7mmMag vs. 300 Weatherby vs. ?

[Revival]

Instead of posting in the hunting section I would like opinions from the riflemen on a large(r) caliber rifle for big game. Elk would be the sample game.

Recoil doesn't bother me, but gun weight does somewhat. I would prefer as light a weapon as possible for ease of carry.

My friends are split into two camps 7mm and .300, which is better ballistically.

I am interested in any other suggestions as well. The largest caliber I own is a .270, so 30-06 maybe should be the next purchase. From everything I hear this is an adequate round with emphasis on shot placement (not a problem).

Please let me know your thoughts.

Thanks,
Brad

Also is if have a few seconds, please hop over to Kings and vote for #7

http://www.kingsoutdoorworld.com/trophy_room.htm

Thanks guys!

 

[artherd]

Both will knock an Elk flat. The 300weatherby maybe a twinge farther out.

Your .270 will kill an Elk with good placement, at close-ish range (ie inside ~150-200yds) and with the correct bullet choice.

 

[Revival]

If I opt with the .270 what would the recomended bullet choice be?

 

[sumpnz]

For the .270Win the 150gr bullet is the typical elk bullet of choice. And I'd venture to say that it will still kill an elk pretty well for a ways past 200 yards. My wife's grandfater dropped an elk from about 400 yards with a single shot from a pre-64 M70 in .270 (after my father in law missed completely 4 or 5 times). If you reload, I'd suggets looking into the Barnes X-bullet choices. You can usually get away with a lighter weight X-bullet than the traditional lead core designs for the same application. IOW, a 140gr X might work as well as a 150gr jacketed lead core bullet. YMMV.

Depending on how far out you really want to reach, you might want to consider a big-bore rifle like a .375H&H, or one of the .338 magnums. When it comes to killing power, a bigger diameter is sometimes (though not always) better than faster. If you're not likely to take shots beyond 100-150 yards, even a 6.5x55mm will kill an elk just as dead with proper shot placement, and bullet sellection (e.g. 140gr Barnes X, or 160gr Sierra semi-round nose).

 

[artherd]

In .170 for elk, I'd use a Barnes 140gr TSX all-copper bullet.

Depending on how far out you really want to reach, you might want to consider a big-bore rifle like a .375H&H, or one of the .338 magnums. When it comes to killing power, a bigger diameter is sometimes (though not always) better than faster.

I've got a .338 Lapua Mag that spits a 250gr at over 3,000fps I know a guy who has killed an Elk at 900yds with his .338LM.

 

[sumpnz]

I know a guy who has killed an Elk at 900yds with his .338LM.

Was he really that good, or was he being irresponsible and got lucky? I know I ain't anywhere near that good. I was thinking more like 400 yards for a "long range" round. That anecdote about my wife's grandfather was just that. Not a suggestion that others try it. I would consider the .270 to be marginal for that range, and the shooter even more so. I merely mentioned the bigger bore rifles as a means of increasing the likelihood of "getting away" with marginal shot placement at that kind of range.

 

[priv8ter]

.270

.270 will certainly get the job done. I hunt with a guy that has used a .270 on elk for the last 20 years. He has got 6 of them, and has never lost one. I'll admit, he did have to put two bullets in one of them, but, that was just anchor it on the spot...the first bullet probably would have done the job.

Two things to consider...he loads his own rounds, and has told me they are very stout loads, and he has uses the same load ALL the time. He knows where that bullet is going to be trajectory wise out to 300 yards, which is as far as he trusts himself.

I bought the wife a .270 last year for deer, but the thought has crossed my mind that it might make an okay elk rifle for her also. The load I was most interested in was Hornady's 140gr Light Magnum load. 3100 FPS at the muzzle, which is about 150fps faster than most other factory .270 loads, and the price was right in the same band as the Big 3's 'Premium' ammo lines.

If you are comfortable using your .270, then there is no NEED for you to get a larger caliber for elk. Now...if you are just looking for an excuse to buy a new gun, then don't allow us to spoil your fun.

greg

 

[redneck2]

Today's super elk

will probably require one the new super whiz-bang super short-long-medium calibers. Certainly something like a mere .270 would simply bounce off

Then again IIRC, the world record was held for many years with a .30-30.

I'm going to use a 300 WM because that's what I've got. If I had a 30-06, I'd use it, and if I had a .270, I'd use it. Barnes-X, Trophy Bonded Bear Claw, or Partition. Whatever it liked to eat.

Guys in Scandanavia use the 6.5x55 for moose all the time and think it's great. We read too many gun rags and hunt too little.