What's the biggest animal a 308 will kill? Elk?

[twoblink]

I know there's a story that a .22LR killed an elephant.. and I'm sure a 9mm up the snout will kill a bear; the problem is getting that close (or do you REALLY want to be that close??)

hehehe

A small problem of multiple engagements with the teams that the human side usually lost.

You have a way with understatements my friend..

800-1000lb bear vs. 175lb human. 6" retractable claws vs. 3" pocket knife.

BTW.. From what my friend who works up in Oregon as a park Ranger says; a 3" buck knife against a bear will not penetrate the blubber...

Wasn't there talk of a slug from a 4 gauge shotgun for bears I seem to recall? Talk about a shoulder buster!!

 

[Wildalaska]

also seem to remember the final rifle selection was the Interarms Mark X, chopped of with some fiddle on the iron sights, NO SCOPE.

Actually, USFS uses 375 H+H winchester 70s chopped down, of various vintages (O! to see a pre 64 model 70 totally trashed) with iron sights (some Williams peeps, some Wild West Ghost rings) and rem 870s, USGS uses 45/70s or 457 mags in Marlins, BLM uses uses Rem 870s IMMSMC...

USFS has a number of pre 64 70s in 30-06 that they have retired but dont have the heart to destroy....

WildandsomeofemaretotallytrashedAlaska

 

[schromf]

I think my report was from the mid 80's and seems that Winchester's of that era weren't controlled feed. Doesn't suprise me at all there is a mixed bag of equipment though, especially across different agencies. I thought they had picked up the Interarms cause of cost at that time somewhere around 400 bucks per rifle and the controlled round feed. Politics might have changed that, and I think Winchester brought the controlled round feed back somewhere not long after that.

Yeah it wouldn't suprise me at all on the condition of those rifles, coastal Alaska is as rough as it gets and I bet the gun bearer really could care less until he really needs the rifle. Just something else to carry for a survey crew.

The 475 Marlin didn't exist then.

 

[HankB]

I just finished reading Mahohboh, a book by Ron Thompson. He worked for many years as a game warden in Rhodesia, later Zimbabwe, and during his career he cropped thousands of elephants. He preferred a .458, but quite a few elephant were - and still are - being cropped by military self loading rifles - namely, FAL variants, chambered in 7.62 x 51 NATO.

Also known as the .308.

When I hunted Zimbabwe, I remember hearing much the same from both my PH and the warden of the Gonarezhou Park. (Who also used it on poachers . . . but that's another story.)

In any case, Thompson seemed to like the rapid fire qualities of the SLR, useful when cropping a whole herd of elephants. But he noted that there was a world of difference in using this cartridge on cow elephants vs. the much larger mature bull elephants. He has one tale of a bull absorbing multiple head shots, only to - luckily - be dropped by the last bullet in his magazine. The military bullets just wouldn't penetrate all that bone mass and reach the brain.

I certainly wouldn't advocate hunting elephant with a .308, but with the right ammo and good shot placement, it ought to do for all thin-skinned, non-dangerous game in the world, with the POSSIBLE exceptions of eland and giraffe.

 

[twoblink]

Well, I'm not too worried about elephants.. I doubt the San Diego Zoo's gonna let me shoot their herd

308 should do most anything in north america.. and that's probably the end of my concern there...

 

[labgrade]

.308, with properly constructed bullets in the right place will kill anything on this earth. "In the right place" makes a big difference, depending upon the critter, how dangerous, how close - yada.

It wouldn't be my first choice for any dangerous game, nor for some of the bigger stuff offered, as there's better out there, but still.

As I've mentioned maybe way too many times, I'm currently shooting a Rem M7 18.5" bbl & a Barnes 165 gr XBT at 2400 fps for elk - rightly equivalent to a .30-40 Krag/.300 Savage to make no difference.

It takes elk all day long. I can see no difference whatsoever between my old Fed Premium (& handload equivalent) of a Sierra Gameking 180 in .30-06 - other than the ballistics. I'm sure the bullet construction helps, although I've yet to recover one. I've recovered plenty of the '06 bullets, but not one yet from the .308 - says something, somehow.

Equivalent elk, same-same shot - distance/placement, etc. & the .308 shot clean through while the '06 stayed within.

I dunno.

Thing is, both got to have the "after check" done - had to have dead elk to do that.

.308's plenty enough if you do your part.

 

[JShirley]

With expanding ammo, slower rounds will usually penetrate deeper. For the first and second generation hollow points in defensive pistols, this lead to some professionals preferring "good ole hardball", because some of the early JHP weren't penetrating deeply enough.

This phenomenon is also why a lightly constructed rifle bullet is less of an overpenetration threat when used defensively, than a handgun bullet. (As you get further away, the light rifle bullet will penetrate more deeply, at least until one reaches a certain point.)

 

[twoblink]

I saw some differences between bullet tips and it's a big difference. I have no idea why, but my friend shot a deer with a 308 but a softpoint, and it was a perfect heart shot (I should know, I pulled the bullet out of the heart when we dressed it) and the internals were like liquid, but one entry and no exit.. But I've seen him shoot with a nosler, and that was like "Bang!" and the deer just dropped.

 

[Bottom Gun]

Although I prefer to use my .338 Win for elk, this year it was raining the morning the season opened so I took my foul weather rifle (AR-10 in .308) out instead. I had never shot anything with a .308 but was confident it would perform adequately since I had taken elk in the past using my 30/06.

An hour into the season, I made a lung shot on an elk at about 225 yards. I was using my handloads with 180 gr Nosler Partitions in front of Win 748 powder.

At the shot, the elk stopped in its tracks, stood for a moment, walked another 15-20 yards, and dropped.
The bullet lodged in the lung on the far side and did not exit.

The bottom line is, the .308 worked for elk. It didn't put the animal down with as much authority as my .33 caliber, but it did work.

 

[labgrade]

I used the same gun/velocities, etc. with a 165 Nosler BT for deer - figured it'd be a slayer.

Only once, but I shot a doe deer (~120 lbs) 5 stinking times to finally bring her down. Good hits - yada. When finally cleaning her out, I found all five bullets on the off-side, expanded as expected .....darned thing just wouldn't die, I guess.

Same load with a Barnes does elk all day long, but with the mentioned bullet, didn't do deer for squat. Likely a 110-130 would've done much better - maybe.

I dunno.

For every deer-thing I've ever done, a .243 just slays them DRT - the .308 hasn't.

Had one deer, shot with the elk-load go over 100 yards - shot at about 15 yards, & kinda expectced it in a way.

Everything deer I've ever shot with 6the .243 just drops, maybe with a bit of a jump, but dies immediately.

The .308 seems to take a bit longer somehow - except for one elk at 15 yards & shot straight through the butt & did drop right there.

 

[Bottom Gun]

It may be that the .243, with it's higher velocity, imparts a little more shock to deer sized game than the .308 does with less velocity and heavier bullets.

 

[twoblink]

Have you considered a slighly lighter bullet, like a 147 or 155 grain? A bit more zip might provide a little bit more shock to the animal.

 

[Bottom Gun]

I've found the 150 and 165 gr Hornady SST bullets work well in my AR-10 since these rifles prefer very pointed bullets and the nylon tips keep deformation to a minimum.
They are accurate and expand well but I wouldn't want to use them for anything larger than a deer.

 

[labgrade]

Beats me, Guys,

I haven't kilt a huge number of bigg(ger) game, but have some experience, & just passing it on. FWIW.

I've shot a 1/2 dozen deer with .243's 87 gr'ers & they always died easily within their initial jumps.

I've shot 2 deer, one with the 165 Nosler & one with the Barnes 165 XBT - the first took 5 hits to bring down - the second ran over 100 yards.

Not drawing any conclusions here, just mentiong what happened.

But, Evey elk I've shot with this same load dropped rather rapidly - easiely within 30-40 yards - & with relatively same-same hits.

That one doe with the .308 Noslers should have been DRT & ended up running off perhaps 1-1/2 miles, with decent enough subsequent hits.

I dunno.

I figure from my experience/s, deer should have a maximum velocity, while elk need more penetrative.

Again, I dunno, I'm not an expert.

Any event, the .308 will drop & kill anything this world's got to offer - just depends on whether r not you can live through the time it takes to kill it.

 

[twoblink]

Well, from what I'm reading from the reload bench's website...

.308 110 grainers will push 3100-3300 or so fps... So what kind of velocities can you make a .243 87 grainer cough up??

 

[Art Eatman]

Mr. Sierra sez the .243 87-grainer will make around 3,200 to 3,300 ft/sec from a 20" barrel.

I wouldn't use this bullet for a body shot on larger deer. Sure does ruin necks, though. About 20, that way...

, Art

 

[twoblink]

Then I see the 110 grain Vmax to be somewhat in the neighborhood of the .243 87grainer..

I'm reading a lot about "other" loads for the 308, and most anything outside the 155-180 grain range all seem to be reload country, as most labels don't provide off the shelf bullets for the two extreme ends..

 

[Delmar]

For a lot of years, the 308 has been my choice for deer, and its been my experience that 150 grains is probably the most effective performer in most bullet styles.

Tried some 165 grain ballistic tips loaded max and they did really well if they struck something tougher than the hide and did break bones on occasion, but I had a few which missed anything really solid and I was getting quarter sized exit holes.

Moved down to 150 grain softnose Hornady's or Winchester PP in a bulk pack, and the exit hole was huge Stops them right here, right now. I handload for a 26 inch barreled Remington, so I tend to go to slightly slower burning powders than W748 to take max effect of the barrel length.

 

[twoblink]

dime size in, basketball size out??

I've noticed though, that most of what I've seen the 308's do, they don't "bang" and the deer drops. But the deer does die.... maybe only 10 yards away..

you get the same with the 165 grainers, or they just drop?

btw... 26" barrel??

 

[Delmar]

Twoblink, I have only had a couple deer take more than 10 steps when using 165 grain bullets. and most of them went down within a step or two.
I like the 150's better as they seem to knock them over right where they stand, especially when hit low on the neck which is my favorite shot when the opportunity presents itself, and ONLY when it clearly does.

And yes, I am a believer in long barrels-to me, its free velocity. I know all the rage is for short barrels, and in some situations, a short barrel is very desirable. As a handloader, I can use slightly slower burning powders to take advantage of that long tube. Understand that I am hunting over shale rock and cactus with short hills all around. Put a stand up on top of one of those hills, and you have shots ranging from 50 to 500 yards. My primary 308 is a Rem Varmint Synthetic and clearly NOT a walking weapon-unless you want to put wheels on it.

You can get really picky in the Texas hill country. Where I go, you can take 2 bucks and 2 doe on a single license, and since the die off they had in 1996, the deer are very plentiful. Provided its a decent size, I'll take the first one I see-buck or doe for the meat locker, and then I can get particular.

After hunting there for better than a dozen years with a 308, I aquired a 270 a couple of years back in a Rem 700. As the classic load seems to be a 130 grain over varying amounts of 4831, I loaded up a few and the first deer I shot with it was 100-125 yards and holy-moly, it blew up the chest so badly I almost didn't have a wind pipe on the animal to pull on when I field dressed it. I've since went to 140 grain Hornadys and they do the job instantly but the damage is less.

 

[Art Eatman]

Twoblink, I'm with Delmar on the 26" barrel, but like he said, it's because of the terrain. In my part of SW Texas, deer are sparse. Your only shot of the entire season might be at 400 to 500 yards. I want all the "goody" I can get. My hunting is mostly walking across country, so the long tube is no bother.

Another point: Compare the ballistics of an '06 in a 26" barrel with the ballistics of a .300 WinMag from a 22" barrel. They're pretty darned close.

, Art

 

[twoblink]

Art,

where can I find ballistics data on 308 with respect to velocity of different length barrels?

hmm..

"Honey... I need a 26" barreled gun.."

"Why?"

"Cause Art and Delmar said so.."

 

[Delmar]

"Cause Art and Delmar said so.."

That should be sufficient for the Mrs

 

[Art Eatman]

twoblink, most of the reloading handbooks will give the length of the barrel on their test rifle.

Hokay: Mr. Hodgon sez 26". A 150-grain bullet ahead of 51.0 grains of H380 gives 2876 ft/sec @ 51,500 CUP.

Mr. Speer doesn't give a barrel length.

Mr. Sierra's Second Edition sez 26", and 2,900 ft/sec on about the same load as Mr. Hodgon.

Some here and back at TFL have claimed higher velocities. I dunno.

Anyhow, for shorter barrels, subtract 50 ft/sec/inch.

FWIW, an '06 wil lose about 70 ft/sec/inch, as will the other somewhat overbore cartridges such as the .270 and .25-'06. The "Maggies" will lose even more.

Art

 

[twoblink]

I personally believe if you can push 150 grain nosler @ 3,000fps... then you can pretty much kill anything that is walking on 2 or 4 legs in this world...

Thanks Art for then numbers.. Now I'll need to start researching my choices of 26" rifles...