270wsm, 280rem or 338fed for Elk?

[Magnumsrule]

I just watched a show on tv. They took a bull elk at 801 yards. One shot. Looked to be a 300 win or 338 win but they did not mention the cal while i was watching. They sure took there time getting the yardage and windage right. But thats what you need to do when making long shots like that.

[.280Rem]

Originally Posted by Phil Lozano

Seems to me, pressure is pressure. It takes about the same pressure to push the same weight bullet the same speed.

However, larger capacity case tend to lower the pressure. But, the felt recoil will be approximately the same.

JMO


Best,
Phil
______________________________
Stay out of sight and down wind
Professional Hunter ~ Tanzania

I was a believer that equal wt bullet at equal speed in equal wt rifles meant the same recoil. That recoil calculator, and others that I trust to know say that more powder equals more recoil.

As for pressure. For instance in my .280, a 140 driven at 3000fps will create higher pressures with H4350 than with R-22. The slower burning powder will give less pressure for the same velocity.

[turner]

Originally Posted by .280Rem

I was a believer that equal wt bullet at equal speed in equal wt rifles meant the same recoil. That recoil calculator, and others that I trust to know say that more powder equals more recoil.

As for pressure. For instance in my .280, a 140 driven at 3000fps will create higher pressures with H4350 than with R-22. The slower burning powder will give less pressure for the same velocity.

Adventures with the .300 Winchester Short Magnum | Guns Magazine | Find Articles at BNET.com

Winchester Short Magnum -- Browning Information and News

A season with the shorts

Short Magnum Cartridges

Short Magnum Trifecta

The Short Mag Revolution


When shall we start the lawsuits for false advertising and fraud? Of course I may not be nearly as experienced as you with SM calibers, but I don't think yours (nor anyone else's recoil calculators) utilize any factors concerning the newly designed cases and powders; simply caliber, bullet weight, rifle weight and velocity.

Quoting from the 5th article listed: " The problem with this is that, mathematically, the difference isn't all that great, while the difference in felt recoil between a .300 WSM and a .300 Win. Mag. of similar weight and feel is noticeable, so there must be some other dynamic involved with efficient ignition and burning that I don't fully understand."

And, another quote from someone you might possibly have heard about: Craig Boddington.

"There is another advantage that is extremely hard to pin down and even harder to explain-but I've shot enough of these rifles that I also believe it's real: Reduction in felt recoil. Partly this is purely a matter of physics, which can be proven. The weight of the powder charge is part of the equation that yields recoil velocity. Less powder weight equals less recoil velocity, and recoil velocity is a key factor (together with gun weight) in deriving foot-pounds of recoil energy. So you have less recoil when you burn less powder, and that's a statement of fact. The problem is that the difference is so slight that I'm not sure you can consistently feel it . . . and yet you can consistently feel less recoil when you compare a rifle chambered to a short magnum cartridge against a rifle of similar weight chambered to a belted magnum delivering similar performance."

"We can easily measure foot pounds of recoil, but felt recoil is much more subjective and almost impossible to pin down. What I'd like to say here is, "Trust me." Or, better, "Just go shoot one of these things and then you'll believe me." Of course that doesn't cut it. So, with no physics background whatsoever, I can only suggest that the same smooth and efficient burning curve that yields more energy with less powder and contributes to accuracy also acts to smooth out the recoil impulse. Compared to belted magnum rifles of similar weight, there is a noticeable difference."

[Phil Lozano]

I was just about to post something about "recoil velocity", however, Mr. Turner has already done so.

For those that would like to calculate the recoil, and recoil velocity of your (or any) rifle, there is a link over at my site.

Best,
Phil
______________________________
Stay out of sight and down wind
Professional Hunter ~ Tanzania

[.280Rem]

Turner,

I'm not arguing with you! We're agreeing! At least I think we are. "Less powder= less recoil. the 300WSM/SAUM are capable of near 300WM velocity, but do it with less powder (around 7 grains less giver or take than the 300WM) because the case capacity is slightly less.

From Chuck Hawks Recoil table:

Rifle wt / Recoil Energy/ Rec. Vel.

300 Rem. SAUM (180 at 2960) 8.25 / 23.5 / 13.6.

300 WSM (180 at 2970) 8.25 / 23.8 / 13.6.

300 Win. Mag. (180 at 2960) 8.5 / 25.9 / 14.0

[Brother Bob]

Elk Cartridges
By Chuck Hawks

Illustration courtesy of Hornady Mfg. Co.Elk rifles and/or cartridges is a controversial subject that I should probably avoid like the plague. Everyone seems to have an opinion, and most of them are contradictory. For a writer, it is likely to be a lose/lose situation. However, I will give it a shot (so to speak).
Just how big is an elk? Of course, individual animals vary in weight. According to the information compiled by Edward A. Matunas, an average mature male Rocky Mountain elk weighs about 500 pounds. A very large male might weigh 800 pounds, and a very large female about 600 pounds. In extreme cases elk can weigh as much as 1100 pounds. The Roosevelt elk of the Pacific Northwest's rain forests are larger. An average male probably weighs about 700 pounds on the hoof, and an extreme example might scale 1200 pounds. For the purposes of this article I am assuming an animal weighing about 600 pounds.
Please bear in mind that in all cases and for all calibers I am assuming that the hunter uses a bullet of adequate weight, sectional density, and expansion characteristics for the cartridge recommended, and gets it into a vital spot (usually the heart/lung area) of the elk. It doesn't have to be a perfect shot that slips between two ribs and blows up the heart, but I am assuming a good shot with an adequate bullet.
A generality is that around 1200 ft. lbs. of energy on target is necessary for humane elk kills, and some sources recommend 1500 ft. lbs. I think that bullet placement is much more important than kinetic energy, but these sorts of figures can serve as a rough guide to the maximum range at which a given load should be used.
One of the real problems with cartridge recommendations is the vitality and state of mind of the individual animal when shot. Most hunters have noticed how relatively easy it is to kill a relaxed animal that is just standing around, and how difficult it can be to stop an animal fleeing for its life. These are variables that are hard to account for in any list. For the record, all of the cartridge suggestions below assume a reasonably undisturbed animal, not one high on adrenalin.
It would be too cumbersome to list every adequate elk cartridge, and I would inadvertently leave out someone's favorite in any case. So the cartridges mentioned below are just examples of typical satisfactory elk cartridges. If a cartridge is not listed it does not mean it is no good. Look for a cartridge with similar ballistics. If you find one, then the cartridge in question is also probably adequate.
I think it might be wise to divide elk cartridges into four categories as follows:
1. Cartridges primarily intended for shooting deer and black bear (CXP2 class game) at woods ranges that are also adequate for elk at short range (100 yards or less). These cartridges are at the low end of the power scale as elk cartridges due to their limited retained energy. Their advantage is that most hunters can shoot them more accurately than the more powerful elk cartridges. Included in this group are the .30-30 Winchester, .30 Remington, .303 Savage, .32 Winchester Special, .35 Remington, .375 Winchester, .44 Remington Magnum and similar cartridges.
2. Cartridges that develop higher velocity and shoot flatter than the .30-30 class and generally develop more energy, but use smaller diameter bullets that limit their effectiveness as elk cartridges. Thus these cartridges are also at their best at relatively modest ranges (perhaps to 100 yards, or maybe a little more). As with the cartridges in Category 1, these kick less than the cartridges in groups 3 and 4 and recoil sensitive hunters will find them easier with which to achieve precise bullet placement. Included in this group are the 6.5x55, .260 Remington, 6.5mm Remington Magnum, 7x57, 7mm-08 Remington and similar cartridges.
3. Combination antelope, deer, black bear, and elk cartridges that are more powerful than strictly necessary for medium size big game. These are more powerful than the cartridges in the first two categories. Most are excellent all-around cartridges, and adequate for shooting elk at medium range (approximately 200+ yards); but they are not necessarily perfect for game at either end of the size spectrum. Many hunters find the muzzle blast and recoil of these cartridges intimidating, particularly when shooting the heavier weight bullets, but few will admit it. This category includes such cartridges as the 6.5x68, .264 Winchester Magnum, .270 Winchester, .270 WSM, .270 Weatherby Magnum, .284 Winchester, 7x64 Brenneke, .280 Remington, the 7mm Magnums, .30-40 Krag, .300 Savage, .307 Winchester, .308 Winchester, .30-06 Springfield, .303 British, 8x57JS and similar cartridges.
4. Ideal elk cartridges. These are good cartridges to consider if you are buying a rifle specifically for elk hunting and don't mind substantial recoil and muzzle blast. Their principle drawback is that most shooters do mind the recoil and muzzle blast, particularly of the magnums, and simply cannot do their best shooting with these cartridges. For long range elk shooting (200-300+ yards) the list is basically limited to cartridges such as the .300 Magnums, 8mm Magnums, and .338 Magnums. At short to medium range (200 yards or less) the list expands to include the .338 Federal, .338-06 A-Square, .348 Winchester, .356 Winchester, .358 Winchester, .35 Whelen, .350 Remington Magnum, 9.3x74R, .444 Marlin, .450 Marlin, .45-70 and similar medium and big bore cartridges.
Bullet placement is the most important factor in killing power. (Memorize that sentence!) I suspect that is why we hear such divergent views about many of the cartridges commonly used for elk hunting. The .270 Winchester would be a good example of this. Some hunters report that the .270 is a nearly ideal elk cartridge. Others consider it adequate, but not ideal. Still others consider the .270 worthless for elk hunting, and recommend nothing less than a .300 Magnum as the absolute minimum elk cartridge.
The truth is that most hunters simply have not shot enough elk, or observed enough elk killed, to be able to draw valid conclusions from their personal experience. It is very instructive to hang around the check out station for a controlled hunt--I have done this. There you can benefit from the experiences of lots of successful (and some not so successful) hunters.
Based on a fair amount of research, I regard the .270 as an adequate elk cartridge. If a hunter puts a decent 130-150 grain .277" bullet into a vital spot, the result is a dead elk. But the .270 will not bowl over even a relaxed elk. Neither, for that matter, will most other calibers. An elk is a big animal!
A lot of hunters are not particularly good shots, and a great many shooters flinch regularly with high intensity calibers like the .270 Winchester. So they think they placed the shot well, when actually they only wounded the animal. A .270 bullet will not bag an elk if it does not hit in an immediately vital spot. The elk may die later, but by that time it will probably be far away. These hunters are very apt to blame the rifle for their bad shooting.
The result is that guys who can shoot and who put their first bullet into an elk's vitals think the .270 is a perfectly adequate elk cartridge; those who can't and don't think it is lousy. They often conclude that nothing less than a .338 Magnum will stop an elk.
Of course, if you put a bullet in the paunch, a .338 Winchester Magnum probably does have a better chance of slowing down an elk than a .270--but you are not supposed to shoot any animal in the paunch in the first place! And even with a .338 a paunch hit can not be relied on to anchor an elk.
Most of the guys who can't shoot don't recover the animals they wound, but some do. It makes me wonder when a guy at a check out station tells me how lousy the .270 (or .308, .30-06, whatever) is at killing elk, and that next year he is going to replace his wimpy .270 with a .300 Magnum. Then I examine his trophy and find a .270 bullet hole in the muscle of the neck that missed the vertebrae, two .270 bullets in the guts, another in the ham, and finally one .300 Magnum bullet in the lungs--put there by his hunting partner. I am no forensic wizard, but I can pretty much figure out what happened.
But this guy is going to tell 50 people that the .270 is no good for elk. And I mean that literally, as market research has shown that the typical bum story is broadcast to about 50 people by word of mouth. If he puts his version of the story on some Internet forum it may reach thousands, which is why I totally ignore Internet forums, bulletin boards and the like.
All of this makes it difficult and even risky to suggest calibers for specific purposes. I have tried to be reasonably conservative, but not excessivley so, in my recommendations.
As you can see from Category 3 above, I consider the popular all-around cartridges like the .270, .308 and .30-06 adequate, but maybe not "ideal," for elk. Perhaps the .300 Magnums, 8mm Magnums, and .338 Magnums are the perfect elk cartridges--if the hunter can shoot them well.
Choose a cartridge more powerful than a .338 Magnum and you are getting into the over-gunned area. A 9.3mm, .375, .416, or .458 magnum will certainly kill elk reliably, but they are simply not necessary. And the weight of such guns, plus their outsized recoil, is a handicap to most hunters. In fact, everyone can shoot more accurately with a less powerful rifle, so why would anyone handicap themselves by using a Big Bertha caliber when it is neither necessary nor desirable?
I would much rather see an elk hunter carrying a .308 that he can shoot well rather than a .300 Magnum that causes him to flinch. Elk are big, vital animals, but they are not indestructible. Use a reasonably adequate caliber within its energy and trajectory limits, an appropriate bullet, and most of all get that bullet into a vital spot!

[Phil Lozano]

Brother Bob,

Thanks for posting that. I found it interesting and . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . a bit surprising.

Many of those cartridges I would not include in the group Chuck put them in, e.g. . . some in group 4, I would put in group 3.

Best,
Phil
______________________________
Stay our of sight and down wind
Professional Hunter ~ Tanzania

[turner]

I've read this article before but have wondered about some of the rankings.... mainly how a 338/06 A-Square is rated below a .338WM when none of it's loadings in the "Expanded and Improved Ballistics tables" (also compiled by Mr Hawks) shows no loading below a ton of energy at 300yds while showing 1 from the .338WM does drop below this benchmark; and also that NO loading shown in the accompanying tables of the .338WM's 4 listed, matches the 250grSPBT loading of the .338/06's energy at 300yds. Take a look, no apples and oranges, simply black and white. Simply odd.

338 Federal (180 BT)2830/32002590/26702350/22152130/1820.338 Federal (185 TSX)2750/31062547/26642353/22752169/1932.338 Federal (210 NP)
2630/32252415/27192211/22792016/1895.////338-06 (200 BT)2750/33582553/28942364/24822184/2118.338-06 (210 NP)2750/35272526/29752312/24032109/2074.338-06 (250 SPBT)2500/34962374/31292252/28162134/2528.////338 Win. Mag. (200 PSP)2960/38902658/31372375/25052110/1977.338 Win. Mag. (210 NP)2830/37342602/31572385/26532179/2214.338 Win. Mag. (225 SP)2920/42592678/35832449/29962232/2489.338 Win. Mag. (250 NP)2660/39252470/33952300/29252120/2505.330 Dakota (250 BX)2900/4668

[Magnumsrule]

I find it odd that a 338-06 would have more energy than a 338 win mag. And unless im reading your numbers wrong dosnt the 338 win mag have more energy?

[Rattle'em up]

According to Chuck Hawks the 45-70 is a 200yrd ELK cartridge anybody want to speculate on that?

[Magnumsrule]

I agree that is streatching the truth. However there is also a story in the nosler reloading guide (there is a story about every cartridge) about Brian Pearce using a 45-70 to hunt cape buffalo. It was 100 yards away when he shot. Apparently it broke both of the bulls sholders, excited and broke both of the sholders on the cow behind it. THe bullet was found on the offside hide of the cow. Now either he is streatching the truth, or everything lined up exactly, and every grain of powder burned to perfection!

[Phil Lozano]

I would love to have seen that 45/70 go through one Buffalo and into another.
As I said where I posted photos of the Buffalo here, the client was using a 458 Win. Mag. with 500 grain solids at under 100 yards and the bullets barely exited.

There is no way a 45/70 can be loaded up to match a 458 Winnie in velocity.

"You should have seen the size of the fish I caught yesterday !"

Best,
Phil
_______________________________
Stay out of sight and down wind
Professional Hunter ~ Tanzania

[Brother Bob]

I remember reading about about the .45/70 being loaded hotter and using tipped bullets by an African Big Game hunter. He also had a custom rifle made, possibly a double barrel. Wish I could remember the site and the story. I realize that there is some hidden potential in the .45/70, but like Phil, I'm sceptical of a slug going through two bulls.

[Magnumsrule]

It went through one bull and one cow. However i too couldnt believe what i was reading. I honestly couldnt believe the guid would let him use it!

[Brother Bob]

Originally Posted by Magnumsrule

It went through one bull and one cow. However i too couldnt believe what i was reading. I honestly couldnt believe the guid would let him use it!

That's why guides charge all that money. LOL! Could you imagine a big Cape Buffalo coming out of the brush at 25 ft. and looking right at you? I don't know if I'd shoot or chit ........or maybe both! LOL! That's about the time you wonder why you didn't bring a bigger rifle, reguardless of what you're holding! LOL!

[.280Rem]

Originally Posted by Magnumsrule

I agree that is streatching the truth. However there is also a story in the nosler reloading guide (there is a story about every cartridge) about Brian Pearce using a 45-70 to hunt cape buffalo. It was 100 yards away when he shot. Apparently it broke both of the bulls sholders, excited and broke both of the sholders on the cow behind it. THe bullet was found on the offside hide of the cow. Now either he is streatching the truth, or everything lined up exactly, and every grain of powder burned to perfection!

I aint buying that. You might get me to bite on it slipping bwtween ribs and lungs, MAYBE! Breaking 4 shoulders on 2 Cape Buffs with one shot from a 45/70? No way in heII! A 50BMG maybe, but not a 45/70.

[Magnumsrule]

I dont really believe it either but if anyone else has the Nosler #6 reloading guide look up the 45-70. That is the story.

[AKHunter]

I've read this article before but have wondered about some of the rankings.... mainly how a 338/06 A-Square is rated below a .338WM when none of it's loadings in the "Expanded and Improved Ballistics tables" (also compiled by Mr Hawks) shows no loading below a ton of energy at 300yds while showing 1 from the .338WM does drop below this benchmark; and also that NO loading shown in the accompanying tables of the .338WM's 4 listed, matches the 250grSPBT loading of the .338/06's energy at 300yds. Take a look, no apples and oranges, simply black and white. Simply odd.

338 Federal (180 BT)2830/32002590/26702350/22152130/1820.338 Federal (185 TSX)2750/31062547/26642353/22752169/1932.338 Federal (210 NP)
2630/32252415/27192211/22792016/1895.////338-06 (200 BT)2750/33582553/28942364/24822184/2118.338-06 (210 NP)2750/35272526/29752312/24032109/2074.338-06 (250 SPBT)2500/34962374/31292252/28162134/2528.////338 Win. Mag. (200 PSP)2960/38902658/31372375/25052110/1977.338 Win. Mag. (210 NP)2830/37342602/31572385/26532179/2214.338 Win. Mag. (225 SP)2920/42592678/35832449/29962232/2489.338 Win. Mag. (250 NP)2660/39252470/33952300/29252120/2505.330 Dakota (250 BX)2900/4668
Last edited by turner; Yesterday at 09:58 AM.

Chalk it up to a typo, at no point does a .338-06 exceed a .338wm as you are aware. BTW that paragraph of numbers you posted makes my head hurt, I can't read enough of it to make head nor tails of it .