, I am not looking for a way to hedge my bet for poor shots at long distances. I like to get close so I am not looking for extra reach, nor a bullet to stretch shots with.

I am looking for the best bang for the buck when compared to a .270 that will cleanly kill an elk at reasonable distances. The answer may be, "for the extra money, most of these rounds will do 90% of what a .270 will."

I may find that replacing my old beat up Remington 700 ADL .270 is the best bang for my buck.

I tend to agree now that to really move up into the next family of rifles I need to look to the 7MM or .300 Mag. The others are just too close to a .270.

I wish I had enough time at the range to reload! My nearest range is 60 miles away and it's only open to the public Sat and Sun. I usually get out there for 2 hours a weekend. A few other thoughts... I really don't think hunting elk with a 22-250 is responsible and although I'm sure the .243 has killed it's fair share of elk, I wouldn't go there, either. I think my .270 is as small a caliber as I would go.

Great input, thanks folks!

This is becoming less a "which caliber for elk" and more of a "help me pick my next gun", which has been overdone on this forum. But that is where I am at, because if I want a true elk gun that stands out from my .270 I think am looking at the 7MM or .300, yet my .270 would still work just fine, too.

So now I am left wondering if there'd be a place in my collection for a .25-06, another .204, a .22-250, or if I drop the cash on an elk rifle that overlaps a rifle I already own!

What to do!!

 

[knoxx45]

have you considered...

the 338 federal. you get the great bc and sd, the heavier weights of the .338 bullets, and tons of down range energy, in a rifle that shoots softer thn the standard magnums. You said that you don't need the extra "reach" of a magnum, so why deal with the added recoil. I'm not recoil shy, in fact i kinda enjoy it some times, but when i hunt, if i don't need the magnum i don't bother. I have taken almost every type of game on that north america has to offer (save the big bears) with a 30-06, including bull moose, and have done so cleanly. Get something that you can and will practice with alot, because shot placement is everything.

 

[TaxPhd]

With a .270, you have no need for anything else on your list. There just aren't enough significant differences to justify one of them.

So, move up to a larger caliber. For North American game, my choice would be something along the lines of a .338 win, .338-06, or .35 Whelan (in either standard or AI versions).

With a .270 and one of the .338's or a .35, you would be well set for North America, and Africa for anything other than dangerous game.

No need to spend $3/cartridge. Reload. Cheaper, and you can tailor loads to rifle/game.



Scott

 

[Dale Taylor]

I have 338 and been very pleased. [email protected]

 

[achildofthesky]

$3.00 a round for .338?

Dang where are you buying ammo? Your .270 like everybody notes is fine for elk. A 7mm mag or 30 mag is as well a good choice and also as noted gives some additional latitude on a "bigger game" hunt at some point, but again short of the large tooth and claw type of critters in this continent your 270 is still a decent choice. Your comment on 338 ammo made me dig out my a receipt from earlier this year for the prices I paid for 338 WM ammo, this all bought from Nachez: 180 gr federal/nosler $31.06/box 20, 225 gr Hornady heavy mag 26.52/ box 20 and I still thought that was spendy. Do a bit of shopping and several of the larger places DO meet or beat prices as the fellow at Nachez noted. I primarily shopped them for this reason and combined several purchases and saved more than $150. Also try ammoman.com and other ammo only places as prices are not too bad and shipping is often included. Good luck with your decision and enjoy it!

Patty

 

[MachIVshooter]

So now I am left wondering if there'd be a place in my collection for a .25-06, another .204, a .22-250, or if I drop the cash on an elk rifle that overlaps a rifle I already own!

There's always room. My 6mm isn't that far behind the .25-06; my justification was wanting another rifle. I've got 4 .30-06's

 

[Oregongundude]

All the rifles you mentioned are good choices.

I think a .270 is great gun for all purpose hunting. Here in Oregon we have a lot of ELK just like in Colorado. Myself I have had about 4 hunting rifles in my life time and I have fired several others. I have killed about 7 bull elk in my life time to date. Two with a 30.06 and the rest with a .308 browning, my current hunting rifle. I have killed five Roosevelt Elk which are the bigger than the Rocky mountain elk in Eastern Oregon. The two Rocky mountain elk I have killed with a 30.06 and it took one shot through the neck to drop both. With the .308 I have killed the bigger elk just with two did it require a second shot. Mostly because of where i hit them with the shoot and distance to the target. I personally like the .308 myself but i'm sure the .270, or the 7 mm magnum would do the job just as well. But all the rifle you mentioned are excellent hunting rifles and you need to make the decision on which one you perfer.

 

[Sharps Shooter]

Man, that’s too bad. I can understand your dilemma. I doubt I’d be all that enthusiastic either about loading my own ammo if every time I worked up a new load I had to travel 60 miles just to try it out.
But I too wonder where you’re buying your factory ammo. $3.00 a pop for .338WM sounds kind of pricey. Cabela’s lists Federal Premium .338WM ammo for $45.99 per box of 20, Hornady Light Magnum .338WM ammo for $33.99 per box of 20, Remington Express Core-Lokt .338 WM ammo for $27.99 per box of 20, and Winchester Ballistic Silvertip .338 WM ammo for $39.99 per box of 20. As far as I can tell, those prices are not much different than the prices Cabela’s lists for the same brands in .300WM ammo.
I have a .338WM in addition to my. 300WM. I don’t shoot it much. My wife had it built for me for one of our anniversaries and after taking one medium sized mule deer with it, it sort of became a safe queen. It’s a fine rifle all right – pre-64 Model 70 action, accurate, and powerful enough for anything in North America. It’s just that I’d hate to scratch it. I know – that probably doesn’t make sense, but it’s the truth. In my own defense, my .300WM is stainless with a synthetic stock, it’s ugly, but it will do anything my .338WM will do, and it shoots a bit flatter. So I really have no reason to risk scratching up a beautiful rifle. If I ever have the chance to go after an Alaskan Brown Bear, I might change my mind, and maybe not.
Anyway, what I wanted to say is that if you’re concerned about recoil, I think the recoil of my .300WM is worse than the recoil of my. 338WM. Physics (action and reaction) of course says it’s not, but I think it is. I think my .300WM has ”faster” recoil. Not that either rifle’s recoil is all that vicious. It just took me a while to get used to it. I’m sure you’ll do fine if you decide on a more powerful rifle than your .270 Winchester.

 

[vmfrantz]

it sounds like you need something slightly larger. if i were you i'd look at the 338 federal.

 

[Trisha]

You're a Colorado hunter? Competent with an extended stalk for one good shot?

I'd really have to recommend a Sharps 45/70 carbine for you.

 

[Jwar88]

These days, caliber is of minor importance in a hunting rifle. The two most important considerations in taking big game are bullet placement and the bullet itself. Caliber and velocity are much farther down the list by comparison. With the right bullet, any caliber from .243 to .375 or larger will do the job on any North American game, in pretty much the same fashion. It's just the launching platform, and they all launch the same bullets.

The 270 was the original "Magnumized" caliber. It was originally conceived as a high velocity, long range hunting round. That was back in 1935 I believe. With the right bullet, there is nothing a .270 won't do as well as any other caliber on the list, Magnum or not. While there might have been a time in the distant past when bullet selection was more sparse, and caliber choice made a difference, with the choices available in bullets today, there really is very little need for a heavy caliber or a magnum anymore.

Basically what is best is a longer, heavy for caliber bullet with solid enough construction to penetrate deeply after expanding. The Barnes X design is at the top of the list...arguably the most lethal design, but the newer bonded plastic tip offerings from Hornady and Nosler are very good too. The old Nosler partition is very effective and hard to beat. It has always been, and still is a top performer. There are more exotic bullet choices, but their results are no better than the ones mentioned.

The Barnes X bullet is really in a class by itself; surprisingly lethal, and it's penetration ability rivals a FMJ. In any caliber, it is a very consistent performer on all types of game. If you can find a factory round loaded with a Barnes X bullet, it makes the 270 the equal of any of them.

If you just want another rifle, pick what ever caliber you want, they will all do the job with a good bullet.

TC