The ultimate Elk Cartridge? - Does a Man-Bun make you more sensitive to recoil?

To be direct, it is a complete non sequitur.
I think you spelled “squirter” wrong.

All jokes aside, elk vary so much in size and habitat. A 275 pound Tule cow is different than a mature bull Roosie pushing 900 pounds. Wide open grasslands where Rockies roam are very different than Afognak Island. So, if I were to have just one “elk rifle”, it would have to be suitable for all of those conditions.

On top of that, public land essentially shrinks by half when people are shooting further than ever. So, if I am going to compete with the cross canyon shooters, I have to be able to take whatever shot presents itself or risk losing it to someone a half mile away. I also need to put it down quickly or risk it getting shot again by someone else and starting a pissing match.

This is why I think the safest choice for elk starts with a 30-06 and 180gr bullets (or maybe 165gr monos). The magnum 30s are better and the 33s are even mo-betta.

Nothing says you can’t have an understudy rifle, chambered in a light kicker, that is proportionately and mechanically similar to your hunting rifle. This is a cheap way to get trigger time and muscle memory.
 
I killed my first cow elk with a .243 when I was 12. One shot with a 100 gr GameKing put it down right there, <200 yard shot. It was an absolutely dead perfect shot.

Would I do it again? Hell no, unless I had to, and I'd damn sure use a better bullet than a cup and core BTSP. I've seen many animals wounded and lost with the Creedmoors and similar rounds, mostly from city people who watch YouTube a lot and shoot very little.

These days my primary elk rifle is a 7 PRC, at least until my 300 PRC is finished. With a good bullet, good (but not perfect) shot placement, and within reasonable range, it will kill most things very quickly. I consider that a reasonable minimum, and more is better if you can shoot it well.
 
I would respectfully suggest that you use enough gun next time and work on your marksmanship in the mean time. If a 125lb 5' 7" lady can be trained to operate the M249 SAW like one of my friends (a former 101st AB) The SAW is not possessed of much recoil but weighs in at 22lbs with a 200rd belt attached. She lugged that pig thru three tours in Iraq and Afghanistan that included more than her fair share of combat.

if you know a 5’7” 125lb female who was a SAW gunner on 3 different tours in Iraq and Afghanistan you met a unicorn. She either wasn’t spending enough time with the right E7’s or is taking some liberties. No one is a SAW gunner on 3 tours especially as a dismount humping a gun, and even more as a female when they weren’t allowed in combat arms roles until after Iraq ended and the foot patrols in Afghanistan became “to dangerous”. Non combat arms troops rarely patrolled like that, they were mostly in support/supply type convoy. The FET teams that came into play later in the war also didn’t run an automatic rifleman (in my experience)

im also not calling out your friend because she very likely did carry a SAW at some point during her 3 deployments, potentially even in a foot patrol or serve as a gunner, just calling out your BS second hand telephone game example from someone


Of all the things that didn't happen, this happened the didn'test.
 
old-man-yells-at-cloud-meme-1.jpg
 
This right here is actually also a really good point. The 6.5x55 is not questionable as a moose cartridge but the 6.5 creedmoor is?

A quick look at the Hodgdon reloading data actually shows the 6.5 creedmoor launching 143gr eld x(not my favorite bullet but just go with it for the sake of argument) at 2791fps out of a 24” barrel while the 6.5x55 shows a 142gr Sierra at a max of 2671fps.

I continue to express my opinion that bullet construction, shot placement, and self control (don’t take low percentage shots) are much more important than caliber choice. I like my .300 win mag with a 180gr ttsx for elk above all else. But I’d take a 6.5 creedmoor loaded with a 127gr Barnes lrx over a 300 win mag loaded with a 180gr Berger target bullet.
Well let’s see the 6.5x55has 100 years of success in the field on moose. What does the 6.5 man bun have besides paper ballistics info? Case closed pending further investigation into field effectiveness on large critters.
 
Well let’s see the 6.5x55has 100 years of success in the field on moose. What does the 6.5 man bun have besides paper ballistics info? Case closed pending further investigation into field effectiveness on large critters.
Same bullet, same speed, same terminal velocity. Yep, clearly the Swede is mythical. Case closed.

It's like a pipsqueek mouse and a pipsqueek vole arguing over who is gonna fight the fox.

Guess one is mighty mouse, eh?
 
Last edited:
Today at the range, younger using AR and AK at an indoor range at 30 ft - using a scope zoom up to 7x. They struggled, and were open about it at 1x. They're everywhere but they are the future.
 
The internet and social media create these questions, so some influencer dipshit can create content. I am a gen-x in my late 50’s, and I wish it would all go away.
 
Apologies to our Gen-X hunters out there if I step on your toes. I enjoy reading and watching videos about other hunters thoughts on best cartridges for various hunting applications. This morning I watched one that made me wonder WTF is going on with today's hunters?

The hunter was about late twenties to early thirties and lived somewhere out west where he hunts Elk every year. He was musing on what makes the ideal Elk cartridge. A big Magnum like a 300wm or a smaller, lighter round like the 6.5cm? He cited studies which concluded that bullet caliber and weight and energy do not matter at all or much anyways and that first shot accuracy is the most critical variable. Not hard to argue so far. He also cited a study by the US Army stating that soldiers rifle accuracy and shotgun accuracy fell off once recoil exceeded 11 ft-lbs. Really?? I wondered if the test subjects were field cooks or Delta operators, lol.
********************************************************************************


Statistics and studies can be fudged to prove most anything

\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/

Why Misleading Statistics Are So Common

Statistics are powerful persuasive tools. A single number can shape opinions much faster than a long explanation.

Unfortunately, this also makes statistics easy to misuse.

Some of the most common techniques include:


  • Cherry-picking data
  • Using percentages without context
  • Misleading averages
  • Small or biased samples
  • Confusing correlation with causation
These techniques appear frequently in media headlines, political speeches, and marketing campaigns.

/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\

In my experience....
The undersized bore animal shooters like incessantly posting/sharing their triumphant hunts. They pat themselves on the back and tell anyone who will stand still. Much like vegetarians, woke persons, marathon runners, etc. Making effectiveness of caliber seem more than it truly is.
IMO There should be minimum caliber requirements for hunting animals like there are for cape buffalo. It won't happen.
++++
And has already been stated the YOUNGEST Gen Xer's were born in 1980 making them 46 years old. ;)
 
Last edited:
I think what is missing from this discussion is frontal surface area. Larger calibers simply have a bigger thump when they hit regardless of velocity. The .458, .470, .500 cartridges were not developed by accident. That said they are not longer range big game cartridges, but neither is the Eargespettenloudenboomer. A sewing needle at 5,000 ft per second is never going to do better than a game appropriate sized projectile.
 
Speak for yourself, I'm early 50s and have as much hair as I ever did--and no gray!
Now I know who stole all of mine. Gandalf has less gray than I do… and I don’t have a forehead anymore… it’s more like a six or a seven head… lol
 
This debate is interesting, but what should really be discussed is what MINIMUM energy threshold is needed to kill cleanly? What reserve power level is needed to break heavy bones if the shot isn't perfect?

This will depend on the specific game animal, distance, shot angle and the experience level and ability of the hunter.

Although not precise, I've seen rough estimates given as minimum for different species. Minimum 1,000ft lbs of energy for Deer, 1,500ft lbs for Elk, etc.

We all know it's possible to kill with far less energy, but what should be an average reasonable minimum? For me, 7mm 160gr and 1,500ft lbs would be minimum, and 30cal, 180gr with 1,800ft lbs even better.

Polar Bears have been killed with the 223, but I wouldn't advise making a habit of it.
 
I have used Both a 30-06 and a .300 Winchester Mag. To hunt elk. Both work fine at the ranges that I am willing to shoot. I don’t feel a need to go to say a .338 or anything like that.
 
A bit to unpack from the OP, but folks have already covered most of it.

I own a 6.5CM and it is easy and cheap to shoot. If needed, I wouldn't mind using it on Caribou or similar sized creatures, especially in the alpine open country up here. I use a 7x57 with 168 LRXs at 2640 fps instead (because I'd like to think I'm classy). Given the same shot placement and bullet type, would the 6.5CM do the same thing on those Caribou? Almost certainly. Obviously there would be similar results in ideal conditions on most animals here in Northern Alaska, but...

I think there are more effective choices for Elk or Moose or Eland or Zebra etc. than a 6.5CM (and definitely 22CM). The first seventeen moose I took were all with 180gr TSXs out of my .30-06 at around 2700 fps. This worked fine, no complaints. I would condsider .30-06 a minimum for my use case.

The moose usually trotted/hobbled a little ways then died without much tracking or effort. It should be mentioned that most of my shots were close range on moving game from less than ideal angles though. I needed the .30-06 penetration to get them down relatively quickly as they are hard to track near the heavily vegetated river I hunt on (plus they are heavy, less distance from my boat is good). I can honestly say I've never thought I needed a smaller more effecient caliber/rifle in those hunting situations.

Fun story about going to a bigger caliber,
I recently built a .458 for an upcoming hunt in Namibia, so I used that for Moose last fall for funsies. Emphatic bullet effect from a .458 404gr bullet going 2450fps was obviously more pronounced than the 180gr .30 cal at 2700. Do you need a .458 for moose? No of course not, but it was nice when he was down on the shot and didn't get up (texas heart shot, full length penetration). This was perfect as a follow-up shot would have been near impossible.
A 6.5CM would not have been effective in that situation. Most folks can't catch up to an alert wounded Moose running full speed with a 143gr 6.5mm bullet stuck in his butt (I obviously wouldn't have taken that shot).
In fact, he was so close, there was also the potential he would have taken offense to me using such a small bullet and likewise attempted to insert his antlers up my... nevermind.

I'll reiterate what others have said. Smaller calibers may be more efficient in some ways, but you need to plan on passing up opportunities that you may have otherwise had if you'd chosen a bullet/caliber combination with more inherent penetration potential.

I guess I don't have a man-bun so I cant' speak to that. I do have a large moustache though. Is that why I'm tempted to hunt everything with a 7x57...?

Thank you for the input and comments. Well stated comments as well as good experiences from your Alaskan hunts. Even though I enjoy obsessing about ideal bullets and calibers for different game animals, in reality a good hunter can kill most game with any decent hunting rifle as long as he/she is patient enough to get a decent shot as reported by others of native Alaskans use of AR15's.

I hunt a good bit with a 7mm/08 which is very very close ballistically to the 6.5cm but it is also not Thor's hammer. It works with well placed shots but it is just not potent enough for really large animals. When I took a Blesbok with it last year, I had to shoot the poor thing 4 times despite a well placed first shot. It is just as dead but ran a long way. I did not like that sort of performance. It's recoil is nothing and it is one of my most accurate rifles but is only good for deer sized game at modest ranges in my opinion. It worked better on all the other game but even one like the Blesbok tainted my view of it. Could I kill an elk with it? Yes, but I would never try.
 
@JG26Irish_2 im also not calling out your friend because she very likely did carry a SAW at some point during her 3 deployments, potentially even in a foot patrol or serve as a gunner, just calling out your BS second hand telephone game example from someone

Respect your comments Sir. I did not serve with the female and I am much older so was not in any of the middle east deployments. All I can confirm for certain is that she served three tours and was with 101st for that entire time and was assigned as a SAW gunner at least some of that time. If I said or implied that she was doing regular foot patrol with a SAW that was poor wording on my part as I cannot say. We only discussed her time in country once and then only briefly. Not sure what the telephone game is. My experiences with such was with a M60 and is irrelevant. I still have a belt of 7.62 hanging on the wall in my trophy room to remind me of past mistakes in my life.

I know that out West ranges can be longer and hunters get used to shooting longer shots. Hitting them that far is doable and once hit well they die most of the time. It is just further than I am willing to go. I can hit 12" plates at 600y with my 223 but would not shoot a deer at that distance with it. It is a personal preference. When I was out west it got to be that a 350y shot on a Prairie Dog was a chip shot and those are not any larger than a 12oz beer can. Have a good-un.
 
Respect your comments Sir. I did not serve with the female and I am much older so was not in any of the middle east deployments. All I can confirm for certain is that she served three tours and was with 101st for that entire time and was assigned as a SAW gunner at least some of that time. If I said or implied that she was doing regular foot patrol with a SAW that was poor wording on my part as I cannot say. We only discussed her time in country once and then only briefly. Not sure what the telephone game is. My experiences with such was with a M60 and is irrelevant. I still have a belt of 7.62 hanging on the wall in my trophy room to remind me of past mistakes in my life.

I know that out West ranges can be longer and hunters get used to shooting longer shots. Hitting them that far is doable and once hit well they die most of the time. It is just further than I am willing to go. I can hit 12" plates at 600y with my 223 but would not shoot a deer at that distance with it. It is a personal preference. When I was out west it got to be that a 350y shot on a Prairie Dog was a chip shot and those are not any larger than a 12oz beer can. Have a good-un.
You said lugged, which for anyone who was a SAW, 240, or even M60 gunner for you old timers (I doubt anyone was old enough to be a BAR Gunner) is going to take that as meaning carried/hiked it.

The telephone game is when something is repeated/story told and it changes with each person who hears/repeats the story. Example would be saying she lugged or humped the SAW when she might’ve said she was a gunner with a SAW. Same thing mixing mounted/dismounted, or that she was a gunner on a couple missions vs 3 deployments. BUT everyone’s military experiences and deployments are different. Wouldn’t have said anything if you weren’t trying to use 2nd/3rd hand info to defend your point.

Case in point; I’m sure when she was with the 101st but depending on dates, BCT, etc her tours were 9-18mo in length. Given the length of the deployments and TIS/TIG for promotions it’s unlikely anyone would do 3 deployments as a AR, especially accounting for dwell time between deployments without getting promoted or demoted. They also likely would’ve had a PCS move in there somewhere.

My post was also a bit satirical given the “hang out with the right E7” comment. I’m sure there were a few who picked up on that reference.

FWIW; in the GWOT Army your AR (Auto Rifleman - non gun team) was generally a E3/E4. In some units it was SOP for them to be the Senior E4, but that was probably a company/battalion leadership decision. The SAW (like the 60) was the most casualty producing weapon for a dismounted line infantry squad and getting it into place/position was critical. Some leaders thought by making that AR the senior E4, it’d mean less direction needed from a TL/SL and getting into the fight quicker. Not sure her MOS but depending on when she served during GWOT the likelihood of her being a female in an infantry unit in Iraq or Afghanistan is extremely low. That’s mean some sort of combat support. Supportive battalions had SAW’s assigned to their books but generally didn’t have a “SAW gunner” in a team or squad because their squads weren’t generally designed for combat battle drills, rather for their support function (Cooks, Pay, Mechanics, etc). They were expected to know how to operated them but didn’t walk around the base with a SAW like an infantry SAW gunner would. The exception to that is probably the MP’s. I wasn’t one and never spent time in an MP unit.

That said, I personally know two females (on the same 101st deployment) who’d often volunteer as gunners on one of the trucks while running supply convoys out to our Outposts. Both were complete badasses on the gun but they didn’t lug it anywhere as it was attached to a turret mount and you wouldn’t call them a SAW gunner because they had different jobs in a support battalion and would just fill that role during the limited 6-8 supply convoys we’d get over the course of that deployment. On every one of them they’d take some sort of contact.

Not trying to take away from her service or deployments just pointing out your repetition of her service from a SINGLE brief conversation isn’t empirical evidence or factual and probably shouldn’t be considered given the SAW is a 5.56 and the weight of a firearms diminishes the recoil substantially.

Secondly, you’re generalizing the “man-bun” millennial crowd and applying your opinions based upon the limitations of your own skill and comfort. That’s in the same light as what the “influencer” referred to for “best caliber” and is basing their opinion on their experience, skillset, recoil tolerance and hunting style. Shoot the caliber you like, and hunt how you like and are comfortable hunting. I’ll continue killing animals at long range and at a couple steps, I’ll shoot 6mm and 25cal guns as well as big bore doubles
 
Point of clarification:

Silent Gen: 1928-1945
Boomer: 1946-1964
Gen X: 1965-1980
Millennial: 1980-1996
Gen Z: 1997-2012

As a Millennial, I prefer a 300 Weatherby with 180-210g bullets for Elk. Grew up shooting 30-06 and 12 ga, and I love recoil up to 100ft-bs.

My BIL, also millennial, is not a big fan of recoil, and he’s spent the last 15yr+ in special forces. He scoped himself with a 270 semi auto.

Different strokes for different folks.
 

Forum statistics

Threads
69,185
Messages
1,541,658
Members
160,153
Latest member
andent
 

 

 

Latest profile posts

curt672 wrote on WoodencrossIII's profile.
just making sure my message went threw
30-06Ken wrote on ftothfadd's profile.
I'll take the Vortex scope cover you have listed in the Pay it Forward thread.

Ken [redacted]
Scott CWO wrote on mark-hunter's profile.
Hi Mark. My email is [redacted]
Selling real estate in dchum’s head
getting some work done in-between hunts!

 
Top