Elk & Deer rifle thoughts

[Unavailable_NA]

I drew an elk tag this year for eastern Oregon. I'm new to hunting as I haven't shot >deer sized animal in honestly 20yrs. Obviously I'm not a hunting specialist or even shooting specialist, so I'd love to hear your thoughts.

I'm drawn towards a .270 as a rifle I could use for multiple hunts. I realize this maybe marginal for elk hunts but more than enough for deer. My budget style says choose one gun for both elk and deer. I realize there are many options (almost endless) so I'd only like to hear why the .270 is a poor choice (30-06 was the runner up.)

Thank you in advance.

Read More

 

[Andy54Hawken]

Shot placement and bullet design plays a much larger role in killing game than whatever caliber is chosen.
Either of your two listed choices , .30-06 and .270 Winchester will work fine for elk. and deer..given the proper shot placement and bullet design.
Elk and deer ain't teflon or kelvar coated.

Learn your rifle...and how to shoot it well....under hunting conditions , not just the controlled conditions at a rifle range.
Hunting conditions as in ....
When you are cold...wet and tired after being out side all day....
In poor light without rifle rest...or at best with some sort of improvised rest.

Learn about the area where you are hunting..and the elk / deer that are in it.
Learn to hunt...and practice those skills along with field shooting.
Andy

 

[NeoBlackdog]

I've taken quite a few elk with the .270. It'll do the job if you work within it's parameters and get out there and practice practice practice practice practice practice practice practice practice practice practice practice practice practice.
What unit is your tag for?

 

[Joe13]

30-06 is hard to beat - lot of different ammo selection and when there is no hunting ammo on the shelf the week before the season, you can pretty much always find at least 30-06 somewhere.

 

[Koda]

I'm drawn towards a .270 as a rifle I could use for multiple hunts. I realize this maybe marginal for elk hunts but more than enough for deer. My budget style says choose one gun for both elk and deer. I realize there are many options (almost endless) so I'd only like to hear why the .270 is a poor choice (30-06 was the runner up.)

The 270 is not a poor choice for elk. Shot placement is critical in any caliber, but do pick a bullet that performs well.

To give you the answer you were looking for some people will claim the 270 is too light (bullet weight) for elk sized game and there are less options in heavier bullet weights to choose from (this part is true), I think it tops out at 150gn bullets. The 30-06 has a much larger spectrum of bullet weights, so even if the caliber is slightly larger for deer you can still buy lighter bullets for deer or heavier bullets up to I think 220gn for elk so the ol 06 is going to be more versatile if thats something you like.

 

[Spitpatch]

A 150 grain Ballistic Tip (NOT known as a "penetrator" or "bone smasher") driven at 3000fps and arriving at 175 yards will enter the ball of the leading shoulder, take fragments of that shoulder ball into the chest cavity, and exit out the far shoulder blade of a Bob Marshall bull, skidding on his chin after a dead run in 10" of powdered snow.

This is not "marginal" performance.

A .270 is just peachy for Elk.

 

[RVTECH]

Read some history about the famous hunter/writer Jack O'Conner and his experiences with the .270.

 

[3MTA3]

East side I lean towards the 270 for it's flatter trajectory, just don't shoot longer than you can shoot.
West side I lean more to the 30-06 for the heavier Roosevelt elk, but either will do just fine.

Worry less about cartridge and more on your shooting skills including range estimation and don't take any shot beyond your abilities. Next priority is scouting the area you will be hunting and making sure you are up to the physical challenges.

Good luck on your hunt!

 

[Quirt Evans]

Read some history about the famous hunter/writer Jack O'Conner and his experiences with the .270.

Not sure how to interpret that?
Yes, Jack O'Conner was the "wizard" with a .270, but in one of his articles he said that when it came to the big elk, (and I quote,) "Now your getting into .375 territory".
With everything "perfect" you could use a .223, but only a fool would.
Elmer Keith wrote that the best rifle for elk in the timber, (close range,) was a .45-70 with a "healthy load of 3031", (his load was pushing a 405gr at ~1,700fps or so,) it would go thru both shoulders and drop the animal in its tracks without blowing up all the meat.
That's a problem with the high-speed little bullets, meat damage from violent expansion.
Both Elmer and Jack knew that with BIG animals a BIG heavy bullet was better.
I'd want at least a .30-06 with 180>200gr slugs, and I wouldn't be trying to stretch the range.

 

[drstrangelove]

6.5 swede has killed more moose with a 160gr RN…
It's not the speed, it's the energy transfer while in the animal, and hitting the boiler.
Choose your rifle and cartridge depending on the distance you plan to shoot. If in timber w.o clear cuts, a 45/70 lever is perfect. If you're an 800yd kind of guy, you're gonna want a 28nosler or a 300 magdujour. I know someone who lost a bull that walked away from a double lung shot from a 300prc up close… basically an ice pick wound. Another buddy dropped a cow elk at 175yds with a 338WM last year… 2 steps and DRT. Gotta stop circulation, orthopedic, or neural function. Otherwise GFL, it doesn't matter.

 

[Spitpatch]

Not sure how to interpret that?
Yes, Jack O'Conner was the "wizard" with a .270, but in one of his articles he said that when it came to the big elk, (and I quote,) "Now your getting into .375 territory".
With everything "perfect" you could use a .223, but only a fool would.
Elmer Keith wrote that the best rifle for elk in the timber, (close range,) was a .45-70 with a "healthy load of 3031", (his load was pushing a 405gr at ~1,700fps or so,) it would go thru both shoulders and drop the animal in its tracks without blowing up all the meat.
That's a problem with the high-speed little bullets, meat damage from violent expansion.
Both Elmer and Jack knew that with BIG animals a BIG heavy bullet was better.
I'd want at least a .30-06 with 180>200gr slugs, and I wouldn't be trying to stretch the range.

This overlooks O'Connor and Keith's running battle. "Getting into .375 territory" may well be the closest Jack ever came to capitulating to Keith's minimal requirement for elk being a .33 caliber bullet, 250 grains or heavier. He had a real problem with Keith's propensity for taking "raking shots", or "base of the tailbone as he crashed away". O'Connor would counter. "I am not in the frequent habit of shooting big game in the fanny."

He did not perform any sort of spells or curses or magic wand waving with the .270, rather relying on knowing full well its limitations and more importantly its capabilities. If he was carrying a .270 on a Sheep or Caribou hunt and was granted the opportunity to fill his Grizzly tag, he employed the tool he had, and knew exactly what it would do. That Grizzly was operating on a very small amount of borrowed time.

There is a misconception that O'Connor staunchly defended the .270 at every turn, and eschewed other calibers. Not so by any measure. He had great praise for the 7mm Magnum (far less for the .264), and his attraction to the .270 and his promotion of such was more toward his knowledge of what it took to kill big game: a well placed shot with a capable cartridge with bullet diameter and weight of lesser priority.

"Both Elmer and Jack knew that with BIG animals a BIG heavy bullet was better." Nope. Jack knew other stuff worked just as well, even better in certain cases based on his experience.

He also once said, "I would be quite comfortable walking across the African Continent with nothing more than a .30-06 on my shoulder." (Note the absence of his supposed "darling" for such work, but if the walk was in front of him and all he had was the .270, I am certain he would be no less comfortable.)

Any new hunter starting out can harvest a lifetime of knowledge from Jack O'Connor's writings. Strictly experience-based, no conclusion he ever reached was unsupported by his vast time in the field and on the range with rifle in hand.

 

[3MTA3]

This overlooks O'Connor and Keith's running battle. "Getting into .375 territory" may well be the closest Jack ever came to capitulating to Keith's minimal requirement for elk being a .33 caliber bullet, 250 grains or heavier. He had a real problem with Keith's propensity for taking "raking shots", or "base of the tailbone as he crashed away". O'Connor would counter. "I am not in the frequent habit of shooting big game in the fanny."

He did not perform any sort of spells or curses or magic wand waving with the .270, rather relying on knowing full well its limitations and more importantly its capabilities. If he was carrying a .270 on a Sheep or Caribou hunt and was granted the opportunity to fill his Grizzly tag, he employed the tool he had, and knew exactly what it would do. That Grizzly was operating on a very small amount of borrowed time.

There is a misconception that O'Connor staunchly defended the .270 at every turn, and eschewed other calibers. Not so by any measure. He had great praise for the 7mm Magnum (far less for the .264), and his attraction to the .270 and his promotion of such was more toward his knowledge of what it took to kill big game: a well placed shot with a capable cartridge with bullet diameter and weight of lesser priority.

"Both Elmer and Jack knew that with BIG animals a BIG heavy bullet was better." Nope. Jack knew other stuff worked just as well, even better in certain cases based on his experience.

He also once said, "I would be quite comfortable walking across the African Continent with nothing more than a .30-06 on my shoulder." (Note the absence of his supposed "darling" for such work, but if the walk was in front of him and all he had was the .270, I am certain he would be no less comfortable.)

Any new hunter starting out can harvest a lifetime of knowledge from Jack O'Connor's writings. Strictly experience-based, no conclusion he ever reached was unsupported by his vast time in the field and on the range with rifle in hand.

As an aside, my oldest brother took elk every year with a 264 WM for decades. It wasn't the extra power, but the flat trajectory he loved. To him placement was king. He got Roosevelt when he was here in Oregon and Rocky Mountain after he moved back to Montana.

 

[Andy54Hawken]

At the risk of angering....just about everyone....

If I want to know something about handguns , specifically revolver shooting...
I''ll read Elmer Keith.

However...
His thoughts on rifles....are .....very biased at best.
I understand that when he started writing the selection of .30-06 bullets was lacking...and lead to issues in the hunting fields.
But to continue with his dislike and bad mouthing the .30-06 well into the 1960's and onwards.....
Is just wrong...bullets have changed since the 1930's...and Keith did not move on or keep up with the times.

To the OP....
Sorry for the thread drift.
Andy

 

[orygun]

Elk and deer rifle thoughts?
30-06.

 

[Spitpatch]

At the risk of angering....just about everyone....

If I want to know something about handguns , specifically revolver shooting...
I''ll read Elmer Keith.

However...
His thoughts on rifles....are .....very biased at best.
I understand that when he started writing the selection of .30-06 bullets was lacking...and lead to issues in the hunting fields.
But to continue with his dislike and bad mouthing the .30-06 well into the 1960's and onwards.....
Is just wrong...bullets have changed since the 1930's...and Keith did not move on or keep up with the times.

To the OP....
Sorry for the thread drift.
Andy

Absolutely on point. Keith learned to hunt elk primarily with saddle guns, and the .45-70 was king in the day.

 

[orygun]

FYI, I do not think the 270 is a poor choice for elk. I think people make poor choices when shooting at big game, but choosing to use a 270 isn't one of them.

The only elk my wife has shot was taken with a 7mm-08.

 

[osprey]

The .270 is a fine choice for an all around big game rifle. The 4 elk I have shot with the .270 thought I was overgunned!

 

[Stomper]

Shot placement and bullet design plays a much larger role in killing game than whatever caliber is chosen.
Either of your two listed choices , .30-06 and .270 Winchester will work fine for elk. and deer..given the proper shot placement and bullet design.
Elk and deer ain't teflon or kelvar coated.

Learn your rifle...and how to shoot it well....under hunting conditions , not just the controlled conditions at a rifle range.
Hunting conditions as in ....
When you are cold...wet and tired after being out side all day....
In poor light without rifle rest...or at best with some sort of improvised rest.

Learn about the area where you are hunting..and the elk / deer that are in it.
Learn to hunt...and practice those skills along with field shooting.
Andy

9 out of 10 deer and elk surveyed said they prefer getting shot with the ubiquitous .308





True story!

 

[Andy54Hawken]

The last elk I took...
I used this rifle :

J.Henry Trade Rifle Circa 1800-1820

• Andy54Hawken
• Dec 12, 2021

It is a .58 caliber , flintlock J.Henry Trade Rifle , from around 1800-1820.

If I take and cleanly kill an elk with one shot from a antique flintlock....
A modern rifle in .270 or the like can easily do the same....if you do your part in the hunt.
Andy

 

[MTpockets]

Here we go again...

...BLAM vs. KERPOW.

I actually love these threads Wishing you a successful hunt.