Ollin Magnetic Digiscoping System

Answered: What's enough bullet for Elk? (long read)

SFR292

New member
Joined
Jun 8, 2017
Messages
21
Location
Texas
Hello,
I’ve been seeing a reoccurring theme in questions that relate around the world of ballistics both with my customers, students, and within the questions posed to Randy on his Elk Talk series so I thought I would share some of my knowledge and experience so that others may learn how to figure this question out for themselves to make better informed decisions for themselves. No one knows your environment, style, abilities, and wants better than you so it only makes sense to empower you with knowledge so that you may be better effective in the field. This topic can get quite lengthy but there is a lot of information to convey in order to teach and give tools required to make informed decisions with.

First let me start off by saying a bit about myself, I am a gunsmith, engineer and machinist, I have been doing this off and on since I was very young, taking a break from the profession while serving our country. I obtained my Bachelors of Science in IT, and later an MBA but I couldn’t leave my passion of shooting, hunting, and gunsmithing. I do this all day every day, shoot competitively and my shooting passion is extreme ultra long range shooting (I’ve personally shot groups beyond 4000 yards). This discussion is not intended to discuss the ethics, morals and skillsets of long range hunting, rather a brief overview of external ballistics that directly tie into terminal performance. I shoot a lot, upwards of 800-1200 rounds of precision fire a week and I’m ever learning myself so please don’t take my opinions and experiences as the end all but rather a guidance to a direction to find the information you need for yourself and your situation.

The initial question I get personally and that I’ve seen asked to Randy on Elk Talk is something like “Is XXX cartridge enough to kill an elk?”. I thought Randy did a good job in responding with “well it depends” because, well, it does depend on a huge amount of variables. We all know shot placement determines almost everything when it comes to hunting, so for now we’ll make some assumptions in order to carry on a discussion, a well-placed shot center mass of the vitals on an elk. With this assumption we need parameters to gauge what is and what is not “enough power” to reliably cause enough penetration and tissue damage to take an animal. Many states list minimum requirements with what is a legal firearm to hunt elk with, usually a combination of minimum caliber (typically 6mm/243) and even go as far as to list minimum energy requirements either at the muzzle or at a given impact distance. Colorado states: “Rifles using center-fire cartridges of .24 caliber or larger, having expanding bullets of at least seventy (70) grains in weight, except for elk and moose where the minimum bullet weight is eighty-five (85) grains, and with a rated impact energy one hundred (100) yards from the muzzle of at least one thousand (1000) foot pounds as determined by the manufacturer's rating…”, (Colorado Parks & Wildlife Regulations- Big Game, 2017). Having this parameter set gives us a minimum of a go/no go situation while finding the answers to the question; What is enough bullet?

External ballistics is the term used to describe what a projectile does between the time it exits the muzzle it impacts its target (or stops its flight). This is in an exercise of physics in order to determine what bullet does what and when, yes the main function of ballistics is the driver behind precision rifle fire, adjustments for distance and CDS dials etc.… but for this purpose we will focusing on the energy potential to find out “what is enough bullet”. We know from the regulations that we need a bullet of at least .243 caliber and weight of 85 grains, we also know that we need at least an impact energy of 1000 foot pounds (ftLbs) at 100 yards. Again, some assumptions need to be made. This assumption is that the generally excepted hunting distance is around 100 yards so for discussion purposes we will substitute the term that we need 1000 ftlbs of energy at point of impact.

We would not be doing our due diligence if we only ran the ballistics based upon impact energy alone, velocity is a key function of energy in ballistics. In a basic sense, mass*velocity=energy. However not all bullets are created equal nor created to do the same job in the same manner. So again research is required to find out what our parameters are in order to create a go/no go situation. In order to stop a discussion about which brand is better than another I’ll use a made-up projectile. The manufacture of the projectile states that maximum and minimum effective expansion range of the bullet is between 2800 feet per second (fps) and 1800 fps. For right now we’re focused on the lower end of those numbers but the higher end will be discussed later.

So now we have our minimum parameters of 1800 fps and 1000 ftlbs of energy at point of impact. Rather than actually lay out the math to do it the long way, there’s a huge amount of tools available online for free as well as some very advanced tools to purchase. Personally I use Applied Ballistics (both at home doing desk testing and in the field) and a beta test version sent to me by another well-known ballistics researcher. Berger Bullets, Applied Ballistics, Hornady, and many others have great, free, and simple to use ballistic solvers online. The results given for this purpose of “what’s enough bullet?” are theoretical max effective range, just because it says you can shoot that far doesn’t mean you should or will, this is just an FYI purpose to help you make decisions on what is enough.

The direct impact on a projectiles ability to maintain speed and energy is the projectiles Ballistic Coefficient (BC). There are multiple different types of BC out there, most common are the G1 and the G7 ballistic drag profile. They are not the same and have different purposes, USUALLY the G7 profile most accurately represents modern bullet designs however the shooting industry has adopted the G1 long ago and that’s what most users are familiar with, however I recommend the use of the G7 profile if available and applicable for your projectile choice. Another semi-major note is not all manufactures measure their G1/G7’s in the same manor in the same conditions, there is no real “standard” for this and do not trust the numbers provided by the manufacture until you’ve verified them yourself in your platform. Rifle twist rates have a major impact on the BC’s, just because shooter “A” and shooter “B” shoot the same projectile but they have twist rates different from each can have major or minor change in BC of the projectile. Unfortunately, factory rifles tend to be on the slow side (both in terms of twist rates and keeping up with the trends in modern projectile development). Just because a rifle groups a bullet well does not mean it’s actually giving that projectile enough stability to gain all of the ballistic potential advantage that projectile has. Berger Bullets has a free online bullet stability factor calculator for you input your setup and see if you’re reaching the potential or somewhere below the potential (idea stability factor numbers are above 1.5).

The next major piece of information needed is the starting speed of the bullet, typically referred to as the muzzle velocity. If possible, always, ALWAYS, I’ll say it again, ALWAYS verify your muzzle velocity either with a good chronograph or through ballistic solver calibration, or ideally both. If you do not have access to these tools you can use the manufactures information as a baseline starting point for initial data collection and results to answer the foundation question. You want the best, most accurate or most representative data you can get, remember with all math and physics solving, trash in = trash out. Now that you have some data to start with, there’s one more piece of the puzzle that has a major impact and is a form of reality with elk hunting, environmental conditions. I’m sure most have heard people discuss how temperature, humidity, elevation effect ballistics, they do, A LOT. However to break it down simply, the environmental conditions are used to compute what the density of the air the projectile is traveling through is. The less dense the air, the less the projectile is shedding velocity and energy. It’s my experience that the ground elevation, temperature, and air pressure (station or Baro) have the most effect on the density of the bullet, yes humidity does have an effect but it’s my opinion that the humidity amount is the least important aspect of the environmental conditions. So now we have a brief idea of what information is needed to get to our desired outcome information, we can get to the meats and potatoes of the initial question, what’s enough?
 
Last edited:
I’ll use one of my current custom rifles I actually plan to elk hunt with this year for the example on this subject, a 6.5 Creedmoor of my own chamber design and with an experimental barrel from HS Precision (Yes I’m officially a pro-team member of HS Precision and have both professional and personal relationships with that company, just full disclosure). I’m currently shooting a very popular bullet, the Hornady ELD-X 143 grain. In my platform I’m pushing these at 2993 fps average with a SD of 2.3 (this is why I stated the experimental barrel comment because these numbers are not normal for a 6.5 Creedmoor). To keep things a little more basic I’ll only being 1 BC number (in real world and field use I use multiple BCs, sometimes a lot of them to get more accurate ballistic prediction solutions). The published G7 BC of this projectile is 0.314 from Hornady and so well use this as our input for this example. Don’t assume that bigger is better, a 308 win is larger than a 6.5 Creedmoor, both in case volume and projectile Sectional Density/weight, but its aerodynamic efficiency is relatively poor. Meaning that it sheds its speed and energy at a much faster rate than the 6.5. Simply put the 308 is as aero dynamic as my F-250 and the 6.5 is more like a Ferrari. Use these methods and tools to compare which is better for you and your scenario.

So now a major note to make, that I see a lot of non-professional or experienced long range shooters make is the environmental conditions set for the testing of finding the maximum theoretical range of a cartridge and projectile, especially for purposes of our discussion, elk hunting. I live in Texas, at very low elevation, around 550 feet actual. However where I’m elk hunting this year has an average elevation of 7000 feet. That’s a MAJOR change in environmental conditions, I’m concerned with energy on elk, in their environment, not what it does here at home in the summer time. So there’s plenty of tools to use, including GOhunt (I am not connected to that company but am a fan of their product) that gives a lot of useful information including weather and environmental conditions of the area you plan to hunt. With this I have set of data to plug into my ballistic solver to get a usable output of information. Using historical weather data I was able to determine that my average station pressure at the time of year in my environment is 27.08 so I’ll use this. If you do not care or do not understand what the difference in station and Barometric pressure is then you can input the elevation, with baro pressure and average temperature into the solver and get the same results. So, all of this said, what’s my results?

My actual results using the 4DOF ballistic Solver from Hornady (I choose this as it’s readily available and simple to use for most people) however I choose to use a different solver for my personal field use. As is the case with most cartridges and projectiles, you typically won’t reach the velocity and energy limit threshold at the same distance, one will happen before the other.
In my case I reach the velocity limit of 1800 FPS at 847 yards and the 1000 ftlbs of energy threshold at 877 yards, relatively close to each other but worth noting that they typically happen at different intervals.

Most of my customers and students are amazed at what the distances are (ON PAPER) that the effective range of a cartridge and projectile combination are useable, typically most think you need much more gun than you do to reach the results. Again this information isn’t intended to spark the discussion on the ethics of taking shots on animals at distance, rather a discussion on energy and effectiveness on Elk.

So that’s it right? Not really, remember we discussed the operational range in terms of velocity of a projectile? The imaginary projectile first discussed stated that its maximum operation for reliable expansion is 2800 fps, what does that mean? This is where some might argue over what they prefer on penetration, energy transfer, exit wounds, etc. My experience is when you push a bullet above its rated velocity range at point of impact the bullet construction fails, this is even more the case if you factor in the physical structure of your target (the elk) and the scenario of hitting a large bone or muscle mass structure. In my case with my starting velocity, I don’t reach the 2800 fps threshold until 138 yards. Does this mean I can’t shoot an elk closer than that? No it doesn’t but it does mean I need to choose my shot placement even more carefully. Sound familiar? Shot placement is key? Because it is.

This is my opinion and experience speaking but, this upper limit of velocity is more the source of issues in bad field results than the lower end of the spectrum ever is. Very few people use their system (weapon) to its outer limit of operations, but all too common is over gunning their situation. A lot of cartridges, and namely projectiles get a bad reputation because they were asked to do too much and failed. The 7mm Remington Magnum, along with certain ballistic tip projectiles is most common “victim” to this problem than many others. This problem is based around the high start velocities that the 7mm mag is capable of. First let me say I’m huge fan of anything 7mm and have personally done some amazing shooting and hunting with them so I’m not picking on the 7’s or you if you use one. However many people use the light for class 140 grain class of projectiles in the big 7s. This falls back to the statement that the factory built rifles tend to be behind the curve on what twist rates are really needed for what projectiles. The slower twist of most of the 7s mean they typically shoot the lighter projectiles better, but with lighter comes higher velocities, a combination that is asking for trouble with most “normal” hunting scenarios. It’s fairly easy to see muzzle velocities above 3300 fps with this combination. Using the same tools to find the max effective range for elk hunting we can find the other end of the spectrum the minimum distance for reliability (this term is key here, I know plenty of people have had good results with this combination but this is a function of odds and food for thought in the goal of this discussion). The results in this combination using the above mentioned thresholds of 2800 fps maximum (a very common speed chosen within the industry) show that the minimum distance of engagement is right at 300 yards! That’s much further than many people expect, and many people don’t care to shoot that far to begin with for multiple reasons. I’ve personally seen this happen many times over the years, watch a good shot throw the animal to the ground only to have it get up and run off and have a long track or unsuccessful recovery because the projectile failed to penetrate. At those high speeds the projectiles come apart upon impact and shed their energy over a larger surface area. Many of the cases I’ve witnessed have large amount of tissue, fur, and blood at the site of the shot but the blood quickly disappears and the recovery effort fails because many times the animal does not die or it dies a long time later, sometimes days or weeks later from infection.

So what does all of this mean to you? That’s for you to answer for yourself and the entire point of this conversation to give a tool for you to use to make an informed decision on what really is enough bullet for elk. Hope this helps and gives people better results in the field. The answer isn’t always you need to buy something else (even though we might use this excuse to do so, I know I have) but rather employ that system more effectively or understand the tool so that the correct tool for the job is selected. Thanks again and have a great time outside!
 
Last edited:
Well said. I've just started getting into ballistics in the last year or so, and being an engineer, it's been fun to figure all this stuff out. Though this post was rather long, it's pretty simple to find your maximum theoretical range for factory ammo. In case anyone wants a shortened version of how to find your max theoretical range that's step by step and quick to do:

If you're a factory loader, MidwayUSA lists the specs for darn near every factory load. Pull up a ballistic calculator (I use the Vortex LRBC but there are lots of free ones). Input your load info. Then input the environmental conditions you expect while hunting: Big Fin I believe sets his custom dials for 7500 feet and 30 degrees for elk guns. Run the ballistics, then look at the results. Most bullets won't expand under 1800 fps, and 1000 foot pounds is roughly the minimum that people use for elk (Randy states 1250 in one of his videos). If your bullet runs below 1800 fps or runs below 1000ish foot pounds, whichever happens first, is your maximum theoretical range. It's up for anyone else to decide what distance they can actually shoot comfortably in, and in what type of conditions.

Great post SFR!
 
Last edited:
Wannakillabigbull,

Yes you do give some shortened quick versions to get some usable data, I felt the need to give some extra explanation in hopes that it causes more readers to stop and think about other aspects they may have not used in the past, namely the BC data provided by manufactures and assumptions made on what their velocities really are compared to what the box says.

Another major point I wanted people to think about was the other end of the spectrum, the high end velocity close range shots with large powerful cartridges. This is by far been the source of problems with more of my customers and students (I say students because I teach very specialized precision shooting systems) because they over asked of their system without realizing what they were actually asking it to.

I hate to name names with brands but Nosler is horrible at providing grossly wrong ballistic information with their products. Not actually wrong but they method of testing is centered around the notion of marketing rather than performance and usable information. That being said I love nosler bullets and use them regularly, their factory ammo is quality, their brass leaves quite a bit to be desired as a reloader however.
 
Well written and I agree with your synopsis, but here is where I differ and always cause a big stir. What most hunters who hunt deer and antelope or even elk haven't experienced what can happen when elk hunting. They are not deer or antelope. This is why many many gun writers and hunters that many of us look up to all favor a heavy, moderate to fast moving bullet with lots of energy. In my 30 years of elk hunting only a few times have I had the perfect conditions when shooting. With that said, yes you can wait for those conditions but most will not. I am not an advocate of long range hunting ( over 500yrds) and would never take a shot that long even though I have the tools and ability as all the below mentioned factors multiply the longer out you get. Here are my concerns with user a smaller bullet for elk in the high country and why 95% of time the shot will not be perfect and your shot will off target one way or the other.

1) wind: is the wind on the other canyon the same as yours?
2) angle of shot: did you properly figure
3) distance: did you calculate bullet drop correct
4) did the animal move on you or is it a moving shot
5) did you not shoot well
6) did you sight gun in properly for your elevation and temperature ( yes it matters)
7) did weather change during hunt ( rain, snow. heat) from your sight in set up
8) are physically fit ( are fully rested when you take the shot or out of breathe from running up hill to get a shot)

I can go on and on and many will discredit what I am saying and as like you said it all goes back to the shooter and conditions. Like I said in an earlier post, I have shot and killed a few elk with my 270Wsm, More with my 300WM and 300 Weatherby. For me (and here is the real answer) I shoot the bigger guns better because it takes some stress off of me as a shooter to make the "perfect shot". I am more relaxed when I shoot. Last elk I shot almost 400 yards and the bullet broke both shoulders and anchored him. My shot was off a bit. When I got to other side of hill 30 minutes later he never moved. My 270WSM would not have done that in my opinion. The only reason I say all this is I have have seen it several times in my years of guiding, a hunter comes out west with their 270 or equivalent and reads how you just don't need a anything bigger and it doesn't go well.
 
belshawelk,

You have very valid points and I tried to address those early in the write up with assumptions on shot placement with my own assumptions that the reader would assume the conditions required to make those shots. The intention of this discussion is purely based around potential energy to get a job done (hunt elk)but you bring up very good points that it's not just that simple, not just a function of energy.

There is a lot to be said for bringing a lot of power to the fight, but understanding that power is just as important. I don't expect most people to use my 375 Cheytac improved that carries more energy than a 660 gr 50 BMG to an elk hunt, but they could and I have hunted with it with great success. Again, doesn't mean they should. When you use something like a Weatherby Mag or Winchester Mag or anything similar you bring with you a much larger margin for error. How much margin do you need is ultimately up to you and what your abilities and capabilities are, I nor anyone else can really tell you what those are, you know better than anyone else what those are. You're most likely right in your assessment on the 270wsm in that scenario, the 270 class of bullets are not that effective in terms of aerodynamic efficiency when compared to the larger (read bullet weight class) of the 30 caliber that directly relate to potential energy transfer on target.

You cannot state the importance of wind reading enough when it comes to conditions, however the ability of the bullet to "buck the wind" is direct correlation to the BC of the bullet, done by comparing lag time (Time of flight - time of flight in a vacuum = lag time) then applying your chosen method of wind equations. I have a ton of experience in wind reading and considered in the top percentages of shooters in the world. that being said I still cannot the wind perfect every time, the average person or hunter typically dont give the wind the respect it deserves. Very good point that all readers need to consider.

In terms of your comments to zeroing, the vast majority of shooters who think their system is zeroed are not actually zeroed. Yes, the conventional method of hunting and shooting required you to adjust your zero for your conditions but advancements in the math and physics of distance shooting and ballistic solvers has really done away with that need and concern, IF you know and truly understand how to use these tools.

It's my personal feeling that the advent of CDS (leupold brand) and other compensation optic devices are one of the worst things to the long range hunting and shooting world there ever has been because of how easy it makes it seems. It gives the average hunter too much false confidence that leads to poor made decisions with even worse results and give those of us who truly live in the world of long range shooting a bad image, that and many TV shows doing the same. When I ask students "who has ever done a tall target test to get their error of tracking percentage" little to none have ever heard the term let alone conducted it. This is just one small aspect that has induced errors into the system of a compensated drop optic system, be it a dial or reticle. Always conduct your own verification and never assume anything when operating in this arena.


All of that being said, I agree with you and don't have an issue at all with what you said. The point of this discussion to teach and get people to think about their decisions with somewhat of an educated process.
 
Last edited:
Wannakillabigbull,

Yes you do give some shortened quick versions to get some usable data, I felt the need to give some extra explanation in hopes that it causes more readers to stop and think about other aspects they may have not used in the past, namely the BC data provided by manufactures and assumptions made on what their velocities really are compared to what the box says.

Another major point I wanted people to think about was the other end of the spectrum, the high end velocity close range shots with large powerful cartridges. This is by far been the source of problems with more of my customers and students (I say students because I teach very specialized precision shooting systems) because they over asked of their system without realizing what they were actually asking it to.

I hate to name names with brands but Nosler is horrible at providing grossly wrong ballistic information with their products. Not actually wrong but they method of testing is centered around the notion of marketing rather than performance and usable information. That being said I love nosler bullets and use them regularly, their factory ammo is quality, their brass leaves quite a bit to be desired as a reloader however.

Couldn't agree more. My post wasn't meant as a ways to skip over yours, but as an add on for someone that got to the end of it and decided they wanted to figure out their max theoretical range, without having to dig through your post to find the steps. The details in your post are most definitely necessary to correctly understand the concepts and potential caveats.
 
Last edited:
Great conversations guys. SFR292 thanks for the work on this post, I hope many read it.

Here is something it sounds like we wont agree on just for giggles: I love my new 30 Nosler. It blows away my 300WM with the 210 Accubond long range. My 300 may never hunt again. I would challenge anyone to show me it doesn't meet advertised specs.
 
HAHA here it goes Belshawelk,

So it does perform as advertised as a cartridge, what is wrong the BC data that nosler publishes for the LR bullet. If you run the data out to around 1500 yards, then shoot three distances within that 1500, say 400, 850, and 1450 and compare the data from whatever ballistic solver you choose then look at the real world data and you'll see what I'm talking about. I could post the data published by Brian Litz on that exact bullet but I'm not sure of the legalities of sharing that information in this format as it's a paid service. I'll put it this way that the BC data is enough "wrong" that you could completely miss an Elk sized target at close as 600 yards with all other information being correct. I say close as 600, thats long range for many people and the term of long range is subjective, not right and wrong answers. For me I don't consider long range anything inside 1500 with most cartridges.

Good times this is kind of conversation I was hoping for with this subject. Thanks guys.
 
Thanks for the time put in on this we don't shoot past 400 and both shoot 30 Cal rifles . We have experienced bullet failure on Super close shot and after reading this I think it was due to to much speed for the bullet we shoot thanks again.
 
Excellent info.
Thank you for the detailed explanation.
Hope more find this as interesting as I have.
 
I have heard the same thing about Nosler and their advertised BC data. Like you said there is absolutely nothing wrong with Nosler in fact they are deadly but you need to know true BC when you're plugging in the data and theirs takes some tinkering to figure it out.
Thanks for the thought provoking write up.
 
Thanks for the time put in on this we don't shoot past 400 and both shoot 30 Cal rifles . We have experienced bullet failure on Super close shot and after reading this I think it was due to to much speed for the bullet we shoot thanks again.

Glad it could help and give a perspective that might help understand what happened so you can have better results in the future.

As a note for a potential solution for that problem is choosing a heavier projectile IF you have the barrel twist to support it. With larger projectiles comes more barrel friction, less case capacities, and slower muzzle velocities. In physics its a game of give and take, for our purposes as shooters, physics usually means you have to give up something to gain something. In this case you give up recoil (meaning adding recoil to the weapon) in order to shoot a larger bullet slower with all other parameters being equal. Also things to consider are the physical construction type and construction methods of the projectile. Some are better than others in different scenarios, using the methods I've described is just one tool to add to the tool box to come to a educated, less subjective matter of making decisions.
 
Interesting? Yeah I guess. But, info you can find if you look for it. mtmuley

Absolutely, it's not like I developed the physics or math to figure this stuff out. The problem is usually people don't look for it or even think about it. My intentions are to spark the fire of education and provide to path to go down to find the information so more of us in the woods have a better understanding and make better decisions.
 
Absolutely, it's not like I developed the physics or math to figure this stuff out. The problem is usually people don't look for it or even think about it. My intentions are to spark the fire of education and provide to path to go down to find the information so more of us in the woods have a better understanding and make better decisions.

Carry on then. mtmuley
 
I switched from .308 Win to .338 Win Mag when was preparing for my first rifle bull elk hunt. My .338 shoots much tighter groups at 300 yards and beyond with a heavier bullet than the .308. Not sure the elk cares about diameter but the extra grains of weight driving into the elk a bit deeper might get his attention. I also bought the lead sled and some bags of shotgun shot during the burn in phase of the new .338.

That leads to a couple of questions. What hearing protection do you use? Do you use a lead sled or similar device to absorb some of the recoil on 100s of shots taken per week?

Bonus question. Do you reload? Sounds like you deal with brass, powder, primers and bullets. If so, what is your reloading setup?

Bonus bonus question. Have you experienced issues with the temperature of the powder in the cartridge being warmer or colder than the air temperature and encounter a resulting negative result? I wonder this when retrieve a bullet from inside my coat on a cold day or when just shot on a cold day and racked a second cartridge that now may be warming up as the recently fired barrel transfers warmth.

Appreciate the detailed info in this thread and wish you luck on your upcoming adventures.
 
Great read with a lot of great information. Thank you for taking time out to post this.
 
So for hearing protection I use Silencers....on everything. From my 375 Cheytac to 22LR, in the field if it's legal which almost everywhere now it is. Yes they add length and weight, but most of mine weigh between 10 and 15 oz so not a ton but the benefits of using it far surpass lugging the weight around. They also do quite a lot for recoil management. As much as the best muzzle brakes, really if you think about it they're large in-cased muzzle brakes.

As far as lead sleds, I hate them and again one of the worst things on the market in opinion for shooting for a couple reasons. First, they don't allow you to have the same shoulder placement and cheek weld that you would normally have in the field or otherwise which cause major shifts in paralax, extreme shifts depending on your scope and setup. Again most of even my experienced customers/students are aware of paralax but dont' understand fully. Next time you're on the range and behind your gun, move your head around with the gun in a very steady position, watch the cross hairs walk around the target. Yes many scopes now have a paralax adjustment (side focus) or claim to be paralaxed at 50 yards, it still matters, a lot. Shooting well is all about consistency, if you can have the same cheek weld and shoulder placement you're shooting yourself in the foot from the start. The recoil management benefits of the lead sled actually promote bad shooting positions and recoil management in the field, another MAJOR factor in being a good shooter. Your shooting position is built around proper recoil management first followed closely by natural point of aim second (not really first and second but with each other). If the gun is designed well, meaning stock design recoil impulse isn't harsh on anything, even my 375s. Unfortantly most hunting guns have absolute horrible stocks in terms of recoil management. The traditional stock designs act as a lever, giving the gun a mechanical advantage with recoil. Small changes make big differences, yes recoil pad do wonders but also look at the kick angle on the stock, a good gunsmith will know how to change it with a recoil pad change to make it best it can be for you.

Bonus: Yes I reload....A LOT. I have almost everything under the sun in terms of reloading equipment, in fact I have an entire mother-in-law house dedicated to it. My go to setup for most "normal" cartridges is a Redding Ultra Mag press on a custom built riser I built. I use Redding Black label dies and Redding Shell holders usually unless it's for one of special setups. I don't neck size, if the chamber and machine work is correct you dont need that and it makes for less reliable field ammunition in my opinion. I set my resizing dies to push the shoulders back 0.004" in most cases. I normally use an RCBS chargemaster set to 0.4 grains low and hand trickle up to my mark then check it on PACT scale then checked on a balance beam if I'm trying to get everything perfect. I prefer to use a micrometer seating die if I can. And every round goes through a custom concentricity checker and adjuster I machined myself, one for each caliber I have (which is A LOT). I play a lot with different primers, typically working to lower my standard deviations the best I can, even using magnum primers in non-magnum rounds (don't do this unless you know what you're doing). I also do full match prep every single time on my brass, they first go through a stainless steel wet media tumbler. Then flash hole deburring (if they need it), then resize. At this point they get a major inspection done to look for any issues. then they get trimmed, chamfered, deburred on the necks. Then the primer pocket is uniformed (if needed). Depending on the number of firings I may or may not send them through my annealing machine prior to resizing. I stay busy as you might guess, I don't sleep a lot but I also don't have any kids and my wife lets me play a lot so I do.

Bonus Bonus: Yes temperature and powder burn rates are very real, out right dangerous in some cases. Different powders act different ways in different loadings so you have to start building a knowledge base to find what works for your system the best. I actually test my loads to find out. After I find my initial load through work ups (which I always try to do when it's as hot as possible outside) I'll then take a batch of ammo and stick it in the freezer, check the temperatures on the ammo and take it out in 10 degree increments, or as close to as I can get and shoot them either over a Magnetto Speed V3 or Labradar chronograph to log velocities. I've even been known to cook ammo in an oven to 175 degrees (again don't do this, this was in a controlled condition safe area) to do the same thing. Now I have a velocity swing based upon ammo temp, next I do a similar set of test on the gun, but measuring chamber temp the best I can with a laser thermometer from the inside of the chamber and stay consistent with how long I "cook" a round in the chamber. Not just for safety but I never run a round in the chamber also so I can control the temp as much as I can, I use detachable magazines on most of my platforms (usually HS Precision magazines) and I keep them on my body in fall and winter field use to have a constant temp as I can. When I fire a shot and need a re-engagement or engage another target I don't load the round into the chamber until the last second.

Sounds like complete overkill, maybe it is but I'm very focused on having as much accurate information I can have, as a long range shooter I'm concerned with first round hits as a priority, as a hunter we always are concerned with first round hits. With all of that said, I'm making ammo now. HA.
 
Great read. For me, I've used a 270 win for many years and tried others, but that trusty old Remington has taken 20 elk and shot placement with accuracy is the most important. Just knowing that you can take that rifle to the range every year and it shoots where it is supposed to makes me more confident on putting an elk down. I'm not a long range shooter, limit of 300 yards on a good shot and, yes, a larger 300 mag will make a bad shot better. Just thought I'd chime in on enough bullet for elk. A 243 seems too light though. I did modify a 30-06 for my daughter, who was 12 at the time, by using a muzzle brake and cutting the stock shorter. She did well with that, but needed good hearing protection.
 
Leupold BX-4 Rangefinding Binoculars

Forum statistics

Threads
111,142
Messages
1,948,627
Members
35,043
Latest member
heddenbk
Back
Top