180gr core lokt vs 165gr sst

[o_O]

Trying to choose a round for both elk and mule deer in Colorado. Theseare two recommended to me. Most everyone is sayiong go with the 180gr core lokt, yet the numbers suggest there is more veolcity and energy in the 165gr sst.

Are people just going with what appears to be common sense, ie bigger is better, or is the 180 the round to go with? If so why?

Code: Select all

Premier® Core-Lokt® Ultra 180gr
	Muzzle	100	200	300	400	500
fps	2700	2480	2270	2070	1882	1704
ft/lb	2913	2457	2059	1713	1415	1161
drop		2.1	zero	-8.9	-25.8	-52.7


Hornady 30-06 Sprg 165gr SST 81153	
	MUZZLE	100	200 	300 	400 	500 yds
fps	2960	2750	2549	2357	2173	1997
ft/lb	3209	2769	2380	2034	1729	1461
drop		1.6	0	-6.9	-20.1	-40.7

sorry cant get the table to line up :/

-Simon

[sneekeepete]

Purely off of personal preference here I would go with the 165 gr bullet. It is faster therfore will shoot flatter. It's not the size of the bullet it's the placement of the shot that counts.

[Springville Shooter]

Shoot the 165's. You don't need to pay the shoulder price for the bigger bullet on deer. SST bullets fly great and kill mule deer easily at these velocities.--------SS

[o_O]

165 on deer isn't the issue that most people have, but it's effectiveness on elk.

Less drop = greater accuracy so better shot placement. All this I hear time and time again too, but when I mentioned I'm trying some 165gr with the friends I'm hunting with they all start sucking their teeth and mumbling" good for deer, but elk? hummmmm". These friends of mine are DOW and have hunted for years and years so I'm inclined to go with what they say. But those numbers above tell a different story.

It seems the 165 is the online choice but face to face it's the 180 every time. I'm a noob but if the 180 is slower and has less energy at every distance (I'm not taking long range shots) and more drop why am I getting told to choose it over the 165?

[yak4fish]

I shot 180 gr core lokt's for years, killed 5 elk with them three dropped in there tracks two I had to do follow up shots. The follow up shots were most likely unneccesary but I don't like the animals I shoot to try to get up or stagger off more than 50 yards.
Switched to 165gr sst's when my son started hunting to hopefully lessen the recoil (I couldn't tell the differance) but he said he could feel a differance. He shot his cow elk at 300 yards and it dropped in its tracks.
Both rounds kill elk just fine, for now I will stick with the 165gr sst because it shoots flatter and seems to have more shock when it hits an animal in my opinion.

[ABert]

Being as I have no problem using 140gr rounds in my .270 for both deer and elk I imagine the 165gr's would do just fine. As has been said, its not the size of the bullet but where you put it.

On a side note, there's a guy that has been hunting with us for the last 7 or 9 years now who used to carry a .300 ultra mag shooting the biggest bullet he could fit in it. We all hunt with .270's and told him he was crazy. He believed us when he shot a small doe at about 20 yards. Hasn't carried that cannon since.

Seems he believed he needed something that big to put elk down. For some reason, there are some folks that think that if an animal doesn't drop in it's tracks then you are using to small of a gun/bullet. The ONLY shot I know of that will drop an animal in it's tracks, guaranteed, is a spine/neck shot. I've had more than a few heart shots over the years, some dropped, some didn't. As long as you can put a round in the boiler room, the animal WILL drop. Maybe not as quick as some like, though.

[killerbee]

i killed my 59" alakan moose with 165 gr swift A-frame bullets. i highly doubt there is an elk that they wont kill as well.

by a WELL CONSTRUCTED BULLET.

i would opt out of both of those options and buy a swift or barnsX tipped bullet( or a few other good bullets as well )

with a good bullet, theres not much i'd be afraid of not killing with a 165gr. bullet. AND i'd take a 165 gr quality bullet over a 180 gr junk bullet anyday.

[maintguy47]

(180grn junk bullet) Now that hurts my feelings. Been useing corelocs since they've been making them, never had a problem with em. That said, I've never taken more than a couple a critters a year with a rifle and never over 250 yrds. It is imo about shot placement more than anything else. These guys on this site know what there talking about as far as western hunting goes, go with the 165s and hit what your aiming at.

[m gardner]

The SST's are a very accurate bullet but not tough enough for elk. The Core Lokt Ultra's are. You need a bullet that will penetrate deeply. I'd go with Barnes Triple shocks in 168 grain myself. I shoot them in my 30-06 and 300 win mag.

[tsimp121]

I don't want to sound like I am beating a dead horse here, but either round will do just fine. The core-lokt bullets have been around a long time, I would say that it is tried and true. The SST's will do just as good. Shot placement is more important than bullet weight all day long. You won't be dissapointed with either one. If you want my honest opinion, buy both boxes and see which bullet your rifle and your shoulder prefer. That would be the bullet I would chose.