# I need a new super rifle!



## lunkerhunter2 (Nov 3, 2007)

Not really, just a new rifle. 
I have a Remington 700 30-06 synthetic that has never treated me wrong until this year. Without going into the whole story, i shot and dropped a 5-point bull 3 TIMES from 75 yards and he still got away. All shots in the boiler room and front shoulder. I was shooting 165 Federal Fusions which have killed 4 elk and 1 deer in their tracks or close to it over the last 5 years. This really bothered me this year and i left for home the following morning.
Now, i am looking at buying a rifle with a bit more boom. I have shot the 300 mags, 7 mags, and 338. I have yet to shoot a short mag of any caliber. I watched a friend shoot a cow last year for 325 yards with a 7 WSM and it did the job but i have heard bad things about that cartridge. 
Is it really worth the money for a 300 Ultra Mag or should i look at the 300 mag instead? Any comments or insight would be much appreciated. Also, any suggestions on other calibers? I will be elk hunting where a 300+ yard shot is a reality and deer to the same distances when i rifle hunt them. I am confident at ranges slightly beyond that but not much. I just need a rifle that has enough punch to stop an animal when it is hit good(or not so good). 8)


----------



## JDF_dogkiller (Apr 7, 2009)

For what you will be using the rifle for, I feel that the 300 WSM will be plenty. Any 180 grain premium hunting bullet (TSX, Partition, A-Frame) out of the 300 WSM would handle elk out to 300 yards with a well placed shot. I have never used the bullets you used, but i feel that the 30 06 more often than not would easily meet your needs. It was probably a freak accident kind of thing. Don't tell your wife that though, any reason to buy a new rifle is a good reason in my opinion. 
Some people feel that the short mags are inferior to the regular mags... I don't understand that school of thought. How can a cartridge that matches the balistics of another while using less powder be inferior? It is more efficient, and with the short action you have additional benefits, such as a stiffer action, which ultimately increases accuracy, and you can cycle a second round more quickly if needed.
Dude, go with the remington 700 in 300 WSM. You won't be dissapointed.


----------



## Bax* (Dec 14, 2008)

I will never talk a guy out of buying a new gun. Its always nice to have the right tool for the job. 

BUT I think that your experience was a bit of a fluke. Maybe you just shot a bull that wasnt ready to give up the ghost like others. The 30-06 is a respectable round, and relatively affordable compared to other high power bullets. 
I know this is a bad example, but I have blown the butt off of a jack rabbit completely, and the bugger still tried to run away using only its front legs. Some animals just have more fight in them than others. So maybe that was just the case in your situation.
If I were to buy another high power, I think I would go for something that would be rather ubiquitous so that if I needed ammo, I could find it in a small town if I needed it. Maybe a 300 Win Mag, or 300 RUM. But I am leery of the WSMs still.


----------



## shootemup (Nov 30, 2008)

In my opinion bullet choice is the most important thing to consider. The problem with a 7mm is that its a smaller bullet then a 30.06, not by much but it is smaller and faster. However the speed is what causes the problem, the bullets tend to fragment very badly. However shooting a bonded bullet such as accubond or a swift a frame, or a solid copper bullet will solve this problem. 
A 300 is *still *a .308 bullet the exact same bullet as 30.06 the difference is more powder so it will carry more energy which will help. I think that your elk must have been some kind of freak. I shot a spike at 650 yards with an accubond twice with my ruger 30.06 and it was more then enough to do the job. I new rifle is always fun, just make sure you read up and find a rifle that will do what you want it too a large rifle is not a magic pill. 
Good luck!


----------



## Frisco Pete (Sep 22, 2007)

> I was shooting 165 Federal Fusions which have killed 4 elk and 1 deer in their tracks or close to it over the last 5 years.


Its not your choice of caliber - even if you had the big mag it is likely that at 75 yards things would have turned out the same. Some elk are just tough no matter what they are hit with - go figure... Gun writer and former editor of _Successful Hunter_ magazine John Barsness wrote, IMO, _the_ outstanding article on this very subject. Considering his wealth of experience, coupled with his ability to view the subject matter from a more logical standpoint than many of his contemporaries, I think his views are worth a read.

It is a long article to read but I hope you will enjoy and learn 

*Tough Game and "Adequate" Rifles Fact or Fiction? * by John Barsness
Rifle Magazine - March - April 2005

How much gun/caliber is enough? How much bigger caliber do you need for elk or moose than for northern whitetail? Must we always use heavy bullets and "magnum" cartridges on the tough stuff, while wimpier animals fall easily to wimpy loads?

No, not necessarily. If hit right, all big game animals succumb even to relatively light bullets pushed at moderate velocities. "Hit right" means through both lungs and the major blood vessels that carry blood between heart and lungs. The original size, weight and speed of the bullet doesn't really matter - as long as it gets inside the animals chest and makes a decent hole. A precisely placed bullet from the .30-06 will do the job on everything from reputedly tough 450-pound gemsbok and elk, and the less "tough" moose, and 1300-pound eland. Few would travel more than 50 yards before collapsing.

Where does the tough part come in? Mostly when game animals aren't hit precisely. Hit any of the "tough" animals around the fringes of the lungs, and they can go an awfully long way, and sometimes even recover. Elk and gemsbok sometimes live fruitful lives after bullet placement around the margins of the lungs.

Will bigger rifles kill "better" with imprecise bullet placement? Not as much as some hunters like to believe. Certainly a 250-grain bullet from a .340 Weatherby Magnum makes a bigger hole than a 150-grain bullet from a 7x57, and the bigger bullet will break larger bones and still penetrate deeply. But it won't make much difference if a .340 bullet fringes the rear of the lungs on an elk or gemsbok.. We end up chasing a long, thin blood trail regardless of how many foot-pounds or KO Factor or whatever the .340's bullet carries.

So "tough" means they'll go a ways if hit around the edges.

Here I would like to add pronghorn and whitetail to The List. Many hunters consider both easy to kill, but if you hunt either long enough, you'll learn differently. I've seen poorly hit whitetails and prairie goats, neither weighing more than 100 pounds, pack an incredible amount of lead for several hundred yards.

Why do most hunters think pronghorns and whitetails aren't tough? Deer hunters usually start out young. Relatives with decades of experience usually choose their first rifles. Consequently, 99 percent of pronghorn and deer hunters hunt with something milder than a .300 magnum. Since most pronghorn and deer hunters aren't afraid of their rifles, they put the bullet in the right place, and the chase ends.

Most of us, however, don't hunt larger game very often so tend to depend on "gun writers" for advice about what works. We read that anything smaller than a .338 Winchester Magnum is "inadequate" for elk, or that a .375 H&H is too small for Cape buffalo. This isn't what the majority of elk outfitters and African professional hunters say, but with rare exceptions, elk outfitters and African PHs aren't gun writers.

So a deer hunter who normally shoots a .30-06 (_in my experience a totally adequate elk rifle_) books his first elk hunt and buys a .338 Winchester Magnum. He can't shoot it very accurately, but "knows" anything less is inadequate. On the fifth day of the hunt, he shoots a middling 5-point bull in the rear of the rib cage, and the bull trots over the mountain before they track it down. Elk sure are tough! Shot right through the lungs with a big ol' .338 and kept on truckin'!

An actual example would be a 110-pound whitetail doe I recently witnessed shot at 250 yards with a 100-grain Barnes Triple-Shock through the ribs with a .257 Roberts. The deer (_as they almost always do when lung-shot_) ran about 35 yards before keeling over. The X-Bullet left an excellent blood trail. After butchering, the shoulder meat wasn't even bruised.

Similar shot placement, however, doesn't always work all that well once we get to animals over 500 pounds, for a couple of reasons. First, there's relatively less bullet hole. Probably, if we averaged all the deer rifles and all the deer in North America, we'd find the average deer bullet to be .27 inch in diameter and weigh 150 grains. We'd also find the average deer to weigh about 150 pounds: one grain for each pound of deer. Generally a bullet this size will almost totally collapse the lungs of the average deer.

To match that on elk we'd have to use 500 to 800 grains of bullet, and on Cape buffalo or bison we'd have to use 1,500 to 2,000-grain bullets. They'd also have to be a lot fatter, around .45 caliber on elk and .60 caliber on the big boys. Instead the bullets we use on elk probably average about .30 inch and 200 grains, and perhaps .40 and 400 grains on buffalo and bison. These do not collapse the lungs of elk and buffalo. Instead they punch holes.

Consequently, the bigger the game, the closer we have to aim for the top of the heart - and a bullet placed there also punches through the biggest part of both lungs. Essentially this means putting a bullet in the shoulder, either the bone itself or the shoulder meat. The average deer hunter isn't conditioned to shoot for the shoulder, but somewhere behind it, one reason so many deer hunters find larger game tough to kill.

Over the years I've made it a point to hunt with as many different cartridges as possible, and to accompany other hunters, either as a guide or simple observer. Over the decades I've made careful shooting notes on several hundred big game animals of all sizes. When hit through the top of the heart, or within a few inches of that ideal spot, there doesn't seem to be much difference in how quickly most big game calibers kill game. Yet many American hunters (_perhaps over-fed on shooting propaganda_) believe that 10 or 15 grains of bullet weight, a few thousandths of an inch in bullet diameter or a 5 percent increase in muzzle velocity can make one cartridge "inadequate" and another as devastating as a medium-sized volcano.

This doesn't mean there isn't an increase in "killing power" from, say, the .243 Winchester to the .460 Weatherby Magnum. Obviously there is. But probably 95 percent of the "big game" taken in the world weighs less than 700 pounds (_including most elk_), and 95 percent of the cartridges use bullets weighing between 150 and 200 grains at velocities between 2,700 and 3,100 fps, generating 2,500 to 3,500 foot-pounds (ft-lbs) of muzzle energy. Compared to the gulf between the .243 and .460, that's pretty narrow. Claiming one cartridge in this bunch is magic and another anemic simply isn't rational.

Sometimes this perception is because certain gun writers may come down many times against lighter cartridges for elk. Some may draw a firm .30-caliber line and state that any .270 or 7mm cartridge isn't their idea of an elk cartridge.

This despite the fact that they have never shot an elk with such a cartridge. Some of them eventually have to use a small caliber because of an odd, unwritten law of gun writing: Only personal experience counts. So [_true story of unnamed writer who favors the 8mm Rem. Mag and bigger_] they use a .270 Winchester on a trophy hunt in New Mexico, handloaded with 150-grain Nosler Partitions. They kill a good 6-point bull at longer range than he'd ever shot an elk - and the bull went down quicker than any of his previous chest-shot bulls.

Fortunately for us, they are soon penning a new article "Are You Overgunned?" He seems to be mellowing, partly because of that elk - and partly because he recently took his daughter and her friend to Africa and watched them slay elk-sized African game with a 7mm-08 Remington and 150-grain Swift Scirocco bullets.

However, we'll never lack for gun writers who insist only larger cartridges are "truly adequate." Many of them suggest that "resident" elk hunters often get by with such truly inadequate rounds as the .270 WCF and .30-06 because residents can go hunting any time they want to, so pass up "marginal" shots.

This is truly a crock. I was born and raised and live in Montana. We have a five-week rifle season, longer than most other elk states. Montana elk hunters, like most hunters in North America, are working people, so Montana hunters mostly hunt weekends - and usually not every day of every weekend. Consequently their elk season is about as long as the 7-to 10-day elk hunt booked by nonresidents. Most Montana resident also hunt public land where (_and when_) everybody else hunts, unlike nonresidents who do their hunting a long horseback ride into the wilderness or on some private ranch.

Most Montana elk hunters (_like most hunters_) don't read gun magazines, so remain ignorant of the latest Magic Rifles and Super Cartridges. Consequently they mostly use average rifles, often purchased at Wal-Mart: Remingtons, Rugers, Savages, and Winchesters chambered for the .270 Winchester, 7mm Remington Magnum and .30-06. A relatively small minority use .300 magnums of any sort, and I can count the .338 Winchester Magnums I've encountered over 40 years of hunting Montana on the fingers of one hand (_and that hand carried one of those .338s_). These residents take any shot they can get, because their time is just as limited as that of any nonresident. If they shoot well, they do well, the secret to using "inadequate" elk rifles.

Something similar happens when American hunters venture to Africa, whether for plains game or big stuff. They read hunting magazines and decide that African game is nearly bulletproof.

Yet upon arrival, they find that most African hunters hold the .30-06 in high regard for anything smaller than eland, and many even use it on those Alaskan moose-sized antelope. Here I mean "professional" hunters, the guides of Africa. Often African gun writers spout the same big-bore stuff that flows from the laptops of many American gun writers. But the Africans who escort amateurs into the field year after year generally recommend the .30-06 for any plains game, or something very much like it, perhaps the 7mm Remington Magnum. If they prefer something larger on eland, it's generally a .375 H&H, not some cutting-edge300 magnum that may develop as many foot-pounds as the .375 but doesn't penetrate eland bones any better than a .30-06. (_One reason many Africans like the .30-06 is that it doesn't require bullets costing several dollars apiece - and that's how much some of our "premium" bullets cost by the time they travel across the Atlantic._)

African game is tough - just as tough as white-tailed deer and elk. Deer-sized African animals fall neatly to deer cartridges, and elk-sized African animals fall easily to the .30-06. Eland are just as easy to kill as moose. Yet many Americans show up for plains game with some super-fast magnum, bragging about how they shoot deer at 600 yards, whereupon their PH yawns and wonders how they'll do on kudu at 60 yards in the thornbrush.

When after Cape buffalo in Botswana last year, I asked my PH Russell Tarr how many dangerous game hunters show up with big-bore rifles that make them flinch. Russell thought a short moment, then said, "The majority." Like many African PHs, Russell carries a .458 Winchester or .470 Nitro Express when backing up over-gunned clients - but hunts buffalo and elephants himself with a .375 H&H.

You might guess that I'm prejudiced against larger cartridges. Not at all. The last five years might be a good example. During that time I hunted big game in nine American states from Alaska to South Texas, several Canadian provinces and territories, Old Mexico and three countries in Africa. The cartridges used included the .250 Savage, .257 Roberts, 6.5x55 "Swedish" Mauser, .270 Winchester, .270 WSM, .270 Weatherby Magnum, 7x57mm Mauser, 7mm Remington SAUM, 7mm STW, .300 Savage, .30-40 Krag, .30-06, .300 WSM, .300 H&H, .300 Winchester Magnum, .338 Winchester Magnum, 9.3x62mm Mauser, .375 H&H, .416 Rigby and .45-70. Oh, and 20- and 12-gauge "slug guns," and a Thompson/Center Hawken .50-caliber muzzleloader.

The .30-06 probably shouldn't have been on the list because I already knew what it would and wouldn't do. One went to Africa anyway, to prove a point about plains game. This ancient round worked just fine, naturally, even making the longest shot I've attempted over there, a one-shot kill on a kudu at almost 400 yards.

Did the magnums kill any better than the smaller cartridges? Not noticeably. I've taken most of my elk with the .30-caliber, 200-grain Nosler Partition, mostly from .30-06s but also a couple of .300 magnums. Generally elk go about 35 to 40 yards before keeling over when shot with that bullet, regardless of the cartridge, and generally the long Partition goes right through. I've never lost an elk shot with the 200-grain Partition, and only shot one twice - with a .300 Winchester Magnum. (_The second wasn't necessary, but powder and bullets are relatively cheap insurance._)

I've also used the .338 Winchester Magnum a lot on game animals weighing 500 to 1,500 pounds. For several years no animal required more than one shot, but then one day the first shot on a blue wildebeest went a little high. The bull started to run off, and a second shot also went a little high. A third went into the rump as the bull turned away. Did three 250-grain bullets make up for poor bullet placement? No, not even the rear-end shot, which ended up inside the chest. We caught up with the bull an hour and most of a mile later, just at dusk. I shot him again, at 30 yards - and he fell and got up again. Another big bullet through both shoulders finally ended it.

Does bullet design make a difference? I know folks who firmly believe in bullets that don't fully penetrate an animal's chest - and others who adamantly prefer bullets that always exit. The first set tends to believe in "releasing all the bullet's energy" in the animal instead of the wilderness beyond, while the second group prefers two holes "to let the blood out and the air in." My hunting notes from the past four decades indicate that as long as the bullet puts a decent hole through the vitals, there isn't much difference in whether it penetrates the off-side skin.

Some bullets, of course, have expanded too much over those years, not penetrating the vitals. Others have expanded very little. Neither killed as quickly as bullets that punched a good hole through the pumping and breathing mechanism. The too-quick expanders often required repeated applications to finish the job - the reason I slightly prefer the deeper divers, but don't make a federal case of it.

Like cartridges, most bullets work. There really isn't a universe of difference between how quickly a Nosler Ballistic Tip or a Barnes X-Bullet kills if either hits the right place. Neither will always drop them in their tracks, and neither prevents some lung-shot game from going 50 yards before collapsing. This is because it takes about 12 seconds for an animal's blood pressure to drop after a bullet punches a hole through its heart and lungs. There's an interval before the brain blacks out.

I've also learned to distrust two kinds of opinions: those that proclaim something The Absolute Best/Worst or those resulting from biased experience. The first almost always means the opinion-holder has limited experience (_perhaps a sample of one_) with the cartridge or bullet in question. The second often means the opinion-holder has no experience at all.

I tend to disregard, for instance, opinions about the .270 WCF and large game held by people who've rarely or never seen one used. I've used the .270 to take more big game than any other cartridge. So has my wife, and I've watched her take almost all her big game. The animals in question ranged from pronghorn and whitetails up to elk and moose. If the .270 truly sucks as a big game cartridge, we would have quit using it long ago. We haven't.

All of this is contrary to much advice published in sporting firearms publications, where we read "absolute best" and "bigger is better" over and over again. The human brain (_the origin of all our technology_) is evidently wired to expect vast improvements in tools. There have been a bunch of new hunting bullets and cartridges introduced in the past half-century. The new short magnums are neat little rounds; I own rifles chambered for two and have taken over a dozen animals with them. I use all sorts of bullets and, while my prejudices about turning edible venison into blood gravy affect my personal choices, no bullet I've tried in the last decade has been absolute junk - if used within what engineers might call its "design parameters."

We discovered perhaps 90 percent of what we know today about big game rifles, cartridges and bullets in the first half-century of smokeless powder. John Nosler, for instance, invented his marvelous bullet only 50-odd years after Winchester produced the first American sporting rifle chambered for a smokeless cartridge. (_For the curious: the 1885 Single Shot in .30-40 Krag, in 1892._) The next 50-odd years have seen some refinements in sporting rifles and ammunition but nothing like the improvements before 1950.

What does all this have to do with tough game? Quite a bit. None of the animals on The List are other-worldly tough if we: 
1)	Put enough practice rounds through rifles that don't scare us.
2)	We must learn big game anatomy.
3)	Develop judgement about when not to pull the trigger. 
All this takes time, effort and expense. If we don't put all three into our shooting, many game animals will prove very tough, even if not on somebody's list - and even if we use the latest wonder-magnum and bullets costing $2 apiece. Tough game, it turns out, is often something hunters create for themselves.


----------



## lunkerhunter2 (Nov 3, 2007)

FP, Thanks for the great read. Some terrific info there. But i still am going to buy a new rifle. I have earned one and my wife is getting back into big game finally.. I am thinking i will go with a 300 mag. The rounds for the 300 RUM are like $80! No thanks. :wink:


----------



## GaryFish (Sep 7, 2007)

My question Lunker - what are you going to do with the 30-06? You probably don't want such a beast around. I'm looking for another 30-06 - so let me know if you are getting rid of it. I might be interested in taking it off your hands for you.


----------



## longbow (Mar 31, 2009)

i shot and dropped a 5-point bull 3 TIMES from 75 yards and he still got away. All shots in the boiler room and front shoulder.

Something aint right here. That bull's dead and he didn't go far!


----------



## Bax* (Dec 14, 2008)

I had one other suggestion. How about a 300 WBY? Its comparably priced to the 300 Win Mag, but shoots a bit faster. I know that some guys don't like fast bullets, but it would be nice to carry a shot a bit further.

PS: there is also the 300 RCM, but it is rather limited to bullet weights because it is a relatively new round. (But cheaper)


----------



## lunkerhunter2 (Nov 3, 2007)

longbow said:


> i shot and dropped a 5-point bull 3 TIMES from 75 yards and he still got away. All shots in the boiler room and front shoulder.
> 
> Something aint right here. That bull's dead and he didn't go far!


I followed small amounts of blood for over a mile after i left him for 1 hour. My wifes uncles joined in the search for another 2 hours without finding him and loosing blood after 1/2 mile. You **** right something aint right!


----------



## longbow (Mar 31, 2009)

Alright, I'm staying out of this one. I still say something ain't right.


----------



## lunkerhunter2 (Nov 3, 2007)

longbow said:


> Alright, I'm staying out of this one. I still say something ain't right.


Please explain! I think you are calling me out. I will oblige.
I shot this bull from 75-80 yards with the above stated rifle and round. The first shot knocked him off his feet. He immediately got back up and tried to run. A second shot put him down again. He quickly got back up and started running. A 3rd shot hit him slightly high of center and center(horizontally). He fell again and stumbled over a small rise. I had to run 100 yards to see where he had fallen and he was not there. The tracks in the snow(8 or 9 elk) went up a ridge and toward the deep canyons and timber. After the small amounts of blood on the snow i stayed put for an hour. I tracked him until i lost blood and could no longer pick out his track from the others. 2 other family members joined in the search and spent another 2 hours looking before the snow melted and we lost all sign of ANY elk. What is your problem with this story? :roll:


----------



## Bax* (Dec 14, 2008)

Maybe it was on PCP!
They say that stuff gives people super strength and they are still insanely strong even with broken bones. Maybe your animal was on PCP.

I dont doubt you lunkerhunter2


----------



## longbow (Mar 31, 2009)

OK, I guess I am calling you out a bit but I'm going to back off because, #1- I wasn't there and you were. #2- I've killed 5 elk with a longbow and 0 with a rifle. However, during my short guiding career I was in on several elk kills and I've have to say, they are **** tough animals. I'll give you that! #3- I am far from a confrontational person.
Having said all that, I am very well-versed and trained, (which is another story), in rifle interior/exterior ballistics and shooting. The inertia it takes to knock down an elk three time had to do extensive damage and, I assumed, a dead elk at the end of a short trail. 
Please except my apology for jumping to conclusions and I'll give you the benifit of the dought.
You can also pm me and get my phone number and we can talk about one of my favorite things, hunting and shooting. Chuck.


----------



## lunkerhunter2 (Nov 3, 2007)

longbow said:


> OK, I guess I am calling you out a bit but I'm going to back off because, #1- I wasn't there and you were. #2- I've killed 5 elk with a longbow and 0 with a rifle. However, during my short guiding career I was in on several elk kills and I've have to say, they are **** tough animals. I'll give you that! #3- I am far from a confrontational person.
> Having said all that, I am very well-versed and trained, (which is another story), in rifle interior/exterior ballistics and shooting. The inertia it takes to knock down an elk three time had to do extensive damage and, I assumed, a dead elk at the end of a short trail.
> Please except my apology for jumping to conclusions and I'll give you the benifit of the dought.
> You can also pm me and get my phone number and we can talk about one of my favorite things, hunting and shooting. Chuck.


Like i said, i have killed about 12 elk in my life. All but 1 with a rifle. This is the first elk i have had do anything close to this. I consider myself a decent shot especially with that rifle. I know exactly where the first 2 shots went and have a good idea of the exact location of the 3rd. They were all right where you are supposed to aim on an elk. I have done the high shoulder shot with instant results. Many through the heart/lungs. I have never had any elk go more than 75 yards after i shot it the first time.
Was this bull an exception to the other 11? I don't know. I did what i was supposed to but i guess the bullet did not or he was a Chuck Norris bull. Like i said, i left the following morning for home because it bothered me. I don't want to loose an animal again hence the request for a different caliber rifle. No hard feelings. 8)


----------



## longbow (Mar 31, 2009)

My son used one of my 300Wbys on elk last year and thunderdicked it on the spot. I shot my moose at 325yds last year with the same gun and it folded on the spot. My friend Al shot a 6-point elk from stern to stem with his 300Wby and it went down right there.
If you can handle the recoil, it might be something to look into. Since you use to shoot a .338, I doubt you'll have a problem.
Accually, I bet you have more of a bullet problem than a caliber problem. I don't know, it might be something to look into.


----------



## James (Oct 7, 2007)

> i shot and dropped a 5-point bull 3 TIMES from 75 yards and he still got away. All shots in the boiler room and front shoulder.


From this I gather he fell down three times, then got up and got away? Since he got up and got away, it may be hard to say where you hit him? Did you have a little buck fever?
Don't blame the gun.

Let me give you a little tip: Put a bullet in the brain and the game is yours every time. No exceptions. Makes butchering easier too. Good grief, we all shoot jack rabbits and squirrels. An elks head is bigger than either. If you don't want to mess up the rack, go for the point where the head meets the neck. Still bigger than a jack. Disconnect the brain from the body and he is yours too. Immediately!!! Go shoot some jacks with your 30-06 to gain confidence.

Try some premium bullets in 180 gr. (Noslers) on Elk.

If you are bound to get a new gun, get a 338. Don't be fooled to think that a .308 bullet going 100 FPS faster is going to make any big difference. Then you can punish yourself every time you pull the trigger.


With all that said, you gotta know that occasionally one gets away.


----------

