Minimum caliber for elk

I know what the law is just what is the smallest round you would recommend I sure as heck wouldn't recommend a .243
Click to expand...

You need to realize, what I’d use myself might be very different than what I’d recommend to the masses. Most shooters don’t show much dicipline when there’s a big bull across a canyon, and they have a valid tag in their pocket.

For them, the 30-06 would be a likely minimum. A .270 or 25-06 would also work, but a 30-06 would work better IMO.

For myself, I’d feel comfortable with a .243 Win. I know it’s capabilities, and I know my capabilities with it.

Even so, I’d probably opt for a 7mm rem mag or some such. It offers more options when it come sto taking a shot.

But, as a minimum that I’d use myself, the .243 could get me by.

I’m seldom a minimalist when it comes to bigger animals, but since that was the question, that’s my answer.

Daryl
 
ElkVitalsTarget.gif


300 Savage has same trajectory and approximate energy as 30-06 and .308 out to about 175 yards. After that, the larger cases gain the advantage. Yet 300 Savage is a moderate recoil cartridge. Any good 180 grain big game bullet will do the job. Hand loaders can flatten trajectory by loading 165 grain Premium bullets.

Jack
 
Daryl said:
But, as a minimum that I’d use myself, the .243 could get me by.

I’m seldom a minimalist when it comes to bigger animals, but since that was the question, that’s my answer.
Click to expand...

Precisely. The question was not "What is the most ideal caliber for elk?", the question was "minimum". One should logically expect the minimum to perform to, well, minimum standards.

The 243 is minimum for elk. It is not "great", "perfect" or "ideal". It is not for 800 yard shots, it is not for steep quartering shots or frontal shots.... it is "minimum".


On the other hand, I'd rather have a lady shooting a 243 with which she could shoot the fleas off an elks back than a 375H&H magnum with which she could not hit a 3 foot square target at 100 yards because of the fear of recoil. So, in some ways, in some circumstances, for some people, the 243 IS both minimum AND ideal.
 
My wife use's a .243 with a good bullet for whitetail. Just myself I think it would be a little light on a elk. You no doubt can do it. You probably no your rifle, practice alot, no your limits, and when to leave them walk. Not everyone knows all of that. Most follks just dont shoot enough. A few shots before season the gun is on, and thats it. A .22 rimfire probably killed lots of whitetails, elk, moose etc. but would I use one for that? Would you use a .223? Why or why not? On Elk?
 
Last edited:
243. win is what the legal minimum caliber is usually. But i wouldn't use anything much smaller then a 270. win with the exception of maybe a 257. weatherby magnum. That caliber seems to really impress me
 
+1 for moderate recoil allowing for good shot placement.

My wife uses a 7mm-08, in a Remington M700 Youth Model, the shorter stock and 20" barrel fits her 5'-5" size well. I handload for her, 145 grain Speer Grand Slams, at ~2600 fps, about 200 fps less than factory. She took a nice bull this year with one shot, broadside at 170 yards, through ribs, hit the heart and broke the offside shoulder bone. The bull made one jump and died.
Our hunting plan for her was to limit shots to 200 yards, standing broadside or quartering with exposed ribcage. With the mild recoil, and the good R3 recoil pad on the M700, she was able to comfortably shoot up to 20 rounds at the range. Her range time was spent shooting from all field positions at cardboard "deer", not bullseyes.
 
I think any good constructed HUNTING bullet that develops 2000 ft lbs of energy at the range the critter is to be taken, within the legal limits of the law.
 
There are a few good ones. I agree with a .243 being a little to small. It is a great rifle, and my wife does have one for whitetail, but even with them shot placement is key, just like any rifle. She has got everything she shot at, but has let a few nice ones walk away not having the placement. For Elk just myself a 30-06 with a Nosler Partition. But there are many good ones .270, 7mm, etc.
 
My wife has a .243 for deer and I use a 30-06, that .243 has dropped a few deer. There is no doubt the correct placement and it would work on a elk, but I would not use it, if I had a choice. I bet a few been dropped with a .22LR but whats the point?
 
Seven years ago, I took a Bull Elk with the help of a Mescalero Indian guide at approximately 45 yards with a a Ruger Super Redhawk chambered in 480 Ruger with a Burris 4X pistol scope in North Central New Mexico.
 
for elk i dont think you can really go "too" big, my elk gun is a 338 ultra mag,or a 300 win mag, 375 H&H,7mm mag at least 300 and up, IMO
 
Sounds like we better go .50BMG just to be safe. :D


I don't worry about hunting southern whitetails with a .243. For elk I'd want to go just a little bit bigger. Friend of mine did all his elk hunting with a .270. I reckon that's big enough. I probably wouldn't feel bad with a 6.5 Swede either. If you shoot your rifle enough to know its limits and yours then I think you're good to go.
 
".223...depending on range."

I dunno. The blowback from a contact wound can be messy. :D

Pardon the sarcasm, but some ideas are just plumb silly...
 
choices

I would not like hunting with a .243. I would be dreading pulling the trigger.
If I left today it would be a .270 as that is what I deer hunt with currently.
Given two weeks notice I would slap a scope on my 7mm rem mag Encore barrel and work up a load for nosler partitions in 175 or 160 grain.
 
O'Connor liked the .270. I would say that it is the minimum caliber to head out hunting elk with. If you live in elk country, and you know the lay of the land, and you are used to shooting at that elevation, and know your rifle well, then I would say that finding a good blind and getting the elk into within 50 yards, you could make a humane kill with a .243, but that is not for the average once a year hunter. If struck square in the chest, the .243 will explode the heart, and its game over. Likewise a side neck shot will do it also at close range, but the little 80 grain pill is not going to penetrate a shoulder at long range.

Lots of common sense needs to be applied here. Do you shoot at least 1000 rounds a year? If not, then better get an elk gun. The .308 will do nicely and it wont kick much more than the .243. However 165 grains of Hornady is much better elk medicine than 80 grains.
 
Whatever the legal minimum in your state is. Here its .243
Click to expand...

I disagree. I wouldn't depend of the "state" to give any type of great opinion on hunting or firearms used. A 243 is a joke. At least a 270. I would rather have a guy use a 50cal before he used a 243. I'd rather have a guy with too much than not enough. Just my opinion.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top