A Bullet’s Killing Power — P2

We often hear of a rifle’s killing power, or a “stopping rifle”. While we understand the intent of such expressions, we know that a rifle does none of those things. Of course, it’s the bullet that kills, wounds, stops or even misses the game animal. The rifle is built to fire the bullet that is intended to kill or stop said creature. Depending on the expected target, we choose a rifle that will fire a suitable projectile. If it’s a big, tough and potentially dangerous beast, we want a rifle commensurate for the job, and that means rifles chambered for cartridges capable of handling bullets of appropriate construction, caliber and shape. (Left click on photos for a better view.)

We’ve already had a couple thousand words regarding construction — no doubt a million words wouldn’t suffice for some folk. For others, a couple hundred might be too much. The point being that bullet construction will continue to be debated into the foreseeable future, as it has in the past, as to what is best for a particular hunting task. But, in my way of thinking, we have the best choices today than we’ve ever had in bygone days.

Next:

CALIBER

That’s the size of the hole in your barrel, sometimes designated by hundreds of an inch, or thousands, or even fractions. That originated with the British, then was adopted by those of the British colonies, and the Americans. Others of European influence use the metric system — i.e. millimetres or mm. The larger the hole in your barrel means the bullet will be larger and usually heavier. That in turn should mean a larger permanent wound channel, all other things equal.

The weight of the bullet in relation to its caliber determines its sectional density, and has a specific influence on its ballistic coefficient and penetration. Caliber is measured in the grooves at 180 degrees from facing grooves. Hence, a .308″ caliber shoots a bullet of .308-inch diameter so that the lands of the rifling will cut into the surface of the bullet for stability as it rotates down the bore, spinning like a top — the purpose of the rifling twist-rate. Of course, we already know all that, right? But the rate of twist is very important in using heavy-for-caliber projectiles that may tend to be overly long in today’s world of monolithic bullets. Ergo: the twist rate must be capable of stabilizing a long – heavy bullet. That may mean a faster rate than normally found in a factory rifle.

And, to emphasize, once again, this site is primarily about Big Bores that fire big bullets!

Big Bores, in general today, are considered to be .40-caliber plus. So in the consideration of suitable bullets for big, large and dangerous game, we are thinking heavy, wide and well constructed bullets.

As per our last blog (P1) on this theme: construction should not be taken for granted, but suited to the task! After that comes bullet weight.

In deciding on caliber we need first to know what cartridges are available in that caliber. A .35 Remington is in no way comparable in ballistics to a .358 Norma Magnum, for example. The .35 Remington holds a maximum of about 42 grains of a medium powder under a 200 grain, and grants an MV of around 2100 fps/1958 ft-lbs, whereas the .358 Norma Magnum will use about 75 grains of a slower powder to propel the same bullet at 2900 fps/3734 ft-lbs; almost twice the powder consumed for nearly twice the energy!

So it’s obvious that we should be considering the cartridge as well as the caliber, if we’re thinking big dangerous stuff! In some cases in Africa, for instance, a .375-cal is minimum for DG. But also joules are a consideration. A .375 Winchester producing about 2000 ft-lbs at the muzzle = 2830 joules (500 joules = 386.78 ft-lbs). Most big and dangerous game in Africa require over 4000 joules to qualify. So a .375 Winchester is not the same thing as a .375 H&H that easily makes 6000 joules. The 9.3 x 62 and 9.3 x 74R are legal in many African countries for large and dangerous game. My 9.3 x 62 can make up to 5960 joules. So the cartridge is at least as important as the caliber, and in some cases (pun unavoidable) more so.

The important thing is that there are plenty of excellent component bullets for the handloader that are available from several sources to fulfil both requirements and expectations in hunting large and dangerous game while using medium and large bores.

SHAPE (profile)

While a bullet’s weight and caliber determines its sectional density (SD), it’s construction, weight, caliber and profile determines its ballistic coefficient (BC).

For instance: a bullet fully constructed of copper will be longer than one fully made of lead, or lead and copper, if the weight, caliber and BC are the same. (The pic on the left has two 350gr/.458″ bullets side by side near the center. On the right is the 350 TSX and on its left is a 350gr Hornady. Note their contrast in length.) The obvious reason being that lead is more dense (heavier) than copper, or copper alloy. So it takes more “space” in the cartridge case in using a monolithic bullet of copper (or copper alloy) than it does for one that does the same thing in ballistics if most of its weight is lead. There are exceptions to that general rule which is explained in the following paragraphs.

There are advantages and some disadvantages to each depending on intention. For example, I’ll not use the Barnes TSX’s in my 9.3 x 62 because  their length takes up room in the cartridge that should be reserved for powder, if COL is nominal as in bolt-action rifles. One the other hand, the Noslers of the same weight have much better BCs and are shorter, allowing more of the best component powders to be used.

Still, the bullets favored (in general) for my .458 Win Mag are the 300, 350 and 450 TSX’s. Because of the long “freebore”, I can seat them out as far as the grooves in the bullets’ shank allows — that is the bottom groove, or cannelure, which takes no more space from the case than any component bullet made of pure lead or copper and lead — they all are seated to the same depth in the case making the COL longer for some than others.

So, if you get the gist of matters here, a bullets’ shape, or profile, may not only affect its BC (downrange punch) but how much of the best powder may be useful. If it’s too long, it will not allow the desired or expected MV, which will determine downrange efficiency, even though the BC may be superior to another of the same weight.

Another example: Several competing companies are now producing LR bullets (LR = long range). Not only are they intended for long-range shooting of game, but they are LONG! Keep that in mind if you load them, thinking they would be best in shooting game at, say, 450 yards.  They might have a higher BC, but if you loose 150 fps in MV due to cramped space in the cartridge, because of an action that is “standard” for the cartridge, your “streamlined” bullet may be no better than another of a more normal profile for the same thing, and possibly less so! Do a ballistic profile.

Construction and caliber are significant bullet entities, but, depending on possible diverse ranges in the same hunt, so is the aerodynamics of your projectile.

The majority of my big game hunts have imposed ranges of less than 200 yards, but not all. In previous blogs I’ve described several moose hunts in the north of our province where potential distances could range between less than a dozen yards to well beyond 600. The rifle and bullet was always the main concern. “Rifle” meaning cartridge. On my first trip, I was not fully aware of the physical context, except we would be hunting from a lodge on a lake about 5 – 6 hours from home. I took a .338 Win Mag and a .45-70 as backup. The .338 got to see most of the country that consisted of very variable terrain from high ridges to small lakes, streams, marshes and bogs. And all of it (other than the lakes, streams, marshes and bogs) heavily wooded. I recall sitting in a tangle of thick bush about 2 to 3 feet high for one morning in a likely spot on the edge of the finger of a small lake, watching for moose on the far side. Range could have been very variable. Directly across was approximately 250 yards, but to my right was more like 1/4 mile. I was loaded with 250gr Sierra BTs at a tad under 2700 fps. They had a thick jacket of 0.050″ in the base and shank, and 0.026″ at the mouth, with a BC of .587 above 2300 fps. Recommended hunting ranges = 100 to 600 yards. I figured there wasn’t much that could be added to that to improve matters for such a hunt — and I was probably right at that time… except for one miserable “fly” in the perfume! That being the weather! It rained… I mean constantly for three days and the two-piece walnut stock on my beloved Sako Carbine, soaked it in! I had to dismantle the stock from the rifle each evening for a dry-out, then reassemble it early the next morning! Did I really know where the poi would be after that? No, not really.

Everything can be perfect, even the bullet… But the weather can spoil those beautiful handloads and the equipment that shoots them! Nonetheless, I continued to be optimistic that given a chance, I made the right ballistic choice.

Let’s see the ballistic potential of that load compared to a 250gr RN:

Cartridge: .338 Win Mag

Bullet: 250gr RN Hornady (some might choose it thinking it better for moose)

BC = .291

MV = 2700 fps/4046 ft-lbs ( Traj. = -1.6″)

100 = 2400 fps/3197 ft-lbs (Traj. = +3.0″)

200 = 2120 fps/2495 ft-lbs (Traj. = +1.57″) zero @ 226 yds.

300 = 1860 fps/1920 ft-lbs (Traj. = -7.59″)

400 = 1630 fps/1475 ft-lbs (Traj. = -26.74″)

Comments: Had I decided on this bullet for my moose hunt, I’m sure it would have been a good choice to about 300 yards, and that’s farther than most moose are taken. But what if a big bull moose had peaked its head out on my right side at 400 yards? Well, it was a bolt-action loaded with four… that may have worked, but there are too many doubts. Would the bullet have expanded? And trajectory? And what if the first shot allowed it to get into the lake? And…

Hornady does make a much better 250gr for a context such as I’ve described – a 250gr Interloc SP-RP with a BC of .431. Personally, I’d have no reasons against using it, except the Sierra had a heavier jacket and much better BC.(The 250 Sierra is 3rd from left and the Hornady is seventh.)

But what about the load I did choose?

Bullet: 250gr Sierra BT

BC = .587

MV = 2700/4046 ft-lbs (Traj. = -1.60″)

100 = 2545/3595 ft-lbs (Traj. = +3.0″)

200 = 2395/3184 ft-lbs (Traj. = +2.25″) zero @ 245 yds.)

300 = 2252/2815 ft-lbs (Traj. = -4.51″)

400 = 2113/2478 ft-lbs (Traj. = -18.03″)

Comments: Whatever our thoughts might be about kinetic energy at impact, there’s no question in my mind that it is a factor — perhaps not as much as generally believed, but 2478 ft-lbs of KE is a real factor, and 1003 ft-lbs more than the 250gr RN at 400 yds can’t be ignored.

(From where I took this photo, it’s about 400 yds  to  the opposite shore line at about 3/4s the distance from the left edge to the right edge of the pic.)

Bullet SHAPE (profile) undeniably matters!

Til the next,

Shalom

BOB MITCHELL

A Bullet’s Killing Power — P1

Many have written on this theme; some being perhaps too scientific, others still being too simplistic for the intellectuals, and a few approaching this matter purely from a practical slant of “Does it work?”. Those of a scientific bent want the questions of “Why does it work?” and “How” to have priority.

I’ve already written a few blogs on this issue in the past. But new products in cartridges and bullets keep appearing in the market place, so updates and comparisons with those that have some history is inevitable.

Since this is a site for discussion of big-bore rifles and what we feed ’em, I’ll not go down “the broad road” of never ending discussion of small to sub-medium rifle cartridges that fill the pages of most hunting-shooting magazines and forums. The majority of readers, and others who want a discussion (ad nauseam) of the latest and “best” in 6.5mm, walk there.

It’s not that I’ve never had interest or investment in calibers and rifles from .223 to .308. As a matter of actual fact, I’ve owned and used (aside from several .22 LRs) a .22 Hornet, a couple of .223 Remingtons, a .25-06 (which I liked), three 6.5s, a .270 Win, five 7mms (including three magnums), three .30-06s and eight .300 magnums. And I handloaded all of those, except two that I recall — a 7×57 and one of the .30-06’s. Plus, I made handloads for a friend’s .308 Winchester.

Yes, I know that’s peanuts compared to those who own ten of each!

But I simply wanted to point out that I’ve never owned rifles that collected dust in a safe or cabinet.

For the last quarter century (or more) I’ve chosen to walk the “narrow road” of Big Bores and Mediums, with far fewer companions. I write my interests and experience, and there are those who seem to appreciate that, so I’m not alone or lonely in that regard.

Some who have experience with Mediums and Big Bores may tend to return to memories of the past as they age. If most of their experience has been with sub-mediums and small bores, then that broad path is where they continue to walk.

There’s nothing there that ignites my passion — except possibly a .300 magnum. That’s not to demean those who do, but whenever I go on a forum for an interesting discussion of hunting, shooting, reloading or cartridges and rifles, intuitively it’s on the Big Bore or Medium sections, and the animals suited to their application. Historically, I’ve written much about that so will not go into further detail here.

In the end-game, however, it’s the bullet fired by such rifles that determines ultimate results in the field. In that regard, there are five important factors involved:

1> Construction

2> Shape

3> Caliber

4> Weight (SD)

5> Impact velocity

Let’s deal with those in order without suggesting any priority. Yes, construction is vitally important, but a pretty bullet sitting in a box isn’t going anywhere! Similarly, impact velocity is also very significant, but without the other factors it’s meaningless — nothing could be calculated. So…

CONSTRUCTION:

If you’ve done much research or general reading on this topic, you already know that ongoing research by bullet manufacturers is indicative of their attempt to continually improve their products. Can you imagine the thoughts and feelings of a bullet manufacturer, that promotes their product as the ultimate projectile for any and all dangerous game, when a client using their DG bullets got stomped, gored, clawed or chewed by a ferocious beast that was only angered by those DG projectiles “guaranteed” to finish the job if the hunter put them where intended!

And that happens — even with today’s “wonder bullets”!

Just yesterday I was reading a thread on a well-known forum where a hunter was asking what would be the best bullet for a Kodiak bear from his .458 Winchester Magnum. And he wanted advice from those who had experience.

Guess what? Perhaps the best well-known guide/outfitter who is a terrific communicator and writer chimed in! None other than Phil Shoemaker! Phil had recently returned from a successful safari in Africa in which he used Ol’Ugly (.458 Win Mag) on Cape buffalo. Also, he’d finished off a wounded brown bear  a couple of weeks AFTER his initial responses to the question cited above, using Ol’Ugly again that somewhat altered his first recommendations. What bullets? And what recommendations? When Phil speaks (or writes) the rest of us sit up and pay attention! But even he admitted, in so many words, that he’d made a mistake in the choice of bullets he used to finish off the wounded brown bear. Among others, he recommended the bonded 500gr Woodleigh. Because he had a stash of those, that is what he used on the wounded brown bear. After that experience he no longer recommends that bullet for brown bear because it took four shots to finish the job! They expanded too much and too quickly, so didn’t penetrate adequately. (I must add at this point that after viewing that bullet many times from pics on an internet forum that had been tested in media, I’d be very hesitant to put much confidence in it due to its expanded shape. While it retained most of its weight, it looked like a flattened fan with “wings” in all directions and practically no shank left! I didn’t think it would adequately penetrate — and Phil has confirmed that.)

Now there’s a man, among men, who is honest and straightforward in giving advice of “what works”, and what doesn’t. Ultimately, however, he had to learn all that from personal experience, which trumps theory or commercials.

While I’ve never hunted grizzly or brown bear, I’ve invested thousands of hours and hundreds of days and nearly sixty months in the pursuit of blacks, involving twenty-eight years and over thirty seasons. And I too had to learn what works best on black bears from both testing bullets in media as well as in the actual shooting of bruins, especially in the use of .458 projectiles. There are .458-cal bullets made for deer and others manufactured for elephant. That involves a very broad range of  expectations from the same diameter bullets. Then, to further complicate matters, not all 300gr/.458-cal bullets are created equal, nor are 500-grainers! The 300gr Barnes TSX is a much tougher bullet than Hornady’s 300gr HP, with a BC of .234 compared to an advertised .197 BC for the Hornady — which is dubious! Why? Because Hornady ONLY claims a BC of .195 for their 350gr FP !!! I can’t get my head around that one!

<(The 350 TSX on far right and the 500 Speer on far left. In the middle is the remains of a core-less 350 Hornady FP)

And, as another matter of actual fact, there is at least one 350gr that will out-penetrate a particular 500gr while retaining 100 % of its unfired weight, while the 500gr held onto only 310 grains being stopped by the test media after only 6.5 inches of penetration! The 350, on the other hand, completely penetrated the 15.5″ of tough media, stopping against the final cardboard panel looking like an advertisement for that brand. The 350 was the 350gr TSX, and the 500 was the 500gr Speer Grand Slam that Terry Wieland pronounced a “good bullet” for African fauna of the large and dangerous variety, based on his tests in wet newsprint!

Phil, by the way, now recommends Barnes TSX, Hornady’s 500gr DGX (expanding), which he recently used on Cape buffalo, and Nosler’s 500gr Partition — expanding bullets only for bear. While he didn’t specify the weight of the TSX’s, he suggested a good 350gr should work well.

The problem with the 500gr TSX is that it’s too long and might loose it’s stability in flesh and bone. Plus, unless you have a long action where it can be seated “long”, it’s very challenging to get enough powder into the case to push it fast enough for expansion and stability in the tough muscles and bone of large game — even for the Lott!  I could push it to 2300 fps from my Ruger, but have already invested in the 450gr TSX thinking that it’s a better overall bullet in being significantly shorter, and being able to push it at up to 2400 fps from my rifle, employing AA2230 gun powder.

<(Those are loaded 450gr TSX’s)

So, my personal recommendation in .458-caliber for anything dangerous on this N.A. Continent would be the 350gr TSX at 2650 to 2750 fps. The 450gr TSX has a better SD and BC, so at 2300 to 2400 fps, it will hit harder but produce more recoil and a less flat trajectory. Either should work to 400 yards or so, depending on actual MV. They are promoted to give some expansion down to about 1600 fps. Of course, that is theory and it would remain to be seen if it works out that way. I shot a bear with the 350 TSX from my CZ 550 in .458 WM. MV was about 2750 fps, impact was around 2500 fps or so, but I don’t think the bullet expanded from a frontal shot on a medium bear. But the bullet never hit bone, making exit in the right-side flank. The bear ran a ways before making up its mind that it was dead. For a larger bear it should work very well, especially if it hits bone. I know Phil used the 400gr X-Bullet for some time on large game and it became his favorite. Unfortunately a 400gr TSX is unavailable. I think it would be the finest all-around bullet for big game if Barnes would make them. In lieu of that, one could make good use of the 350 TSX, or perhaps the 450 TSX.

Another bullet that shoots well in my Ruger #1 Tropical is the 450gr Swift AF (On far right of pic). Using H335, I’ve no trouble pushing it out the muzzle at +2400 fps/5900 ft-lbs. It’s copper and pure lead, so they tell us, with a partition, and the front core is bonded to the jacket. It has an excellent reputation, holding on to 90 to 95% of initial weight while penetration is very good, though perhaps not as good as the TSX of the same weight and application. The cause being that the TSX has gaps between its petals, so slows in flesh less quickly. In any case, I’d not hesitate in choosing either of those two for soft-skinned large game, as well as for bears, lion and leopard (big cats). Of course, recoil will be more severe than in making use of the 350 TSX by a factor of about 18% if each is driven at max velocity. And max velocity, or close thereto, is essential for confidence of good expansion for the TSX’s in particular. They are tough bullets.

An additional bullet that impresses me in .458-caliber is the Hornady 480gr DGX. I chose the 480gr over the 500gr for my Ruger #1 in .45-70 LT. In testing it from my Ruger in tough media (when the 350 TSX and 500gr Speer were also tested, plus several others — of which I gave a full report in late 2017) at a reduced MV to simulate impact on large game at about 100 yards, it completely penetrated everything, impacting a ledge of rock behind the test setup, leaving the clear imprint of a non-expanded bullet of .458″. That WAS impressive compared to some of the others! Hornady has since bonded the hard lead core to the steel jacket — which has a copper coating to protect the rifle’s barrel. With a flat meplat of about 1/4″, it will do severe damage even if it should not expand at a low impact velocity of about 1200 fps. And, I’d expect, at that impact speed, for it to completely penetrate a big whitetail (350 – 400 lbs?) from stem to stern, or visa-versa! Or a big bull moose completely through the shoulders!

Those are a few examples of bullet construction. And companies are now paying more attention to the structure of a bullet to ensure that they accomplish what the hunter expects while giving a sense of security in facing down dangerous game.

Most bullet manufacturers are now producing monolithic bullets — either all copper or copper alloys. Some specialize in bonded bullets (lead core bonded to a copper jacket or copper alloy jacket). It’s obviously essential, I believe, that we need to know before the fact that a bullet intended for large or dangerous game will expand while holding onto most of its weight, and penetrate not merely to vitals, but cause destruction in the process. Bullet construction, more that anything else, is the determining factor.

Next: bullet Profile and Caliber.

Shalom

BOB MITCHELL

The .458 Winchester Magnum — Update

Since the purchase of the Ruger No.1 in .458 Win Mag “Tropical” in August of 2018, I’ve been testing a variety of bullets and loads. This is a report on that activity and an evaluation of the same.

From mid October, 2018, to sometime in April, 2019, I didn’t visit our range due to winter weather conditions arriving somewhat early in late October to early November and lasting into mid April of this year. I did some shooting in late August and September of 2018, and carried the rifle into a remote hunting area in early October. That was it for 2018. In the meanwhile I purchased some additional bullets and made plans for loads to start the 2019 spring season as soon as possible. I’ve reported some of that activity on the Accurate Reloading Forum, BIG BORES, .458 Winchester Magnum thread.

Generally speaking, that involved becoming more familiar with the Ruger No.1 Tropical in .458 Winchester Magnum in shooting handloads of component bullets in 500gr, 480gr, 450gr, 400gr, 350gr and 300gr. In addition, I did some limited shooting of handloaded 470gr hardcasts and the 330gr Barnes Banded brass solids.

But due to an impending cataract surgery in May of this year, I quit shooting for a few weeks prior to that event; and I didn’t pursue shooting again for three weeks after surgery. I also purchased a Lead Sled that would nullify most felt recoil. Thereafter, I never shot anything like 15 to 20 rounds in a single sitting. I did take my CZ 455 (.22LR) along for more trigger time and practice.

I wanted to see if the 24″ ported barrel of the Ruger #1 in .458 could match the 25″ of the former CZ550 in MV and accuracy. For some loads I had to increase the powder charge by 1-grain; the 350 TSX as an example of that at 2760 fps. For the 500s there didn’t seem to be much loss, if any at all.

In seating all bullets as long as possible, while still having enough in the case for a solid grip on the bullets, which I’d also done for loads used in the CZ550 with its 3.8″ long action, I found that I could attain, and in some cases surpass, 2300 fps from the 500gr Hornady RN and the 500gr Speer GS.

*Here’s a list of the bullets tried this year (2019):

500gr Hornady RN Interloc

500gr Speer Grand Slam

480gr Hornady DGX — at 2353 fps (Hodgdon 4895)

470gr hardcast – at 2075 (RL-15) – not max

450gr TSX — at 2385 fps (Hodgdon 4895)

450gr Swift AF — at 2414 fps (H335)

405gr Remington — at 2085 fps (RL-15) – not max

400 Barnes X — at 2590 fps (H4198)

350gr TSX — at 2760 fps (H4198)

350gr Hornady FP — at 2510 fps (H4198) – not max

330gr Barnes Banded — at 2607 fps (H4198) – not max

300gr TSX — at 2980 fps (H4198) max

300gr TSX — at 2752 fps (H4198) – not max for hunting

*Most of the above was given previously, but for those who have not seen it, I provide it again.

My 1-lb can of AA2230 is comparatively “old”, having purchased it in 2010, so didn’t see much use prior to selling the CZ550 the following year. And I’ve been recently informed that the current manufacturer of that propellant is a different source, and it has been somewhat improved. My can, which is still about 70% unused and nearly a decade old came a bit short in MV compared to some of my old standbys, H4895 in particular, which was a recent purchase.

There were basically two gun powders that worked best in my former Ruger #1 in .45-70 LT for all bullet weights from the 300gr TSX to the 500gr Hornady. Those were H335 for the heavies, 450gr to 500gr, and H4198 for the rest. H335 was ideal for the .45-70 case since being a ball powder it allowed more into the case without undo compression. And having approximately the same burn rate as H4895, which is one of the best in the .458, it acted like I was using a full charge of H4895 in the .45-70 case, and still seat the 500s adequately, while still using a COL of up to 3.21″ for the long Barnes monos. That was 75 grains of H335 behind the 500 Hornady and 76 grains under the 450 Swift. That would not have been possible in using H4895, so I went with the ball powder that proved itself worthy of complete confidence through consistent and stable results. It was therefore natural that I should use those same two powders in my former CZ550 in .458, and for the same applications. In addition to those two, I also gave H4895 a try for the heavyweights in the .458 Win Mag since there was more available room in those cases. And in also seating the bullets long, that made my CZ equal to a .458 Lott. But I also discovered that I could exceed the .458 Lott COL of 3.600″ using the long Barnes bullets. That meant ballistics for the .458 Winchester in the CZ550 could exceed those of the Lott.

Indeed, as mentioned above, I’ve found it quite possible to duplicate all that in my current Ruger Single-shot, as previously explained in recent blogs.

The current load that I’ve settled on for walk-about-hunting of both bear and wolf is the 300gr TSX at 2752 fps/5044 ft-lbs. My intent, God willing, is to spend a few days this fall in that unhurried form of outdoor recreation. I will walk a bit, then sit a bit for some calling. A number of years ago I was calling moose and ended up calling in a big bear! You never exactly know what to expect from such adventures, but you must be alert to all possibilities. I have a variety of mouth calls, and have recently added a hand-held electronic caller with recorded sounds of deer, fawns, coyote and rabbits. It’s all fun that keeps one on edge! At times I’ll have a partner, and at other times I’ll be solo — at least that’s the plan.

The Ruger is heavy (needs to be) but comfortable to carry. It balances very well, and is very short overall for such a powerful rifle at 40-inches. On the stock I’ll put a stock cartridge holder, and limit the number of cartridges in the holder to five, which will add about 1/2 lb but not enough to upset the rifle’s balance. Of course, I’ll have a few extra in a jacket pocket as well.

The 300gr TSX load makes the rifle quite versatile for reaching out a bit in the case of a wolf on the far side of a small lake or marsh, plus in close quarters it will lack nothing for a charging bear.

The MV ballistics are similar to a .375 Weatherby firing a 300gr. But a .458″, 300gr is relatively short so will slow down quicker than a .375. Still, it’s a load that as sighted at +1.31″ at 100 will drop to about -2.00″ at 200 yards. That’s plenty good enough for that type of hunt as I don’t expect to be shooting that far in any case.

<(The 300 TSX as tested in tough media at 2650 fps from 5 yards employing my former Ruger #1 in .45-70 LT. Left click on pics for a better view.)

Here is the load and ballistics as shot yesterday at our range (Oct. 8/19):

Ambient conditions: Sunny but frosty.

Rifle: Ruger #1 Tropical in .458 Win Mag with a 24″ Mag-Na-Ported barrel.

Remington brass (1x previously fired in my former CZ550)

WLRM primers

75 grains H4198 (up 2 grains from previous results at 2687 fps)

MV = 2734, 2728, 2736 instrumental. Corrected average at muzzle = 2752 fps/5044 ft-lbs.

3 shots into sub-moa. Group was +2.25″ high, and 3/4 inch right. Adjustments were made to center that group at +1.31″ high dead over center.

Recoil will be about 36 ft-lbs with the Mag-Na-Ports, which, by the way, doesn’t seem to be more loud than a typical .30-06 — for some yet unknown reason.

The point of all this is to demonstrate that a .458 Winchester Magnum doesn’t need be reserved for shooting an elephant in your petunias!

Go ahead, use it on some hogs, deer, and an elk now and then. Many are doing just that, so why not try something different by way of a Big Bore, rather than going as small as current culture seems to suggest. There are far more .458 Win Mags out there than most “pundits” seem to think — or are aware of. And they are not going into oblivion any time soon!

Hunting and shooting isn’t just about killing something — as I believe most of us are aware of by now. It’s the composite of many things that may be perhaps summed up in a word — “adventure”. But if we have to kill something, let it be with an instrument that causes the least trauma possible. If it’s a .243, learn to shoot it precisely. If it’s a .458, learn also to shoot that one precisely. But I assure you there IS a pronounced difference in effect on the shooter as well as the animal!

Yesterday, at the range, I met a man whom I’d never previously encountered. It was a beautiful, frosty morning. I was the first to arrive at 8 am in order to get “set up”, including target, Chrony and rifle rests, as well as other accessories. I don’t like to be in the way of others who arrive later. The second was a fellow I’ve known for several years, much younger than I. Lastly was the unknown person — as least to myself, and he was older than the younger man, but not as old as myself — I’d say in his late sixties. Shooting was to start at 9:30 am, and while the second man was at the 300 yard berm putting up some targets, this “unknown man” and I chatted about moose hunting. It turned out that he’d shot a bull moose in the same northern jurisdiction as myself. He described in great detail the rain and wind that lasted for about 10 days before there was a break in the weather. The following day was good, and he shot a bull moose at around 150 yards. But he shot it a total of six times. After three shots it went down. But it didn’t stay down. It got up and started to move away from him and he shot it three more times and it went down to stay.

The rifle and load? A .30-06 shooting 180 factory fodder. None of the loads fully penetrated the moose through the lungs from broad-side hits! I told him I shot mine using 250gr Nosler Partitions from a .340 Weatherby. The first shot was broadside at 165 yards through the lungs from an offhand position, and not only did the bullet land within an inch or so of where I aimed, but it was a pass-through, with blood and lung tissue splattering over the bushes on the far side for twenty feet! On the second shot the moose went down on the spot! And those were lung shots — not CNS hits! I waited for my son to arrive from his blind at 350 yards from me. He wanted to see the bull that was in a bit of a hollow and out of sight. He got too close and the bull staggered to its feet, but wasn’t going anywhere. I gave it another in the seat of its pants and it went down to stay. In total, it moved not more than half its length from where I fired the first shot.

The point: larger bores, bigger bullets and speed DOES make a difference! And a significant one at that — most of the time assuming good bullets and hits where they should be!

The .458 Winchester Magnum can do all that and more — if we can manage its potential. That’s a challenge to those who want to climb this “mountain”.

At this point I feel a need to give glory to my LORD, and public thanks to a friend before terminating this piece.

Most of you know that I’ve professionally been a pastor/missionary most of my adult years — and still am part-time — and own a “Rev” before my name for some official purposes, which I never otherwise use, much preferring “Pastor” by those who know me in that role. That’s sort of a preamble to what follows. I want to preempt any notion that what I have to say from this point on is therefore some sort of “professional” statement. It is NOT! It’s simply a confession of faith as a Christian.

Several weeks have past since an “accident” occurred at the range to my Ruger Tropical in .458 Winchester Magnum. I had just finished firing five medium loads of a 470gr hardcast at around 2075 fps. I then removed the rifle from the Lead Sled, looked it over (which I always do) and to my utter horror noticed a hairline crack extending from where the butt stock attaches to the action for a full 5 – 6 inches, then another crack right where it touches the action!

To put this in perspective, I’d cleaned the barrel and all external parts the evening before coming to the range. I had previously been given a “head’s up” by the “second” man, mentioned above, that the Lead Sled had a reputation of cracking stocks on heavy magnum rifles. There is no “give” for the stock to move rearward under severe recoil, therefore tremendous pressure must be endured by the stock all by itself. (Recently, I’ve abandoned the Lead Sled for the .458 Win., taking that force on my body that moves rearward under recoil.)

Immediately, I knew what was involved. It could not be repaired in any manner that would render it capable of handling .458 Win Mag loads! Replacement might take a year or more! We’re not as fortunate in these matters as those south of the border. Even then, costs could amount to + $500, taking into account shipping from Ruger, Canadian tax, import duties, and exchange on the Canadian dollar! For a senior on a fixed income, that’s no small amount!

I prayed about it, and immediately had peace! I KNEW my Father in heaven would take it in hand, as I had put it there. No worries from that point on! Within a couple of days I mentioned the problem on the AR forum as I’d been sharing test loads, and said I’d not be able to continue due to the cracked butt stock. It was not, believe me, with any intention of getting sympathy or anything else, it was simply to inform others that I’d not be able to continue contributing to the thread on the .458 Win Mag.

Well, Dr. Ron Berry (known as RIP on the forum, except for a few friends who know him as “Ron”) immediately wanted to know how he could get a “spare” (as he called it) to me! We dealt with it privately, and within about a week I had a “new” Tropical butt stock for my Ruger Tropical in .458, pictured on the header! I gave, and owe, many thanks to Ron, but did not forget to give thanks to my heavenly Father! Ron may not know this, but his generous gift was the hand of God in blessing me! As James, the brother of our Lord, wrote it in his epistle: “Every good and perfect gift is from above, coming down from the Father … who does not change like shifting shadows”. (James 1:17)

It’s Canadian Thanksgiving time, so what an additional reason for offering thanks to my Father above, while not forgetting my generous friend… Thanks again Ron!

Til the next,

Shalom

BOB MITCHELL

 

What is the Best BIG-GAME Rifle? — P4

My Big-Bore Rifle for large and dangerous game (moose and bear) is the .458 Winchester Magnum, as you already know if you’ve spent any time reading my blogs.

But there are, of course, other Big Bores that could serve for the same general purposes though they are not as popular, nor do they have the great versatility of the .458 Win Mag. I believe all that has been adequately covered here in previous articles.

Nonetheless, let’s delve into that theme once again. The most popular after the .458s are the .416s. They do have a solid reputation in Africa against DG and could serve admirably for some of the plains game, and the likes of moose, bear and elk in our neck of the woods.

I’ve written my thoughts on the .416s a few times in the past, and have confessed an interest in them. But for myself they would only serve to conflict with .458s as there is only so much money and time that can be dedicated to the sport of hunting and shooting. So, it would have to be one or the other, not both and, for myself. Since the .458s – the Winchester version and the .45-70s – have consumed an inordinate amount of time and money, and there is still far too much to be learned and experienced from them, so I can’t imagine myself getting involved with what I’d consider a “runner up” in a .416 “Whatever”.

Yet, there are quite a few who have them. For what reason? A good portion of it is nostalgia. “Nostalgia – a longing for something far away or long ago or for former happy circumstances”. – New World Dictionary of The American Language. Then the belief that they “kick” less. How much? Mostly they’re not sure, but think that must be the case since they shoot smaller-bore, lighter bullets. But most burn more powder than the .458 Winchester. For example: The .416 Rigby is an oldie that has a greedy appetite for gun powder — right on the heels of the .416 Weatherby. The .416s Remington and Ruger are both on a more stringent diet but produce the same work. Since I have a rather strong pragmatic bent, I’d choose one or the other of the latter two. But alas, they also come short of the .458 Win Mag’s abilities that consumes still less, or no more, of the propellants that make projectiles happy.

Since historically I’ve gone into considerable detail in this regard, I’ll not do it again except to say that whatever your Big Bore might be, love it, shoot it, and don’t for goodness sake let it feel lonely.

Others still – that is very few “others” — like something “different”, so being somewhat jaded (bored) with their current lonely collection, they opt for a 450 – 400, a 404 Jeff, or a “Whatever”, hoping for a relationship that will last longer than most marriages! (By the way, my wife and I celebrated our 62nd anniversary in June.)

Ho-hum… get a life and buy a .458 Winchester, explore its vital features, take it to a dance… er, safari, and live happily ever after! Then you won’t have to get cramps and headaches over the schizoid, lamb duck, inefficient rifles you’ve been feeding for the past half-century.

Then there are the Mediums: This is where the action is… or where most of it should be. Mediums are thought to be more than .30-caliber and less than .40-caliber. The craze over the 6.5s (.264- cal) will ware thin sooner than later, I believe. People get caught up with “new” toys. “New”! .26-cal goes well back into history! Why is .26 better than .27, .28, .30, .32, .33, or .35? Tell me, please! Don’t bother though, you’d be wasting your breath… I promise I’d NOT be impressed.

Outside the mega-blasters, I believe the following to be the best of the MEDIUMS: .338 Winchester Magnum; .340 Weatherby; .35 Whelen; 9.3 x 62 and the favorite .375 H&H.

“Best” as in common, reasonable ballistics, price, and handloading components. There are a few others that try to compete with these but have, or are, failing in their attempts.

For example: there are several relatively “new” .338 magnums that have come on the scene over the last few years, but really they only “do” what either the .338 Win Mag or .340 Weatherby have already “done”! The .35 Whelen has been around almost as long as the .375 H&H and the 9.3 x 62. What one of these three will do, or has done,  the others live on the same street and go to work in the same places.

My favorite, of course, of all those, and I’ve owned and used each one, is the historic 9.3 x 62. But I’d NEVER cast dishonor or disrespect in the direction of any of them.

What the 338 Lapua can do, the .340 WBY has done! What the .375 Ruger can do, the .375 H&H has done! Etc. But for the Lapua and Weatherby you need a long barrel of 26″ to make them sing. The .338 Win Mag and the .375 H&H can make good music from 24″ pipes! The .35 Whelen and the 9.3 x 62 don’t miss the high notes if sung through 22″ tubes. And so on…

Frankly, I’d be happy with any one of them when used on the fauna mostly known as big game across our great lands. Yet, I think now I’d pass on the Lapua and the .340 since they do require at least 26″ barrels to make them efficient.

My nominations would be three of the five mentioned at the outset: .338 WM, .35 Whelen or the 9.3 x 62. Why not the .375 H&H? Just because the H&H stands close to the true Big Bores and can do most of what they do. I (personally) see it as sort of a competitor with the Big Guns! Hunters who don’t want to deal with the recoil of a .458 Win Mag, for example, will often settle for the .375 H&H. And with the “new” projectiles, they often succeed just as well. But, I think it’s important to keep in mind that they are most often backed up by a PH toting a Big Bore! Nonetheless, those who go to Africa these days often take only one rifle, and in a majority of cases that will be a .375 H&H. Question: If they didn’t have a PH backing them with a Big Bore would the .375 still be their cartridge of choice?

In correspondence with the late John Wootters, he said to me that he didn’t want to have to depend on a PH if matters turned sour. That reflects my sentiments as I’ve mostly been solo when I squeezed the trigger on big game.

In sum, I believe the .375 is more of a specialised cartridge in a North American hunting context for the likes of the large and dangerous fauna of Alaska, as an example of that impression, though I did tote mine (an M70) for black bear and moose in our province. On the other hand, the .35 Whelen has proven its worth in harvesting any N.A. fauna from whitetails to giant moose, with grizzly/brown bear thrown into that mix. As well, it has had great success on other continents dealing with similar size game. And it has done it in burning about 80% of the fuel required for the .375 H&H or .375 Ruger! And considering the differential in “kick” between the .35 and .375 — about 32 ft-lbs vs 42 ft-lbs, or 3/4s the recoil of the H&H, make mine a .35 Whelen that will do basically the same things in N.A. as the H&H. Or better still — in my view — the 9.3 x 62, which is the .35 Whelen, plus! It’s called “expansion ratio”: the ratio of the case capacity to bore volumn. The larger the bore in relation to case capacity makes a cartridge more efficient than another of a smaller bore in relation to case capacity. Straight-wall cartridges are therefore the most efficient (most potential KE for amount of powder burned). Next are relatively large bores with minimal shoulders. That’s what makes a 9.3 x 62 nearly as “powerful” as a .375 H&H, and more powerful (handloaded) than a .338 Winchester Magnum that burns more powder to attain less energy or momentum when a “faster” powder is used in the 9.3 x 62. And why the .340 Weatherby (.338-cal) has up to 700 ft-lbs more KE at the muzzle than the .300 Weatherby, though they share the same case — the .300 necked to .338. Equally so for the .35 Whelen over its parent, the .30-06. When each is handloaded to the same psi the .35 Whelen has a 600 ft-lb advantage when each employs their best powders and bullet weights.

Oh yeah… I know the .338 Win Mag is also very popular, and with the proliferation of bullets from 180gr to 300, what’s there not to like? Yes, it can do whatever you need to have done on this continent, and several others as well, from medium to large game. But it too needs at least a 24″ tube to attain any meaningful advantage over the .35 Whelen. I’ve owned a few, so ought to know. In my experience (and view), the Whelen is handier, burns less fuel and can do 100% of what the .338 Win can do — or was intended to accomplish — and it’s been around much longer. In shooting 225s, which seems to be the favorite weight projectile for the .338, reduce the barrel length to match the typical .35 Whelen at 22″, and any meaningful distinction in effect on an elk or moose between the two will be in bullet placement and perhaps their construction. As stated — it takes less propellant to accomplish the same effect. In other words, it’s more efficient — and the 9.3 x 62 is more efficient than the .35 Whelen. All of which is due to larger bores. The larger bore of .358-cal over .338-cal gives it a 12.6% larger cross-sectional area than the .338. That amounts in a practical advantage of using a lesser amount of a faster burning powder in the .35 Whelen to get the same or similar results as the .338 WM of the same barrel length. Less powder burned also means less recoil. So while I have good thoughts in favor of the .338, I prefer the .35 Whelen.

As y’all know by now… I went looking for another .35 Whelen and came home with a 9.3 x 62… and have never looked back!  But, if all I had for hunting purposes for the rest of my days on Planet Earth was a .35 Whelen using home-brewed ammo, I’d shed no tears. From my experience, it will easily make 2600 fps firing excellent  250 grainers from a 22″ barrel. And that’s plenty for anything North America has to offer, including the “big bears” and the giant moose of the Yukon and Alaskan variety.

There are other pluses for the handloader: Cases can be formed from the ubiquitous .30-06 brass, and there’s an abundance of good to excellent powders and bullets available “off the shelf”. Woodleigh makes a 310gr for the likes of buffalo, and Swift a 280 for overweight fauna. Given the chance, I’d use it on Cape buffalo without qualms, where legal. Then, there’s a myriad of pistol bullets for varmints and practice. Do you want to make your own? Lots of moulds out there too.

So my nomination for a single BG medium rifle for N.A. is the .35 Whelen… unless you already have a 9.3 x 62, which has superior factory ammo and slightly more potential for the handloader.

Yet, I’ve already chosen the 9.3 x 62 as a minimum for ALL big thin-skinned game and the .458 Winchester Magnum as the OPTIMUM!

Til the next on .458 Winchester Magnum “Updates”.

Shalom

BOB MITCHELL

What is the Best BIG-GAME Rifle? — P3

The date was the second week of May, 1989. The circumstance was in the middle of “nowhere”, somewhere in the northeast of our province, Ontario, where my hope was to shoot a black bear — my first. There were many “firsts” that spring. My rifle: an 1895 Marlin chambered for the well proven .45-70. Handloads: the 400gr Speer that was leaving the muzzle of the 22″ barrel at an average of 1865 fps. The area: barely outside the southeast corner of Algonquin Park. Ambient conditions: HOT, with swarms of biting (starving?) black flies! (Several, from south of the border, had never experienced anything like that, and decided “that experience” was not part of their expectations! ).

But despite the biting flies, I enjoyed those days but never scored on a bear. However, the next spring (1990) found me back with the same outfitter in the same general area. The rifle: The same. The load: The same. That time, however, I did score on a trophy-quality bear. The range was approximately 100 yards to the bait setup, and I waited until the bear presented a broadside shot… which happened almost immediately. The 400gr Speer hit exactly where aimed — just behind the right shoulder, midway up the body. The bear went over backwards and took off on a dead run… for ten yards where he piled up in a tangle of alders with all four paws pointing skyward. I paid the insurance from a standing position on the 12-foot high moose-hunting platform spiked to a huge hardwood where it separated into two large branches.

My first bear, but not my last. The last may be yet to come. My latest was in October 2015, taken at 87 yards with a single 250gr AccuBond from my Tikka T3 in 9.3 x 62, leaving the muzzle at a tad over 2700 fps. In between those dates (1990 to 2015), I’ve shot several bears with a variety of rifles and cartridges, having hunted them each year from 1989 to 2017 with the exception of one calendar year.  In addition, due to health issues, I didn’t hunt in 2018. So far this year (2019), I’ve not hunted but plan to, God willing, in October – November.

So the number of bear seasons I’ve hunted from 1989 to 2017 number 27 calendar years, plus a few years where I hunted bruin both spring and fall, so the total exceeds 30. Of course, I didn’t take a bear every season they were hunted — I passed on some bears, and wounded a couple that were not found, and missed my shot on three others. But on average, I’ve taken a bear about every second year, though it didn’t always work out that way. By times I’d make a “run” on bears for two or three years in a row, then “nothing” for another two or three years.

But in that process I’ve learned what calibers work best, or better, from those I’ve tried. And, of course, over the years, including those mentioned, I’ve hunted other fauna like deer and moose, as well as smaller game. For example: I know from experience that I’d choose a .300 Win Mag over a .30-06 for all conditions where moose and whitetails might be hunted in the same season in the areas I’ve hunted them in Central and Northern Ontario.

NOTICE: I said what “I’d choose”, based on MY experience. You might be happier with something else. I shoot a .300 Win Mag as well as I shoot a .30-06 in a hunting situation. My longest “hit” from my .300 Win Mag was near 300 yards on a JACK RABBIT, and that was on my first shot! My .338 Win Mag (Browning A-Bolt SS) printed a neat cloverleaf of 3/4″ at 300 yards at our range using bench-rest style! I didn’t duplicate that, but it would shoot the same load at .5 MOA at the same distance on a regular basis! (That’s not .5-inch at 300, by the way!)

That’s not to boast, but to point out factually that I have more than a little experience with so-called “magnums” all the way to the .458. And 99.5% of the loads were handloads, or “hand loads”.

Now as to the arguments in favor of the .458 Winchester Magnum being MY first choice as a one rifle for all big game. Notice again: It would be MY first choice, knowing what I now know in using it with handloads compared to others I’ve used with handloads, under these terms and conditions:

1 > world-wide hunting of BG, including the African DG, but N.A. in particular.

2 > as a younger man.

3 > as a handloader.

While I have fired mega-loads from the three .458 Win Mags I’ve owned since January 1993 — the first one purchased proved it’s worth on September 28 of the same year. Within a couple of weeks, the load fired on Sept 28, ’93 went on a moose hunt, as backup in N. Ontario. It turned out that due to the tail end of a hurricane, the 22″ Ruger 77 in .458 Winchester Magnum got carried more than my “main rifle”. On the 28th it fired three 500gr Hornady RNs into 1/4″ center to center at 100 yards! It was a single ragged hole! (I’m sure you can find someone who can explain how to measure 3 shots into the same hole from bullets that are .458″ in diameter!) It wasn’t the hottest load from H4895 at a little under 2000 fps, but it sure was “magic” in my view! I loaded up fifteen of those for that hunt. But, of course, the moose didn’t cooperate due to trees crashing in the forest every so often! But I’ve never carried anything before or since in which I’ve had more confidence for moose under those physical conditions, aside the storm. Recoil was my last consideration — in fact it never was any consideration at all. The rifle ready to shoot was around 9.3 lbs with scope and ammo, and the same length as a Rugger 77 in a 22″ .30-06. I had traded a rifle for it with no money involved.

Later, it went on a bear hunt and the 350gr Speer at 2345 fps flattened a bear at 75 yards. The damage was awesome in a going away shot. I’d owned at least a couple of .45-70s prior to that, and so was not “overwhelmed” by such an experience. But I was “sold”on Big Bores for bears; at least two in the salt from .458” projectiles — a 400gr and a 350gr, both from Speer.

In between the first and the current, I owned a CZ550 with a magnum action and  25″ barrel made in the Czech Republic. With that one from 2007 to 2011, I went to school on the possibilities of a .458 Winchester Magnum. For instance, I found that the 500gr Hornady could be safely driven from the muzzle of the 25″ barrel at 2200 fps, or more, from at least four powders: H335, H4895, AA2460 and AA2230; and all that within SAAMI COL at 3.34″. Of course, the action and chamber allowed a COL of up to 3.78″ for the long monolithics, if wanted, surpassing the .458 Lott!

In all, I developed loads for most of the following bullets. But the one that intrigued me for our game (moose, deer and bear) was the 350gr Barnes TSX at 2750 fps/5876 ft-lbs that shot into MOA. I had confidence in it to 400 yards for moose (at above 1600 fps impact — enough for expansion according to Barnes).

Currently, since August 2018, my .458 Winchester Magnum is a Ruger No.1 Tropical (Pic on the header). I started shooting it with known handloads from that date. Of course, winter had intervened before starting up again in late April of this year. In all I’ve fired it over 130 times employing 11 different bullets from 500s on down to the 300 TSX, using several different loads for each bullet, two brands of cases and seven distinct powders. One primer throughout has been employed, the WLRM.

The following is representative:

300gr TSX at up to 2980 fps/5915 ft-lbs from H4198

350gr TSX a very good load at 2760 fps/5919 ft-lbs from H4198

350gr Hornady at 2510 fps/4895 ft-lbs from H4198

350gr Hornady at 2000 fps/3108 ft-lbs from RL-15

400-X bullet from Barnes at 2590 fps/5957 ft-lbs from H4198

405gr Remington at 2075 fps/3871 ft-lbs from RL-15

450gr Swift AF at 2414/5822 ft-lbs from H335

450gr TSX at 2402/5764 ft-lbs from AA2230

470gr hardcast at 2087 fps/4545 ft-lbs from H4895

480gr Hornady DGX at 2353 fps/5900 ft-lbs from H4895

480gr Hornady DGX at 1810 fps/3491 ft-lbs from RL-15

500gr Speer GS at 2312 fps/5934 ft-lbs from H4895

500gr Hornady at  2317 fps/5960 ft-lbs from H4895

 

Notes on the above and projected tests for the future:

1 > My Ruger #1 has a 24″ Mag-Na-Ported barrel, and the typical long throat of all .458 Win Mags, plus no magazine to constrain COL. So all of the above loads have had their bullets seated as long as practical. While I didn’t give the COLs of each, or charges of the various propellants, yet the Barnes monos and all the other bullets were seated from about SAAMI 3.3″ to a max of 3.71″ for the 450 TSX not crimped into the bottom cannelure. Crimped, they measure 3.68″. Those exceed the Lott at 3.6″. Others of the 500s equal or exceed 3.6″ in COL. I don’t need to crimp any bullet in the single-shot Ruger. And from hundreds of rounds through my former Ruger #1 in .45-70 LT, never was crimping an issue even though all bullets were seated no more than .25 – .30″. And never a problem with a bullet being, or becoming, “loose” in the cartridge. I employ the same practices for the Ruger #1 Tropical in .458 WM.

2 > All of the Barnes TSX bullets from the 500s, 450s, 350s and 300s, can be driven at an MV that will permit them to still exceed 1600 fps at 400 yards – the limit for expansion in big game proposed by Barnes. Even though their 500 and 450 will start much slower than the 350 or 300, they will retain the velocity much better due to better sectional densities and ballistic coefficients.

So in effect, one can tailor their bullet weight and MV to the game animal and expected range limit.

Some of the above loads are maximum, and some, obviously, are reduced loads.

3 > Down the road, God willing, I have expectations to produce several more reduced loads for the likes of wolf and deer in woodlands, such as the 300 TSX at around 2500 to 2700 fps, and a 350 Hornady FP around 2000 fps for woods hunting. Of course, there are many other possibilities as well, such as lobbing a 470 cast lead at 1250 or a 300 Hornady at 1600 fps. There really are few limits.

But from a 250gr Barnes all copper (made for the .45-70) poking along at 2200 fps to the Barnes 500gr solid moving out at the same speed, what is there left to quibble over?

Nothing in my estimation. So make mine a .458 Winchester Magnum for anything from gophers (good for practice) to the grumpiest, anywhere at anytime!

Next up: other choices in Big Bores and Mediums.

Shalom

BOB MITCHELL

What is The Best Big-Game Rifle? — P2

It has taken many years, but my experience, research and analysis have compelled me to choose particular cartridges and rifles for the pursuit of game from small to large, and in some cases, dangerous.

Notice, I said “cartridges and rifles”,  as I have believed from the beginning that is the proper order — first, the cartridge is chosen, and then the rifle in which the cartridge is to be chambered and fired. The cartridge, of course, determines the caliber, and the caliber defines the bullets.

A .30-caliber rifle cartridge — of which there are many — is defined as .308-inch in diameter, though the length of the bullet is determined by its weight and the material used in its construction. We know, for instance, that a lead-core bullet with a guilding-metal jacket will be shorter than one of equal weight constructed of pure copper/copper alloy assuming profile is the same or similar. The reason being that lead is heavier than copper. So, a .30-cal rifle, whether chambered in .308 Winchester or .300 Winchester Magnum will be limited in bullet weights from about 110gr to 200gr in the .308, and 110gr to 220gr in the .300 Win Mag. Yes, I’m aware that one could load a 220 in the .308 but that would hardly improve its usefulness due to limited case capacity. The upper end in useful bullet weight is usually considered to be a 200gr SP or RN at about 2500 fps max. On the other hand, a 220gr (Nosler Partition in particular) at 2800 fps is a very practical load for the likes of Alaska/Yukon moose, grizzly or brown bear. The .308 Win would be making 2775 ft-lbs at the muzzle whereas the .300 Win Mag would be putting out 3890 ft-lbs at the muzzle and 2760 ft-lbs at 300 yards if using the 200gr AccuBond! The .300 Win Mag has a 300 yard advantage over the .308 Winchester!!

The foregoing is presented to demonstrate that CARTRIDGE and CALIBER are distinct entities! They are NOT synonymous! For example: we could have a larger CALIBER, such as a .44 Rem Mag, that would be less effective on a mature bull elk, say at 250 yards, than a smaller CALIBER like a .280 Remington. So, I mention CARTRIDGE as of first importance, then the RIFLE in which it is to be chambered.

Many seemingly “fall in love” with a rifle without much thought going into the cartridge for which it has been chambered. Several years ago I had a very dear friend (now deceased). We often visited gun shops together. One shop in particular seemed to have a large number of good lightly used rifles — it was there that I purchased my first .458 Win Mag – a nearly new Ruger 77 at a bargain-basement price! My friend spied a beautiful Sako FS carbine, with a 20″ barrel — chambered in 7mm Rem Mag! He would have bought it on the spot had I not intervened and convinced him that it would be a very LOUD .270 Winchester! I mean, he was so captivated by its beauty — in his view — that any pragmatic considerations flew out of his head! He simply “loved” beautiful wood and metal!

I put CARTRIDGE first because in the end game that is what determines results in the field, whether we are hunting rabbits or Wood Bison.

Next in importance is the rifle.

There are multiple choices. Actually too many to identify here in our limited space and time. But once we have settled on the CARTRIDGE, then we can begin our search for the BEST RIFLE from which the bullet is to be fired.

The “best rifle” may mean several distinct things to different sportsmen or women. Among styles/forms of rifles there are: Bolt-action repeating magazine rifles; single-shot, break-action; single-shot falling block; lever action repeating with rotary clips, and lever-action repeating with tubular magazines, and finally: semi-autos military style, or semis of sporting style — they are repeating with magazine clips, usually.

Then the aesthetics: form should follow function, but often the reverse drives the bus — as in all biz, looks sell products! That’s why my friend almost desperately wanted the 7 Rem Mag in a Sako FS carbine. I know, because I’d done the same exact thing a few years earlier in choosing a Sako FS carbine in a .338 Winchester Magnum with its 20-inch barrel! What I had in ballistics was the equivalent of a 24″ .35 Whelen that would burn fifteen grains less powder, be much softer in recoil, and not as obnoxious in muzzle blast!  But I thought I had the answer to any ballistic question by saving four-inches of barrel! Put your hand before your face, with eyes wide open, spread your thumb and index finger by four inches! That’s how much we save in overall rifle length, and that is supposed to make a meaningful difference in a hunt? If it were today, I’d pass on the Sako FS carbine in .338 WM and choose what I did later: A 26″ Browning in .338 Win that would easily shoot a 250gr Nosler Partition at OVER 2800 fps!   My son’s 24″ Rem 700 would fire the same bullet at over 2700 fps with ease.

The RIFLE; the best one: Let’s circumscribe it by the following set of parameters. And let’s keep in mind that this one rifle is to adequately serve for ALL big game on our “bucket list” — with THE EXCEPTION of African DG, and even then it might prove its worth!

Of the five most important characteristics that should be found in a big-game rifle for all hunting of  soft-skinned game from 200 lbs to 3000 lbs, including DG, within that very broad potential world-wide list, let’s list them in a descending order of significance:

1 > the CARTRIDGE

2 > the RIFLE (including barrel contour & length, stock, sights, recoil pad, etc.)

3 > the STYLE (bolt-action, lever-action, single-shot, semi, etc.)

4 > the ERGONOMICS (how it fits and feels in handling and shooting)

5 > the WEIGHT (contributes to ergonomics)

Anything else is overall appearance, cosmetics, and non-essentials.

 

CARTRIDGE: My criteria for the cartridge of a single hunting rifle is (as already described) that it must be fully capable of cleanly dispatching any big-game animal I intend or hope to hunt on the North American Continent, or any other continent if I do my part.

It also must be reasonably priced and have sufficient components for handloading.

In addition to all that the cartridge must be versatile enough, through choices of bullets and powders, to be reasonably useful on the lightest of big game as well as the largest and toughest, within their potential ranges and conditions.

That’s a VERY tall order! And I have intended it to be because those are my personal expectations and goals for any BG rifle I own.

That’s why I earlier stated (in P1) that a .300 magnum would be a starting point for myself.

Some believe in owning a particular rifle for every job! I believe most hunting “jobs” can be effectively and efficiently done with a well-chosen single rifle!

While I don’t necessarily subscribe to all of Phil Shoemaker’s gun philosophies, I do agree with the sentiment he has so aptly applied to inquiring brown bear client’s question: “What rifle should I bring?” His invariable reply is: “Bring what you already have and are comfortable with.” He’s thereby NOT suggesting a .223 Remington! But Phil is an expert shooter of anything in handguns or rifles! Few, if any, can compete with him! That’s why I think he should temper some of his statements and recommendations.

(That’s the late Dr. Don Heath, PH and Doctor of wildlife biology who is^ shooting a large bull elephant with his 9.3 x 62 Mauser. He would have preferred his Big Bore in his hands at the time, but he was as comfortable with it as if using it on the smallest of antelope – a 25 lb duiker.)

The world’s large soft-skinned game animals have pretty much all been harvested in using a .30-06! And all of it in using a .300 Weatherby! HOWEVER!!! That isn’t saying ANYTHING about ranges or other physical conditions! Then, were those experts alone or accompanied by backups in PHs, scouts or friends? That would make (and has made) a HUGE difference for what single rifle cartridge I’d choose! It has never been (and will never be) a non-magnum .30-caliber! And even then a .300 magnum, if that’s all I had, would not be my FIRST choice!

I’d want a bigger bore, one that could at least throw a 250gr at not less than 2700 fps. And more is better in my view if we’re talking one rifle for the whole-wide world! When I had the .340 Weatherby, that came close — but my 9.3 x 62 will equal it in momentum all the way to 500 yards and makes a bigger hole!

The main issue being: to LEARN to shoot something like that without fear or developing a flinch! (And that’s another subject.)

One thing I’ve learned from experience: A bigger hole going in and coming out pumps a LOT MORE blood on the ground in a much shorter time than ANY .30-caliber or .35-caliber!

But a “bigger hole going in and coming out” assumes a cartridge potentially capable of throwing that big bullet fast enough to accomplish that feat at WHATEVER range we decide to squeeze the trigger; and the bullet must be not only fast enough, but tough enough to break big bones in the process!

I’ve therefore chosen the 9.3 x 62 as a MINIMUM; and the .458 Winchester Magnum as OPTIMUM!

Why?

Let me tell you why: In summary, it’s because no other cartridge can match its versatility! And I’ll prove that in P3.

Shalom

BOB MITCHELL

What is The Best Big-Game Rifle ? — P1

Many writers and other professionals have suggested their own ideas and preferences in answer to that question. Obviously, the question is very open-ended as many good options are available, and have been suggested, so why should I pretend to have anything to say on the subject that has not already been said a few hundred times — perhaps even a few thousand?

First off, hunting has changed to a significant degree over the past one-half century in many parts of the world, and so has the availability of good rifles at affordable prices for that chore. In addition, more hunters load their own from the best components available, and it seems that the ammo companies have caught on to that fact and are now manufacturing better products for a broader array of BG rifles.  Even factory products for old standbys like the .30-06 have significantly improved in bullet choices, MV, accuracy and reliable performance. So, if one chooses to go that route, after finding what works best in his/her rifle, they will not likely be disappointed. Simply put: the .30-06 is better than ever! But so is just about any other BG rifle, especially if we make our own loads for them.

Then, with All-Terrain-Vehicles, 4×4 pickups, etc, one can get closer to where the game lives with less sweat, blood and frustration. Yes, blood (from bruised shins, scrapes and falls!).

Big Game regulations have also been altered over time with limits going down and costs going up! That means less time in the field and more urgency in filling a tag.

All of that impinges on “What BG Rifle is best for the task at hand?”

The answer, of course, is variable depending largely on four factors:

1) The game being hunted;

2) Where (involving what country and terrain);

3) You — your experience, temperament and preferences;

4) Suitable rifles and loads available — and the best among them.

Having to start somewhere, we obviously need to set parameters for big game. How big is “big”? Size matters, so does weight. Are DG (dangerous game) included? If so, then size and weight might not be the most important factors. There is also the matter of terrain/region. If high up in mountains, then rifle weight, caliber and cartridge must be of top priority. So the picture gets murky if we are considering a single rifle for all chores in hunting big game, does it not? What about a one BG rifle safari for a mixed bag? And that might become inconvenient in certain regions of the same continent, such as the west of North America. BG could mean sheep in the mountains or brown bear in the willows! What single rifle would you choose for a BG hunt in the mountains and a willow-hunt for moose or grizzly in the same season?

So, again, how “big” is BIG?

I’d suggest northern mature buck whitetails (250 to 400 lbs) as a starter, to Alaska/Yukon moose and brown bear/grizzly at the top end as big game in North America, and anything else that might fit within those parameters in the rest of the world — with African DG as an exception with certain qualifications.

As a starter, I’d choose nothing less than a .300 magnum (there are obviously several) for all BG in North America, IF it was/became an issue — for whatever reason — of a single BG rifle. Others have said it, and I repeat it out of personal conviction: A .300 magnum would be one among a possible half-dozen that I would consider as a single rifle for all big game hunting on this continent, and even in my province. That’s from experience and careful analysis of all potential factors involved.

<(.300 Win Mag, second from left)

“As a starter”, I said… one among a half-dozen.

Though the .45-70 (handloaded) has been one of my personal favorites for most of my BG hunts in Ontario, it has not been for ALL BG hunts… The reason has been its limited range under certain conditions of deer and moose hunting. So, I want a BG rifle that will be MORE than adequate under ALL potential conditions, no matter what!

So, among the criteria set above, physical conditions, including potential range, must be among top priorities. Someone once wrote, and it’s been quoted several times by others: “If the recoil from a .375 H&H is too much for a hunter, then there’s a certain amount of hunting he will have to forego.” In general, I endorse that statement — in principle at least, as there are several other cartridges that will do as well. More on that when we get to make nominations.

That was a general overview in answer to the question .

Now for some specifics:

AFRICA: If I were to do much hunting there it would be for a mixed bag of plains game and one or two of the dangerous game (DG). And I would use what I have for big game in North America, including a Big Bore and a Medium. From that point on if I were to do several more hunts in Africa the focus would be mostly Cape buffalo and a select few of plains game that had not previously been taken.

That would be a philosophical/practical approach to the question should I ever have that opportunity — which isn’t likely at this stage of my life. But I did have a taste of African hunting sponsored by my son who was a licensed resident BG hunter. He loaned me his 12-ga. pump shotgun loaded with Brennekes. I got to fire it twice on warthogs. However, he said “If we run into a nasty buff or lion, use it!” In such a scenario, I’d have handed it to him who was following behind me and his friend, the local scout whom I was following. Brent (my son) was toting a camera.

My choice for African DG would be a bolt-action  .458 Winchester Magnum, and my 9.3 x 62 for plains game. Both shooting handloads.

For Cape buffalo it would be either the 450gr Barnes TSX or the 450gr Swift AF at 2400 fps from a 24″- 25″ barrel, seated long in the case.  Using modern powders (reformulated) such as H4895, H335 and AA2230, such bullet speeds at the muzzle are possible. For a solid, Barnes makes a 450gr and Hornady a 480gr. Why not a 500? Good question. I could go either way, but the 450s are about 100 fps faster while generating  less recoil. That’s a bit of hair-splitting, I know. 2400 fps from a 450gr is making 5755 ft-lbs at the muzzle. That’s some reserve over the traditional standard of 5000 ft-lbs for African DG of the largest/toughest sort.

Yeah, I too believe there’s more to it than that — nevertheless, it might resolve any doubts as long as the bullet and shooter are equal to the task at hand.

Of course, there are other capable rifles and cartridges that have proven their worth on African DG all the way to elephant, including the hoary .375 H&H. But after watching numerous professional videos on DG hunting in Africa, including the likes of elephant, Cape buff and lion, make mine a handloaded .458 Win Mag. I’ve witnessed on film, Cape buffalo take more than a half-dozen shots from .375s before they were done… finished! A big male free-ranging lion has also taken as many hits before the game was over — with PH’s doing most of the hitting! Yes, of course, timely and accurate shooting of a Cape buff in the African “alders”, er…. thickets, is a very challenging feat for a North American hunter who has never shot anything more than a smallish whitetail munching clover in an open field!

How many times have I seen on various videos the PH shouting, or voicing these words: “Shoot now!”, and there was no shot! Then the animal moves further into a thick tangle of thorn bush… and the rodeo begins! The hunter was mesmerized by what he was experiencing! And likely had not previously used his rifle in actual North American hunting! Yes, he may have shot it a few times at a bench (by a “few times” is meant a couple of boxes!), but never in an actual challenging N.A. hunt!  So, he is unsure of himself in a strange setting, and using sticks, or offhand, for a rifle that weighs three pounds more than he’s used to, and kicks like the devil! So, he’s not ready to “Shoot now!”

To me, at least, it’s interesting (and informative) that promotional material from agencies that arrange African hunts for clients only use well-known “professionals” to do the shooting, but even they at time mess-up!

Personally, I’d not take an unfamiliar, unused rifle to Africa for hunting DG, or even plains game. I’d take my single-shot Ruger in .458 Win Mag over a bolt-action repeater in the same caliber that I had little to no experience with in the field prior to venturing on an African safari.

(This was my former CZ550 in .458 Win Mag that was used in Ontario, Canada, for several BG hunts. I would gladly have used it in Africa if the opportunity had presented itself)

As a “Medium”, my nomination was the historic, African proven 9.3 x 62 Mauser. But not only because of its credentials. That counts, but more than that I’ve owned and used one for the past eight years. From  excellent handloads it’s fully the equal of the venerable .375 H&H firing nominal factory stuff. Yes, the .375 H&H also can be handloaded to exceed their nominal specs; any experienced handloader could safely pull that off! I’ve done it! But the choice of components must be exact to surpass the downrange effect of the 9.3 x 62. For example: Should the .375 H&H be loaded with the 300 Swift AF, the 300 Nosler Partition or the 300 Barnes TSX, to 2600 fps MV, they will be lagging behind the 286 Nosler Partition from my rifle at the 300 yd mark in energy and momentum. The 286 in .366 has the same sectional density as the 300s in .375, so should produce the same penetration at equal impact velocity as the .375s. The truth of the matter is, however, that the 9.3x 62 has greater impact velocity from 25 yards on due to a better ballistic coefficient (BC).

Moreover, my rifle (TIKKA) with it’s 22.4″ barrel will shoot the 286 NP at 2620 – 2640 fps MV. If the barrel of a .375 H&H is cut to 22.5″, will it still make 2600 fps from 300s at the muzzle? My 26″ Browning shortened to 22″ would do factory specs of 2530 fps from good handloads. “Hot loads” made 2560 fps.

My choice would be what I now own: a TIKKA T3 in 9.3 x 62, that readily makes over 2600 fps from the 286 NP; or 2700+ fps from the 250 Nosler AB, or 2460 fps from the 320gr Woodleigh PP; all in using RL-17. And I have milder loads for whitetails and wolf. Could any of that be suitable for African Plains Game?

(My Tikka 9.3 x 62 in hand as I check the bait barrel. I shot a “good” bear a day or so later using the 250gr Nosler AB at +2700 fps. Range was 87 yards.)

Frankly, it has replaced all of my “mediums”, AND “sub-mediums”. Yes, recoil is a bit “stout” from the big bullets, surpassing even a .375 H&H that weighs over 9 lbs. Mine weighs a T3 “Lite” at 7.7 lbs, loaded, with a 3 – 9 x 40mm scope on board. It’s also a very accurate rifle, shooting MOA, or better, from the selected loads.  And, according to QuickLoad, it should fire 300s at 2550 fps (from a 22.5″) at 64,000 psi; a standard I use for all loads since that rifle has also been chambered in .338 Win Mag. The effect on the Hornady brass that I use for all handloads isn’t greater than for any magnum loads. And I’ve handloaded a bunch of .338 Win Mags, a .340 Wby, and several .375 H&H’s. It’s not that modern 9.3 x 62’s are made “weaker” than the magnums; nor are the brass cases.

So, in P2 we’ll have a look at the challenges facing N.A. hunters of BG, and anywhere else in the world. From all that I’ll give my selection of “the BEST” BG rifle for the one-rifle hunter.

Of course, you have your own ideas, biases and preferences… I know that. And I’ll not claim that my choice should be the “best” for you. Remember the four criteria at the commencement of this piece. That’s open-ended, making any of several options viable. But I will tell you my choice from what I now know from analysis and forty years handloading rifles from the .22 Hornet to the .458 Win Mag; plus over sixty years hunting experience.

However, my choice of a one-rifle for all/any African game in a mixed bag hunt would be the .458 Winchester Magnum. Reasons and arguments will be presented in P2.

Shalom

BOB MITCHELL