270 for Elk, 150gr NP
 

Any strong opinions around hunting w 270 150gr NP for elk? Could go w 30-06 180gr but would like to go w 270. Thanks.

could even try that 270-130gr TSX load.

Yer gonna get some advice on this I bet! IMO I would go with the 30-06 with a good 165 grain. I have killed a few elk with the 270 150 gr combo, most of them quite cleanly. I did have a bad experience with a long shot on a big bull, I killed him but only after he wandered around the woods and bled out every last bit. After that I have switched solely to my 300 WSM with 180's. I'm a firm believer in 30 cal for elk, but the 270 will do it if your willing to be picky (ie get close) with your shot.

I have killed several elk with a .270 Win using the 150 NP. I usually carry a .270 when I am cow elk (meat) hunting and all of the shots that I have taken were through the lower chest. The 150 NP does a great job.

its all about shot placement, i shot a bull elk at 500 yards with a 117 grain hornady out of my 25-06, one in the shoulder, one in the neck, went down where it stood

Those 150's should work fine. I prefer 130's but 150's are fine.

It'll owrk just fine with 130 or 140 or 150, tho I prefer 130.

For the unsure of their .270 I would suggest try the new Hornady Super Performance 130gr SST ammo, you get 200fps more velocity with no increase in pressure. Keep your magnums in the closet, unless youre hunting grizzers.

back when I was rifle hunting them, I shot 12 elk with a .270 with hand loaded ammo. topped with the 150 Nosler partitions. Recovered every bullet. Longest shot was 250 yards, but only two required a 2nd shot.
I tried the 140 gr. Fail Safes one year, and it was the only bullet that went complete pass through on a cow at only about 35 yards.
I got ribbed a lot when I was the newbie in camp because I was the only one not using a .30 cal of some sort. Everyone would joke about "how many times do you pump that thing", But after a few years of killing elk, the ribbing went away.

270+elk=dinner. 270 Winchester, 130 grain Speer and complete pass through at 200 yards.

Both will work but the 06 will give you a bit more range and little more punch. Given the option and assuming I could shoot both relatively equally I'd take the 06.

PS - The 270 has been the center of some HUGE debates in the past about use on elk. I choose to no longer aruge on the subject but if the original poster has a question I would have no problems discussing it.

When loaded with the right bullet and with proper shot placement the .270 is an Elk cartridge period.
I not gonna argue with anyone that says differently.
But even any other cal. suggested,needs to have a bullet
that can get the job done and placed in the vitals that are in the kill zone.

Lets ask it another way:

Will the 30-06 with a 165 or 180 bullet give me a little more punch and a little more distance?

Answer: Yes.

Thems the facts, debate away

Wow, where to start. I almost let this one go, but because there are always newbys and kids reading this, I did not want them to think that this kind of shot was acceptable to take for 99.999999% of us.

Too far with too small of a bullet for elk. That is just wrong in my opinion. There is just one word to describe the outcome of this shot: Lucky.

Not saying the 25-06 could never be used responsibly for an elk, just not nearly that far of a distance.

The 06 may pack more punch and you may be able to lob it a little farther, but a 270 is still more than enough for elk. And I gotta comment on the 25-06 kill at 500 as well. Ive also drilled elk that far with a 25 caliber rifle. Difference was I used 100 grain partitions. Dropped her where she stood. txhunter that maybe wrong in your opinion but it is your opinion and I would do it again tomorrow if I had the chance. Elk maybe tough but they arent bullet proof to sub 30 caliber bullets. To the poster who started this thread if your more comfortable with the 270 then you have already solved your own debate. Pack it.

100 gr Nosler at 500 yards has aprox 900 ft lbs of energy left. I Know ft lbs is only a mathmatical formula to compare calibers with, but it still gives us some useful info. IMO, that is too low of a number for elk. Shooting a 1 inch MOA rifle, that means 5 iches at 500 yards, factor in wind, elevation, angle of shot, and buck fever and that 5 inches grows. Yes, it is my opinion, but I bet you that over 99% of elk hunters would agree with me. Would it be effective if slipped in between ribs at that distance? Sure. How about if the elk moves, a gust of wind hits, you flinch, ............ and you don't make an ideal shot on the elk. Or have all your shots at 500 yards been ideal?

I guess my question is if a 380 bull steps out at 500 yards and you have the choice between a 25 caliber 100 gr bullet and a 30-06/270, which gun are you going to pick up? IMO, a cow elk deserves just as much respect.

Remember guys, we are teaching here as well as giving our opinion.

txhunter what about about a rifle still pushing 2000 ft/lbs of energy at 500 yards will that work for you? What if with a 2.5 inch sight in at 100 Im still holding on hair on that elk at 500 yards. Maybe top of the back but its still on hair. 270 with a 150 gr. bullet wont do that at 200. Would that change things any? And yes Id take that same shot at a 380 bull at the same distance with my 257 stw. I am not trrying to be disrespctful of your opinion but I see no problem using a 25 caliber rifle when it has better ballistics than everyones required minimum of the 270. You wont hear me disagree about most of your arguement but at the same time some people always do more with less. And they can do so effectively.

These threads always crack me the f*$# up. Txhunter you might as well give it up. I agree with you 100% and so would most of the real elk hunters in the world.

Going out with the bare minimum is not how most REAL elk hunters roll. As a matter of fact, most elk camps have a .270 minimum allowed in the camp and that is mostly meant for women and kids.

"txhunter what about about a rifle still pushing 2800 ft/lbs of energy at 500 yards will that work for you?"

Absolutley. However, the orignial post was for a 25-06 with a 117 gr bullet pushing around 950 ft lbs at 500 Yards. Your first post doesn't allude to the specific rifle you are shooting. Comparing your caliber to a 25-06 is like comparing a 30-30 to a 300 win mag. Both 30 caliber, but not the same beast.

The 257 STW pushing a 100 gr nosler partition that fast would still leave room for debate (I would not use it), but I would not call it irresponsible in the right guys hands.

Luckydog: Hey, the 270/elk thing has to be the most overdone thing on forums. Ya got change the debate some. LOL

Youre right I didnt say I wasnt using a 25-06. I wouldnt call a 25-06 in the right guys hands irresponsible either. In my defense all you said was a 25 cal bullet was too small for elk. I was just repsectfully disagreeing. You shoot what works for you I shoot what works for me. The only reason I dont pack my stw for elk anymore is because it weights in at 13 pounds and after ten days it gets heavy. But then again not being a REAL elk hunter I just dont know how to roll.

The sheer ability of being able to stalk an elk within 500 yards and not being detected, is nothing short of amazing. How do you guys ever get so close? :poke:

I wish I could learn to hunt that way.:confused0024:

These remarks are not intended to anyone with a physical handicap. I respect those guys way to much.:party0005:

Bull pucky..the chit just gets deeper..You're tellin' us that a 2.5" high sight in at 100 yards with a 150 gr. partition out of a .270 is going to hit low at 200 yards. Ah...yeah right..

THe 270 win at 200 doesnt hit as hard as my stw at 500. Never meant it to sound like the 270 isnt flat shooting. I know it wont hit low at 200 with a 2.5 inch sight in. My 270 hits dead on at 300 with a 2 inch sight in.

All I have been trying to say is that a 25 caliber can kill elk just as easily as a 270 or 3006 will.

Real elk hunters, thats funny! I have been hunting elk for 16 years and the only gun I have ever hunted with is a 270. Two of the 3 brothers have .270, my father has hunted elk for 40 years with his ruger #1 in .270. I have used 130 and 150 grain bullets and never had any problems. First elk was taken at 350 yards with a 150gr NP. All other shots have been in the 75 - 200 yard range. I know multiple other hunters that hunt elk every year with their .270s because that is what they prefer. You can't make someone like your favorite caliber. I know alot of people that also think the 300 mag is the only rifle that is capable of killing elk. I prefer the 67# bow over rifle hunting anyway but I thought I would chime in on what I have used and had great success with. BTW if I am not successful on the archery hunt this year I will be packing my .270 with the 150gr bullet as usual.

I would load up the 270 and have at it. You will loose approx 75 yards max range to an 06 but within that limit there will not be problems.

I am a fan of the Interbond bullet and would suggest you look at that bullet if you handload. It has a .525 BC and 90+% weight retention and generates a large mushroom. They would extend a 270s range to match much of the 06 ammo out there even when shooting the 180s.

How exactly does the .270 "lose range" to a .30-06?

The 06 has higher KE and momentum at the muzzle. Both have plenty of energy at the muzzle of course but as the bullet travels downrange and looses KE due to friction at some point the round is not adaquate to consistantly kill. Many peg this number between 1,200 to 2,000 ft/lbs KE for Elk. When you compare the two rounds when they hit say 1,500 ft/lbs KE there is approx 75 yards on average that separate the two.

Of course BC plays a big role but on average the BC of the 30 will match or exceed the BC for a .277 cal bullet of similar sectional density so the energy advantage is carried downrange.

That is why I suggested the Interbond for the 270. Despite starting off with less energy it is so efficient thru the air that it actually starts to "chase down" most 30 caliber hunting bullets. At say 400-500 yards it will equal or exceed the energy of a 180 grain Nosler Partition from an 06 for example.

But you can do the same thing with the '06: use a better velocity retaining bullet. Therefore, the 270 will always "lose distance" if you compare apples to apples (or 150gr interbonds to 150 gr interbonds).

AND, bigger bullets always get the nod in my book when velocities drop. If you compare 180 gr bullet and a 130 gr bullet that both have 1200 ft lbs of energy on impact, the 180 is going to have more stopping power.

You can't look just at ft lbs as velocity drops. It is nothing more than a mathmatical formula that squares the velocity, so it therefore slanted toward faster bullets. That is fine if you are using relatively small lead with fast velocities. However, big slugs will still kill effectively at lower velocities even though the ft lbs doesn't look that good.

Everyone has to use what they are comfortable with. Math just fuels the debate!

If you want more fuel, look at the Taylor index. It reconizes that big, slow bullets KILL. Gives you another Math problem/results to compare.

If you guys are going to start comparing terminal performance of bullets of different calibers then you must compare the same bullet design/construction with as close as possible sectional densities.

A 150 grain .277" bullet compares very closely to a 180 grain .308" bullet of the same design and construction.

If you compare the 150 and 180 interbonds at published factory velocities of 2830 for the .270 and 2700 for the 30-06, the .270 gives up only 10 yards to the heavier 30-06 bullet to reach the 1500 foot pound mark.

440 yards for the .270 and 450 yards for the 30-06.

I don't think the dead elk is going to give a rip one way or the other.



.

The Interbond is the exception to the rule which is why I mentioned it. The 150 grain .277 cal interbond has a .525 BC. When lauched at 2830 it carrys 1500 ft/lbs to about 440 yards just ten yards less than the 30 caliber 180 with a .480 BC.

The 150 grain .277 cal interbond is a bit of a freak with a BC that high so it skews the comparison in favor of the .277.

Yeah, that's what I was using too but I must have hit a wrong number. :confused0024:

Edited my above numbers.


Using Nosler partitions the .270 only gives up 55 yards to the heavier 30-06.

Noslers E-Tip bullet 30 cal 180 gr. has a .523 bc. So that would put it back ahead of the of the 270 right. I think there is being too much thought thrown into this problem. Pick a well constructed bullet from a legal caliber rifle and put that bullet in the kill zone. Results - backstraps for dinner.

"I think there is being too much thought thrown into this problem. "

Of course there is! LOL, but we have to pass the time some way. Only 4 weeks until I leave (Colorado muzzy season)!

Good luck on your hunt tx. Ive got to wait til November just to be a tag-a-long/packhorse on an elk hunt. So just to be curious and add fuel to the fire, "Is that muzzle loader enough for elk?" All joking aside, what kind of setup do you use for a muzzy elk tag? Curious because Ive never done it.

Which gun are you more confident in? And which gun shoots better for you. That would be my choice. Both are gonna kill an elk dead if you put it in the boiler room at an ethical shooting distance. As for the 150 NP, NP is a good bullet for elk, I prefer the Barnes Triple Shock, but my opinion is based on my experience personally.

T/C Omega 50 caliber. 95 gr of Blackhorn 209, 350 gr Hornady FPB bullet.

Is it enough for elk? Have never shot one that I have not recovered. In fact, never had one go more than 50 yards. Shots from 30 to 120 yards.

Plenty of punch out to 150 yards, which is my absolute max (open sights as required by Colorado)

With 100 gr of blackpowder, here are the ballistics (velocity/ft.lbs---muzzle, 50yds, 100, 150, 200, and 250yards) then trajectory at same distances

350 gr. FPB† 1620/2039 1509/1769 1406/1536 1312/1338 1230/1176 1159/1043 -1.5 2.7 3 -1.1 -10.2 -25.0

Ft lbs won't tell you the story though. Have to use the Taylor index to compare big slow bullets.

I was just curious about it. Like I said Ive never tried it and was wondering. Ive never hunted with anything other than a rifle and been considering trying muzzleloader and archery just for more opportunities to hunt.

Wow. That is a can a worms but some good insights. Thanks guys. Went to range today my groups tighter w 130 NBT in the 270 vs the 150 NP. I'll bring those. And the 06 in 165 NBT. Sounds like either one will do the job. A longer shot at a nice bull will likely have me grab the 06. We ll have both. One in each Thanks again

kind of depend on what you shoot good and feels good shooting,guess theres only one way to find out

Just a thought but BT's were made to punch paper and have superior accuracy on smaller targets such as varmits and lighter game. So it's not a surprise the BT's are grouping tighter but if it were me and the groups from the NP's aren't much looser I'd rather slap a heavier NP on an elk than a plastic tipped bullet. The NP's have better weight retention and penetration. The plastic tips can distintgrate quickly on large game like elk and not always get the job done.