I've killed elk with rifles from .243 win to 338 win mag and with a 44 mag revolver I carried daily when I lived in Colorado. I have seen many others killed with all types of calibers so I know that there are calibers that are proven performers and they start at the 7mm Rem mag and get bigger. Just because you can kill elk with small calibers you cannot let the exception be the rule. You are about to go on your first elk hunt from the sounds of it so I would opt for as big a gun as you can accurately shoot and go with someone who can tell you if and when and where to shoot. Elk are big and tough. The 700 pound elk mentioned is a monster most big cows will go 400 or a little more. Good luck.
3030 For small Elk
- Thread starter Sweet Shooter
- Start date
Sweet Shooter
New member
I'm going by myself. I'm walking in (out). I'm not carrying a big rifle, I'll sleep rough for a max of three days and I am prepared. Always am. Part of what makes me want to hunt is being by myself. 400lbs cow would suit me fine on this tag.
-SS-
-SS-
Good luck. You're walking in and bushwacking. Good way to hunt. From what I've learned about 3 miles is the limit of most human's endurance when it comes to packing out an elk and if it's hot (90 during the day and 60 at night) you have about a day to do it. Quarter and bag it and hang it up. You'll be able to take a good elk out in 3 to 4 trips. Good luck on your first hunt.
Sweet Shooter
New member
@rgrundy, that is good to know. I have identified two forks of river that are about 2.5 miles long... they may be all but dry in two months but still give me a good inroad. It's the snow I worry about most... not that I worry though.
-SS-
-SS-
The 30-30 wasn't even sold prior to 1895. Wasn't a major player until after WW-1 and had to compete with the 30-06 at the same time. While it was used as a prop in an awful lot of movies, it simply wasn't used back in the day. Single shot rifles ruled the day for large game back when the cowbows and indians were fighting each other. Even hunters in the early 1900's knew it was a close range gun for that purpose and the bolt rifles, in better chamberings were available long before the 30-30 was invented.
But it will kill an elk if you are willing to accept its use at limited ranges. I'd not buy one for an elk gun. But if it is what I had, I'd go hunting.
Sweet Shooter
New member
Okay let's take conversation a step further... and only because I've been pottering about with my cz527 in 7.62 x 39 lately. That's almost up there with 3030 right. Except that I've so far failed to scope it, maybe I should consider using that? It still has about 1300flbs @ 100 yards I think. It shoots tiny groups at the range and handles beautifully. I think there are some 125 gr softies available for it.
-SS-
-SS-
The 7.62X39 is a fine deer cartridge, but due to the majority of bullet construction, I wouldn't probably use it for elk over a .30-30. You don't need to shoot the wings off a fly, but you will probably be better off with the increased penetration from the heavier bullet. If you do use the X39, get some corbon hunter ammo for it, as it's sending a 150 out there at 2300.
But, by saying all of this, I'm being a bit hypocritical, as I've killed a cow with Federal Powershok 130gr. 270s. Those are by far not a well-constructed bullet for elk. It only took 1 hit, though, and she went down. The range was about 120 yards. It's moving a lot faster than a 123 from a 7.62x39, but it's a worse bullet than a premium .30 cal.
What is the bore on that CZ? Is it .308 or a proper .311? Just like the .30-30, put your bullet where it matters. Lung shots that are broadside don't require much penetration or energy to shred some vital material. If you're Elmer Keith-ing it, then you're counting on a paunch shot angled toward the vitals. Neither of those cartridges are good for that. Of course, in my book, that's a crappy shot to take to begin with, and shouldn't be done except as a secondary, follow-up shot.
If you're patient, you can get a good broadside shot. I've only ever gutshot one cow, and that was when she was moving away after I double-lunged her. The second shot put her down.
But, by saying all of this, I'm being a bit hypocritical, as I've killed a cow with Federal Powershok 130gr. 270s. Those are by far not a well-constructed bullet for elk. It only took 1 hit, though, and she went down. The range was about 120 yards. It's moving a lot faster than a 123 from a 7.62x39, but it's a worse bullet than a premium .30 cal.
What is the bore on that CZ? Is it .308 or a proper .311? Just like the .30-30, put your bullet where it matters. Lung shots that are broadside don't require much penetration or energy to shred some vital material. If you're Elmer Keith-ing it, then you're counting on a paunch shot angled toward the vitals. Neither of those cartridges are good for that. Of course, in my book, that's a crappy shot to take to begin with, and shouldn't be done except as a secondary, follow-up shot.
If you're patient, you can get a good broadside shot. I've only ever gutshot one cow, and that was when she was moving away after I double-lunged her. The second shot put her down.
math teacher
New member
I am afraid the Sweet Shooter is putting himself at a disadvantage hunting elk with a 30-30. I tend to agree with Rgrundy that elk are a tough animal. I killed one with a 30-30, but was not impressed. While most of my rifle killed elk have been with a 7mm mag, there are lesser cartridges that are quite adequate such as the 270 or the 30-06. I have seen several elk shot with the 30-30 that ran off not to be found. Perhaps the shots were not perfectly placed, but that is the point. Brian, in your hands I am sure a 243 is adequate, but for a beginner I cannot recommend either a 30-30 or a 243. Not unless that is the most they can shoot accurately. I will concede that as Jack O'Conner said, where you hit them is more important than what you hit them with.
Brian Pfleuger
Moderator Emeritus
mathteacher, did you watch the video post above?
If not, here it is:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hY0w1c-gf18
Makes it tough to argue against the 243. That's almost 700 yards. Must be 2 1/2, 3 times farther than the longest shot most hunters will take.
As long as you've got enough energy to reach both lungs, the ONLY thing that matters is shot placement.
If not, here it is:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hY0w1c-gf18
Makes it tough to argue against the 243. That's almost 700 yards. Must be 2 1/2, 3 times farther than the longest shot most hunters will take.
As long as you've got enough energy to reach both lungs, the ONLY thing that matters is shot placement.
sc928porsche
New member
Keep it within 75 yards and you will do fine.
The problem with people who have killed or talked to people who brag about killing elk with small calibers is that very few will ever admit to the ones they wounded that got away. 
I know this happens. I've had to help run down more than a few and some were never recovered. Most of the time the lack of enough damage to get some blood trail led the hunter to believe they had missed because elk show little reaction to the shot many times.
Sweetshooter the snow in moderate amounts is your friend. I have a little sled that I drag them out on when I can. It's very little effort on fairly level ground.
I know this happens. I've had to help run down more than a few and some were never recovered. Most of the time the lack of enough damage to get some blood trail led the hunter to believe they had missed because elk show little reaction to the shot many times. Sweetshooter the snow in moderate amounts is your friend. I have a little sled that I drag them out on when I can. It's very little effort on fairly level ground.
Peetza-
The thing that amazed me in that vid was the fact that that animal was hit at all..... you can hear the wind blowing pretty hard in the audio, and I'm pretty sure it wasn't constant over the course of the bullet's flight path..... that was either some world class wind doping or just dumb luck..... There's some luck involved, too, even if the feat of wind feading was spot on: A .243 105 gr VLD, even if launched at 3000 f/sec (!) will take nearly a second to reach the animal.... hoping that animal (some of the others were moving) does not move in that second is risking a gut shot, unrecoverable animal.
How many times did they try this stunt and it did not work out so well?
The thing that amazed me in that vid was the fact that that animal was hit at all..... you can hear the wind blowing pretty hard in the audio, and I'm pretty sure it wasn't constant over the course of the bullet's flight path..... that was either some world class wind doping or just dumb luck..... There's some luck involved, too, even if the feat of wind feading was spot on: A .243 105 gr VLD, even if launched at 3000 f/sec (!) will take nearly a second to reach the animal.... hoping that animal (some of the others were moving) does not move in that second is risking a gut shot, unrecoverable animal.
How many times did they try this stunt and it did not work out so well?
Brian Pfleuger
Moderator Emeritus
I don't know how many they woumded at long range, but I do know that it should be obvious that the cartridge is not even close to marginal for close range shots.
Big deal. In my area, we've hunted deer for decades with 12ga shotguns that generate up near 3,000 ft/lbs of energy. I have seen and found quite a few that were wounded by bad shots.
Oddly, when we hunt them with archery equipment, even though we still wound them, I know of and find far fewer wounded animals than I do those wounded with shotguns.
Is 3,000 ft/lbs not enough for deer? Would ANYONE make that argument?
I doubt anyone would, yet, if you hit them in the vitals, they die, if you don't they don't.
It's not the gun that matters, it's the shooter.
I would propose that more animals are wounded by hunters using mega-louden-boomers who wrongly think they can make up for bad marksmanship with power than there are animals wounded by "undergunned" hunters.
rgrundy said:
Big deal. In my area, we've hunted deer for decades with 12ga shotguns that generate up near 3,000 ft/lbs of energy. I have seen and found quite a few that were wounded by bad shots.
Oddly, when we hunt them with archery equipment, even though we still wound them, I know of and find far fewer wounded animals than I do those wounded with shotguns.
Is 3,000 ft/lbs not enough for deer? Would ANYONE make that argument?
I doubt anyone would, yet, if you hit them in the vitals, they die, if you don't they don't.
It's not the gun that matters, it's the shooter.
I would propose that more animals are wounded by hunters using mega-louden-boomers who wrongly think they can make up for bad marksmanship with power than there are animals wounded by "undergunned" hunters.
Brian Pfleuger
Moderator Emeritus
Only up to a point.
Is 3,000 ft/lbs in a bullet that exits the animal and deposits 2,000 ft/lbs in a tree on the other side, using 1,000 within the animal better than 2,000 ft/lbs that exits the animal with 1,000 ft/lbs remaining, using 1,000 within the animal?
If the lungs are pierced and there was 2,000 ft/lbs used in the animal, will it be more dead that if the lungs are pierced and only 1,000 ft/lbs was absorbed?
Given an identical shot with an exit wound, would a .308 kill better than a 243? A 7mm WSM? A 300 WinMag? A 12ga slug?
No. As long as both lungs are pierced, the animal has taken it's last breath. It will be dead in 5 to 15 seconds, depending on if it was at full inhale or full exhale or in-between. Doesn't matter if it was an arrow, a 223, a 243 a 30-30 or a 50BMG.
Is 3,000 ft/lbs in a bullet that exits the animal and deposits 2,000 ft/lbs in a tree on the other side, using 1,000 within the animal better than 2,000 ft/lbs that exits the animal with 1,000 ft/lbs remaining, using 1,000 within the animal?
If the lungs are pierced and there was 2,000 ft/lbs used in the animal, will it be more dead that if the lungs are pierced and only 1,000 ft/lbs was absorbed?
Given an identical shot with an exit wound, would a .308 kill better than a 243? A 7mm WSM? A 300 WinMag? A 12ga slug?
No. As long as both lungs are pierced, the animal has taken it's last breath. It will be dead in 5 to 15 seconds, depending on if it was at full inhale or full exhale or in-between. Doesn't matter if it was an arrow, a 223, a 243 a 30-30 or a 50BMG.