6.5mm against elk.

[Ankeny]

I have shot several elk with my 7mm-08 with a 120 Barnes TTSX. I have also shot several ek with my 6.5-284, and a couple with my 6.5x55. When I switched to the TTSX, the representatives at Barnes told me folks are getting the best results by going down one or two weights from usual. That would be a 120 TTSX in a 6.5.

My experience is that a 120 TTSX would be OK at close yardage (200 yards or less) with your 6.5 Grendel. But you will need perfect shot placement and the will to turn down anything other than the ideal shot.

 

[Paul7]

I used a 156 gr. out of my Sako 6.5x55 in January on a cow elk, it worked fine, blew a big hole in the spine and never took another step.

 

[GJgo]

I have a Swede, and I have a friend with a Grendel which I have shot. Quite a bit less oomph than the Swede. I've also shot a lot of elk with a 30 cal. I agree with Ankeny, and I will add that if you take elk hunting as seriously as you should, taking a Grendel I don't think would be a good idea. When you have to work your ass off to get *any* shot, having to pass up all but a perfect short yardage shot would be a real let down.

In that weight class the TTSX is the best bullet for the job but they really need speed to work well. They're all I use.

 

[coloradokevin]

I clicked on this thread out of curiosity, because I'm tossing around the idea of using my .260 Rem for elk sometime (I'm also conservatively pushing a 139grain bullet above 2,700 fps, and could probably easily get to 2,850fps. And I can absolutely put my bullet where I want it out of the rifle I have chambered in .260 Rem).

To me, I just don't see a 120gr projectile at 2,500 fps being sufficient for a heavy-boned animal like an elk. In a survival situation? Yeah, absolutely. In a normal hunting situation? It just doesn't seem like it has the juice to reliably produce a clean kill.

I know we live in the days of "magnum envy", and every hunter at the gun counter wants to have the next biggest, baddest, Super-Dooper-Ultra-Deathray-Magnum on opening day. But, I've never subscribed to that philosophy, so I'm not speaking from that bias point as an individual. Like many others, I've gone the opposite direction with my thinking on that subject, favoring shot placement above ballistics (to an extent). Personally, I think a .308Win is plenty for elk, and I'm considering my .260 Rem as an option. I've also known plenty of hunters who were successful with both of those calibers.

Still, there's got to be a place to draw the line on the low end of the spectrum, and I just don't see 120gr @2,500fps as being a really wise choice. Maybe I'm wrong? That's likely a philosophical question, since someone is always ready to point out the fact that "a properly placed .22lr shot can kill anything that walks on this planet". Yawn. Your milage may vary!

 

[T.R.]

The famous ivory hunter, WDM Bell, shot hundreds of animals to feed his crew during elephant hunts within Africa. He favored his 6.5mm X 54 shooting soft nose bullets for taking "meat for the pot." Bell killed all manner of antelope (large & small) plus giraffe with this rifle and had no complaints about performance. He even shot lions with it.

Bell was an expert rifle shot and placed his bullet where it did the most damage to the animal. Of course this proves that shot placement is more important than any other factor related to killing power.

The 6.5mm X 55 has slain scores of moose for Scandinavian hunters. The .308 is also popular with these Europeans. It seems that the infatuation with magnum cartridges is largely an American theme.

TR

 

[GooseGestapo]

Elk aren't bullet proof.
I had a co-worker who's grandfather was one of the first Colorado game wardens. He has a picture from the late 1910's or 1920's where he's holding a Winchester Mod92 in .25-20 while he's sitting on a wagon load of elk he confiscated along with the rifle from a commercial poacher. Interesting part is that the judge awarded the rifle to the officer as the officers weren't paid too well back then. It was an engraved presentation grade rifle given to the poacher by a client he'd guided previously. My co-worker still has the rifle!

Shot placement, shot placement, shot placement.

Based on my experience with my .260Rem (Mod-7 w/20"bbl) and the 120gr bullets on deer, I would have no qualms about using the 120gr bullets on elk. I'd prefer a 140, but if I was mule deer or antelope hunting and an elk tag and an elk presented an opportunity, the elk would be in deep, deep trouble!
Think about how many elk have been killed with the .257Roberts, .250Savage, and .270wcf.

Given the cartridge (6.5Grendel), I'd use the 120gr Speer PtSpt "HotCor" bullet.
I've only recovered one from a deer and it was a ~100yd shot. Bullet is a deep, broad mushroom and retained ~85% weight.
Deer was trotting at an angle towards me. I didn't lead the deer quite enough and bullet struck him forward of the next-to-last rib and ranged rearward into the pelvis where it broke the pelvis and lodged just under the skin.

Get inside 300yds and shoot straight and you'll do well. And given that with an AR, follow-up shots are available, GO AT IT.

My only reservation on your weapon of choice is that there are so many better choices.
Given the cost of an elk tag, cost of getting to where elk are, difficulty of getting into a shooting position; I'd use a better gun.
But, you could also do worse.

 

[Ankeny]

To me, I just don't see a 120gr projectile at 2,500 fps being sufficient for a heavy-boned animal like an elk

Yeah, going lighter does seem counter intuitive. But that is the recommendation from Barnes for their expanding monolithic construction...and it works. I use a Barnes 120 TTSX in my 7mm-08 and my brother uses a 140 grain Nosler Accubond. Both are fine bullets. I get reliable expansion and complete penetration on elk (so far) with the 120 TTSX.

FWIW, I usually use a 140 Berger in my 6.5-284 on elk. Both of the bullets mentioned above have better penetration and kill just as effectively.

 

[Buzsaw]

I would avoid the sst for elk. However, partitions, acubonds, interbonds or other premium bullets should do fine. I love the sst for deer, but had a 139 grain sst disintegrate on an elk. I did recover the elk with a follow up shot. The distance for the sst was under 100 yds, velocity a little under 2500 in 7-08 on an encore pistol.

 

[Lj1941]

It seem to me there is no correct answer to the question of the OP. All he will get is opinions and we all should know that everyone has one. It takes me back to the old argument of the 223 Remington's suitability for deer. The are no right or wrong answers only opinions.:banghead: