48 replies [Last post]
WesternHunter's picture
Offline
Joined: 05/05/2006
Posts: 2368
Just a Caution

jim boyd wrote:

Wow - Western Hunter - if I read this correctly - with the 145 grain bullet traveling at 2850 at the muzzle - this round would be a reliable offering to take an elk at 400 yards?

With that said - and if yes - that is probably further than I would ever shoot - likely my figure is closer to 300 yards...

I do genuinely appreciate all the time and effort you folks put into this debate.

I planned to add a 30 caliber rifle this summer - and may still - but I am very comfrotable with the 7-08...

I think I misspoke earlier too... it is a 24" barrel and not a 22".

It has great glass on it and also has a muzzle break so it is VERY comfortable to shoot.

Wow - great news - thanks!!!! 

I only caution Jim that you find out the BC of the particular bullets you plan to use and do the math to determine if you will get the same performance with your choice of bullets.  Some rounds even in the same caliber and bullet weight can differ depending on the BC and other factors.  The numbers I used are straight from the Speer manual and as such refer to various Speer brand bullets being used.  I do doubt that other brand bullets will be much different in the amount of energy they retain at distance.

Nothing wrong with larger 30 cal magnums, they do perform very well as the others have stated.  But, as with any high performance product, there does come time when you reach a point of diminishing returns.  When that happens I really begin to wonder what the advantage really is Confused

In many instances some of these magnums drop down to the same performance at say 550 yards to 600 yards as the 7mm-08 already delivers at say 300 yrds. That's a fact that advocates for these magnums fail to ever take into consideration.  Anyway, just one of many things to take into account when hunting.  Sometimes my ranting also reaches a point of diminishing returns too, so it's time for me to chime out on this topic lol

SoCoKHntr's picture
Offline
Location: Pueblo Colorado
Joined: 12/18/2006
Posts: 1787
Wait a minute

WesternHunter wrote:

In many instances some of these magnums drop down to the same performance at say 550 yards to 600 yards as the 7mm-08 already delivers at say 300 yrds. That's a fact that advocates for these magnums fail to ever take into consideration.  Anyway, just one of many things to take into account when hunting.  Sometimes my ranting also reaches a point of diminishing returns too, so it's time for me to chime out on this topic lol

Western, I really apologize for pulling out my club and hitting this horse one more time, but something you said here above is just begging for a response. What you said above is the whole point of a Magnum caliber and applying to those that use them for extreme long range hunting. That at those extended ranges 5 to 600 yards and beyond a Magnum round is still carrying enough velocity to equal a standard cartridge's killing power at short or moderate ranges. Again, that is the whole point. You said the above as if it's a drawback to a Mag. What kind of performance do you think a 7mm-08 would have at 600 yards?

Fester's picture
Offline
Joined: 12/12/2010
Posts: 13
The 7mm-08 as a 400 yard Elk Cartridge

Jim,

In my humble opinion the 7mm-08 is NOT a 400 yard Elk Cartridge nor would it be a 300 yard Elk cartridge and probably be marginal at 150 yards.  The 7mm-08 is a very fine cartridge for deer and black bear at medium distances up to 275 yards but when you move up to a heavy animal like an elk with big muscles and bones, it would be a daunting task to penetrate into the vitals for an ethical shot with the 7mm-08. 

Make no bones about it, if the 7mm-08 was capable of humanely taking an Elk at 400 yards all of the 30 caliber (and larger) rifles would be off the market in a New York minute.   

Therefore, if you are thinking about a serious caliber for Elk hunting you will need to up your game (no pun intended) to at least a 30-06, 7mm Mag, 300 win Mag or something in the .338 class of rifles if you really want to get out and touch one with absolute authority at more than woods range hunting.  As fine of a caliber that it is, it is not going to compete with the above calibers or the 35 Whelen when big animals are on the menu. 

 

 

SoCoKHntr's picture
Offline
Location: Pueblo Colorado
Joined: 12/18/2006
Posts: 1787
Um

WesternHunter wrote:

You see SoCo, even with a 7mm-08 using a 145 grain bullet you don't even have to stick with what you called my self-imposed or entry level or handicapped limitations to cleanly take an elk out to 400 yards with that 7mm-08 Dancing

By the way here's some number for you when you get that new .338 Win Mag

*Ballistic coefficient of 0.431 for an average 250 grain bullet

*Typical muzzle velocity of 2600 ft/sec, but 1836 ft/sec @ 400 yards

*Energy in Ft/Lbs per grain = 7.48 @ 400 yards

Lets do some math?  7.48 X 250 grains = 1870 ft/lbs of energy @ 400 yards.  Thats pretty good! You have an extra 200 yard advantage with that cartridge.

You actually get more energy using a 200 grain bullet with a BC of 0.448, velocity of about 2900 ft/sec at muzzle and 2116 ft/sec @ 400 yards with 9.94 ft-lbs per grain @ 400 yards. 

I wouldn't go much beyond 500 yards with that .338 Win Mag though.  The kinetic energy on target drops off pretty signifigantly beyond 500 yards with those heavy magnum bullets, (in fact they looks pretty much along the same lines or worse than the 7mm-08 Rem or .270 Win does @ 400 yards)  Whistling

Never said it couldn't be done with an -08 at 400 yards just that it wouldn't be my choice nor do I feel the majority of hunting sages would choose that either for 400 yard work (unless of course they enjoyed defending humorous positions for fun).

And, in regard to the 338 the 225 gr from my understanding is the ideal elk weight. Of course the big heavy 250 is going to be running a lower velocity but any elk will still feel like it was hit with the hammer of Thor with it out to 400. As I've said before I myself don't envision myself taking 500 yard shots at elk. Whistling

WesternHunter's picture
Offline
Joined: 05/05/2006
Posts: 2368
distance and energy

SoCo, I see your point about the bebefit of magnums out to a certain distance, but not extream distances.  And you are correct a 7mm-08 is not a 500 yard or 600 yard cartridge for elk.  I personally would not use it to 300 yards on elk, though the ballistsic numbers prove that it can be effective.  I'm just going by pure ballistsic math here as far as what the numers allow to bring down an elk.  I only drive the point home because too many hunters claim that cartridge X isn't capable of taking elk and is no good.  I say prove it.  I think I have not only with my own personal experience, but also with real ballistic numbers and tables as well.  I think that's more credible than someone simply stating that cartridge X is no good!

My point with posting those  numbers is, taking into account the sectional density of the 7mm bullet being able to penetrate better at a given energy level.  You get better performance from the 7mm-08 at 200-300 yards than you would get from that .338 Win Mag beyond 600 yards. And I don't really consider 600 yards to be an extream distance.  At extream distances those heavy bullets get slow real fast, if those last three words make any sense.  Do you see what I'm getting at? 

Oh by the way the 225 grain in that .338 Win Mag actually showed the least energy of the three weights in that caliber when I did the math.  That's why I didn't include that weight in my examples.  That's not to say it performed low by  any means, just when compared to the heavy and light weight in that caliber it was the least in kinetic energy at any given range.

SoCoKHntr's picture
Offline
Location: Pueblo Colorado
Joined: 12/18/2006
Posts: 1787
Uh

WesternHunter wrote:

SoCo, I see your point about the bebefit of magnums out to a certain distance, I really do, and I've never disputed that.  And you are correct a 7mm-08 is not a 500 yard or 600 yard cartridge for elk.  I personally would not use it to 300 yards on elk, though the ballistsic numbers prove that it can be effective.  I'm just going by pure ballistsic math here as far as what the numers allow to bring down an elk.

So if your getting the same energy transfer on target with that .338 at 600+ yards as you would already get with an 7mm-08 at say 300-400 yards and then you say that you would not use an -08 at 300 yards or 400 yrds (because of lack of energy) then why would you say the .338 is more capable at 600+yards than the -08 is @ 300-400 yards?  Also taking into account the sectional density of the 7mm bullet being able to penetrate better at a given energy level.  You get better performance from the 7mm-08 at 300 yards than you would get from that .338 Win Mag beyond 600 yards. Do you see what I'm getting at? 

Oh by the way the 225 grain in that .338 Win Mag actually showed the least energy of the three weights in that caliber when I did the math.  That's why I didn't include that weight in my examples.  That's not to say it performed low by  any means, just when compared to the heavy and light weight in that caliber it was the least in kinetic energy at any given range.

Sectional density does have it's importance but it's not the end all be all. A 200gr or heavier spitzer with a lower sd but traveling at a muzzle velocity of 2900 fps is going to hit harder and transfer more energy and thus cause more damage then a bullet weighing far less regardless of the pee wee's SD number. You are acting like just due to an SD number a bullet is going to perform better when there are surely more factors at play weight being one of the big ones in the equation of penetration and killing power. I'd still take a 300 Win Mag, a 7mm Mag, a 338 Mag, with a heavy spitzer any day over a 270 or 7mm-08, or 243, or 257 Roberts, or 25-06, with a SD of 1000 (yes I know I exaggerate:\\\\:D/ ) to specifically go slay an elk. And, that's from 100 yards all the way out to 400 if necessary. I already told you I'm not a 500 yard and further man. I also never said I wouldn't use the -08 or 270 if'n that's what I had to hunt with I just said I'd be more selective with range and shot placement.

I have a sneaky suspicion that if you had an opportunity at a bull of a lifetime at hell, lets say 350 yards, and for some reason you had to choose at that moment between a high SD 7mm-08 or a 200 gr Magnum spitzer with a slightly lower SD you'd ask the guide to hand you the Mag. This of course being a hypothetical situation since of course this would never happen in reality. Or maybe that wouldn't be your choice. Confused

WesternHunter's picture
Offline
Joined: 05/05/2006
Posts: 2368
sectional density

SoCo, no, SD is not the end all be all.  You gotta use SD and KE together.  When you take into account sectional density you also have to take into account bullet weight and the kinetic energy transfer on target.  Also the bullet construction needs to be factored in depending on what your target is.  Put all that together SoCo with kinetic energy being equal and bullet construction being equal on the same target and you'll find the one with the better SD will penetrate better regardless of bullet weight.  Granted bullet weight and velocity will determine KE at various ranges.  The key here is penetration, to reach the vitals. 

To answer your hypothetical question about what I'd do on an elk of a lifetime with a guide.  Well actually all my hunts are self-guided affairs and always have been.  I guess I could call my dad the guide for about the first 8 years that I hunted.  But what would I use?  If I had a .338 Mag I'd use it.  But for someone just getting into elk hunting for the first time not knowing if it will be a life long persuite and all they have is a 7mm-08, my advise is to use it and recognize what it's limitations are, because all calibers have limitations.  I would not however recommend going less than a 7mm-08.  I hunt elk most years.  I don't always fill my tags every year.  I own a few rifles, but I selected on the use of my .270 Win in my Winchester M70 Featherweight for various reasons.  I've been told a number of times by various hunter, mostly from people with far less experience than me, that it's not enough gun for my hunts, but my rifle along with my critter count has proven othewise. 

SoCoKHntr's picture
Offline
Location: Pueblo Colorado
Joined: 12/18/2006
Posts: 1787
Yes

WesternHunter wrote:

SoCo, you gotta use them all together.  When you take into account sectional density you also have to take into account bullet weight and the kinetic energy transfer on target.  All three must work togther, not one independent of the other, even with magnums. Also the bullet construction needs to be factored in depending on what your target is.  Put all that together SoCo and you'll find that there is an array of cartridges that can perform equally at various distances. 

This is exactly what I just said. You seemed to be the one fixated on SD in our fun little debate here not me. Yeah I'm also pretty aware of the array of cartridges and their uses as I prolly like you have killed big game with cals ranging from 243 on up to 7mm Mag and muzzleloaders as well. Funny you now mention bullet construction as a prime factor (though I agree) as in the past you've derided premium or bonded or other specialty bullets and seemed to favor regular cup and core but now place importance on bullet construction. Sometimes you seem to contradict points you've made in past topics. Ah, well as said been fun!

Cheers

WesternHunter's picture
Offline
Joined: 05/05/2006
Posts: 2368
bullet construction

SoCoKHntr wrote:

WesternHunter wrote:

SoCo, you gotta use them all together.  When you take into account sectional density you also have to take into account bullet weight and the kinetic energy transfer on target.  All three must work togther, not one independent of the other, even with magnums. Also the bullet construction needs to be factored in depending on what your target is.  Put all that together SoCo and you'll find that there is an array of cartridges that can perform equally at various distances. 

This is exactly what I just said. You seemed to be the one fixated on SD in our fun little debate here not me. Yeah I'm also pretty aware of the array of cartridges and their uses as I prolly like you have killed big game with cals ranging from 243 on up to 7mm Mag and muzzleloaders as well. Funny you now mention bullet construction as a prime factor (though I agree) as in the past you've derided premium or bonded or other specialty bullets and seemed to favor regular cup and core but now place importance on bullet construction. Sometimes you seem to contradict points you've made in past topics. Ah, well as said been fun!

Cheers

Not quite. To clarify, since you misunderstood. Bullet construction in my discussion here being used to refere to lead core jacketed as opposed to something like a frangible or fragmenting bullet.  My mension of bullet construction in no way indicated any preference for premiums or standard soft points in this thread.  My opinion on premiums has been widely stated, and I stand behind it, no need to go there.  The term construction here was used in this topic simply to state any given bullet being equal in costruction.  No contradiction that I can see.  Hope that clears it up for those who think the word "construction" is a blanket word for "premium" bullets.  It's not!

SoCoKHntr's picture
Offline
Location: Pueblo Colorado
Joined: 12/18/2006
Posts: 1787
Hmm

WesternHunter wrote:

Not quite. To clarify, since you misunderstood. Bullet construction in my discussion here being used to refere to lead core jacketed as opposed to something like a frangible or fragmenting bullet.  My mension of bullet construction in no way indicated any preference for premiums or standard soft points in this thread.  My opinion on premiums has been widely stated, and I stand behind it, no need to go there.  The term construction here was used in this topic simply to state any given bullet being equal in costruction.  No contradiction that I can see.  Hope that clears it up for those who think the word "construction" is a blanket word for "premium" bullets.  It's not!

[/quote]

 Since no one in their right mind would advise using a 'frangible or fragmenting' bullet for elk hunting I figured when you stated 'bullet construction' you were referring to the stoutness or make (construction) of the 'hunting' bullet in the equation. Any way we truly are beating this horse to death so I'll wish you good hunting and 'duck' on outta here.

Related Forum Threads You Might Like

ThreadThread StarterRepliesLast Updated
Thoughts on Advanced Hunter Program?Wazzu07610/07/2006 19:58 pm
What caliber for this creature?WesternHunter3306/25/2009 21:32 pm
power belts and a wolfhunter12009/23/2011 06:58 am
sighting in varible scopesSJ1311/05/2006 12:57 pm
Cow power helps light VermontQuicksilver101/25/2005 13:46 pm