Most accurate 500 yard Round for Elk & Moose

[nasem]

I have always thought of this topic.  What is the most “inherently” accurate round that is capable of taking down something as big as Moose or Elk at 500 yards.  I know many of us think a good-ole 30-06 with a premium 180 gr bullet is more than capable and I agree with that, but is the 30-06 most inherently accurate?  Doubt it….

I would like the answers to stay away from the super duper magnums, no 338 lapua or excaliber or anything of that sort.  I wanna keep the responses to the typical calibers, and at the most the RUM or the wby Magnums.

My opinion goes into many different directions and I have no idea what is best answer.  My caliber thoughts are 300 win mag, 7mm mag, 270, 280, 338 win mag and I think the 7mm mag is the most inherently accurate round of the once listed.

[Questor]

The 50 BMG comes to mind first.

[Siskiyou]

Why limit yourself to 500 yards?  I mean nobody but a fool would shot at an Elk or Moose at 500 yards with a production magnum round.  But if you do not respect the game this might be your alley.  http://members.aol.com/fiftyguy/ptrd20mm.htm

[nasem]

I was hoping the responses would stay with the TYPICAL calibers

[Don Fischer]

222 Rem shooting a 55gr solid placed in the center of the brain!

[Questor]

I guess it depends on what you mean by typical because I see a lot more in print about the 50BMG lately than the 338s.

But if I have to limit myself to a rifle that would generally be recognized as a hunting rifle, I'd pick a 340 Weatherby with 250 or 275 grain bullets and a scope with a reticle for distance compensation like a mil-dot or varmint-hunter reticle. Add to that a top quality range-finder and a day pack set up to serve as a rifle rest.

I'd also add 500 rounds of ammo and a week-long vacation at a 1000 yard range to practice with the new gun, emphasizing mirage, wind-doping, and hold-over at 10-yard increments from 300 to 600 yards. Better make that two weeks and 1000 rounds.

[victorcharlie]

.17 HMR with 17 grain V-max.......through the eye or in the ear.......

[jpsmith1]

I guess that I'll come right out and say what everyone is hinting around.  500 yards borders on shooting rather than hunting.  Most, and I seriously mean most, people don't have the abilities to hit at that range consistently enough to cleanly take game.  The amount of practice and dedication required to do it are beyond that dedication of most.

Of course, this is not in any way meant to impugn your amazing shooting ability, which, I'm sure, includes that ability to regularly triple on grouse with a double barreled shotgun and shoot prarie dogs in the eye offhand at 600 yards, calling the eye beforehand.

At these ranges, inherent accuracy matters less than intimate familiarity with your rifle/scope/load and knowledge of the EXACT range to the target. 

[nasem]

I guess that I'll come right out and say what everyone is hinting around.  500 yards borders on shooting rather than hunting.  Most, and I seriously mean most, people don't have the abilities to hit at that range consistently enough to cleanly take game.  The amount of practice and dedication required to do it are beyond that dedication of most.

Of course, this is not in any way meant to impugn your amazing shooting ability, which, I'm sure, includes that ability to regularly triple on grouse with a double barreled shotgun and shoot prarie dogs in the eye offhand at 600 yards, calling the eye beforehand.

At these ranges, inherent accuracy matters less than intimate familiarity with your rifle/scope/load and knowledge of the EXACT range to the target. 

I underestand what you saying, and Im not one to say that I normaly hunt at ranges beyond 250 yards, the purpose of this Thread is only a means to get some information on "inherently" accurate cartridges than are capable of killing elk size game as huge ranges like 500 yards.  The main reason I started thinking about this was that I started reading about the long range accuracy difference between the 308 and the 30-06 and how the 308 is so much more "inherently" accurate than the 30-06 at ranges above 600 yards.

I know alot of folks who come to GBO are guys who do alot of long range shooting and I wanted to hear thier opinions on inherently accurate "standard" magnums (not refering to the super duper magnums or 50 BMG)......  Believe me guys, I already know the 50 BMG (or the 20mm mini cannon) is more than capable of handling 1000 yard+ shots at elk.....

[conrad101st]

338 lapua by sako or Accuracy International.   But who wants too hump it???

500 yards is not at all unusual I would think.  I have shot one at 425 and my brother has shot one at 575. With a 1200 yard rangefinder, no wind,a stationary target, and a mildot reticle or target knobs, a prone shot off a bipod should be a snap on a kill zone the size of basketball if you have your handy drop table. 

You can bitch about it all day as sniping, but we generally sit on high mountain saddles where we wait for the local boys to push the elk to us through the escape routes.  I usually hump a sleeping bag and a therma rest to stay cozy in.  It has put our party in the 50% kill ratio year after year.  I think that technique works just fine.  We shoot sako, weatherby and remington in 300 win mags with various 180 grain loads.

[cam69conv]

Nasim...Perfect honesty here....there is no such thing as an inherantly accurate caliber...It all has to do with MANY different variables such as Bullet Coeffeciants (i know I cant speel fer chit so hush he gets the point) Load data...Winds...Barrel thickness...Bedding... and most of all...THE SHOOTER HIMSELF....Now...As far as the range and the amound of energy that will be needed....The 30.06 or the .300 win or weatherby mags would be plenty sufficiant given that you are WELL VERSED with not only your weapon but also everything else from above to make a clean humane shot...Being that I was Military trained and I practice often and I load my own rounds and I CONSTANTLY strive for improvement in my form and abilities...Would I take a 500 yard shot at an Elk...Yes if the conditions were acceptable and I felt within my capabilities...But as stated above by others, I am NOT your average individual in the woods...Would I recommend ANYONE doing it...NO....Not without MANY practice sessions at long distance....My practice is this....If I feel I am going to have to take 400 yard shots in the field...I practice at 600 yards...If I can consistantly hit at my further range then that gives me an acceptible level of confidence at the ranges that I am going to limit myself to..I do the same with a Bow....I constantly practice at 50 and 60 yards though I wont shoot at a deer past 35 yards...those 60 yard practice sessions make a 35 yard shot seem like a chip shot...

[roper]

338 lapua by sako or Accuracy International.   But who wants too hump it???

500 yards is not at all unusual I would think.  I have shot one at 425 and my brother has shot one at 575. With a 1200 yard rangefinder, no wind,a stationary target, and a mildot reticle or target knobs, a prone shot off a bipod should be a snap on a kill zone the size of basketball if you have your handy drop table. 

You can bitch about it all day as sniping, but we generally sit on high mountain saddles where we wait for the local boys to push the elk to us through the escape routes.  I usually hump a sleeping bag and a therma rest to stay cozy in.  It has put our party in the 50% kill ratio year after year.  I think that technique works just fine.  We shoot sako, weatherby and remington in 300 win mags with various 180 grain loads.

You are 100% correct.  You hunt to the conditions that will products.  I haven't hunted Moose but have taken a fair number of elk and I've always figured 3000fps plus with a 180gr 30 caliber bullet will have enough energy to take an elk out to 500yds plus.  I guess guys don't think we have some open country here in Colorado were you can get a 500yd plus shot at an elk.  We have alot of guys who hunt the timber but I like the open country to hunt elk in so you get rifles that will do the job.  Myself I think someone who want to use a 30-06 and shoot Moose or elk at 500yds may be alittle under gunned.  I'm having a new light 300Wby being build for the 200gr bullets should make a nice LR elk rifle.  My elk rifles are a factory 300Wby and 300RUM in the customs I have acouple 30-338Mag,300Mag and 300WSM and if I figured a 30-06 would do the job I'd of build one.  My style of elk hunting isn't for everyone first off it take alittle money to have a good rifle build and alot of practice.

[Thebear_78]

338 RUM comes to mind

[nasem]

cam69conv ~

Not trying to put you down or anything, but I beg to differ..... There is such thing as inherently accurate rounds.  There are plenty of articles out there that will explain to you how 2 exact rifles with the same exact material both shooting the same 308 diameter bullet and one will out-group the other by more than twice the accuracy (I am talking about bench resters who used 308 win vs 30-06).  The '06 folks were getting 12" groups at ranges of 600 yards while the 308 folks were getting just under half of that.

Take a look at the 6mm PPC, its considered the most "inherently" accurate short range round ever made.  There is A LOT of physics involved when designing a super accurate round... and Im on a mission to find out which

[Coyote Hunter]

nasem -

I think the question to be asked is not what is the most inherently accurate cartridge but rather how much accuracy do you want and which cartridges can meet that level of accuracy and still deliver the energy you want at that range.  Otherwise I'm going for a 30-pound .50 BMG with a 750 bullet to buck the wind.

A few weeks back my daughter's friend and I were shooting at ranges from 200 yards out to 600.  The .22-250 and .257 Roberts both hit clay pigeons at 500.   After a couple ranging rounds with the .22-250 (neither of us had ever shot that far before with bolt guns) we each took a couple shots and we both hit a pigeon. We repeated the scenaris with the .257 Roberts.

Next we took the conoe paddle Ruger .300 win Mag.  Both of us hit the steel gong on the first shot using the Burris Fullfield Ballistic Plex scope.

Then it was out to the 600-yard line.  One ranging shot missed the gong a tad high at 10:30 or 11:00.  I made an adjustment and hit the gong.  Told Zach where to aim and he hit the gong as well.  Inspection of the gong shoed we had both hit about 3" out at the 10:30 position forming a 2-shot "group".  Not bad for a factory stock rifle that has only had the trigger polished up.  (Or for my daughter's friend, who hadn't lifted a rifle in 4 years.)

The .300 Win Mag was what I got for the long shots, although my 7mm Rem Mag would probably have done just fine.

[RaySendero]

I have always thought of this topic.  What is the most “inherently” accurate round that is capable of taking down something as big as Moose or Elk at 500 yards.  I know many of us think a good-ole 30-06 with a premium 180 gr bullet is more than capable and I agree with that, but is the 30-06 most inherently accurate?  Doubt it….

I would like the answers to stay away from the super duper magnums, no 338 lapua or excaliber or anything of that sort.  I wanna keep the responses to the typical calibers, and at the most the RUM or the wby Magnums.

My opinion goes into many different directions and I have no idea what is best answer.  My caliber thoughts are 300 win mag, 7mm mag, 270, 280, 338 win mag and I think the 7mm mag is the most inherently accurate round of the once listed.

nasem,

Based on your list I would sort from accurate first: 270, 300WM, 280, 338WM and 7RM last with factory loads given varitions in factory chambers.  However, reloading and neck sizing the belted magnums would level the field as far as cartridges go.  So, if reloading is an option for you, then all of your list could be accurate enough and your left with the rifle accuracy plus the energy the cartridge can carry to 500 yards.

I've read where 1,500 Ft-Lb energy is recommended minimum for elk (like 1,000 is for deer).  Figure the 270 will be the lowest energy cartridge of your list - My 270 reload is HOT and will just make it at 1,520 at 500 yards.  Assume all others can be reloaded to carry 1,500 or more to 500 yards.  So this doesn't rule any on your list out - Even indicates a 30/06 could be included.

That leaves just THE RIFLE! Recommend this is where you should concentrate your efforts.



PS: Like jp says, This really borders on shooting - Not hunting!

[kyote]

but is the 30-06 most inherently accurate?  Doubt it….

you lost me there..are you saying you have not tried it,have not researched it???or that it is out of play here as it is not accurate enough to 500 yards to make a clean kill by some one that is proficient enough to make the shot?

and why a shot at 500 yards on one of those big noisy animals.if you could not close the distance on one of those big beast you should not be in the field hunting at all.now I am wondering if I can kill an elephant with my .17 remington and a solid bullet.

Don,,could the 222 rem make it that far with enough power??maybe if it were acklyized eh???

[acearch72]

read this article

http://www.lazzeroni.com/ct_lrs.htm

[kudzu]

Why limit yourself to 500 yards?  I mean nobody but a fool would shot at an Elk or Moose at 500 yards with a production magnum round.  But if you do not respect the game this might be your alley.  http://members.aol.com/fiftyguy/ptrd20mm.htm

That's your opinion, and it's worth just what I payed for it. NOTHING.

Why is it every time someone asks a question you get a bunch of stupid responces.
Most of these comes from the ones that just want to respond and don't have enough scense to make a halfway decent responce.

I believe that you can respect the game you are hunting and still take one at or up to 500yrds.
As for the gun. I used my Rem. Sendero 300RUM last month to take two elk. Both over 400 yrds, and both fell where the stood.  The load is 200gr. Accubonds over 92gr RL25. Zeroed at 300yrds and holds 1 1/4'' groups at this distance. At 400 it's 8'' low and 16'' low at 500.
It's also still packing close to 2600ft/lbs at 500 yrds.
To say that you are not much of a hunter if you can't get closer than 500 yards to your game is not correct either. Where we were at in Co., the range was wide open and on a 7 day hunt 500 yrds may be all you get.
Having said this ,there are some irrespossible hunters that shoot outside their capabillities. I know what my gun is doing out to 500 because I practice at these distances and if one does his homework 500 is very resonable with the right equipment.

DM

[RaySendero]

read this article

http://www.lazzeroni.com/ct_lrs.htm

Thx ace,
Enjoyed the read - He said it very well.

[Questor]

I agree with you dancoman. Practice is the key. 500 yards is reasonable as long as the shooter has the practice.

[nasem]

but is the 30-06 most inherently accurate?  Doubt it….

you lost me there..are you saying you have not tried it,have not researched it???or that it is out of play here as it is not accurate enough to 500 yards to make a clean kill by some one that is proficient enough to make the shot?

and why a shot at 500 yards on one of those big noisy animals.if you could not close the distance on one of those big beast you should not be in the field hunting at all.now I am wondering if I can kill an elephant with my .17 remington and a solid bullet.

Don,,could the 222 rem make it that far with enough power??maybe if it were acklyized eh???

I don't underestand why your getting confused about what I said..... the 30-06 is not the most inherently accurate round.... what other possible explanation would you want me to say?  and.... I never said anything about the 30-06 not being accurate enough for 500 yard shots... where are you getting that from?  What I was trying to get at was that I wanted to find out which rounds are "inherently" accurate... I have said this multiple times now....

You guys are confusing the purpose of this thread, I am trying to research the inherent potiential of multiple calibers to cleanly take out an elk size game at 500 yards....

[nasem]

Why is it every time someone asks a question you get a bunch of stupid responces.
Most of these comes from the ones that just want to respond and don't have enough scense to make a halfway decent responce.
DM

So true.....

[nasem]

Why limit yourself to 500 yards?  I mean nobody but a fool would shot at an Elk or Moose at 500 yards with a production magnum round.  But if you do not respect the game this might be your alley.  http://members.aol.com/fiftyguy/ptrd20mm.htm

I really really think your being sarcastic here.  Are you ?

[RaySendero]

.....
You guys are confusing the purpose of this thread, I am trying to research the inherent potiential of multiple calibers to cleanly take out an elk size game at 500 yards....

Well OK - I'll step out here.
Just don't think its about "the arrow" as much as its about "the bow" and "the Indian"!

[kudzu]

read this article

http://www.lazzeroni.com/ct_lrs.htm

 Just read, sounds like me and this guy would get along.
Finally, a responce with forthought

DM
 

[nomosendero]

Why is it every time someone asks a question you get a bunch of stupid responces.
Most of these comes from the ones that just want to respond and don't have enough scense to make a halfway decent responce.
DM

So true.....

Yes indeed!!!

These crazy crap responses just keep coming & always will.

What dancoman mentioned about the 300RUM & 200 Accubond is right on. I shoot a 300WM Sendero & with a 200Accubond at 3,050, it
is great as is a the other 300's & 338 rounds.

But to me the answer to this question is not that hard.  By the time a shooter puts in the serious trigger time to be very proficient at the yardage stated, then he will know which of the rounds he wants.

[skb2706]

If you truly want to know the answer.......it is doubtful that you have any business shooting anything that far.

Anyone who is qulaified to shoot at bg that far away will already know the answer to the question making this a stupid one.

[acearch72]

I have a friend that returned several months ago from a Marco Polo sheep hunt in one of the 'stans.  He shoots a Christensen Arms Carbon Fiber 300 Ultra Mag.  He took a ram that will be in the top 15 in the world record book at 750 yards.  He is comfortable with that shot.  I would not be, but that's not to say that he is wrong.  The question of what's the longest shot is just like the question of what's the best gun, it's all about what's good for each individual and what you are comfortable doing.

I would like to say that I would never have taken that 750yd shot, but after spending about $20k for the priviledge of climbing around those mountains at 16,000ft altitude for over 2 weeks and that's the closest that I could get, maybe I would have, and then I certainly would have been open for criticism because I would not have been comfortable with that range.  But my friend is totally comfortable with those ranges, so NO one should criticize him for his actions. 

[jpsmith1]

acearch72 , congrats to your friend.  Marco Polo sheep is a fine and rare trophy.  Quite a shot as well.

The Lazzeroni article is exactly right.  I've seen a lot of people who are mediocre shots at best that believe that once they got their hands on a 'magnum' rifle that they were good to 400 or more, JUST BECAUSE IT WAS A MAGNUM!  Crap!

The good ol '06 will do what you ask of it, if you know exactly how to ask it.  As will the .270, the .308, the 7mm, the various .300s and .338s.  The point is that YOU need to know exactly what the gun will do at what range.

You mentioned the 6mm PPC.  The 'experts' say that it is the 'most inherently accurate cartridge'.  How the heck do they know.  With a 36# beavy bench rifle, I'd bet that my .243 would shoot bugholes, heck, it's already a sub MOA rifle at 100 yards.  Inherent accuracy is nearly impossible to prove because there are too many variables involved.