hunting rifles
1 - 20 of 33 Posts
Joined
·
83 Posts
The only guns I've ever hunted with is a over/under 12ga, and a bolt-action 30-06 (modified for lefties).
I believe the brands are Nokia and Husqvarna, but I won't swear by it. Both of them are my father's- it seems like he prefers his weapons to have some kick.
I believe the brands are Nokia and Husqvarna, but I won't swear by it. Both of them are my father's- it seems like he prefers his weapons to have some kick.
Joined
·
2,031 Posts
Remington 700/.270win.
Got it in 1970.
Got it in 1970.
Joined
·
1,978 Posts
I just have my can gun in 5.45, but works very well for ferul hogs and coyote.
I am looking into a .300 Win. Mag.
There is plenty of room out here to stretch out a distance shot, and the Elk would require this cal. or better.
I am thinking of a custom Remington 700 with a Lother Walther Bbl. and a McMillan stock.
Unsure of my scope choice though, but Mil-Dot in 10X is the plan.
Any suggestions that don't cost a small fortune?
I am looking into a .300 Win. Mag.
There is plenty of room out here to stretch out a distance shot, and the Elk would require this cal. or better.
I am thinking of a custom Remington 700 with a Lother Walther Bbl. and a McMillan stock.
Unsure of my scope choice though, but Mil-Dot in 10X is the plan.
Any suggestions that don't cost a small fortune?
Joined
·
608 Posts
Most used - .300 Win Mag
.338 Win Mag for Moose, Bear, and Musk-Ox
.338 Win Mag for Moose, Bear, and Musk-Ox
The 270 Win does not have the bullet weight of the 30-06 but is flatter shooting, which is why it was developed. I find that the recoil is a bit lighter and I like the accuracy, though except for the bullet drop, it is no more accurate than a good 30-06. My cheapo savage shoots .75 MOA with cheap factory ammo 
. Handloading would shave the group size down a bit but why invest the money and time when I only shoot 3-6 rounds a year? I have enough ammo to last a decade or so at that rate. The only draw-back to the 270 is that it is too light for moose or REALLY big elk at long range, depending on where you hit them.
. Handloading would shave the group size down a bit but why invest the money and time when I only shoot 3-6 rounds a year? I have enough ammo to last a decade or so at that rate. The only draw-back to the 270 is that it is too light for moose or REALLY big elk at long range, depending on where you hit them.
Joined
·
1,978 Posts
Head or neck shot just below the base of the skull.
You will shatter the neck vertabre and sever the spine.
It will drop like a hot rock.
I have taken deer with a .22 hornet like this.
I see no reason a .270 can't take a bull elk the same way.
I no longer own my .270, but it was a great shooter as well.
MK 77 Ruger.
You will shatter the neck vertabre and sever the spine.
It will drop like a hot rock.
I have taken deer with a .22 hornet like this.
I see no reason a .270 can't take a bull elk the same way.
I no longer own my .270, but it was a great shooter as well.
MK 77 Ruger.
If you could only have one gun for all speicies it would have to be a .30 06. It can take any big game animal in N. america and just about any on the planet. They are cheap, the ammo is even cheaper. I am comfortable with shots in exccess of 300 yards and have killed deer at over 500 with one... that being said, for deer and elk in thick brush I use my .45/70. It is a great brush gun, looks like a lever action 30/30 and will take an elk off there feet at pretty much any range you can hit at.(100-200 yards if you practice...this is with open sights) .270's are great guns and i have taken elk no problem with one. And you cant forget the old reliable...the 30/30 lever action. 30/30's have killed more deer and elk than all the other calibers combined. It pretty much comes down to what you are comfortable with and shoot alot. I know people that have taken full sized elk with .243's and .22 mags. Just my 2cents.
Nick
Nick
1 - 20 of 33 Posts
