Author Topic: Life begins with the 338 (Read 2051 times)

crow_feather · « **on:** June 18, 2006, 04:29:26 PM »

I have a friend who two years ago dressed out his cow elk and found a rear quarter that had been hit with a 270 bullet earlier in the season. The bullet failed to penetrate, ruined the rear quarter and the taste of the elk. Several years ago, I dropped an elk with my 338 that had a 270 bullet through it's lungs that had stopped on the far side skin. The elk would have died eventually, but with no blood trail, I doubt it would have been found.

I was gonna spout all these fancy facts to show how the 338 Win Mag is the best elk rifle invented and the 270 should be outlawed, but I guess I really don't have to. It's probably common knowledge.

There are those who are gonna deny the truth, but the Pope IS Catholic, London Bridge IS in the USA, and the 338 Win Mag IS the best elk caliber made so far.

C F

CyberSniper · « **Reply #1 on:** June 18, 2006, 05:08:41 PM »

This seems to be a "loaded" post...
< Disclaimer: The following is intentional hogwash on my part >

Wellll alrighty then...ok, so even if the .270 is useless for this
application, then you are also saying that stuff like the .30-06,
.35 Whelen, etc, are also useless ?

Quote

There are those who are gonna deny the truth, but the Pope IS Catholic, London Bridge IS in the USA, and the 338 Win Mag IS the best elk caliber made so far.

Following the "bigger is better" logic to it's extreme, I'd suggest
at least a 105mm Howitzer. Should come in handy for those shots
where they manage to top the next ridge. The howitzer trajectory
will allow indirect fire over the top, thus making IT the best Elk "caliber".
The .338 would shoot too flat for this application.
ehehehehee

crow_feather · « **Reply #2 on:** June 19, 2006, 02:17:11 AM »

CyberSniper,

If you are in that vein of thought, you might as well nuke em. You can find em at night cause they glow and they are cooked at the same time.

C F

CyberSniper · « **Reply #3 on:** June 19, 2006, 03:19:03 AM »

Not only that, but the blast should clear out excess brush and
terrain, thus making it easier to get them out after the fact.
By golly, it sounds like a plan to me. lol

james · « **Reply #4 on:** June 19, 2006, 04:47:24 AM »

Personally I never used anything smaller than a 50 caliber. Over the last 15 years my brother and I bagged somwhere around 25 elk with our smoke poles. Then this last year he had to go use his 7mm mag and ruin our record. I'm going back this year with my modern rifle.... a TC encore with a ML barrel. If it fails me, I'm not too proud to go back to my traditional Hawken.

wijim · « **Reply #5 on:** June 19, 2006, 05:36:32 AM »

Quote from: crow_feather

I have a friend who two years ago dressed out his cow elk and found a rear quarter that had been hit with a 270 bullet earlier in the season. The bullet failed to penetrate, ruined the rear quarter and the taste of the elk. Several years ago, I dropped an elk with my 338 that had a 270 bullet through it's lungs that had stopped on the far side skin. The elk would have died eventually, but with no blood trail, I doubt it would have been found.

I was gonna spout all these fancy facts to show how the 338 Win Mag is the best elk rifle invented and the 270 should be outlawed, but I guess I really don't have to. It's probably common knowledge.

There are those who are gonna deny the truth, but the Pope IS Catholic, London Bridge IS in the USA, and the 338 Win Mag IS the best elk caliber made so far.

C F

ive shot whitetails with broadheads in them......doesnt mean that broadheads cant dont or wont kill them though. its all in the hit.

#1...the "rear 1/4 shot" on that elk was not a good shot..period. #2....what type of .270 bullet was used in the non penetrating shot through the mid section of the other elk? if it was not a big game bullet..im not surprised.

#3....many people can not shoot a .338. its just plain too big or too punishing for them. so id think a more ethical thing would be for them to shoot what they can handle and get a good shot off as opposed to shooting a gun they can handle and making an iffy or even horrible shot.

i shoot a 7mm rem mag and a 45/70. but by no means would i say that these are the best calibers for elk...maybe just the best for me cuz i can hit with them and know my limitations. i cant hit an elk and kill it at 300 yards with my 45/70 (open sights)...just because "i cant"....so i wouldnt take that shot with that gun. but with my 7mm rem mag...i can easily take a high percentage quality shot at over 350......

thos examples you gave with the .270 bullets are more shooter than caliber issues as far as i can tell.

ive seen a .270 with nosler partitions go through an adult holstein at 100 yards

454Puma · « **Reply #6 on:** June 19, 2006, 07:24:06 PM »

The first 270 was just a plain bad shot ! The second was a good shot with out proper follow up shot. I don't think of the 270 as the ideal elk caliber it works cause to many folks fill there tags every year with it. The 338 might be the one that fills the bill for you, but not most folk- like me the '06 will and does take elk cleanly ! :lol:

gwindrider1 · « **Reply #7 on:** June 21, 2006, 03:15:04 AM »

Although the .338 is my Elk rifle of choice, I wouldn't hesitate to use a .270 with a proper bullet. It is probably the most prevalent Elk caliber in my neck of the Rockies. Shot placement, and bullet construction are the key elements to a quick, humane kill.

crow_feather · « **Reply #8 on:** July 31, 2006, 09:03:09 AM »

O K,

I will fess up and admit that I was wrong. The 338 is only the second best caliber for elk. You see, I found a Sako 375 H. H. Carbine with a Mannlicher stock that will put several 270 grain bullets into the same area of target if I hold it steady. It is not as fast as a Lazzeroni, nor as wild looking as a STW, nor as hefty as a 50 BMG, but it is the best elk caliber around.

Coppertop · « **Reply #9 on:** September 15, 2006, 09:16:45 AM »

Crow Feather-

Not arguing but putting my cents worth in. I have hunted with nothing but a .270 for 18 years and have routinely taken Deer, Elk, Goats, prarie dogs, and about anything else you can find around here ( Wyoming and Montana) and dropped most, not all but most, with one shot. I ended up dropping a bull elk with a shot from my .270 after a client (years ago when i was guiding) shot it three times with a .338. He shot it in the chest and I put it down with a round to the neck (another argument). I am not saying i'm like everyone- better or worse, just one opinion. I feel that someone who pays attention to where they shoot, How far away the shot is, and has enough respect for the animal to practice until proficient can do well with what ever they choose to shoot with. I have worked for a guy who shot every deer i saw him shoot with a single shot 22mag. He head shot them from about 50 yard and never had one take a step after he pulled the trigger. Was it adequate- yes, Could anyone else do it? not with out alot of practice. do i agree with it? No. The story just goes to make my point.

Beware the man with one gun, for he likely knows how to use it.

Casull · « **Reply #10 on:** September 15, 2006, 09:36:12 AM »

Quote

shot it three times with a .338. He shot it in the chest

Must have been wearing Kevlar under its hide.

Syncerus · « **Reply #11 on:** September 15, 2006, 10:23:45 AM »

Whew! I was really worried there. I'm so glad you set me straight. I thought the Pope was Jewish, London Bridge was in London (is Grant really in Grant's tomb?), and that the .270 was a damn fine coyote rifle (who said that?).

Syncerus

crow_feather · « **Reply #12 on:** September 15, 2006, 06:40:25 PM »

Syncerus,
The pope is catholic, London bridge is in the USA, Grant is in his tomb, hydrostatic shock is largly myth, Elmer Keith was right, Weatherby was wrong, and the 270 is better than a coyote rifle. It is good enough for deer - maybe.

Coppertop,

In the hands of a great shot, a 270 is like a 22 for deer - adequate. But most people shoot their rifles twice a year. Every other year, they blow the dust off the scope lenses. When you put a rifle in the hands of the common man, they should be shooting the 375 for elk.

(you know that this is only semi-serious)

Coppertop · « **Reply #13 on:** September 16, 2006, 07:09:49 AM »

Crow feather

It would take a lot more than this thread to get my dander up.

I think we are on the same wavelength for the most part. I was just giving the devils advocate some room here. I whole heartedly agree with you that most people don't give the animal enough credit and only shoot once or twice a year if that. I have some in my immediate family that are like that and then wonder why they miss all the time. But to put that farther, even a bad hit with a large caliber gun will cause an elk to run off and die where it may possibly not be found. MHO

Coppertop · « **Reply #14 on:** September 16, 2006, 07:11:24 AM »

Woops

Wrong wording

a large caliber- bad hit may allow an elk to run off.

crow_feather · « **Reply #15 on:** September 16, 2006, 02:29:19 PM »

I used to have no mercy for those that shoot twice a year once to hit a paper plate at 50 yards, once to get their elk at 100 yds. But then it dawned on me that some people find handloading about as mysterious as witchcraft and are afraid of sending a bolt through their eye. (made me flinch a time or two) And with the price of ammo getting where two boxes costs about 50 bucks, some people just don't want to take that much food out of their kid's mouths.

I would hate for hunting to go the way of polo and boat races - only for the rich. With the cost of rifles and ammunition increasing, and with hunting leases, hunting clubs, high fence hunting, and everyone from farmer to processer trying to get the most they can from the hunter, it appears to be heading that way.

What has this got to do with the 338 or 375 and hunting?

kudzu · « **Reply #16 on:** September 18, 2006, 09:12:07 AM »

CF, I sure wish you would quit changing your mind. Just ordered a 338 barrel for Pro Hunter. Now I'm looking for a 375. Come on man, give me ya final answer. LOL DM.

ps- are you familiar with unit 22 in CO. heading there in about 3 weeks.

Coppertop · « **Reply #17 on:** September 18, 2006, 11:16:07 AM »

Dancoman:

Where is area 22. I used to hunt in CO but don't remember what the areas were.

crow_feather · « **Reply #18 on:** September 19, 2006, 10:25:11 AM »

first to the Colorado fish and game site - then to either Google earth or a web site that has satalite pictures - a little typing - but it is worth it.

C F

crow_feather · « **Reply #19 on:** September 19, 2006, 10:31:29 AM »

dancoman

I did have a 416 Rem Mag and it was awsome! The rifle was just too heavy though. If you can handle the recoil and can find a light enough rifle, the 416 is your best bet from mice to elephant.

Somebody mention a 338?

Coppertop · « **Reply #20 on:** September 20, 2006, 07:28:14 AM »

Dancoman

I hunted that area when i lived there. I enjoyed hunting that area alot more than i do the high country mountains. I got 1 bull in area 22 and three cows in area 31 (right next door).

fowler · « **Reply #21 on:** October 11, 2006, 11:10:06 AM »

Ok Ok my B.S. meter is pegged. I have not a world of experience on elk just killed about 20 head and been in on as many others. I am sorry but a 270 slug through the lungs of anything will kill it quickly and humainly, period. A 270 not penetrating the rear ham? B.S. I have killed 7 or 8 with a 270, 10 or so with a 300 win mag, and 2 with my 338 (and a couple with other odds and ends). Is a 338 a better elk rifle than a 270, yes. Is the 270 to small for elk? Hell no and thousands of elk are killed every year to prove it.

If the chips were down I would reach for my 300 before any other rifle, it seems the right balence of power and results. But thruth be known they are likely to stay in the truck this year and a heavy loaded 45 Colt revolver will kill this years elk. But then if a 270 will not kill elk then my 45 Colt must be just foolishness. Of course I know a man that has killed 25 Cape Buffalo with a 45 Colt revolver with similar loads but then I guess he was just a fool too, right?

crow_feather · « **Reply #22 on:** October 18, 2006, 04:25:32 PM »

fowler,

This was meant to be a light hearted topic. I do not hunt elk with a 270 as I live in Grizzly country and I honestly believe that a 270 is not the BEST medicine for an upset grizzly.

A 270 - with the wrong ammunition - is not an elk caliber. I would guess that is true of any caliber for any game. What I wrote about the two elk is true, I have the 270 bullet recovered from the offside hide of the elk I killed with my 338. It was a 130 grain that didn't expand very much and left no blood trail.

Or maybe we just grow bigger elk up here..................................

Les Staley · « **Reply #23 on:** October 22, 2006, 01:54:42 PM »

Crowfeather: I too, believe that anything under 30 cal should be outlawed for hunting elk.. INCLUDEING the 7mmMag! What a wounder!.. I have personaly cleaned up after two elk wounded with 7 Mags.. If you're cool enough to wait for the perfect shot, and place a bullet with surgical precision, then hunting doesn't get you excited enough to even be out there in the first place!! This ain't the Outdoor Channel.. It's the real world. an elk can swap ends quicker than your finger can squeeze (read Jerk) the trigger, and I for one want enough steam to perforate an elk stem to stern if need be.. the cow I murdered Fri evening bought the big one at the behest of a 338 Win Mag... JMHO.... Les

crow_feather · « **Reply #24 on:** October 22, 2006, 07:54:07 PM »

An honest reply from a knowledgable person.

C F