Choosing best all around caliber?

[tahunua001]

Woman and younger hunters use the .243 on elk regularly and on purpose, unless their husbands/fathers are infected with the magnumitis so prevalent today.

Elk are heavy but they're not particularly thick skinned or heavy boned. They're giant deer for crying out loud. A .243 loaded with 80gr Barnes TTSX will penetrate 3+ FEET in a deer. How thick is an elk? Half that, maybe?

"That video" shows an elk killed with a .243 from nearly 700 yards. Considering that's probably 4 times the average shot distance, how could it even be argued that the .243 isn't a reasonable elk gun?

I agree with about 90% of what brian said. however I would like to point out that in my elk unit 700 yards is only about double the average range for elk, 600 is usually where I draw the line but if I was really desperate for meat and I had my 180 grains of deep curl medication to treat the symptoms of my type 300 weatherby magnumitis, I would probably take the shot. with a 80gr out of a 243, I just do not trust my skills enough. then again my gun hates 80s, the best accuracy round I've found for the 243 has been 100gr federal powershoks and is the only load I have been able to harvest anything with. maybe some tinkering with a 90gr deep curl is in order.

now I will also reiterate what brian said by saying that there are a lot of people that hunt elk with a 243. a lot of them are maligned for doing it. a while back(way back) there was a thread here on TFL of a guy that had killed his elk with a 243 and the entire thread was a bunch of goobers claiming that he was unethical and didn't deserve to hunt even though there was another thread running at the exact same time where an idiot had to double tap a deer with a 300 win mag to drop it and he was lauded for his successful hunt. do I sense a double standard here?

 

[Mystro]

I hear the same thing with 223 on whitetail by people that have never hunted with it. How it is unethical, blah,blah,..... I have seen a number of BIG whitetails fall over from a chest shot from a 223. A family member and a very good deer hunter has used a 223 for well over 25 years and I dont think he has ever lost a deer. I believe he was using 55 grain softpoints. I notice there are several manufactures making deer specific bullets for the 223 today.

 

[taylorce1]

My problem is Brian that you make it sound like the .243 is commonly used to hunt elk. Especially by youth and female hunters who don't have any recoil tolerance, but you admittedly have little to no experience hunting elk. You have to rely on a friend who is a bow hunter and his experience to try and prove your point.

Post #51

Now, lest you think that I have some sort of love affair with the 243, I don't. I don't even own one. I wouldn't own one. It's more than I care to use on varmints and for deer there are cartridges that offer advantages over the 243 with few or no trade-offs, like the 7mm-08. My point is that the 243 is in no way "too small to be a good deer rifle." That premise is utter nonsense.

Which this old post of yours is what I've been trying to say all along there are far better cartridges even for the recoil sensitive than a .243 Win or your current AI when it comes to hunting elk, even with modern mono metal bullets. I did a little research on your old posts to find out exactly what your experience with elk hunting was. I didn't find much, but I found this interesting little excerpt from back when you were known as Peetza. I never found where you said that you'd ever hunted elk only the recent trip to CO where you shot some photographs.

My point is that I've hunted elk now for over 20 years, I've met and been in contact with a few hundred elk hunters over this time. I can tell you honestly that I've only met two people who have used the .243 to take an elk. I mentioned this fact, and I hunt regularly with one of the guys who used the .243 on a cow elk. In my personal experience this would put the hunters who use the .243 on elk to less than 1%.

In Colorado last year there were over 135,000 elk tags sold, approximately 40% went to archery and muzzle loader hunters. This left a little over 80,000 tags for the firearm hunters. So if I were to figure my personal experience in that would mean that less than 800 hunters in the state of Colorado are using a .243 Win. The success rate for all of those tags were around 52% across archery, ML, and firearm seasons so maybe a total of 400 elk would have fallen to the .243 Win.

Is that "plenty" or "a lot" of hunters? No, it is a distinct minority of hunters who use the .243 for elk. I never said the .243 wasn't capable of killing an elk. I said that it wasn't even close to the .270 in performance and that it isn't widely used by "plenty" or "a lot" of hunters, and that there are better choices starting with 6.5mm calibers and up.

 

[tahunua001]

where did brian say that 243 was used by hunters with no experience? I didn't see that phrase once, perhaps I missed it?

he said it was popular among people with low recoil tolerance, in which case a 243 would serve such a person a lot better than a magnum rifle cartridge where it would be more difficult to get good shot placement. I know some women that have killed more elk than I have deer and I know of some children that could make kill shots that I would never dream of attempting. saying that a round is favored by women and children is not the same as claiming that it's favored by inexperienced people.

of course, there is only one way to gauge what a person's capabilities are against game and that's from their record. some people can hit bullseyes all day long but seem to maim every animal they run across and there are others that can't hit paper at 100 yards to save their lives that kill every animal they have ever shot at on the first try.

 

[taylorce1]

where did brian say that 243 was used by hunters with no experience? I didn't see that phrase once, perhaps I missed it?

He didn't, Brian admittedly has little or no experience hunting elk. He has only said that he has a friend who regularly hunts CO, but that friend is a bow hunter.

 

[jimbob86]

.....

It IS kind of amusing listening to a guy for NEW YORK tell a guy from COLORADO what is a good ELK rifle ....... what's the word? That thing New Yorkers are (in)famous for? Chutzpah? That's it!

 

[JASmith]

from Brian Pfleuger:

So the difference between an unacceptable cartridge and "Thor's Hammer" is 2 or 3 hundredths of an inch?

What's the basis of your claim of an "uncomfortable loss rate"?

That 2 or three hundredths happens to mean the difference between 100 grain bullets and the ability to sling 130+ grain bullets for the 6.5 mm and 270. Even the .270 is not considered a good elk gun by many very experienced hunters unless one is using premium bullets.

The 6.5 caliber, for some reason, has long had an excellent reputation for harvesting elk and moose among European hunters. It is possible that the 160 grain-class commonly used in the European cartridges has something to do with this.

 

[taylorce1]

The reason the 6.5's work well is they have heavy for caliber bullets. 140 grain spitzer and 160 round nose aren't uncommon. These long bullets give a high sectional density that makes for deep penetration.

 

[Mystro]

That would be a opinion not based on facts. They may be experienced with hunting the game itself but ignorant to ballistics and other calibers they have no experience with. That's almost absurd that anyone especial one that is truely knowledgable with game and balistics could question the lethality of the 270 for elk. Jack O'Connor recomended it and he's a hell of ALOT more experienced than anyone could be today. The Alaska fish and game recommends the 270 as does the Montana Guide association for elk. Premium bullets were never a requirement unless premium bullets are soft points.

Even the .270 is not considered a good elk gun by many very experienced hunters unless one is using premium bullets.

 

[Brian Pfleuger]

Even the .270 is not considered a good elk gun by many very experienced hunters unless one is using premium bullets.

That opinion is one of the silliest I've seen, laughable. I absolutely guarantee that the .270 is one of the most popular elk cartridges of all time.


I'll never understand the opinions on this stuff. Look at the CO Wildlife Division, it's almost schizophrenic. They have an entire article on elk hunting, including chapters on firearms and cartridge selection.

Imagine this:

1)Handguns need 550 ft/lbs at 50 yards to be sufficient for elk.
2)Rifles need 1,500 ft/lbs at impact.

Um... ok

3).243Win is marginal
4).30-30, .35Rem and even .32Win Spec are all perfectly fine.

Uh... what?

Anyhow, I'll take this snippet from Chuck Hawks:

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 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, a .270 bullet in the guts, a third .270 in a 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.

However, this guy is going to tell 50 people that the .270 is no good for elk. 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.

 

[tahunua001]

Even the .270 is not considered a good elk gun by many very experienced hunters unless one is using premium bullets.

who in God's green earth thinks that? besides people suffering from advanced stage Magnumitis?

270 is recommended by outfitters, guides, and just about anyone that knows that a 30-06 is not the minimum required cartridge for texas poodle deer. I hunt elk with a 300 WTBY mag and if someone handed me a 270 and told me to go get an elk I would have no problem. heck, if I knew I could get close enough I wouldn't hesitate to use my 6.5 jap carbine and that is a helluva lot more anemic than the 270. I only go the magnum route because I like the knowing that my gun will kill an elk well beyond the distance that I can not longer hit the target.

 

[MarkCO]

I am not sure there is a common caliber I have not hunted with. I usually hunt deer and elk with a .338-06, Pronghorn with a .260 Rem and smaller stuff with .243s, .22-250s and .223s.

When folks ask me what rifle to consider for hunting, it does of course matter how recoil sensitive they are, how much they will practice, do they want to target shoot or compete too, and what will they be hunting.

In following this thread, some are getting into caliber wars instead of answering, but part of that is because there really is not one best all-around caliber. If you were primarily looking at hunting, I would steer you towards something based on the .30-06 parent case. The .30-06 itself, the .270, the .338-06, 35 Whelen are a bit better with larger diameter bullets. But, since you are more interested in target shooting with hunting as a secondary, I think I would steer you towards the .308 parent case. Pros are a shorter action and cheaper brass. I look at long range as starting at 600 yards, but most people think 300-600 is long range, so consider that. Also, in the .308 family, there are differences.

The .243 is the minimum legal in some states for big game. It is fairly flat shooting, low recoil and there are a large variety of bullets including some great varmint bullets. On the downside, the faster you push the bullets, the less barrel life you get. I've seen barrels go south in the 4 to 5k range commonly. If that seems like a lot of rounds, maybe this is a good choice to you. I consider it decent out to 500 yards for varmints and targets, but you should probably stay short of that for big game. A re-barrel is about $300 to $600 depending on quality and profile.

The .260 Rem gets you a bit more horsepower. I have killed deer with mine well past 600 yards. It is accurate and fast in general. With a good optic, 1000 yard target and varmint hits are well within the possibility. Barrel life is improved by about twice over the .243.

The 7mm-08 is another good choice with a wide array of bullets, but not quite the velocity. If I did not use the .260, I would probably go to a 7mm-08 over the .243.

The .308 is perfectly fine for all NA game and is just a bit behind the .30-06 in reality. I will be using one of my match rifles in .308 this year since my son will be using a .308 Encore rifle in .308 for his first deer and elk hunts and i will be carrying all of the ammo for both rifles. There are more reduced velocity and low recoil rounds for the .308 than the other calibers, plus sub-sonics. I started my son off with the .308 training rounds which are one of the main reasons he is starting with .308. I of course have other rounds, but the ability to let him practice cheaper and more often makes the .308 a good idea. There are still some decent varmint bullets for the .308, and overall, it will be one of the cheaper to re-barrel, but barrel life can get into the 15 to 20K if you do your part.

The .338 Federal is probably too much hunting based and not enough target for your criteria. It is a fine caliber for NA game, but varmint bullets are not prevalent and the bullets will be heavier and thus more coin than .30 caliber bullets.

 

[Revoltella]

Mainly looking for flat long range round with minimal drop.

I realize ammo cost is an issue, but you just described .257 Weatherby Magnum.

 

[JASmith]

There seems to be both confusion and strong opinion regarding wound ballistics for hunting. A 130 grain bullet, the same as a 32 gr bullet, is capable of killing an elk. It is, however, very easy to lose an elk when using a .22 and one can lose even a well-hit animal with a 130 grain bullet of standard construction. This has been proven many times.

The challenge is in how quickly the animal faints on average. There is a correlation between the size of the wound channel and the rate of blood loss.

For example, the .243 Win acts like the "Thor's hammer" mentioned in an earlier post as long as the deer weighs less than 125-150 lbs. As the animal gets larger, however, the amount of blood needed to reduce blood pressure enough to cause fainting in less than about ten seconds gets larger too. So, users of the .243 Win tend to report more lost animals when the weights grow to the 300+ lbs of the largest mule deer. The number gets really large for elk.

Similarly, the 130 gr soft point bullet from the .270 Win does extraordinarily well for all deer, but shows an increased number of lost animals when the quarry is elk.

The story changes when the very heaviest standard .277" bullets are used or one uses premium bullets in the 130 grain class (140 gr for bonded bullets). These bullets do open a wound channel that is deep and wide enough to routinely bring down the larger animals.

 

[LOUD]

okay but how about the 7 millimeter,take a look at the 280 Remington ,ballistically it is very much a superior cartridge .It bridges the gap between the 270 Winchester and the 30 O6 Springfield and outperforms both.and with the wide range of projectiles available In. 284 it is a real performer.with that said I'd like to nominate 280 Remington.You can get 7 mm Magnum performance without all the recoil.just my 2 cents.........LOUD

 

[asmith]

I lived in MM for 58 years and every elk hunter I ever met used either a 30-06 or 7mm mag except for one friend that uses a .338.....never heard of using anything smaller.....

 

[Mystro]

Actually, the 280 has identical muzzle energy as the 270 except it drops 2 more inches at 500 yards. This is according to Hornady using the latest SST Superformance loads.

http://www.hornady.com/store/280-Rem-139-gr-SST-Superformance/

 

[taylorce1]

I'll never understand the opinions on this stuff. Look at the CO Wildlife Division, it's almost schizophrenic. They have an entire article on elk hunting, including chapters on firearms and cartridge selection.

Imagine this:

1)Handguns need 550 ft/lbs at 50 yards to be sufficient for elk.
2)Rifles need 1,500 ft/lbs at impact.

Close but not quite right. Here is the article I'm guessing you were referencing.

Laws and Ethical Limits

Before selecting a firearm for hunting elk, we should first look at the laws on legal method of take for big game:


Center fire rifles, 24 caliber (6mm) or larger and produce an impact energy of 1000 ft/lbs at 100yds. Barrel must be at least 16" and total length at least 26".
Muzzle loaders for elk hunting must be 50 caliber or larger and only open sights are allowed.
Electronic ignitions are not legal for muzzle loading season in Colorado.
Shotguns must be 20 gauge or larger with 18" or longer barrel and minimum 26" total length.
Handguns, 24 caliber (6mm) or larger and produce an impact energy of 550 ft/lbs at 50 yards as rated by the manufacturer. Four inches is minimum length for handgun barrels.
For a complete list of legal hunting methods, see the Big Game Brochure.

Since we are mainly talking about rifles, here is the actual regulation for rifle hunting in Colorado.

2013 Colorado Big Game Hunting
1. CENTERFIRE RIFLES
a. Must be minimum of .24 caliber (6 mm).
b. Must have a minimum 16-inch barrel and be at least 26 inches long.
c. If semiautomatic, a maximum of six rounds are allowed in the magazine
and chamber combined.
d. Must use expanding bullets that weigh minimum 70 grains for deer,
pronghorn and bear, 85 grains for elk and moose, and have an impact
energy (at 100 yards) of 1,000-ft. pounds as rated by manufacturer.

Um... ok

3).243Win is marginal
4).30-30, .35Rem and even .32Win Spec are all perfectly fine.

While I wouldn't call the above cartridges perfectly fine in the article they were mentioned for:

Short Range (Heavy Timber, Still Hunting, Small Parks, Crossing Trails)

This is the type of hunting that, on public land, can produce elk any time after noon on opening day. Animals are spotted at close range (under 100 yards). Long barrels and actions are at a disadvantage when moving or shooting in these circumstances.

There are many slower velocity cartridges that are suitable for short range hunting; a short list follows. The bottom four carry their killing energy out to some very long ranges but the bullet path looks like a rainbow.

Caliber Bullet Wt. (Grams) Muzzle Vel Firearm Wt. (lbs.) Muzzle Energy Recoil Energy 
32 Win Special 170 2240 8 1892 10.94 
35 Rem 180 2232 8 1989 12.32 
30/30 Win 150 2461 8 2015 10.59 
444 Marlin 300 2082 8 2884 25.01 
45/70 Lever Action 350 2086 8 3377 37.28 
450 Marlin 350 2196 8 3743 39.66 
45/70 Ruger #1 350 2300 8 4106 41.94

Plus used within the limitations all including the .243 will work for elk. However none of the above are used commonly in any elk camp I've been in. Although I took a .30-30 as my back up rifle on my first elk hunt, but I used a .30-06 to kill my first cow elk on that hunt at around 25-30 yards. I have no doubt the .30-30 would have been just as effective at that range.

 

[Mystro]

This is very revealing and a bit of a reality check.
Check out this monster moose being dumped by a 30-30.

Go to 24:50 for the shot.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6xZsgwPlLM0&list=FL4Se-AcaSUHderIK7Ng0BZQ

 

[JD0x0]

Actually, the 280 has identical muzzle energy as the 270 except it drops 2 more inches at 500 yards.

As much as I love the .270 I have to disagree if we're talking hand loaded ammo. Factory ammo, yes, the .280 rem has about the same ME as the .270 win, but it seems like a majority of factory .280 rem ammo is loaded fairly mild.
Generally, with the 06' cases the larger the diameter bullet the neck is sized for, the more potential ME you are capable of safely achieving, up to about .35caliber, where it begins to fall off in potential. The sweet spot for the 06' case seems to be between .277 and .338 for the most efficient loads.
Even so, hand loaded, the .270 versus the .280, the differences in ME is fairly negligible, we're only talking maybe 100ft/lbs difference, if that. No game, or piece of paper you're shooting at is going to know the difference between the two.