22 or 6.5 Creedmore for Moose and Elk?

[JG26Irish_2]

Additional evidence of wound chanel diameter v bullet diameter.

375 h&h with a barnes tsx, max diameter 1.61 inches:

25 creedmoor with eldm, max diameter 1.8 inches:


22 creedmoor with eldx, max diameter 1.73 inches:

Additional evidence of wound chanel diameter v bullet diameter.

375 h&h with a barnes tsx, max diameter 1.61 inches:
View attachment 765071
25 creedmoor with eldm, max diameter 1.8 inches:
View attachment 765072

22 creedmoor with eldx, max diameter 1.73 inches:

View attachment 765073

Using this logic, we should use the 22 CM to hunt Cape Buffalo, right? Can I watch from a safe distance? Should be entertaining. Too many variables to settle such an argument using only data and logic after all. A little fast, frangible bullet makes an impressive cavity in gel. But, that is about where it ends. It lacks the momentum to penetrate deep and break bone to get to the vitals on all but the "perfect shot". Try a Texas heart shot with it and watch your deer or elk run away. Do the same with the 375HH and you will get a bang/flop almost every time. Talk to Elmer Keith.

 

[AckleyHunter]

I have zero idea how many MM thick these are , but a 130gr Barnes ttsx .308win punched a hole through both, I was aoudad hunting when we saw her , I don’t know if Texas elk are smaller than other states? I think medium size game starts with.270
I don’t agree with the other web site that has literally thousands and thousands of post arguing that a 223 is proper elk , bear , moose medicine.View attachment 765070

I do like your picture. It is a good demonstration of how bullets of different construction make different size/type of wound. Monometal bullets make long, narrow wounds while lead jacketed bullets make wider, shallower wounds.

 

[dchum]

That's not really an apples-to-apples comparison. TSX in a big slow gun vs a match bullet from smaller, zippier calibers? The H&H has over twice the penetration at a velocity that is barely above that is currently accepted as the minimum for expansion for a Barnes bullet. Your smaller bullets can expand all they want, but if they aren't reaching the vitals, it's "just a flesh wound" in the words of the Black Knight. Those lighter bullets also have a sizeable chance of deflecting or flattening off of solid bone.

I've pulled many a .223 out of a Texas hog's shield, fired by people who believe that since the military uses it to kill humans, it must be good for hogs too.

223 failing to penetrate wild hogs chest?

We are living on different planets

 

[AckleyHunter]

Using this logic, we should use the 22 CM to hunt Cape Buffalo, right?

People shoot cape buffalo with bow and arrows.

Dr. Ed Ashby reports on killing cape buffalo with a 22 hornet shooting a 45 gr fmj.

Do you think a broadhead or a 22 hornet make a bigger wound than a 22 creedmoor?

And please, never texas heart shoot anything. Totally unethical.

 

[AckleyHunter]

You need a caliber with enough ass to make it to those lungs and do enough damage so that your *target dies quickly*.

That is why I posted pictures of how wide an elk really is, only about 15 inches. I can make a slit in the ribs of any elk and tounch lung without going past the first joint in my finger. This is how chest tubes are put in, even on bigger animals like horses.

This goes back to the 'elk are so much bigger' argument where people belive they are wider. Joseph von Benedikt often claims you have to shoot through 6-9 inches of muscle to get to the lungs. This simply is not true.

People also assume that when they see a bullet fragment it is going splat and will not penetrate. This is also not true, with the execption of varmint bullets which are designed to due just that. Any modern hutting bullet with penetrate a 1/4 or more of mild steel. No animal bone is tougher than a steel plate.

I have never seen any evidence, and I would love to see a picture of it, of a true hunting bullet 'blowing up' and failing to penetrate. Most true bullet failures are due to failure to upset. There are about a dozen or more posts in the bullet performance data base showing barnes bullets that didn't open. When they fail to open, they often bend and take non-striaght line paths. I have had corelokts come out the same side they went in.

My question for you is, how does 40+ inches of penetration help kill an animal that is only 15 inches wide.

 

[ElevenBravo]

I'm reminded of a recent episode of Eastman's Outdoors, where Ike took his family to Africa for safari. He sighted in on a zebra with a 6.5CM and missed, which resulted in a rant from me about how these "professional hunters" seem to miss easy lay-up shots all the time (don't get me started on Pigman, at least he has an excuse). Second, 6.5 is totally inappropriate for that class of game.

Unfortunately for the zebra, it only trotted off a few steps and stopped, giving Ike a second chance. He hit the zebra, but did it fall down? Absolutely not. It tanked that shot and ran off, leaving the barest of blood trails. Did they find a dead zebra? The next day quite some distance away from where the shot took place. Now imagine the amount of time it took before it finally died. Absolutely unethical. An (eventual) kill shot from a 6.5CM would likely be a dead-right-there shot from an appropriate caliber for that class of game: 7mag/PRC, 300WM/PRC, -06 or even a .308Win. I've always said that there are many right answers for what to use on something, but an -06 is never the wrong answer.

Ike was lucky that some lions didn't stumble upon a free meal that night, it would have been quite fitting for him to have to pay trophy fees and not have a trophy.

 

[AckleyHunter]

That's not really an apples-to-apples comparison. TSX in a big slow gun vs a match bullet from smaller, zippier calibers?

1.77 inches with a cup and core 375 h&h at higher MV. The penetration was also not much more than the creedmoor, about 4-5 more inches. Bigger diameter does not make a bigger diameter wound. Most people here argue they wouldn't shoot a rabbit with interlocks, "too soft".

Also, see previous pictures I posted of elk bones not stopping a 6mm eldm. One elk had shoulder to shoulder penetration. The other was quatering much harder and the angle of shot had the bullet make it to the very stinky stomach. Extreme amount of internal bleeding.

 

[JG26Irish_2]

In one case a 150g Nosler BT from a 270 was used to shoot a buck from a frontal position slight quartering to the right. The failure was mostly due to a poorly placed shot and poor bullet choice but it skimmed over the shoulder joint and then fragmented in the muscle tissue above the ribs. It never penetrated the chest cavity but created a massive 4-5" bleeding surface wound and a small fragment did rupture one lung creating a sucking chest wound.

The poor animal ran over 400y but was found dead. A bonded bullet or a mono might have penetrated or might have broken the shoulder joint. I am fairly sure that using a smaller, faster bullet would not have made things better. We do not always have time to get into a perfect shooting position or to be perfectly stable when hunting. Things happen fast. Very fast. In this case, I was leaving a stand and a spooked buck ran down the hill and toward me. I was out in the open field standing without any rest and took a fast off hand shot that was poorly placed. I am not proud of it and it is one of only two times that I wounded an animal and thought it had gotten away. I was lucky to find it and tracked it for hours. Would a 375HH have performed better? Doubtful, but I am sure that a 22 CM would not have.

 

[AckleyHunter]

Now, if I ever to get hunt giant ground sloths, I think I am going with 458 lott. Those guys had some serious bones.

 

[Spartan5]

Not trying to call you out specifically, but this is a misunderstanding of the arguement.

It isn't that bigger cartridges have too much recoil or can't be shot accurately, it is that everybody shoots lighter recoiling rifles better than heavy ones.

Given the reason why many people fail in harvesting an animal is they make bad shots, a lighter recoiling rifle affords you the chance to A. spot your imapcts so you get immediated feedback on your shot and B. the chance to put more rounds down range to become a better shooter. Nobody wants to shoot 300 round sessions with a 300 win mag. It will hit your wallet just as hard as your shoulder.

You can alway shoot the small rifle at the range and take a bigger one in the field if you so choose, but spent primers are the best teacher. But then you have people thinking of recoil rather than shooting fundementals and we are back at square one.

Totally get range time with a lighter recoil, that’s why a gas powered 308 at the range is nicer than a 338, 375, or bigger for the cases of practice. Perhaps I’m just an American Recoil Addict!

 

[ElevenBravo]

My question for you is, how does 40+ inches of penetration help kill an animal that is only 15 inches wide.

Game animals aren't made from pure, bare gelatin. There's hide, fat, muscle, bone that a bullet needs to get through. Plus loss of velocity from shooting at hunting ranges. Ever seen what a hog's shield will do to a .223 just trying to pass through? That stuff is almost better than Kevlar in some circumstances. and that's the reason why you hunt Cape Buffalo with a 375 instead of a 22 Creedmoor.

Shooting Jell-o is fun and gives you an idea of how a bullet performs under not-entirely-realistic circumstances. Let's call it "unrealistically optimistic". Let's say you do manage to hit your target, and hit it where you intended. And the way I see people shoot, that's a big IF, but a different discussion... your lightweight bullet has a higher probability of deflecting off of a piece of bone and not hitting the intended area due to simple physics. I've seen this firsthand.

I was working with a ballistics gel maker to develop some better targets as I wanted realistic displays. Unfortunately, they went radio silent on me during talks so I've written them off.

 

[jruby]

When it comes to deer my two favorite cartridges are the 7x57 and the 6.5x55 sweed. When it comes to elk here in Oregon I start with a 30-06 or a 7mm RM, I know others have used smaller cartridges for elk and been successful. Anyone that recommends using a 22 cal cartridge on deer or elk loses my respect immediately. There are better rounds that stack the odds in your favor, use them.

 

[AckleyHunter]

Anyone that recommends using a 22 cal cartridge on deer or elk loses my respect immediately.

Absolutes like this are the problem.

Match the gun to the shooter. A 22 creedmoor will absolutely kill an elk. I would rather the shooter have a 22 creedmoor they shoot really well then a big magnum they do not shoot well all because somebody disapproves of their choice.

A 22 cal eldm through the lungs kills way faster than 30 cal ttsx through the stomach.

 

[AckleyHunter]

Game animals aren't made from pure, bare gelatin.

The purpose of the gel is to provide an equal medium for testing. Bones are more dense, lung tissue way less dense (and account for a much greater % of a bullets path). Your arguement both 'helps' and hurts the point you are trying to make.

There is no magic bullet diameter that performs wildly different in an animal then another bullet of equal construction but small diameter than it did in gel. That is why I posted pictures of what a bullet actually does to bone and tissue.

 

[AckleyHunter]

He sighted in on a zebra with a 6.5CM and missed

Number one reason for 'bullet faliure' is you missed. Number two is you hit the animal, but didn't hit any thing important.

 

[AckleyHunter]

When it comes to deer my two favorite cartridges are the 7x57 and the 6.5x55 sweed. When it comes to elk here in Oregon I start with a 30-06 or a 7mm RM, I know others have used smaller cartridges for elk and been successful. Anyone that recommends using a 22 cal cartridge on deer or elk loses my respect immediately. There are better rounds that stack the odds in your favor, use them.

Why go from the 7×57 to the 7mm RM? They both shoot the same exact bullet. The slight velocity boost is only important at ranges none of us should be shooting at anyway.

*assuming you handload, 7x57 factory loads are anemic*

 

[JG26Irish_2]

Deer are not Elk but for sake of argument, please allow me to add some anecdotal evidence to the discussion. I used to hunt deer with a 44 Mag rifle and every single deer I shot dropped dead in its tracks. Bang/flop/done. I used 200g HP expanding ammo. One year, I used harder, slower 240g SP ammo and it was less impressive. The deer ran about 30y and died.

But then I had a huge buck that was 200y away and moving slowly away from me escape because my iron sighted pistol caliber rifle was not capable of accurate fire at such distances. Prior to that I had never shot a deer from more than 100y (Typical Eastern woods range is 50-80y where I hunt). I borrowed a buddies 270 the next morning and bagged that big buck with a 250y shot. So, I got a 270 by the next deer season and for about 20y I never had a failure. But, the deer if shot in the vitals would run 50-100y before death almost every time. If hit in the CNS it would drop but always required a 2nd shot. I try to avoid such shots. I just accepted that the small diameter, fast bullets killed them more slowly and accepted the fact that they would run and bleed out within 100y or so. Really, there is not that much difference in the affect of a 22, 243, 6.5mm, 270, 7mm diameter bullet except the larger bullets have more momentum and can penetrate a little more in some cases.

Then I tried hunting deer with a 375HH and later a 338. Both delivered both 200y reach and bang/flop performance. This might suggest that for a given animal size and type a large enough bullet might provide more rapid killing action in some if not most cases. I have found that for African PG and large deer class animals this minimum caliber is about 308 or 30-06 class rifles and larger. 7mm mag also fits this group with the heavier bullets.

If my hypothesis is correct?? I dunno, then the opposite might also be true. That being if I deploy a smaller bullet of say 22 cal or 20 cal or there abouts, on the same class of game at some point the bullet becomes so small that the animal is wounded and runs off to die or gets away to survive with its wound. Either way the hunter fails to to bag his prey. What size would be too small for Elk? I think it is likely 22cal or possibly 6mm. That is not to say either can and will kill the animal but the death will be slower and risk of loss is greater. All only because I cannot or choose not to tolerate a bit more recall? If I were hunting Elk today my go to would be one of these:

• 7mm RM
• 30-06
• 338 rcm
• 338wm

Same for Moose. The 375HH absolutely can do the job too but unless the ranges will be 250y or less, I would choose one of the others. The 338 rcm has become my favorite deer rifle but mine is not accurate enough for long range use. Not bad mind you just that I shoot the 338wm better at longer ranges as well as all of the others. Partly because of the scopes on some of them but mostly it is just not super accurate and I do not reload for it.

 

[AckleyHunter]

I used 200g HP expanding ammo. One year, I used harder, slower 240g SP ammo and it was less impressive. The deer ran about 30y and died.

You answered your own question. Bullet construction matters. The fastest kills are the ones that destroy the most tissue. Your harder bullet made longer, narrower wounds than the expanding bullet.

I don't know what bullets you used in your 270, but the conversation should be on projectile choice and impact velocity instead of headstamp.

CNS shots hit the reset button. If your bullet choice/shot placement failed to cause a wide enough wound the animal will get back up before it bleeds out and you will have to shoot again. I have had this happen with 7mm accubonds and 35 cal corelokts and why I don't recommend high shoulder shots. They are good for TV, but not killing quickly.

If I were hunting Elk today my go to would be one of these

Any thing can work and you should choose what you like, for any reason. I like to shoot things with my dad's old 30-30, and I like to shoot them with 358 norma, and I like shooting them with a 6 arc because rifle, scope, and suppressor weight less than 7lbs and I don't want to carry a boat anchor 12 miles up a mountian. There are lots of reason to choose one thing over the other. The only thing that matters is that you are shooting the right bullet at the right impact velocity, which is different for each caliber. My preference is to always shoot heavy for caliber. Longer bullets kill quicker in my experience. The corollary would be to pick a bullet > .27 sectional density.

 

[jruby]

Absolutes like this are the problem.

Match the gun to the shooter. A 22 creedmoor will absolutely kill an elk. I would rather the shooter have a 22 creedmoor they shoot really well then a big magnum they do not shoot well all because somebody disapproves of their choice.

A 22 cal eldm through the lungs kills way faster than 30 cal ttsx through the stomach.

I have seen a whit tailed deer killed with a 22lr. That does not make it a deer rifle anymore than a 22 creedmoor
In Oregon 22 cal is the minimum cal for hunting deer. Still not going to use one when there are better rounds.

 

[MS 9x56]

People says things like this all the time, but provide little to no evidence to substantiate it. While it seems logical, reality is that wounding from bullets is almost entirely due to bullet construction and impact velocity. Larger diameter and heavier bullets do not make wounds that are bigger around, just longer. i.e. they penetrate more.

Here is a video showing how a 6 creed and 223 make bigger wound chanels than a 50 bmg. If your bullet is too big and tough, the path of least resistance is to push through and not upset, the media it is going through can only push back so hard and is going to be the same regardless of caliber.

Wounding from bullets has very little to do with bullet construction and very much to do with bullet placement. To say otherwise indicates a lack of experience finishing a wounded animal. It is a very onerous and sometimes dangerous task.