Question for yall.

[firstcoueswas80]

Or, if you want to shoot a HUNTING bullet from a HUNTING rifle shoot a TSX or a Accubond.

[COOSEFAN]

Or, if you want to shoot a HUNTING bullet from a HUNTING rifle shoot a TSX or a Accubond.

 

C'mon......don't start that again (just pretend you didn't read this reply Gino)

[firstcoueswas80]

You know I had to Jim.

 

(gino, im just kidding)(kinda)

[Coues 'n' Sheep]

Or, if you want to shoot a HUNTING bullet from a HUNTING rifle shoot a TSX or a Accubond.

 

C'mon......don't start that again. (just pretend you didn't read this reply Gino)

 

 

It's is okay Jimbo..... Gamehauler already told me that you can't fix stupid..... ......Or maybe it was you can't teach an old dog new tricks.... .... Or maybe it was if you shoot and something dies (without loosing a horn) it works..... I just don't know!!! :

 

 

I am sorry G/H.... I guess you are going to have to help me remember what you were trying to tell/teach me......

 

 

Hey Casey.... how many elk has your gun killed with an Accubond or a TSX???? Just checking....

 

 

 

 

For all who read this and wonder ...... Casey and I beat each other to death on this before..... I happen to love Barnes bullets, and others for certain things and not for others.... But I also have found a target/hunting bullet (Berger) that I like very much for other things..... There are many bullets out there, each one has a Perfect use and we all have to figure out what works best for us in our hunting style and hunting goals....

[firstcoueswas80]

Just one.

[Coues 'n' Sheep]

Just one.

 

 

Mine is 3 with Barnes X and 2 With Berger...... I'm not switching back!!!!

[coueschaser3]

ill try em all out. see how the bunnies like em. but i gotta say i am anti-no lead bullets. i cant support a cause thats gonna end up banning lead ammo. Thats a buncha crap. as for the horn thing, im sure casey feels bad enough ive read to many posts with folks rippin on his....experience....im sure his main concern was not lettin that buck suffer right buddy? but again the first few time i was on the floor laughin. i really appreciate everyones input its been helpful, casey even offered to help build up a load for me for the 300. granted im relatively new on here thats awesome. id be glad to help anyone here with any hunts or questions they got that i can answer......or if anyones got a fetish for really high end european guns, thats what i do for a livin'.

[coueschaser3]

by the way CNS, how old is your shorthair? got a one and half year old male here, your dog looks like a heck of a good lookin' pup.

[firstcoueswas80]

ill try em all out. see how the bunnies like em. but i gotta say i am anti-no lead bullets. i cant support a cause thats gonna end up banning lead ammo. Thats a buncha crap. as for the horn thing, im sure casey feels bad enough ive read to many posts with folks rippin on his....experience....im sure his main concern was not lettin that buck suffer right buddy? but again the first few time i was on the floor laughin. i really appreciate everyones input its been helpful, casey even offered to help build up a load for me for the 300. granted im relatively new on here thats awesome. id be glad to help anyone here with any hunts or questions they got that i can answer......or if anyones got a fetish for really high end european guns, thats what i do for a livin'.

 

 

The banning of leadbullets is pretty lame, I must admit.

 

However, all in all that TSX really is one heck of a bullet. both of these bucks fell to a TSX and didnt move a muslce afterwards. one was at 354 yards, the other at 401 yards.

 

401 yards, 7mm mag, 160 TSX: DEAD!

 

354 yards, 270 wsm 130 TSX : DEAD!

And this is how the above buck fell when we went up to him :

[.270]

if you want to throw a .17 in this discussion, you're losing all credibility. i would have to say that everyone would agree that it is not a realistic elk cartridge. heck, use a .25 auto pistol. it's legal. you can't kill an elk with one, but go ahead. and i know a guy who killed a nice bull with a .17 rem. did it on a bet. shot it in the ear. but if you're dumb enough to shoot one in the lungs with a 20 grain bullet, go ahead. you deserve the consequences. you'll track it for awhile and then give up. arrows and bullets don't kill differently. they cause blood loss and the animal dies, or you make a poor shot and they get away. they're just different ways of accomplishing the same thing. i have a lotta experience with em both. it wouldn't scare me to use a .243 for elk. not one bit. or an '06, a .300, a .270, a 7mm, a .338, .375, an ultra mag, etc. but i'd use a rifle with a good bullet and know how to shoot it. to automatically decide a .277 diameter bullet is "unethical" but a .284 is ok, ain't a valid arguement. there isn't enough difference in the 2 to matter. one is as good as the other. for some reason folks think if a bullet has an "mm" behind it, it is some kinda super gun. bet you didn't know that a .270 is a true 7mm, did ya? what we call a 7mm is actually a bit larger. europeans like to use the diameter of the bore inside the lands. .300's are a great elk round. killed several with mine. but none i couldn't have killed just as dead with my .270. and i ain't arguing that a .270 is the only option. but i get real sick of people starting this "unethical" crap and acting like there is some mythical formula that has to be followed to kill an animal. shoot it in the lungs, it dies. it's real simple. you just hafta be a good enough rifleman to do it. nothing makes up for poor shooting. and as far as copper bullets. get ready to track em. i've seen several hundred elk go down. i won't even hunt with someone who uses copper bullets anymore. only well hit elk i've ever had to track were shot with copper bullets. 3 in one week a while back. they died, but it sure took em awhile and it sure made a lotta work gettin' em out. the copper bullets seem to zip through em and don't shock em enough, i think. be good for brown bears, maybe in africa, but they ain't the best elk bullets, from my experience. Lark.

[Coues 'n' Sheep]

.......... only well hit elk i've ever had to track were shot with copper bullets. 3 in one week a while back. they died, but it sure took em awhile and it sure made a lotta work gettin' em out. the copper bullets seem to zip through em and don't shock em enough, i think. be good for brown bears, maybe in africa, but they ain't the best elk bullets, from my experience. Lark.

 

 

+1 Lark.

 

The solid copper is great on Coues and is ok on elk "if" you hit the solid part of the shoulder or center punch heart, liver, or lung.... otherwise, even a 4" miss (on an elk) or just "clipping" an organ can result in a lot-a lookin'. I have seen it, too.

 

 

cc3...... My pup (Shiela) is almost 5 months.... She is really coming along nicely!

[coueschaser3]

if you want to throw a .17 in this discussion, you're losing all credibility. i would have to say that everyone would agree that it is not a realistic elk cartridge. heck, use a .25 auto pistol. it's legal. you can't kill an elk with one, but go ahead. and i know a guy who killed a nice bull with a .17 rem. did it on a bet. shot it in the ear. but if you're dumb enough to shoot one in the lungs with a 20 grain bullet, go ahead. you deserve the consequences. you'll track it for awhile and then give up. arrows and bullets don't kill differently. they cause blood loss and the animal dies, or you make a poor shot and they get away. they're just different ways of accomplishing the same thing. i have a lotta experience with em both. it wouldn't scare me to use a .243 for elk. not one bit. or an '06, a .300, a .270, a 7mm, a .338, .375, an ultra mag, etc. but i'd use a rifle with a good bullet and know how to shoot it. to automatically decide a .277 diameter bullet is "unethical" but a .284 is ok, ain't a valid arguement. there isn't enough difference in the 2 to matter. one is as good as the other. for some reason folks think if a bullet has an "mm" behind it, it is some kinda super gun. bet you didn't know that a .270 is a true 7mm, did ya? what we call a 7mm is actually a bit larger. europeans like to use the diameter of the bore inside the lands. .300's are a great elk round. killed several with mine. but none i couldn't have killed just as dead with my .270. and i ain't arguing that a .270 is the only option. but i get real sick of people starting this "unethical" crap and acting like there is some mythical formula that has to be followed to kill an animal. shoot it in the lungs, it dies. it's real simple. you just hafta be a good enough rifleman to do it. nothing makes up for poor shooting. and as far as copper bullets. get ready to track em. i've seen several hundred elk go down. i won't even hunt with someone who uses copper bullets anymore. only well hit elk i've ever had to track were shot with copper bullets. 3 in one week a while back. they died, but it sure took em awhile and it sure made a lotta work gettin' em out. the copper bullets seem to zip through em and don't shock em enough, i think. be good for brown bears, maybe in africa, but they ain't the best elk bullets, from my experience. Lark.

 

well now your stating that a copper bullet doesnt deliver enough shock......what happend to a hole in the right place is all that matters? i used the 17 cal to take it to extremes, by saying ANY gun is better than a bow is simply ignorant and wrong. Yes i do know that IN EUROPE a 270 is a true 7mm due to measuring discrepancies, considering i deal in fine european guns i would imagine i should know that. First of all ethics are unique to each person, so bashing them is slightly off base. i have no problem shooting an elk witha 270 but at a longer range, 300 or 350+, i dont believe it will deliver enough shock, just the same as your issue with copper bullets. My statement about a 7mm was refering to a MAGNUM load. not just any 7mm diameter bullet. and hey didnt you say if there was a season for limited weapon broken whiskey bottle you could kill one.....thats a bit less effective than a 25acp. I believe you should probabaly read my original question. i never denounced the 270, in fact i wanted opinions considering all circumstances, not just the animal in mind. i originally was fine with taking it but due to the access to a good custom 300 flatter shooting and overall better LONG RANGE gun and the fact that i have wanted a bull out of this unit for a long time and now have the tag, a gun i am more comfortable with seems to make just a bit more sense. And yes i will shoot a good quailty bullet and know the rifle as well if not better than my 270 by then. Now im confused if its the hole or the shock that matters now cuz ya keep changin it...... an arrow delivers very little shock, yet a copper bullet going fast and zipping through does the same but the hole is there right Bullets need the DELIVERY of kinetic energy, arrows dont, thats why they are different. Ya can get killed gettin hit by a truck but it dont have to put a hole in ya for ya to be dead.

 

Example: If you gut shoot somethin with a bow your gonna be trackin a long time, really need to know what your doing and make another stalk on a animal that is injured and is still nervous about any predator in the area especially you. its not a good circumstance. on the other hand i had a guy on a cow hunt a few years back shooting a 30-06, at 300 yards hit her to far back and dead center in the gut. She had been feeding all day and had a belly full of grass. After gettin to the place about an hour later when she was standing i noticed she had gone 10 ft and layed down. still beded and lookin at me. but could not physically get up or move. That is not a tensed up muscle situation, it was right in the gut mid body. She was in shock. That is why we found her, 180 grains delivering all it had and not comin out the other side. not the rule, but proved my very valid point.

[.270]

keep smilin' and slingin' big words, i'll keep draggin' in big elk. if i had to kill an elk and could take a gun over a bow, i'd take a .17 or a .223 or even a .22 long rifle. would not scare me a bit. just shoot em in the ear or the eye. something that i can do. but then again, i'm a sneaky guy. what my entire arguement is based on is you said a .280 is better than a .270, when they are so near identical there isn't a real arguement. none. their bullets in like weights perform so near identical there's no way to argue it. i've seen big bulls dropped in their tracks with a 100 gr .270 bullet in the lungs. it was out of a short mag going real fast, but it looked like a neck shot. real impressive. but under identical circumstances, ANY reasonable rifle would have done the same thing. i've seen perfect copper bullet lung shots with a .338/.378, a fairly big gun, as in good enough for rhinos and elephants, that ended up in an all nighter tracking with lanterns. you couldn't have drawn a better bullet location on a target. i know it would never have left the meadow even with a .243. my favorite elk rifle is a .300 mag. it's faster with bigger bullets. my kid killed a 6 point last year at 804 yards with his .300 ultra. even at that range, it went maybe 50 feet and died. go ahead, use copper bullets and drill a hole through em and trail em around for awhile. both blood trails go to the same elk. once again, shock, knockdown, whatever you wanna call it is just numbers on a piece of paper. if the paper says you have 2000 lbs of energy it means if you have a 2000 lb weight hanging from a rope, it will swing a foot when you hit it. it doesn't take into any account, the bullet, the animal, whether you're hitting bone or guts or whatever. it's just physics. every action has an opposite and equal reaction, E=MC2, all that einstein stuff. the animal you shoot doesn't know how fast the bullet is going or how hard it hits him. he doesn't go "crap, he shot me with a .338, 250 gr barnes going 2800 fps". he just runs until he dies. when a bullet is wadded up in a big ball under the skin on the off side, i know every bit of it's "shock" was left in the animal. not slung across the countryside after it goes through. on a lung shot a copper bullet zips through, doesn't do a lot of damage, and they run off and you have to track em. it kills em, but not very fast. the elk reaction reminds me a lot of using a muzzleloader. marksmanship is the only factor that really means much, when you're using a rifle suited to what you're hunting. Lark.

[coueschaser3]

well you go right ahead and have your opinion, i have mine. and have seen evidence of mine to back it up, as im sure you do for yours. Never said id use a copper bullet, it was a suggestion and i will gladly see how they shoot through the gun. as for head and neck shots, those i will not take, that is my personal choice. i believe things can go wrong and your margin of error decreases significantly with those shots. I love my 270 but hey i need a 300 cuz i want one and simply think its a better elk gun. sure they all do the same thing, for this hunt and this country it just is a better choice. As for the 270/7mm MAG, the 7 is a hair flatter, and more well known for being a longer range gun. If i were hunting in pines or close flat juniper i wouldnt take a 300 or even a 270 for that matter. I would probably be lookin at a 45-70 levergun, why cuz its a good excuse to have one and i wouldnt need longer shots. As for bein "sneaky" i will guarantee ive been as close to live elk as the next guy, maybe not as many as some, but alot. 338-378wby is a big mamajama and im sure it would take a elephant or rhino with the correct shot, but again its not ideal for the way they are hunted, not sniped off from 100+ yards. Thats a close quarters game, and in most of africa you would be below your 375 minimum. The 378 on the other hand if you are a velocity nut and wanna hit em with a train would be ideal.

[.270]

man you need to have your own comedy show. or be a politician. never seen so much flipfloppin'. now a .338/.378 is too big? i guess i'll never figger it out. well, time to get ready for "MY" elk hunt. lemee, what'll i use, maybe a, well, maybe a .270. or would that be unethical?????????