7mm-08 bullet weight for elk?

[Peakbagger46]

My wife is a fairly new hunter and thus far has tagged several mule deer with her Remington model 7 in .308. She has been shooting my reloads consisting of 130g soft points using Hodgdon youth data.

Obviously a bigger, tougher bullet is in order for elk. Trouble is, that model 7 is a bear with full loads since it only weighs about 6.5# scoped.

We have a TC Venture in 7mm-08 in the safe. I’m thinking this rifle may be the way to go for a cow elk hunt using premium bullets. What bullet weight should we be looking at for the 7? She is very conservative about shot distance and I don’t see her shooting beyond 200y.

Thanks in advance for the help. I don’t know much about the 7mm-08 or 7mm bullets in general.

 

[troy fairweather]

150 grain and up

 

[Riomouse911]

140 gr Barnes ttsx. A bit lighter so a touch less recoil than the 150 gr bullets, it is tipped and has a boat tail so trajectory is a bit flatter than a flat base spitzer, and the 7mm x bullet is plenty tough enough for elk.

Good luck!

 

[TDL]

I've successfully used the 120 grain Barnes TSX in my Remington 700 titanium 7mm-08 on either eight or nine cow elk, with shots from a guesstimated 60 to a lasered 324 yards. All except one were one shot kills, and I've recovered only one bullet. Recoil is moderate and I like carrying the light rifle in the high country. I handload, but the Barnes Vor-tex load is very similar in velocity to what I load. The 140 grain Barnes load would also work.

Good luck on your hunt.

 

[jmr40]

120 gr Barnes TTSX will probably shoot all the way through most elk under 300 yards and kill it as dead as anything else. The all copper bullets retain weight much better than lead and you don't have to start out with as much weight. The 120 gr Barnes bullet will still weigh 120 gr after it penetrates all the way through. A 160 gr lead bullet will end up weighing 80-120 gr after impact and may well not penetrate as much. If you want to stay with conventional lead bullets the construction is more important than weight. A bonded bullet or Nosler Partition in the 140-160 gr weight class would work too. If using old school cup and core bullets that come apart easy then you need to start with more weight in order to get the penetration.

You might want to up the powder charge if you use copper. Copper bullets need more speed at impact in order to expand. Keep impact speeds down to 2000 fps and they are fine. Much slower and they may not expand and act like FMJ.

 

[Peakbagger46]

Thanks guys.

I forget to mention in my opening post that I don’t use monolithic solids. I know may hunters do to great success, but I’ve had two bad experiences (failures to expand at impact velocities that were higher than Barne’s recommended minimums) with them and have no interest in trying all copper again.

With say partitions or accubonds, would a 140 or 160 be best?

 

[LoonWulf]

From the 7-08, I'd probably use 150-160 standard bullets.
For partitions at moderate range id go with the 160s. I generally consider partitions the same as regular cup and cores for initial damage, and initial penetration.
The sectioned rear simply guarantees an exit wound.

BUT if your trying to keep recoil down the 140s should do just fine when launched in the 25-2700fps range.

The accubonds, I'd use 140s as well.

I've taken feral bulls that weighted 500-800lbs with softer bullets and had no issue getting to the vitals. The only bullets I've had exit tho we're big slow 405s from my .458socom.
I'm not positive the accubonds will exit, but I'm pretty sure the partitions butt chunk will.

 

[earlthegoat2]

I shot a 200 lb hog from the front of the chest to the skin behind the rump with a 150gr Partition from a .280 Rem. The bullet had the typical expansion with 60% of mass retained. Total penetration was about 30”.

I know it is not the same cartridge or the same animal but I can vouch that the 7mm Nosler Partion in 150 gr is an amazing bullet on a hog where cup and cores have failed on occasion.

 

[Steve S.]

As others have stated, what consensus might be for elk medicine bullet weight is not necessarily always needed; try to match a hypothetical distance and shot placement scenario to what might be the shooting conditions on the hunt, especially the shooter’s ability (with recoil tolerance). You can easily kill an elk with 120 grain bullets given reasonable distance and good shot placement but a heavier bullet will do it “stronger”. All things equal, my choice for her would be a 140.

 

[darkcloud]

The cartridge is not suited for bullets heavier than 140 grains. Stick with a good 139-140 grain bullet and all will be well in elkville.

 

[DannyLandrum]

"With say partitions or accubonds, would a 140 or 160 be best?"

Those are both premium bullets so I say 140s - better trajectory, less recoil, and plenty enough terminal performance.

 

[darkcloud]

Go with 140 partitions. Heavy bullets are seated too deep in the short case neck and take up valuable powder space. 140 partition will do an elk in with room to spare in a reasonable distances. I am very familiar with the 7mm-08. It is a GREAT cartridge and an inherently accurate one with proper weight range bullets. I have killed elk deer, antelope and coyotes with the Hornady 139 grain flatbase spire point behind IMR 4064. Put it in the boiler room and they are a dead critter no doubt about it. Only had one whitetail deer move after being shot in the chest and he made a dying leap into the brush. Was dead where he landed.

 

[cdb1]

I’ll be the outlier, I’d use a 156 grain Oryx.

 

[George P]

I have both a 7mm mag and a 7-08. For elk-size critters, I used a 160 Partition in my mag and a 140 Partition in the 7-08; just seemed to have better accuracy in that Model 7 of mine. Anything 140 and up should do the trick, so go with whatever gives the best accuracy

 

[Peakbagger46]

Thanks all! Think I’ll try loading up some 140g Accubonds and see how they shoot. I already have twenty 120g Sierra Gamekings loaded using Hogdon’s youth loads ready to go so the wife can get used to the rifle.

 

[Peakbagger46]

Bought some 140g Accubonds today. Think we will give Varget a go and see how it shoots

 

[GooseGestapo]

I disagree with the poster who said the 7mm08 wasn’t suited to bullets heavier than 140gr. My 7mm08 much prefers 150 and heavier bullets.
However, the only elk its taken was killed with a Nosler 140gr Partition.
Outfitter was so astonished and impressed by performance, he tried to buy the rifle from my friend who used it. It actually out performed all the “magnums” that all the other hunters used in camp. (Fewer shots to put down elk, impressive wound channels).
It’s a Rem Mod7 w20”bbl in a laminated stock. Only mods are glass bedding action and boring two 7/8” x 8” holes in butt stock to improve balance).
I suggest the 150gr Nosler Partition over RL17. My Rifle delivers 2,800fps and superior accuracy to the 140’s.

 

[GooseGestapo]

IMO you need to use a powder slower than Varget to see good performance with the 7mm08 with bullets 150gr or heavier. Varget is too fast. Great with 120-130gr bullets, though.

Even IMR4350 comes up short because it’s too bulky. H380 was a favorite of many metallic silhouette shooters with the 162gr bullets. In fact this is what brought the 7mm08 into vogue. However, H414, RL17, H4350, and new IMR4451 are THE best.

 

[morcey2]

I would recommend H4350 if you can find some. I haven't looked lately but it was nonexistent about a year ago. I use it in 7mm Mauser with 140 grain ballistic tips (not a bullet recommendation for elk) and it works extremely well and is really close to 7mm-08 in terms of loading. I've found it very consistent in terms of temperature, which is good for me since most of my load workup is done in the warmer part of the year and hunting is usually much colder. H414 (W760) works well also, but it was a lot more temp sensitive, even with a magnum primer.

Matt

 

[George P]

I disagree with the poster who said the 7mm08 wasn’t suited to bullets heavier than 140gr. My 7mm08 much prefers 150 and heavier bullets.
However, the only elk its taken was killed with a Nosler 140gr Partition.
Outfitter was so astonished and impressed by performance, he tried to buy the rifle from my friend who used it. It actually out performed all the “magnums” that all the other hunters used in camp. (Fewer shots to put down elk, impressive wound channels).
It’s a Rem Mod7 w20”bbl in a laminated stock. Only mods are glass bedding action and boring two 7/8” x 8” holes in butt stock to improve balance).
I suggest the 150gr Nosler Partition over RL17. My Rifle delivers 2,800fps and superior accuracy to the 140’s.

That Nosler 140 Partition is a great bullet in 7-08 (and not a bad one in 7mm mag either).....

 

[darkcloud]

Bullets heavier than 140 grains take up valuable powder space due to the case design. It has a shorter neck and are seated deeper below the neck into the case. MOST rifles do not allow longer OAL. To get the most out of the round use ALL of the case that you can. Some custom or long action rifles do allow longer lengths and that is an advantage. 140 grains is plenty for elk with a good bullet construction for game hunted. My favorite is the Hornady 139 grain spire point flat base. It was very accurate and held together well. The boattail version not so much. It was much more fragile upon impact. The Nosler 140 grain was not nearly as accurate but it is what I would use if I thought it was needed as it is still plenty accurate for hunting critters the size of deer and elk.

 

[cdb1]

There is something about short necks I don’t care for whether it be on a cartridge case or women.

 

[GooseGestapo]

With the denser powders I listed, maximum pressures and max capacity reach the same with the heavier bullets. My 7mm08 allows a maximum OAL of 2.835” to fit and feed from the magazine. The short, tight chamber/throat allow only a OAL of 2.800-2.830”. With the 162gr A-Max, it’s about 2.830”. (Bullet touching lands). This allows a max load of RL17/H4350/414 to be loaded under it with slight compression. This is a perfect storm of tolerances that gives peak velocity, accuracy, and efficiency from a compact package. From my barrel (20”), it means I can get 3,000fps from a139gr Hornady, 2,900 from a Sierra or Nosler 140gr, 2,800 from a 150gr Sierra or Nosler, or 2,700fps from a 154-162, and 2,600fps from a discontinued 170gr Sierra RNSPT.
I originally bought the rifle as a donor action for a rebarrel to .284 or 6.5-284.

I made the “mistake” of accepting 3 boxes of PMC 139gr 7mm08 with the deal. Furthermore, I mistakenly chronographed them and saw the 3,000fps on the chrono which was my goal with a .284. 14yrs later, and it’s still a 7mm08!

It’s only a 1.5moa shooter, but it’s put up an amazing amount of big game.
Belatedly, easily my favorite big game rifle. (I have a bevy of Marlins vying for that position). It encompasses the entirety of what my hero, Jack O’Connor wrote was Mrs. O’Conner’s requisites were for the ideal hunting rifle.
We used to joke that the college professor she had pose for photos was actually a stand in and the the REAL “Jack” was Mrs O’Conner!!!

Her favorite was an Al Biesen custom on a Mauser 33/40 action in 7x57. Very, very, close to my Mod-7 in 7mm08!!!

My Rem Mod-7 in .260Rem only rates an “also ran”. Though better than MOA accurate, the little 6.5 lacks the BRUTAL efficacy on game that the larger 7mm exhibits. The 7mm easily matches the .30/06 with 165-180gr bullets, but with less powder and recoil.
Between the two, I pick the 7mm08 over the .270win.

 

[Newtosavage]

The cartridge is not suited for bullets heavier than 140 grains. Stick with a good 139-140 grain bullet and all will be well in elkville.

Where did you read this nonsense?

My 7mm-08 absolutely LOVES the 162-grain ELD-X. In fact, last week I shot them into a tidy 2" group at no less than 400 yards.

Please have some real world experience before you make claims like that. The 7x57 is essentially the same cartridge and it was loaded with 175's for decades.

To answer the OP's question, I would choose 140 grain Accubonds for the wife. Reason being the 140's don't kick as much as the 160-162's. She will enjoy shooting the rifle more, be more accurate with it, and I suspect 400 yard shots are not really in question. Keep the 140 Accubonds inside 300 and you'll be just fine and she will be happy.

 

[darkcloud]

"The cartridge is not suited for bullets heavier than 140 grains. Stick with a good 139-140 grain bullet and all will be well in elkville."

"Where did you read this nonsense?"

This is FACT. The cartridge was developed for steel silhouette competition and morphed into a hunting round to be used in a short action rifles. Limited OAL in MOST rifles when this came out caused heavier than 140 grain bullets to be seated into the case below the neck for reliable feeding.This takes up powder space. Yes I have REAL WORLD EXPERIENCE. I owned and hunted with the 7mm-08 for YEARS. Yes there are exceptions with long action chamberings for this cartridge. If you have one great. Use it to your advantage but if it is the standard short action you WILL do best with the 140 grain rounds sent down range at higher than factory 270 Win velocities. Jack O'Connor said the 270 Win was the ideal hunting round for much of what he hunted. The 7mm-08 matches or exceeds it AND is an inherently accurate round with 140 grain bullets. If you shoot elk with Texas heart shots (NOT ADVISED) then man up and use a 338 Win MAG. The 7mm-08 is plenty with 140 grain bullets for good shots into the boiler room under 300 yds.