I consider the 243 marginal for elk. I consider the 25-06 a bit marginal for elk. I do not consider the 6.5 or the 270 at all marginal. I have just seen them work to well for to long to have any question about it. With the Barnes X bullets in 140 and 150, there is no problem taking out the shoulders on an elk I have done it with the 140 grain X in the 260. The X bullet in these two calibers will almost always exit regardless of where they hit. They have high sectional densities and enough velocity to do the job. Sorry but I have eaten a lot of elk taken with both the 270 and 6.5x55 Swede. And yes the 30-30 too. I doubt many more elk were wounded with these calbers than any other. I would never try to convince a guy who needs more gun to hunt with a smaller caliber than he thinks he needs. Nor will I be convinced that what I have seen many times with my own eyes will no longer work just because there are so many magnum calibers around. The 30-40 krag was a fine elk rifle as well with velocities around 2200 fps. I quess it had no right to do be. We just didn't know it and niether did the elk. I still hold that no matter what you shoot, you have to make a good hit to collect your elk. No substitute.

Varmit Rifles, Deer Rifles, CrossOver Rifles, Elk Rifles, Elk Hammers

One has to understand that a lot of what is at play is emotion. A lot of these folks don’t have a wide cross section of rifles both larger and smaller and the ole 270 (the big stick in the closet) has killed every deer they have come across in the local patch so anyone inferring in the slightest that it might not work as well on game 2 or 3 times larger kinda strikes at the ole manhood and dashes some dreams so they gotta attack. Just gotta.

A tool used earlier to dissect things a bit and make a little more sense of things and was virtually uncontested by everyone here at the time used categories to break down the cartridge list into meaningful groups [of course the problem (not much) is that folks always want to “sneak” their cartridge up a group]

*** Varmit Rifles .17’s to 220 Swift
*** Deer Rifles 243’s to 260’s
*** Cross Over Rifles 264WinMag, 7RemMag, 280, 308, 30-06
*** Elk Rifles 300WinMag, 300 Weatherby, 300RUM, 8mmRemMag, 338WinMag
*** Elk Hammers 340Weatherby, 338RUM, 338 Lapua, 338-378, 375H&H, 378 Weatherby, 416’s and up

Cross over rifles, most the controversy lies with the cross-over rifles. They are strong for deer. They can handle an elk (especially in experienced hands and on cows and rags) as long as the “checklist of if’s, buts, don’ts, and if only’s” are paid close attention to. But things tend to get uglier quicker rather than slower if things go even a little bit awry when compared to the “elk rifles”, hence the need to walk away from many situations. [Something which everyone says they do while here on the internet, probably not such good percentages when a newbie pulls down on his first elk, or the “really big bull” steps into sight with his bones in the way.

Elk Rifles tend to be overkill for deer (though a lot of fun to some folks) and have proven themselves in their ability to “get to the boiler room” even on large bull elk without having to do the “Texas Whitetail 2 Step, Stop, Now Pose” maneuver to avoid bone structures. Lot of energy and wide frontal areas make these rifles a force to be dealt with.

Elk Hammers do everything Elk Rifles do and in spades: overwhelming energy, velocity, trajectory, comparatively heavy bullets, high Taylor Knock Out scores. These rifles do to elk just what their name implies.
===============

Generally, elk rifles and elk hammers involve recoil that don’t have to be a big deal but is often made a big deal. Their additional recoil requires the development of some simple techniques which are readily learnable, but curiously seldom taught to the bulk of the shooting public. This tends to result in the creation of “once burned, twice shy, don’t need to do that again” fashionably recoil sensitive Americans. (The African PH’s think Americans are an odd sort of lot on this count) Hence there is a small portion of folks out there that will remain forever cross-over shooters. The balance can rather easily move up to elk rifles and beyond. (Indeed, there is a pretty fair list of women who have done so.)

Mike, remember this one for when the next "270 for elk" thread comes up!

It's Not What You've Got, It's How You Use It!

I see the age old "it not what you got but how you use it that counts" line floating about the forum with no reprimands of any sort in spite of its connotation, therefore here is the response line..... Be careful how you frame it. "Thats nice honey, but you can't churn butter with a toothpick." The more I think about it I think that is true, even if one used a minature butter churn.

I have seen a 375H&H shatter major bones on elk and literally "plaster" the inside of the chest cavity (not the meat) with what looked to be a cottage cheese like substance --- about a couple of cups worth, bone marrow?, churned up fat?, I don't know. I've only seen it happen when major bones were broken with an "elk hammer." One could say.....

"IT IS a matter of BOTH what you have AND knowing how to use it!"
Nah, that would make the whole thing too complicated for folks.

No its not all about what you have, its how you use it.

The .270 Winchester must be a damn good cartridge for it to be as old as it is and still being chambered in so many rifles. Thats more than I can say for alot of calibers.

God bless ya Jeepy, boy it didn't take long....

Using that simplistic approach, a 22LR would become a legitimate elk hunting round (in the right hands --- oh boy here we go) --- nope, IMO a meaningful dialogue requires a leeetle more qualification, thought process, and articulation.

BTW, I certainly do agree with you on liking some of the older cartridges especially about the time they turned "modern" around the start of the 20th century! (Must of been a lot of howling and whining and carrying on by the black powder boys back then as similar to what we see today). Anyway in line with your train of thought on the matter, I kinda agree as I believe the '06, the 375H&H, and the 416 Rigby will turn 100 years old WELL BEFORE the 270! The 45-70 is already about a 125 years old or so. Not that it really means diddly squat as long as they are comparitively competent cartridges, but it is a nice circumstance. Thanks for the idea, but IMHO it doesn't take away from the mid to late 20th century magnums at all.

I don't doubt that the 270 will kill elk. What I don't like about it is having to be picky with my shots. I took my 270 into the hills after elk on my first trip. It was all I had and I couldn't afford to get anything bigger at the time. I got into camp with the only 270. Everybody else was using 7mm or '06. The only exception was my mom's boyfriend. He uses a 300 H&H necked to 270 shooting Barnes bullets. That thing had no problem putting down bulls at 800 yards. After seeing how big elk are, I decided I'd better save up a few pesos and get something a little better than the 270. I stepped up to 300WM. Recoil's not bad and I don't have to be as picky about the shots I take. I still prefer the perfect broadside, but if it doesn't happen, I know I have enough gun to punch through a shoulder to make the kill. I've had to track whitetails that were hit poorly with light cal/bullets, and I don't like doing it. Why not do everything you can to put the animal's a$$ on the ground as quickly and humanely as possible? Leave the deer rifles at home! Anybody want to buy a slightly used 270?

EKM you brought up something else I forgot to mention in my last post. Bringing down a cow, spike, or even a small raghorn is a whole different ball game. We put elk into one category and in reality we should when talking what round to use because you never know what you'll have in front of you. Now I sure someone here has killed or know's someone who has killed a big bull with a .270. But I'm also guessing that there is more than a few people here praising the .270 that have only dumped a cow or small bull not realizing that a big bull is a different beast altogether.

You can bet your bloomers that many trophy Ekl, Moose and African Plains game have been taken with the 270 and 7x57. I know a woman who has done it. I have reloaded for her and her husband for several African trips and BC trips for Moose , Elk and sheep. Except for Cape buffalo and grizzly, she shoots the 270 with Barnes X bullets. Their troghy room is full of proof. They shoot a 416 Rem Mag in a Dakota rifle and a 375 H&H in a old Model 70 Win. For buffalo and grizzly but but the 270 gets the nod for everything else.

True but I already conceded that point. I only said that a few praising it probably never have shot a big bull with and their opinion is based on shooting smaller elk.

That could be true. Can't deny that. I quess my main point is that from my expeirence the 270 is not a marginal elk cartridge in the least way. I don't even have a 270 right now although I have had several over the years and used them for elk without the first sign of a problem. I now prefer the 280 over the 270 for the use of the 175 grain Grandslam. I have used the 30-06 and 50 cal muzzle loader for elk more than anything else. I have dropped a couple with the 260 and 6.5 Mauser. Also one with the 35 Remington Contender handgun. I have taken moose with the 35 Rem Contender as well.