I am glad I found this board. There seems to be alot of great information on here. I am going on my first elk hunt in Oct. 07 in Montana. I hunt with a 270 for deer here in South Carolina. This gives me a great excuse to get a new rifle. I have done alot of research and decided on a 7mm Weatherby Mag. Mark V Accumark Rifle. For a scope I have decided on a Zeiss Conquest 3-9x. I am not sure on whether to get the 40 or 50 (mm) dia. scope. Am I that far off in my selections?
14 replies [Last post]
Thu, 2006-06-22 16:47
Thu, 2006-06-22 19:49#1
I have no experience with elk, but I'm sure you'll get all questions answered around here. Just wanted to welcome you to the board
Fri, 2006-06-23 04:17#2
We all know the quality of Weatherby and in combination with Zeiss Optics, your selection is one of the best, you won't be able to blame the equipment.
Fri, 2006-06-23 05:49#3
The weatherby round is great but very very pricey unless ou handload. If you don't the 7mm Rem. Mag would be cheaper. Both will bust elk with fine results. best of luck.
Fri, 2006-06-23 16:14#4
Thanks for the input. Thanks for the welcome. Yeah, the only blame will be on me. I don't handload so the ammo is going to be expensive like you said. But I know that going in, so I will have to pay the price.
Fri, 2006-06-23 17:53#5
The only thing I would add to the above comments is that the accumark is a heavy rifle so if you will be walking that will be a factor but it is a great rifle for a stand/blind.
Fri, 2006-06-23 19:10#6
ChesterGolf: I took that into consideration alot. I figured the lighter rifle would be better for walking alot. But at the same time, with it being a magnum, the extra weight may help a little with the recoil and I tend to be able to hold a heavier gun steadier. I guess you could go either way.
Sat, 2006-06-24 06:04#7
If you plan on walking at all buy a lighter rifle. I own a remington sendero sf which is similar to the rifle you are looking at but it is not a rifle you want to carry any great distances. I have many other rifles to choose from if I am walking but the sendero is a stand/blind rifle.
Sat, 2006-06-24 16:03#8
Well said!! Hunters often overlook the value of a light handy rifle when still hunting or stalking.
Sun, 2006-06-25 22:33#9
Since you're looking for an excuse to buy a new rifle, this probably isn't what you want to hear, but...your .270 should be more than adequate for elk. I just looked in the Barnes Reloading Manual, and found the following information:
270 Winchester Magnum 150 grain XFB
velocity with RL 22:
~2800 fps at muzzle
~2600 at 100 yards
~2400 at 200 yards
~2250 at 300 yards
13" drop at 300 yards with a 100 yard zero
7mm Weatherby Magnum 150 grain XFB
velocity with RL 22:
~3000 fps at muzzle
~2800 at 100 yards
~2600 at 200 yards
~2400 at 300 yards
11" drop at 300 yards with a 100 yard zero
Not too different, IMO. Throw in the 30% extra recoil and the more expensive ammo, and you're not getting much extra bang for your buck (so to speak).
There seems to be a trend to bigger ammunition in hunting. There's nothing wrong with having a second gun, but just be aware that unless you *really* go up in caliber, the incremental benefits are pretty minor. Others with more experience may disagree, but I'd venture that your .270 is probably good for most anything you'll encounter in the lower 48, given proper ammunition and decent shot placement (for which there is no substitute).
Wed, 2006-06-28 16:39#10
Thanks for the info mzimmers. I have a regular .270 not the magnum. But that info did make me look at the .270 Weatherby Mag. They are almost identical in trajectory, enegy and velocity. This is making me rethink my decision about the 7mm. But with them being so similar I am sure either will be a good choice.