I need an accurate hunting bullet!

[OYE]

We are trying to point you in the right direction. All the major bullet manufacturers agree that the ballistics on the 6.5 x 55 is not suitable for elk or even large deer at intermediate ranges. Most say 300 yds is stretching it. Of course there have been many killed at that range and there have been many catastrophic failures. That is typically about 2200-2300 fps and 1500- 1600 ft.lbs. The .264 bullet does not perform up to expectations reliably. It's not a .277 bullet. The sectional density just doesn't work in this caliber. They do not penetrate like the .277 caliber bullets. Every load book will agree and you can call all the manufacturers and talk to the engineering and technical people and none will recommend the 6.5 x 55 or 260 remington as a long range caliber for elk.
The 260 remington like it or not is ballistically identical to a 6.5 x55 swede
We urge you to call them and do your own research. Do your homework, you are just looking at the numbers. There is more to it than that in this caliber.
OYE

 

[coloradokevin]

Thanks, Water-man. The Barnes offerings are definitely on the list of those bullets I'd like to play around with a bit more. I believe they claim reliable expansion down to a velocity of about 1,800 fps, though I'll dig around a bit more to hear what people have actually experienced with them at these velocities.

As a side note, those Tikkas are superbly accurate guns for the money… my first precision rifle was a Tikka, and I was amazed with how well it shot for the money. Mine is actually still my go-to hunting rifle in most cases.

 

[Andrew Leigh]

Accuracy International AX rifle with a 24" barrel and an SAS Arbiter suppressor, wearing a S&B 3-20x50 PMII scope with a H2CMR reticle (now you can see why I said I'm not planning to haul this gun on hunts where I'm walking a lot).

.260 Remington. 140 grain Berger Hybrid Match bullet, sitting over 41.4 grains of H4350 powder, in a Lapua case, using a Winchester LR primer.

That load produces the following results, based on data provided from the Ballistic AE computer, and verified repeatedly in the field. NOTE: velocities were obtained from a Magnetospeed V3 chronograph:

Muzzle:

2763 fps, 2373 ft-lbs

100 yards (zero distance):

2652 fps, 2187 ft-lbs

300 yards:

DROP: 0.9 MIL, 2439fps, 1849 ft-lbs

600 yards:

DROP: 3.3 MIL, 2129fps, 1408 ft-lbs


(NOTE: in field conditions down here on the plains with a DA of 7,000 feet I would still produce the following results at 600 yards: 3.3 MIL of drop, 2,082 fps at target, with a remaining energy of 1347 fps).

I concur with the above numbers and have checked them in QL for the load and then in Sierra Infinity for the trajectory. You are spot on OBT Node 5 assuming a COL of 71.1gr.

If you used either the VLD or VLD G7, your load according to QuickLOAD would be identical to your existing load.

My problem would have been if you moved to say a Nosler Partition in the same weight then you would need 42.0gr with all other load parameters staying the same. Velocity would be 2 724fps. The bad news comes with the trajectory, the simulation in Sierra at 600yds spits out a MV of 1 911fps and 1 135ft.lbs. This is near identical to a 30-06 load with a 150gr. Partition at a MV of 2 900fps for all the 30-06 boys.

The Berger will do you better but I would want a little more impact energy for insurance. As you point out 600m is probably your max range so it all get better from there on in.

Good luck.

 

[coloradokevin]

We urge you to call them and do your own research. Do your homework, you are just looking at the numbers. There is more to it than that in this caliber.

Who is the "we" you keep referring to?

Don't worry, I intend to do my homework on this issue, and this search for an adequate bullet is part of that research! Trust me, you'd be hard pressed to find a shooter or hunter who is more detail oriented than me. I simply don't like to leave things to chance, and don't ever intend to pull the trigger on something when I'm not reasonably certain of the outcome.

As far as caliber is concerned, I know an old timer who took elk for years using a .243, and never lost one. I've known quite a few who have done the same with a .270 (which is pretty comparable to the .260 Rem). And, it appears that a lot of Europeans are still using the 6.5x55 for moose hunts. I can't comment on the distances of these shots, or the shot placement, but it's still worth noting that these loads are all in the same basic ballistic class.

Admittedly, that's all anecdotal in terms of evidence, but people are still killing elk each year with no more than a bow firing a fancy sharp stick!

Distance is a fair concern, and everyone has a different method for determining what maximum range shot they'd be willing to take. One area where the .260 Remington shines is the fact that it fires a higher B.C. bullet than most of the older offerings. As such, classics like the .30-06 are no more potent in terms of velocity/energy measurements at 600 yards than the .260 Rem. Again, other factors are worth considering, but in essence the .260 Rem is less potent than a .30-06 as the muzzle, but equally potent by the above measures by the time it reaches 600 yards.

 

[coloradokevin]

I concur with the above numbers and have checked them in QL for the load and then in Sierra Infinity for the trajectory. You are spot on OBT Node 5 assuming a COL of 71.1gr.

If you used either the VLD or VLD G7, your load according to QuickLOAD would be identical to your existing load.

My problem would have been if you moved to say a Nosler Partition in the same weight then you would need 42.0gr with all other load parameters staying the same. Velocity would be 2 724fps. The bad news comes with the trajectory, the simulation in Sierra at 600yds spits out a MV of 1 911fps and 1 135ft.lbs. This is near identical to a 30-06 load with a 150gr. Partition at a MV of 2 900fps for all the 30-06 boys.

The Berger will do you better but I would want a little more impact energy for insurance. As you point out 600m is probably your max range so it all get better from there on in.

Good luck.

Thanks for the reply. Another thing to remember is that we're still tied up in yards here on my side of the world. As such, 600 yards equates to 549 meters. Granted, that's not an enormous difference, but should help a bit at these "maximum distance" shots.

Have you had any experience with the Berger hunting bullet? I'm thinking it will probably perform well in my gun once I tweak the seating depth, but I've never fired one of these bullets into something where terminal ballistics matters. I know the Accubond performs on the animal (at adequate velocity), but it isn't giving me the accuracy I seek. If the VLD performs on target and gives me good accuracy it would be the clear winner.

 

[coloradokevin]

Can you hit a 9" pie plate, every time, at 600 yards?

I never use the term "always" when it comes to shooting, since that's simply not a reality. No hunter can absolutely guarantee that they'll never miss. But for the purposes of this thread, yes, I'm quite comfortable at that distance. In fact, I used a target of that approximate size as my cold bore warm up at 600 yards during most of 2014. Over the course of 12 consecutive range trips I hit it each time. I later moved my cold bore shot back to 750 yards, where I'm probably 75-85% on a first shot (but, again, I'm not hunting at 750).

Here's a video I took a while back shooting this rifle at 750 yards. It's four shots, and the first shot is the cold bore shot. I'd have made a better video, but I was just screwing around at the time. Also, this is a 12" plate.

https://youtu.be/dc62BkSQU7Q

Match bullets, of any brand, are not made for hunting anything but varmints.

Agreed. Never said otherwise.

"...my current load will arrive moving approximately 2138 fps, with an on-target energy of 1421 ft-lbs..." No it won't.

Yes, it will. External ballistics isn't imaginary, it's science. I provided all of the information in a previous post that you can dissect at your leisure to fact-check my math, but that is the data on my current load (again, it's a MATCH load, not a HUNTING load).

 

[gamestalker]

Speaking of the .243 win. I have an old friend / guide, that lost his right eye at some point in his childhood. He didn't allow this disability to prevent him from his love for hunting as he grew up, but another incident while hunting with a high recoiling round nearly cost him his left eye. So, he decided to step down a the .243 win., and hunted everything from antelope to elk and bear with that cartridge, never lost an animal.

GS

 

[COLOSHOOTR]

Wow some of you guys are unreal! The numbers he posted are solid and it is exactly why the .260 and 6.5 Creedmoor have become so popular in the long range community. Check JBM ballistics using a 7000ft DA that is common here. I can personally vouch for him and tell you he could easily hit a 8 inch plate at 600 shot after shot. It is my voice in the background and I'm holding the camera in that video he posted. No need to preach about wind either as we have shot in some interesting wind conditions. Anyone questioning the accuracy of that rifle needs to look into the reputation of Accuracy International. AI rifles are arguably some of the most accurate rifles in the world and make Remington and Savage rifles seem like utter garbage in comparison.

Back onto the actual topic since only a few people seem to actually have anything worthwhile to add. I too would like to know if anyone has had luck with the Berger VLD hunting bullets or any other accurate hunting bullets that people have had luck with.

 

[Andrew Leigh]

Thanks for the reply. Another thing to remember is that we're still tied up in yards here on my side of the world. As such, 600 yards equates to 549 meters. Granted, that's not an enormous difference, but should help a bit at these "maximum distance" shots.

Have you had any experience with the Berger hunting bullet? I'm thinking it will probably perform well in my gun once I tweak the seating depth, but I've never fired one of these bullets into something where terminal ballistics matters. I know the Accubond performs on the animal (at adequate velocity), but it isn't giving me the accuracy I seek. If the VLD performs on target and gives me good accuracy it would be the clear winner.

I did work everything in yards.

I have no experience with the Bergers unfortunately. I have standardised in Accubonds for all my calibre's and will rarely need to shoot over 300 yards due to the terrain I hunt, most times it will be at 200 yards.

I must add a caveat her ethough. This is certain to stir up some emotion but it is my experience and is valid. In many case I think "premium" bullets are like fishing lures ...... they catch more fishermen than fish. I have shot Sierra's in 6.5mm, 30-06 and .375 and have never lost and animal, in fact not many have ventured too far away from the point at which they were shot. The same is my experience for Accubonds and one or two others. I am talking about soft skinned game here and not dangerous game or Eland which are huge animals.

I understand all the arguments for "premium" bullets and will even put them forward myself as general comments. So given that I have shot roughly equal amounts of animal with each kind of bullet I am left wondering why I pay the premium. I am seriously considering a return to Sierra bullets for my hunting, you may ask why.

Sierra''s are more accurate than Accubonds in my three calibres.
Sierra's do the job and I have not failed to take an animal with them.
My shooting philosophy is one where I will gladly pass up on a marginal shot.
My POI is more important that the expansion of the bullet.
I generally shoot behind the should either into the heart or through the lungs, no fancy shots for me.
If the animal is under 100 yards I trust a Sierra's on a frontal chest shot.

With regard to long range hunting, I would rather be able to put the bullets where I want to so accuracy is very important.

Have you confirmed through actual bullet drop that the Bergers B.C. is what they claim?

I have modelled other bullets for you, Barnes and Sierra's and Nosler's but their profiles do not give the same reach or impact.

 

[Grumulkin]

I have not yet settled on a bullet brand as being the most accurate and I don't think you can do that since in a load other factors are just as important such as how well the powder is matched to the bullet weight, how the throat of the rifle is etc.

I have a very accurate 270 Winchester load that uses cheap Remington Core Lokts, LOL. Barnes TSX bullets do very well in a 375 H&H Magnum handgun and a 378 Weatherby. I use Nosler Accubonds for 300 Weatherby and 300 Winchester Magnum loads and the list goes on.

All that said, the first bullets to try that would be on my list for a new hunting bullet load workup would be Nosler Accubonds, Berger VLDs and Barnes TSX (not necessarily in that order). For long range, the Accubonds and VLDs would have the edge.

By the way, on my last South Africa trip, I used 200 grain Accubonds in a 300 Weatherby and shot a BUNCH of animals with it with excellent results. One was a Gemsbok at 400 yards. I've used VLDs on Pronghorn and Whitetails with excellent results.

 

[rogn]

I for one think shooting at live game at ranges greater than 300M is irresponsible and the manifestation of an overactive ego. For support lets look at the flight time of a bullet of excellent ballistics, say a 105 Berger 6mm hybrid launched at 2900FPS. Time of flight is over 0.75 second.. How far can you run or walk in 3/4 of a second? I once had a doe turn as the trigger broke at 175yd and the impact went from POA, behind the shoulder to a raking shot from ribcage to offside hip. It was a 45cal bullet launched at over 2400fps from a muzzleloader so the damage dropped the deer in short order. But a 140gr 6.5 at 1600fps will not have nearly the same lethality as the 45 did and a elk is reputed to be tougher than a whitetail. I constantly read about these long-range "kills", but I have to wonder how many animals are "MISSED" and not followed up. These animals are not prairie dogs, ground hogs or enemy soldiers where the results can be different. Think about it.

 

[Grumulkin]

Interesting. The OP asked about accurate loads and not about yall's opinion about how far one should shoot.

Some of us just don't care about what you consider acceptable hunting ranges.

 

[coloradokevin]

Speaking of the .243 win. I have an old friend / guide, that lost his right eye at some point in his childhood. He didn't allow this disability to prevent him from his love for hunting as he grew up, but another incident while hunting with a high recoiling round nearly cost him his left eye. So, he decided to step down a the .243 win., and hunted everything from antelope to elk and bear with that cartridge, never lost an animal.

That's awesome… I'm glad to hear that he kept at it! One guy I know is moving over to the .243 due to the fact that chronic pain from a shoulder injury has made shooting heavy recoiling rifles a bit unbearable for him.

Have you confirmed through actual bullet drop that the Bergers B.C. is what they claim?

Out to 800 yards my Berger "Match Hybrid" bullet was dead on with the data. I seem to recall being off a tenth or so as I moved back to 1,250 yards (but it was more an issue of my impact being a bit high). In my experience it seems like the potential for deviation from computer generated data grows as the distances become more extreme, so I'm not entirely surprised by the results I got in the field at really long ranges. So, overall I'd say they're likely pretty close on their B.C. I'd have to check my data again to see what I wrote down, but obviously I'm not planning on hunting at 1,250 yards, either.

Interesting. The OP asked about accurate loads and not about yall's opinion about how far one should shoot.

Some of us just don't care about what you consider acceptable hunting ranges.

Exactly.

I for one think shooting at live game at ranges greater than 300M is irresponsible and the manifestation of an overactive ego. For support lets look at the flight time of a bullet of excellent ballistics, say a 105 Berger 6mm hybrid launched at 2900FPS. Time of flight is over 0.75 second..

Your flight time is about right. But, 0.74 seconds (per my computer on my current load) is hardly a long time. Yeah, if everything goes precisely wrong it could theoretically result in a shot hitting in a spot that wasn't intended. On the other hand, the game animal standing at 50 yards may hear you click your safety off and move at exactly the time you were thinking of breaking your shot. There are no guarantees in hunting, but 0.74 seconds isn't exactly an enormous amount of time, either. Particularly if the animal appears to be in a static state, without any likely disturbances.

After all, many bow hunters take shots that require a half second or more of arrow flight time, and they're shooting from a position where the animal can actually hear the shot before it hits them (a subsonic arrow gets to the animal after the sound of the arrow being released).

There's a mountain near my house that I use for the purpose of exercise at least three times per week. When I get to the summit of this hill I can almost always spot some mule deer in the distance (on a good evening I've counted in excess of 100 of them up there). Anyway, after years of watching them from this spot I've rarely had an instance where one of them has made an unexpected move on me. Of course it's always possible, but it's also true that animals try to conserve energy, and a grazing ungulate usually isn't in any great hurry to go somewhere. When I have seen a herd or small group spook, it's almost always caused by some outside force influencing their behavior (a dog running toward them, a mountain biker zipping by, or a coyote approaching them). The males do tend to be a bit more active during the rut, so another deer can influence their behavior in some instances, too.

In my experiences our elk are even lazier. When I've been in the field with camera equipment I've sometimes watched these animals for a ridiculous amount of time just waiting for them to move, simply so I could get a better picture.

The long and short of this is only to say that, yes, in theory you could conceivably lose a game animal in 0.74 seconds. But, it's not highly likely, especially if you're choosy about the shot you take (and especially when considering that it would be rare for my shot to be taken exactly at the longest distance I said I'd consider taking a shot — 0.6 sec to 500 yards, 0.47 to 400 yards, etc). For that matter, the 300M shot that you consider to be acceptable will still take about 0.38 seconds to reach its target, and an animal that decides to lunge into a sprint at exactly that time could still conceivably be lost or gut shot!

Anyway, there's a flip side to this coin, too… when shooting at longer distances you often have a wider field of view (at least in the meadows where these shots would typically happen out here). As such, an animal that doesn't immediately drop is more likely to stay visible for a follow-up shot when you start out further away from it in the first place. The goal, of course, is always to drop the beast as if it was struck by a bolt of lightning, but that doesn't always happen even with the best shot, from the most powerful rifle, at the shortest distance.

Ultimately, if I wanted an absolute guarantee I'd buy my meat at the local grocery store… I can usually outwit it, and the stalk is quite easy, unless it's on sale during a pre-holiday shopping experience.

 

[Ankeny]

coloradokevin:

I gave up on Berger bullets for good last year. I was shooting the 140 VLD hunting in my 6.5-284. After shooting a dozen elk with that bullet, I finally had enough. I don't want to start a war, but the Berger hunting bullet is nothing more than their old match bullet with the butter soft core and a thin J4 jacket.

The 130 and 140 Accubond bullets shoot OK for me, but I am going to try the new Barnes 127 grain LRX. After finding the sweet spot for bullet jump and an accuracy node with H4831SC, I am getting .5 moa and plenty of speed. I use the Barnes TTSX in my 7mm-08 and it works very well on elk.

I also have a 6.5 Creedmoor and I use the 140 Berger in it for prarie dogs. The 127 LRX shoots lights out in that rifle also. I wouldn't be afraid to use the Creedmoor on elk at reasonable distances if I didn't already have the 6.5-284 dialed in and the dope calculated and verified. Good luck with your search.

 

[coloradokevin]

coloradokevin:

I gave up on Berger bullets for good last year. I was shooting the 140 VLD hunting in my 6.5-284. After shooting a dozen elk with that bullet, I finally had enough. I don't want to start a war, but the Berger hunting bullet is nothing more than their old match bullet with the butter soft core and a thin J4 jacket.

The 130 and 140 Accubond bullets shoot OK for me, but I am going to try the new Barnes 127 grain LRX. After finding the sweet spot for bullet jump and an accuracy node with H4831SC, I am getting .5 moa and plenty of speed. I use the Barnes TTSX in my 7mm-08 and it works very well on elk.

I also have a 6.5 Creedmoor and I use the 140 Berger in it for prarie dogs. The 127 LRX shoots lights out in that rifle also. I wouldn't be afraid to use the Creedmoor on elk at reasonable distances if I didn't already have the 6.5-284 dialed in and the dope calculated and verified. Good luck with your search.

Thanks for sharing your experiences. The construction of the Berger bullet was a concern to me as well, as I've heard others describe it much as you have (basically as more of a match bullet than a hunting bullet). Incidentally, what kind of issues did you find with it when you shot elk? Did it just zip through like a FMJ? Fragment too soon to be effective? Or was it simply inconsistent on target?

I'm definitely going to play around with some of the Barnes offerings, though I've been mostly searching for a bullet that is of a similar profile to the 139/140 grain offerings I normally run in my gun (I believe the Barnes suggests that I drop into the 120's for their bullets — which matches what you're now using). I'm not sure how well the 120's will run in my gun, but I might give them a test shoot to find out.

 

[35 Whelen]

Interesting. The OP asked about accurate loads and not about yall's opinion about how far one should shoot.

Some of us just don't care about what you consider acceptable hunting ranges.

Well....what'd you expect? Anyone who's done even a modicum of shooting at ranges over 300 yds. or so, from FIELD positions, will understand the ramifications of shooting at difficult to kill game at 3/8 of a mile with a .26 caliber cartridge.
I can tell you from personal experience that it's much easier to talk about it than it is to DO it.

35W

 

[coloradokevin]

Well....what'd you expect? Anyone who's done even a modicum of shooting at ranges over 300 yds. or so, from FIELD positions, will understand the ramifications of shooting at difficult to kill game at 3/8 of a mile with a .26 caliber cartridge.
I can tell you from personal experience that it's much easier to talk about it than it is to DO it.

Well, I assure you I've done more than a modicum of shooting, and I certainly didn't post this thread to ask a bunch of strangers if they thought I could land my shots where I intended to in field conditions at the distances I mentioned. I do know my own abilities.

As for the terminal ballistics, that's an issue of endless debate among hunters, and probably has been since the first caveman chucked a rock at a passing mammal. I doubt we'll come to a consensus on that issue.

But, bullet selection is something that is not as hot of a topic. Sure, people have their favorites, but for the most part it seems like everyone accepts that a hunting bullet of some variety should be used for big game… I'm just looking for an accurate one.


To address your post, how's this for a field position? It's on the clock at a small match, from shooting sticks... 6 targets to engage, with 5 of them being beyond 300 yards. Targets are 5 and 10" diamonds, and the rules say that you cannot rest on the tall wood pile, nor may your rifle support (shooting sticks) have more than 2 points of contact with the ground.




This second shot was taken at the same match, as I hastily constructed a position to engage an 875 yard target on a mountainside across this valley. I was running short on time on this stage, and ended up in this goofy position because I needed to send the shot within 10 seconds of the time that I realized I had run out of bipod height short of spotting the target.




Shooting in field conditions at medium to long range targets is exactly what I like to do! It's how I spend the vast majority of my time shooting, and it's what my equipment and practice is designed around. So, why wouldn't I want to apply this interest (within reason, as I've mentioned) toward my hunting as well?

 

[Ankeny]

Incidentally, what kind of issues did you find with it when you shot elk?

The two biggest issues (with 140s in 6.5 and 168 in 7mm) are the bullets are to frangible (splatter effect), and with the long ogive the point can bend and the bullet can take off in about any direction. Kind of leaves one scratching their head when the bullet goes a couple of inches into ballistic gelatin, then makes a turn and exits out the side. BTW, nice boom stick in the pics.

 

[coloradokevin]

The two biggest issues (with 140s in 6.5 and 168 in 7mm) are the bullets are to frangible (splatter effect), and with the long ogive the point can bend and the bullet can take off in about any direction. Kind of leaves one scratching their head when the bullet goes a couple of inches into ballistic gelatin, then makes a turn and exits out the side. BTW, nice boom stick in the pics.

Thanks, and thanks for that analysis. I've only done gelatin testing with pistol, carbine, and shotgun loads for work in the past, but I can understand what you're saying about how some bullets perform (or fail to).

The frangibility of the VLD Hunting was a concern to me, and they seemed to advertise that as a benefit (if it goes deeply enough I suppose it could be, but it seems a bit unreliable in theory). I generally prefer good controlled expansion with a bullet, and weight retention appears to help with penetration. The other thing I've sometimes seen is that a bullet that is supposed to fragment will cook right on through like a FMJ (not saying that this happens with the VLD necessarily, but it happens with some bullets).

So, I greatly appreciate hearing your firsthand experience with that VLD hunting bullet!

 

[wankerjake]

All that said, the first bullets to try that would be on my list for a new hunting bullet load workup would be Nosler Accubonds, Berger VLDs and Barnes TSX (not necessarily in that order). For long range, the Accubonds and VLDs would have the edge.

That's where I'd start as well. I'm also not crazy about your choice in a cartridge and distance for elk (antleope anything that's accurate would be fine), but, what matters most is that the bullet gets to the target. I'd try and tweak the Accubond if I were you, or look at Swift Scirocco (looks like they are made in 130gr). I have no first hand experience with Bergers (VLD hunting is all I care about) other than they are the most accurate bullet around, but people say they work great on elk (with bigger cartridges though). I don't like the ballistic tip/frangible theory especially for elk but honestly people kill stuff with them and if you hit them right they work great. The Berger VLD is likely to meet your accuracy needs.

I guess if it was me, I'd use a bonded bullet and adjust my range down to accommodate the decrease in accuracy. 600 can be the goal but if you can't get a hunting bullet that far consistently then rethink it.

I missed if you've hunted elk before but I'll say this. It can be done with less and shot placement is important. There's a lot of room on an elk to put a bullet that won't knock it down and you have a rodeo on your hands. They're easy to hit because they are big, they can be hard to kill because they are big. They carry bullets well if you don't break something important. Make a good shot, post pics when you get one. If you hunt elk at distance over the years, my guess is that you will move up in cartridge.

 

[coloradokevin]

I guess if it was me, I'd use a bonded bullet and adjust my range down to accommodate the decrease in accuracy. 600 can be the goal but if you can't get a hunting bullet that far consistently then rethink it.

I agree completely with your reasoning here. And, if the new bullet has a lower B.C. than my match bullet, and thereby arrives on-target with less energy, I would also adjust my theoretical maximum range accordingly.

I do hope everyone understands that I'm not planning to load this rifle up and head out to the field in October in search of a 600 yard shot to take at an elk. Instead, I thought about taking this gun on a hunt at some point, for any of the big game ungulates in this state, and I'm merely seeking a projectile that will be both accurate and effective to that distance.

I honestly think the weight of this gun will make it far more applicable to pronghorn hunts than elk hunts, and pronghorn are quite easy to kill if you make a shot connect.

When I stated my theoretical maximum distance it was with a scenario in mind where I just happen to find myself in good conditions that I can easily dope, with an animal standing in a position for a good clean shot, where I know I can deliver the round to exactly where it needs to be, and the distance of the shot is less than or equal to 600 yards. When I speak of maximum ranges I'm speaking of it as exactly that… not an ideal distance, but a distance beyond which I won't even consider taking the shot.

Perhaps this is mildly analogous to the turn around times that a lot of mountaineers set on big climbs… as a margin of safety it's often decided ahead of time that they'll stop moving uphill at a certain time if they haven't made the summit. That's not to say that they will always keep going uphill until that time, as weather or fatigue may force them down sooner, nor is it to say that they couldn't theoretically climb safely beyond their turn around time. It's just used as a margin of safety: "no matter what we won't keep going uphill after 1pm… if we haven't made the summit yet, we'll just turn around".

So, I guess I was trying to say: "no matter what, I won't be shooting an elk with this rifle at 601 yards".

What I've obviously got going for me is a good accurate rifle that I've comfortably shot at twice that distance. What I've got going against me is that the .260 Rem is clearly on the smaller side for elk. Everything else has created this very opinionated debate

But, I do agree that a good bonded bullet sounds most suitable for this purpose, assuming that I can find one that shoots decent, or can tweak the current load I have to achieve such results.

 

[coloradokevin]

Since the following video has a few elements that have been discussed in this thread, and the hunter is shooting one of the bullets (a Berger VLD) that we discussed, I thought I'd link it here. Personally, this is not a shot that I would take, but it does demonstrate that an elk can be easily killed by a small bullet at long ranges.

The shooter is firing a .243 Win with a 105 grain Berger VLD bullet, and absolutely plants a cow elk at 688 yards.

I don't like this shot personally, for the following reasons:

1) It's even further than the maximum range I felt would produce a reliable kill.
2) It uses a cartridge even less potent (terminally) than the .260 Rem. At that distance the bullet would probably produce around 1000 ft-lbs of energy @ about 2075 fps.
3) Most importantly: the terrain they are shooting would put them probably an hour or more behind any wounded animal they had to track, and that animal could pretty quickly disappear from view if wounded.

I wouldn't have taken that shot myself. But, that shot demonstrates that even a small pill can quickly plant a large animal if it's delivered to the vitals!

https://youtu.be/hY0w1c-gf18

 

[rjfunk]

Originally posted by colaradokevin

The other thing I've sometimes seen is that a bullet that is supposed to fragment will cook right on through like a FMJ (not saying that this happens with the VLD necessarily, but it happens with some bullets).

I good friend of mine shot 180gr Berger hunting vld's in his 300wsm. On one occasion he shot a wolf at around 450 yards. It took off running. He took 3 follow up shots (he was sure he hit it with the first round)
They found it the next day and the taxidermist found three bullet holes - they just penciled through like a FMJ. The wolf should be tough enough to get them to expand.

This is only one instance, but it shows it can happen.

 

[35 Whelen]

A few parting thoughts....

People don't post videos of lost or wounded game. So for every elk killed at extended ranges with small caliber bullets, you can bet there are many, many more wounded or completely missed.

I understand the thrill of long range shooting. My current enjoyment comes from wailing my 200 yd. gong with standard SA revolvers. But I wouldn't dream of attempting those type shots on game.

Shooting static targets at known ranges in no way simulates field conditions. Hunt long enough and you'll figure this out.

Set up for a long range shot and eventually you're going to have an elk walk out under your nose or you'll jump one on the way to your hunting spot. Hunt long enough and you'll figure this out.

Bullet energy has exactly nothing to do with, and is no indication of, how well a bullet will or will not kill.

35W

 

[illinoisburt]

I will add my support for the Speer Hot Cor bullets. They have decent BC and I have always gotten good accuracy with no terminal effect issues. Nothing fancy, reasonably priced and they just work.