44 Magnum Rifle for Elk?

[LeverGunner]

I saw this thread a while back where a guy takes an elk with a 357 Magnum Rifle. Well that sparked all kinds of discussion, including here on castboolits, where folks say he's not ethical, or that 357 Magnum isn't large enough.

Now I don't want to go into that, but I want to know what's everyone's opinion of the 44 Magnum.

Is the 44 Magnum in a rifle enough for elk?

Either 270 grain bullets such as my Ranch Dog TLC432-265-RF or the Lee C430-310-RF?

It should go without saying, but shots would be limited to iron sight range of about 150 yards or less, and probably closer to 75 yards.

[jkbrea]

All about placement but yes. A .44 mag with right bullet will work.

[GunnyMack]

I knew a guy that shot an elk with a 30 carbine. WAY under gunned but it worked. Heck a 22lr will kill an elk, gotta get the bullet into the good stuff... I know a guy who did it.
Within the 44s effective range, under 150 yards I wouldn't have any issues.
Colorado law says 243/6mm is minimum bullet diameter for elk, no speed or energy specs just diameter ( or that's what it was ).
I'd say the 444 would make an awesome elk rifle.

[stretch]

I'd say the 444 would make an awesome elk rifle.

Oh yeah, it would.

-Stretch

[Scott Tschirhart]

Doug Wesson did just fine with a .357 revolver.

Many elk and similar sized game (and some much bigger and tougher animals) have been taken with.44 magnum revolvers.

I see no reason why a .44 magnum carbine would not do the job.

[Ray]

Deleted.

[JimT]

I used my .41 Magnum to take an elk. It worked just fine. The .44 rifle has more than the .41 sixgun. But like anything, bullet placement is key.

DSC06668.JPG

[AJMD429]

.
In importance (in my opinion), Shot Placement (gotta hit the CNS on a big critter) > Bullet Construction (gotta get TO the CNS on a big critter) > Bullet Weight (gotta mess up the CNS when it gets there).

Since placement depends on trajectory and distance estimation, the flatter/faster rounds have an edge, plus deliver more energy for a given diameter.

But just looking at real-world data I'm sure elk have been killed with spears, rocks, and all sorts of things less powerful than today's bows and guns.

Probably MANY muzzleloaders and 30-30's...

With a good hard-cast or solid bullet, and a rifle I could hit a tennis ball with at my hunting range, I'd not feel under-gunned.

However, as a lifelong fan of the 444 Marlin, I have to say I think that if a 44 Magnum is good, a 444 Marlin is gonna be mo-betta...

[Grizz]

I agree about the 44 assessments. BUT i think there should be a serious ballistic comparison of the impact velocity of a 44 carbine load at 150 yards. I agree that the 444 is a better idea, energy wise, at that range. It should be close to the muzzle energy of the same load from a hand gun, more or less. We used a 44 revolver and carbine for the majority of our harvest. The carbine load was white-box 240 Gr JSP. It's a deer hammer. It was perfect for our location, and i would have shot a moose or elk with the same setup, if it wandered into my zone. [there were none anywhere near our happy hunting grounds]

I can't remember any 100 yard shots, even with the scoped 338, except for rocks across an anchorage.

Exquisite perfect shots happen some times. But there can be exceptions, and distance exacerbates them. My tendency is to look at the momentum and impact velocity of my load over the range of expected distances. I passed up a LOT of dodgy shots because there was so many animals around to eat.

[earlmck]

I've shot a couple elk with 44 mag revolver. 280 grain hard cast RFP. Neither got full penetration on pretty much broad-side shots, so If I were to do it again I'd go to a heavier bullet yet, 320 grains maybe. Because sometimes you gotta' follow the critter a ways through thick stuff before they lay down for good and I sure like to have blood leaking out both sides when that happens. First revolver elk shot went down within 10 yards on a big open hillside so no issue. Second elk took off like striped-butt ape and made it 200 yards in thick stuff without having a single drop of blood get to the ground through the thick hair and I was really stressing for a bit there before I found it nicely piled up dead as a nit.

44 definitely will do the job but I'd opt for heavy bullet to get an exit wound.

[Grizz]

I've shot a couple elk with 44 mag revolver. 280 grain hard cast RFP. Neither got full penetration on pretty much broad-side shots, so If I were to do it again I'd go to a heavier bullet yet, 320 grains maybe. Because sometimes you gotta' follow the critter a ways through thick stuff before they lay down for good and I sure like to have blood leaking out both sides when that happens. First revolver elk shot went down within 10 yards on a big open hillside so no issue. Second elk took off like striped-butt ape and made it 200 yards in thick stuff without having a single drop of blood get to the ground through the thick hair and I was really stressing for a bit there before I found it nicely piled up dead as a nit.

44 definitely will do the job but I'd opt for heavy bullet to get an exit wound.

I agree about the heavier bullets. On the runner, was it a heart shot? Every deer that ran had a blown up heart . . .

[samsi]

20-some years ago I knew a fellow who dropped a huge bull elk at around 60 yards with 94 Trapper in 45 Colt using a standard pressure load. If the Colt can do it the .44 should as well.

[Scott Tschirhart]

I can’t believe that the elk I have seen are any tougher than a full sized cow.

I drove this 270 gr bullet at .45 Colt standard velocity through a cow.

[44shooter]

Personally I would keep it under 100 yards but otherwise I think you are good to go assuming good shot placement. I put the Federal 300 gr hard cast load the long way through a whitetail.

[LeverGunner]

Very interesting replies, thank you all.

I am not in a position to hunt elk yet, but I want to be when it comes time.

[earlmck]

I've shot a couple elk with 44 mag revolver. 280 grain hard cast RFP. Neither got full penetration on pretty much broad-side shots, so If I were to do it again I'd go to a heavier bullet yet, 320 grains maybe. Because sometimes you gotta' follow the critter a ways through thick stuff before they lay down for good and I sure like to have blood leaking out both sides when that happens. First revolver elk shot went down within 10 yards on a big open hillside so no issue. Second elk took off like striped-butt ape and made it 200 yards in thick stuff without having a single drop of blood get to the ground through the thick hair and I was really stressing for a bit there before I found it nicely piled up dead as a nit.

44 definitely will do the job but I'd opt for heavy bullet to get an exit wound.

I agree about the heavier bullets. On the runner, was it a heart shot? Every deer that ran had a blown up heart . . .

A good solid lung shot. Ran back into a herd so lots of tracks and I was not sure I was on the track of "my elk". Caused the serious concern for a bit.

[earlmck]

I can’t believe that the elk I have seen are any tougher than a full sized cow.

I drove this 270 gr bullet at .45 Colt standard velocity through a cow.

Well I wouldn't have thought so either Scott but maybe elk are tougher than cows. Twice my 280 grain 44 at well above standard velocity didn't make it clear through the elk. Water dropped wheelweight metal so I doubt it expanded much. One of 'em made it to the far side of the elk but not clear through; the other must have stayed in the lungs and came out with the gutting.

[Pisgah]

Given that so many elk have fallen to .44 and .45 handguns, I have little concern with a good hunter who uses a rifle...

[JimT]

I can’t believe that the elk I have seen are any tougher than a full sized cow.

I drove this 270 gr bullet at .45 Colt standard velocity through a cow.

Well I wouldn't have thought so either Scott but maybe elk are tougher than cows. Twice my 280 grain 44 at well above standard velocity didn't make it clear through the elk. Water dropped wheelweight metal so I doubt it expanded much. One of 'em made it to the far side of the elk but not clear through; the other must have stayed in the lungs and came out with the gutting.

Big bones will radically slow down or stop bullets. When we were raising our own beef I used the leg bones at times to test bullets and it was amazing how they often tore bullets apart.

On the cow elk that I shot, the bullet was the 210 gr. XTP @ 1450 fps. It went through the elk and stopped under the hide on the far side. I slit the hide and popped the bullet out. It hardly lost any weight. I did not hit any large bones with it.

210 gr. XTP.JPG

[Grizz]

I'd like to find a dead cow sometime so I could do a real-world penetration test. The only 320gr 44 bullet that didn't exit was a front on head shot where the bullet tracked along the spine and chopped up a couple of vertebrae. That one was dead before it hit the ground.

I hated the bullets that stayed inside. My 7mm did that. Maybe the 338 did as well. I reasoned that those were not good loads for a bear stopper. Almost anything will kill a deer. They are more or less built like us. This is how I wound up with 45/70/525 and 405gr bullets in the redhawk. But by that time my kids were bringing home the venison and I was relegated to tying fishing gear and chopping fire wood, so i don't have many data points.

The 525gr did make a nice round hole thru the pelvis of a deer son dropped with the guide gun. It was down but struggled to get up and he anchored it with the only shot he had. No fragments or shattered bone, just a clean round hole on the way out to sea. The "eat up to the hole" saying held for that one.

my guess is that it's a lack of momentum that fails to drive a bullet thru, but i would still like to find a volunteer cadaver, or some slow hogs LOL

[Bearskinner]

I used my .41 Magnum to take an elk. It worked just fine. The .44 rifle has more than the .41 sixgun. But like anything, bullet placement is key.

DSC06668.JPG

I used my 41 (revolver) for Elk this last year as well, no problems at all. The added velocity of a rifle will let the bullet carry better at range. I would not discount a 44, unless in Un skilled hands. As always, a hit with a 22 is better than a clear miss with a howitzer.

[JB]

Bullet placement and distance to target makes all the difference. I've seen a number of black bears killed with 22 magnums. I wouldn't call the 22 magnum a bear cartridge, but a shot to the head while the bear is treed by dogs always seemed to do the job.

[wvfarrier]

44 mag in a revolver has killed just about everything that walks the Earth...from.a rifle it is even better

[Grizz]

44 mag in a revolver has killed just about everything that walks the Earth...from.a rifle it is even better

I know two people that stopped charging grizzlys with the 'regular standard' 44 mag load, 240Gr white box i think.
I know of one more with a 44 handgun. and i know someone who stopped a downhill charge after putting (4) 7mm rounds in it. the bear knocked him and out, and he woke up near to a dead bear that had rolled over him.

I also know of three people killed and eaten by brownies, one of whom I was acquainted with. With regard to the 44 Mag, context and experience is everything. Sometimes the gun can do what I can't. :|

[Bill in Oregon]

Just really enjoying this thread, and imagining getting to shoot and hunt again. Not in a position to do either right now, so I have to get the joy of it vicariously. Thanks to all who have posted.

[LeverGunner]

44 mag in a revolver has killed just about everything that walks the Earth...from.a rifle it is even better

I know two people that stopped charging grizzlys with the 'regular standard' 44 mag load, 240Gr white box i think.
I know of one more with a 44 handgun. and i know someone who stopped a downhill charge after putting (4) 7mm rounds in it. the bear knocked him and out, and he woke up near to a dead bear that had rolled over him.

I also know of three people killed and eaten by brownies, one of whom I was acquainted with. With regard to the 44 Mag, context and experience is everything. Sometimes the gun can do what I can't.

Wow!

[LeverGunner]

Just really enjoying this thread, and imagining getting to shoot and hunt again. Not in a position to do either right now, so I have to get the joy of it vicariously. Thanks to all who have posted.

Sorry to hear it.

[Jeffrey A Pitts]

I've taken over two dozen big Roosevelt bulls with .44s in both rifles, revolvers, and T/Cs. Almost always with one shot using cast bullets in every case but one. That one - my first - was killed with a Remington 240 grain flat nose - the only one I ever recovered, and the only factory load I used. Except for one, every shot taken was under a hundred yards. The one longer was at about 125 yards and died the fastest of any game animal I've killed, literally dropping at the shot.

[Scott Tschirhart]

20-some years ago I knew a fellow who dropped a huge bull elk at around 60 yards with 94 Trapper in 45 Colt using a standard pressure load. If the Colt can do it the .44 should as well.

I would not hesitate to shoot an elk within reasonable range with my Marlin Cowboy and that 270-SAA bullet at standard velocity.

[LeverGunner]

Thanks all, now I guess I'll be dreaming of elk hunting with my Winchester 92.

[mickbr]

As we always say anything can be killed with about anything, but I dont think 44 needs that marginal sort of caveat here. I think its power level from a rifle is fine for game that size, a legitmate option.

[COSteve]

One must check the hunting laws in the state before selecting a platform as they vary. In Colorado it's illegal to use a .44 mag to hunt deer and larger as the caliber doesn't have sufficient muzzle energy at 100 yds to conform to state law. Here the bullet must be at least a .26 caliber and must produce 1,000 ft/lbs of energy at 100 yds to be legal.