Efficient Cartridges — Part 1

This is a photo of two very efficient cartridges.(a .458 Winchester Magnum and several in .45-70).

And this is a photo of two that are less efficient (a 9.3 X 62 and a .30-06)

You will notice the distinction between the two sets is rather obvious: The first two are straight-wall, with minimal taper and no shoulder. The second set have more taper, but more striking is a pronounced shoulder with the .30-06 being more “bottle-neck” than the 9.3 X 62, which makes the 9.3 more efficient than the .30-06 by a significant amount.

The most efficient cartridges are straight-wall and the second most efficient are those with minimal shoulders. Efficient cartridges are those that produce more kinetic energy per grain of powder than others that have to burn more powder (or produce greater psi) to attain the same kinetic energy.

An article appeared some time ago in a gun magazine showing the .35 Whelen to be the “most” efficient big game cartridge. Now, the .35 Whelen IS an efficient cartridge — more so than its parent cartridge, the .30-06, but it’s NOT the most efficient. In truth, it is far from the most efficient because of that small shoulder. Straight-wall cartridges are still THE most efficient, starting with the diminutive .22 RF.

“EFFICIENT” = “Producing a desired effect, product, etc. with a minimum of effort, expense, or waste; working well” (New World Dictionary of the American Language).

A bottle-neck cartridge may give higher velocity than another with the same powder volume, but it will be at the expense of either higher psi or a lighter bullet, and sometimes a much lighter bullet. For example, a .30-06 150gr deer bullet at 2910 fps/2820 ft-lbs at 60,000 psi will not shoot as flat as a .270 Winchester 130gr at 3030 fps/2650 ft-lbs at 62,000 psi (at 54,000 cup/64,000 psi in the distant past). But notice that the .30-06 is more efficient at less psi while producing more energy. That’s due to several factors, the main one being that the .30-06 is a larger bore while the .270 has the same basic powder space. And that difference is magnified when heavier bullets are used in the .30-06, such as a 180gr, 200gr or even a 220gr.

For the same reasons that the .30-06 is more efficient than the .270 Winchester, so is the .35 Whelen more efficient than the .30-06. As far as energy is concerned, the .30-06 maxes out at around 3300 ft-lbs while the .35 Whelen can approach 4000 ft-lbs! That’s an improvement of 21% from about the same amount of powder! And that’s not to include (yet) things like a larger cross-sectional area of bullet producing a larger wound cavity and significantly more momentum which may produce better penetration, all else equal.

So frankly, the .35 Whelen always makes more sense to me as a one-rifle for all things I hunt than a .30-06! Yet the .35 Whelen is simply a necked-up .30-06 from .308 – cal. to .358-cal.! That makes me ask a question: Why would any knowledgeable handloader choose a .30-06 over a .35 Whelen, if such a choice had to be made? And there are plenty of bullets in .35-caliber to choose from in anything from 180gr to 310gr, made by the same companies that produce .308-caliber bullets!

That’s not to suggest that the .30-06 is inadequate for most things but, rather, that the .35 Whelen is a 21% improvement on the .30-06. Logically, for me at least, that counts for something — and I’m not one who is “hung up” on the idea that I “must have” a .30-06 because it’s most popular or due to nostalgic reasons! Nostalgia, if carried too far, becomes a mental handicap! And I already have enough handicaps. Personally, I think the same thing applies to the .270 Winchester! There are better, more efficient cartridges with more efficient bullets — the .280 Remington being one of them. Why? Because it has just enough larger bore to allow for efficient 160gr and 175gr excellent 7mm bullets! To me, the .270 is a wannabe 7mm. It’s not quite there and never will be. On purpose, however, the .280 Remington (.284-cal.) has been handicapped to 60,000 psi (50,000 cup), and the way it’s loaded by Remington to about 55,000 psi, it will always “appear” to be somewhat inferior to the .270 Win. Any politics in factory ballistics or gun writers thinking? Any nostalgia?

I’ve chosen efficient cartridges for all big game hunting…. they’er ancient, and not because I’m nostalgic. To me, it’s a practical concern. I’m getting about 4400 ft-lbs from a cartridge case that’s only 10% greater in capacity than a .30-06, but making 33% increase in energy over a max loaded .30-06 at approximately the same psi.

Yes, if you load a 22″ .30-06 firing a 180gr at about 2880 fps you’re at about 64,000 psi. And, a few powders will do that. And a new rifle will handle that. That’s what the .300 H&H is supposed to give from factory in a 24″. But folks are loading them to over 3000 fps! Do you think the psi is not approaching 65,000 psi?

Using Hodgdon data for the .458 Winchester Magnum, 75.5 grains of H335 behind a 500gr is making 2163 fps/5194 ft-lbs at the muzzle of a 24″ barrel. Momentum is 154.5. In dividing 5194 by 75.5, we come up with a very efficient cartridge. That’s 68.79 ft-lbs per 1 grain of H335. AA2230 is even better than that, according to the Accurate Manual: 72 grains of 2230 is shown as producing 2159 fps/5175 ft-lbs! But the psi is much less than Hodgdon’s H335 at 53,808 psi vs about 59,350 psi (50,300 cup). 2230 is therefore making 71.875 ft-lbs per 1 grain of powder, and at less psi! It would seem to me that both of these powders are capable of producing at least 2200 fps/5373 ft-lbs from a 24″ at less than MAP (62,500 psi). That’s EFFICIENCY!

My Ruger No.1 in .45-70 LT (long-throat) is even more efficient as it’s ballistics are from a 22″ barrel. It is making 2210 fps/5422 ft-lbs from 75.5 grains of H335, plus the 500gr. But the psi is obviously somewhat higher at about 64,500 psi.

That’s 71.81 ft-lbs in a 22″. About the same as A2230, but that from a 24″. So my “improved” .45-70 in a Ruger No.1 is the most efficient of the Big Bores, though at higher psi.

If we compare those numbers with a cartridge case that holds about 12% more powder than a .458, but in a smaller caliber, we will verify that a straight-wall case is obviously more efficient when psi is the same, or similar.

In this example we’ll evaluate one of the new kids on the block — the .375 Ruger: In turning to the Barnes Manual, Number 4, pg.349, the highest MV from their 300gr TSX is 2649 fps/4674 ft-lbs from 78.5 grains of powder. That translates to 59.54 ft-lbs per each grain of WW 760 from a 24″ barrel. But the .375 Ruger doesn’t come from the Ruger factory in 24″ — it’s either 20″ or 23″. Then, of course, momentum is far less, plus the bullet being only 67% in cross-section area as the .458″ caliber. Yes, it will shoot “flatter”, but not hit as hard or make as large a permanent wound cavity.

The advantages of the .375 Ruger would be less recoil and a flatter trajectory, while being less efficient. Does efficiency matter? Well, it does if that is the subject, but not if results are the prime objective. And usually they are! If results at less recoil is the topic, then the .375 Ruger wins! If game down on-the-spot is the main thing, no matter rifle weight or recoil, then you choose your medicine!

But, our topic is: “Efficient Cartridges”. So we continue…

In comparing (again) the .35 Whelen with it’s parent, the .30-06, we objectively see these factors which may, or should, determine our opinions of one versus the other in decision making or any debate:

And, of course, these ballistic comparisons can only be made on the basis of handloads as factory loads for the .35 Whelen are practically non-existent. Yes, Remington makes a couple, but they are a very poor representative of its actual potential. So, handloads only for each based on Nosler’s Manual No.6:

the .30-06

180gr (Partition, Solid Base or AccuBond)
24″ barrel
Highest MV: 2872 fps/3296 ft-lbs
61 grains of RL-22
Efficiency = 54 ft-lbs per grain

.35 Whelen

225gr (Partition or Accubond)
24″ barrel
Highest MV: 2805 fps/3930 ft-lbs
58 grains IMR4064
Efficiency = 67.76 ft-lbs per grain

As “they” say:YMMV.

But my experience was with two 22″ .35 Whelens, and I’d choose the 250gr Partition at 2600 fps if in a bolt gun. Finn Aagaard’s load in a 22″ was 59.5 grains of RL-15 behind the 250 NP at 2600 fps.
(This NEF single-shot was one of my .35 Whelens)

But, nonetheless, the original point was that powder capacity the same (or nearly so), a larger caliber will ALWAYS be more efficient in energy and momentum than anything smaller in caliber.

Let’s consider one more example, that is somewhat more extreme than those previously given: The .223 Remington vs. the .44 Remington Magnum. They have approximately the same case capacity when bullets are seated.

Both are popular cartridges; the one for small game and varments, the other for self defence and bigger game up to about 400 lbs. One is for varments at about 250 to 300 yards, the other for big game to a max of about 125 yards. But they burn about equal amounts of gun powder, a somewhat faster type for the .44 Mag. One produces about 1200 ft-lbs at the muzzle, the other close to 2000 ft-lbs. One has a momentum of about 24, the other a momentum of 73. They each have a purpose, but the “little” .223 can’t compare with the .44 mag in efficiency! You can shoot “big” varments with either, but only the .44 Rem Mag is appropriate for a 350 lb bear inside 100 yards! And, by the way, the “little” .44 Rem Mag is more efficient than both the .45-70 and the .458 Winchester. It is making about 84 ft-lbs per grain of powder, whereas the .223 is about 57 ft-lbs per grain.

More to come, next time… (Other factors involved in efficiency, only hinted at this time.)

Shalom

BOB MITCHELL

Three Rifles for World-Wide Hunting of Big Game — Part 3

This is not a particularly inspiring photo until it is connected with something I wrote on February 5, 2015 under the title of “Testing Loads — 12 Gauge Slugs and other stuff”. In that article I described an encounter with a set of tracks freshly made in the snow by a big buck being tracked by a big wolf several years ago. My van was parked off this road at the entrance of a trail (an old logging road – now a snow-mobile or ATV trail) on the left at the sharp bend on the hill. I walked up that hill still in my snowshoes. It gets steep past the corner and turns left again at the top. That’s were I picked up the trail of the wolf following the buck again as they crossed the road into the thick bush on the right.

They say a picture is worth a thousand words… This one, taken a couple of weeks ago, holds untold memories that could fill a book. From where I took this pic, in the middle of the road, immediately on the right is another trail, a one-time old logging road, perhaps as old as I am, but now an official ATV and snow-mobile trail. I brought my last big buck out from that trail.

In about 1988 or ’89, I first entered it while deer hunting in November. Yet, I’d hunted this area in 1982 and ’83 with my sons, but never the trails on the left (half-way up the hill) or the one immediately on the right of this pic. From January 1st, 1978 to February 1984, I was a pastor in Toronto, so my sons and I travelled for two hours to get to this area for deer hunting. Between early 1984 and late 1987, my wife and I lived in Halifax N.S, where I was pastor. The only one of our four still at home was the youngest who was actually in college. The others were all married. The oldest in Africa, the second a youth pastor in N.S. and our daughter married and in Toronto.

When we (wife and I) returned to Ontario in late ’87, it was too late to do any deer hunting, and I had to be in Ontario for a year before being considered a resident hunter again. But we were now living within an hour of this area in the photo. As mentioned, I first entered this trail in ’88 or ’89 during the deer hunt in November. To put this in perspective, the Haliburton Highlands are world famous. This is one dirt road access to the Highlands that encompasses hundreds of square miles. Since 1988, I’ve explored a lot of this territory, but I keep coming back to this road that gives access to thousands of acres of Crown Land.

The pic on the left is about a mile from where the trail begins on the left, at the corner, of the first photo. In this one I was toting my CZ550 in .458 WM. In this country there are many lakes — small, medium and large — ridges and ravines, and all possible creatures that one may run into in Ontario, including moose, deer, bear, wolf, coyote, brush wolves, fox, fisher, bobcat, cougar, rabbit, weasel, mink, beaver and possibly elk. And game birds like ducks, geese, turkey and grouse… I’m sure I’ve missed something. Then, of course fish in the dozens of lakes and streams and squirrels by the millions as well as coons and skunk! Lots of song birds and ravens too, as well as birds of prey.

(In this pic taken early in the New Year, there are the following tracks all made after a fresh snow fall during the night. I arrived at noon: deer, wolf, coyote, fox, fisher, coon and squirrel!)

Going back to the first photo and the memories it recalls: On the immediate right of this pic is a trail, as mentioned, that I entered for the first time in either 1988 or ’89. I knew it was there but had some miss-information about it from some source — I don’t recall, but believe it was from someone who didn’t want us to go there. I was under the impression for some time that it merely led to a hunt camp on private property. What was not told to us was the fact that the hunt camp was actually on Crown Land and more than a mile away! Anyway, my hunting friend, Mike and I had spent the morning part of our hunt in a snowstorm trying to find some fresh tracks on the far side of a big bog. We were wanting to try another area which would take us onto the mentioned trail. So, rather than following the extended route around the bog again, we decided to cross it. That was a BIG mistake! The bog was of course covered with wet fallen snow! We slogged through that stuff to about our knees for over an hour to reach high ground on the far side! Needless to say perhaps, but we were exhausted! Time for some rehab. Parked at the entrance to the trail, we ate lunch and took a brief nap in the vehicle.

Then it was pit-stop time! I had two rifles on board: my Marlin in .45-70, which I’d toted all morning — and through that bog! Now a 22″ Marlin in .45-70 is not particularly a “light rifle” with a scope, four cartridges loaded with 400-grainers and a sling — particularly with a heavy, bull-like barrel to begin with, and all coated with wet snow — it probably weighed over 9 lbs starting out that morning, and it must have weighed twice that by noon… at least it FELT that way! But, I had a lighter, slimmer rifle on board as well — a beautiful Sako in 6.5 X 55 sporting a 22″ barrel. Yes, it had a scope and sling plus four in the magazine, and came in at around 8 lbs. So, I decided to give myself a little break for the afternoon. I took the 6.5 in on the trail for a few hundred yards for my pit-stop. On the way, I came across two sets of fresh deer tracks! So, rather than toting the heavy Marlin loaded for polar bears, I continued on with my light 6.5 loaded for varments! The rifle was not a mistake, but the load was! How come?

Is a 6.5 X 55 unsuitable for a 250 lb whitetail when it has been successfully used in its native land on moose? It IS suitable for game to about 750 lbs if loaded right… and pointed right — within range of 100 yards or so! “HOLD IT!” someone is shouting at me… “What about those Swedish moose that go… hmmm, maybe 800 lbs?” Well, first of all they’re NOT shot at 300 meters, and often it takes two or more unless its a CNS hit! And NOT with 120gr Nosler Ballistic Tips at 2900 fps in thick woods! That’s the load I took with me as a convenience because that’s what I had loaded. I was out of 140gr Nosler Partitions — loaded. They were making 2700 fps. That day, I never planned on using the 6.5… it was intended as a backup ONLY. But we make mistakes when we’re tired! There’s nothing wrong with the cartridge chosen as a backup or as the MAIN rifle in such a hunt, but not with bullets intended for smaller game under better circumstances.

But, I was also influenced by what I’d read in the rags, er magazines which promoted the Nosler Ballistic Tips as great for bambi! Yet, I was without excuse as I’d loaded those bullets for coyote, having seen them turn to confetti against brush! And guess what? At the end of that long day, as it was drawing to a close — I mean, 5 minutes of hunting light left, in a snow storm, an approximate 265 lb buck emerged from the fog-like snow coming my way from a ravine below.

I waited until I though it was clear of all obstructions, a perfect broadside shot presented itself, the trigger was squeezed and the buck went down! But, it bounced right back up again, scrambling over a slippery, snow-covered ledge and disappeared into the snow-fog never to be seen again! It got pitch dark almost immediately and the snow was coming down like it was on a mission! Mike arrived. We found a drop of blood, followed the tracks over the ledge and part way into the ravine where we couldn’t see three-feet! It was pitch dark in a snowstorm, on a trail we’d never been on before at about a mile from our wheels. And then… there was that hill with the sharp corners! We were unsure if we could make it back to civilization that dark-stormy night!

That was the last few minutes of legal deer hunting for the year! The next day was Sunday and I was unavailable for a follow-up, but Mike did that chore and reported that it appeared that the buck was still healthy and it’s tracks led into unknown country. On Monday, I returned to the area alone and there were no remaining tracks left — they were snow covered. But I did find a 1″ hardwood sapling in line with the shot that was lopped over — nearly cut in half at the approximate height of the bullet’s path. From previous experience with that bullet, I knew it had turned to shrapnel and a piece, or few pieces at most, had hit the buck. It fell trying to get out of harm’s way and slipped on the slippery ledge causing a wound to one of its legs, hence the drop of blood!

(In this pic of an old photo, somewhat in bad focus, I was using my Marlin in .45-70 near the same spot of the incident mentioned above. It was about a year or two later, but it may give an idea of conditions on that dark night.)

There are several lessons here: 1) Use the right bullet; 2) Don’t blame the rifle, and 3) Don’t blame the cartridge.

In a three-rifle scenario for all game, these would be my three: 1) a 6.5 X 55, 2) a 9.3 X 62 and 3) a .458 Winchester Magnum. In effect, I have a 9.3 and a .458. If I added a third, it would be another 6.5 X 55, or it’s equal in 6.5.

I can’t conceive of any legitimate argument against that threesome. There is a .26-cal., a .36-cal. and a .46-cal. (well, almost). Perfect separation with two being older than I am (they must know something)! And the .458 WM being a 59 year-old veteran of numerous African safaris. No safari hunter, past or present, has as much experience in facing the world’s dangerous game than the .458 Winchester Magnum! And that’s a true fact! It doesn’t need to feel embarrassment or fear when confronted by doubters who’ve been on 59 safaris to Africa. It’s been there thousands of times!

First: the 6.5 X 55

Not much remains to be said, I think. It’s a proven cartridge that is very innately accurate, with a variety of excellent bullets available to the handloader from 85gr to 160gr. Most have excellent SD’s and BC’s. The 140gr Nosler Partition is the one I’d use for game hunting at about 2700 fps.

My longest shot on a live creature was 325 yards on a groundhog using an 85gr Sierra HP at around 3200 fps, as I recall. Being a somewhat tough bullet, it could also be useful on coyotes. But my choice on wolves/coyotes today would be the 130gr Accubond. On bear, I’d use the 140gr Partition.

The 9.3 X 62

I’ve written so much on this I fear any further commentary might become redundant. However, there are always newcomers to this site. So for those shooters and hunters, I’d encourage them to refer to the previous two blogs in this current series for more details.

I feel it should be stated, however, that experience shows it to be as capable as a .375 H&H for anything big. We could split hairs of course and give a slight edge to the .375 H&H.

The issue of African DG is often cited as a reason for choosing the .375 H&H over the 9.3 X 62. It must be remembered, however, that the 9.3 X 62 has proven itself on elephant, with solids, too many times to be discounted. Dead is dead! Then the matter of it’s legality in certain African states for DG is often brought up as a reason to downgrade it to the status of excellence for plains game… ONLY. I BEG TO DIFFER!

In ALL the following African states the 9.3 X 62 with appropriate bullets making a minimum of 3900 ft-lbs (5200 Joules) where energy is even mentioned, the 9.3 X 62 qualifies for ALL big game: Benin, Burkina Faso, Cameroon, Ethiopia, Mozambique, Namibia, South Africa (most provinces) and Zimbabwe. For the rest of African states, if the travelling hunter gets permission from their PH, he/she can often use their 9.3 X 62 on the Big Game, including the DG. Of course, all hunters must obey laws and their PH!

The .458 Winchester

This one needs little introduction from myself, having been the main heavy hitter in Africa for nearly 60 years. Yes, others have come along in recent times with a claim to better performance for this or that. As well, some oldies have seen a resurrection of sorts. But as long as there are thousands of .458 Win Mags still in the hands and closets of Americans and Canadians, as well as others around the globe, there’s no fear it will become obsolescent as long as really big and dangerous game are still hunted. 5000 ft-lbs of kinetic energy is still the benchmark from a 500gr .458-caliber… The .458 Winchester Magnum can easily attain that number today, and exceed it, from better powders and using super-premium bullets. In 2015, the .458 WM surpasses its more-than-adequate qualities of 1956 by a whole bunch! Like good wine, it has improved with age!

For this one too I have an abiding affection. It’s a sensible choice for anything big and dangerous on our side of the pond as well. And, oh yeah, it does a superb job on bears of any size, not only the Alaskan brand!

(That’s a .458 Win Mag hanging from my shoulder in the “North Country” while looking for a good bull moose.)

That’s it for “Three Rifles for All Game World-Wide”. You, of course, may have your own legitimate “Trio”, and that’s OK too.

Next time: EFFICIENT CARTRIDGES.

Shalom

BOB MITCHELL

Three Rifles for World-Wide Hunting of Big Game — Part 2

I’s bright and sunny today so I’m tempted to leave writing and go hunting for a wolf… but, I desist as it’s also very cold with a promise of 50 km winds…. brrrrr! But the thought prompts me, nonetheless, to consider options for a rifle suitable for such a “varment”.

Hi again! Our theme is “Three rifles” for all hunting world-wide. Yes, I know the title says “…of Big Game”. For me “big game” starts with white-tailed deer. Our whitetails are BIG! Anything smaller is “medium”, “small” or “varment”. Yet, some of our varments are also of quite good size. Take, for an example, our brush wolves, or perhaps more properly stated: our “brush wolves”. That’s because no one, including “officialdom” seems to know for sure what to call ‘em. However, the wildlife “brain trust” has finally (after about a century) acknowledged that they do in actual fact exist as a species! Down East, where I come from, it’s been acknowledged for a very loooong time that brush wolves are a distinct species; though, sometimes referred to as “coy dogs”.

Here in Ontario, wildlife technicians have “discovered” from DNA that they are actually the result of inbreeding between wolf and coyote, which previously they authoritatively proclaimed couldn’t happen! So much for authoritative proclamations…. something like “the earth is flat, I tell you”, or even better: “eggs are bad for you!”, no, that’s wrong, we’ve discovered “eggs are good for you!”, of even better: “Global warming is the result of humans abuse of carbon!”, or this one: “We’ve all evolved from protoplasm!”, or until a better authoritative pronouncement is made by “those who know” stuff. Pardon that excursion…

(Three sets of wolf tracks made in the early morning in fresh snow before I arrived on the scene.)

Brush wolves, or coyote-wolves, or coy-wolves, or whatever someone may want to call ‘em, exist and have so for a very long time! So do cougars in the eastern half of Canada, as well as the western-half, though that too has been denied by “officialdom” here in Ontario, as well as in New Brunswick until about 40 years ago — that is in reference to N.B., not Ontario where it’s admitted by some “officials” and denied by others… still! Well, I know a big cat’s tracks from that of a moose or bear, as well as a canine’s tracks. And I’ve seen a big cat’s tracks in the snow where I hunt, and it wasn’t from a bobcat, unless it was from a very long one! I also saw a very large black cougar in New Brunswick in 1972… I came within 6-feet of it at 5 mph in my car! Three years later, our oldest son, Brent, saw one (a black one) in plain daylight about 20 miles (32km) from my sighting. It was crossing a main highway and at first sighting he thought it was a black bear, that is until he got close enough to see the long body with a very long tail!

We also have real wolves! That is, the timber wolf. So, when I’m hunting grouse in the same areas that I do most of my big-game hunting, I have to be aware of a possible encounter with a bear, wolf, brush wolf or cougar! So, what should my “varment rifle” be? Maybe my varment “rifle” should be a 12-gauge! But this is about rifles… three of ‘em, right? Yes.

So this time around my threesome will be a .243 Winchester, a .350 Rem Mag and a .416 Ruger. I’ve never owned, nor even fired the smallest or largest of this group, but I think it could work as a decent trio for “all things”. The .350 Rem Mag is also a favorite of mine, and I do have some experience in toting one in hunting and a lot of handloading experience with two, both Remingtons with 22″ barrels.

The .243 Winchester

While having never owned one, I did recommend and helped provide a .243 Winchester for my youngest son who resides in Western Canada. He wanted something for coyotes. I suggested it could also be useful on whitetails if he felt so inclined. In my view, however, I think it’s most ideal for the wild canines. So does one of my hunting buddies — who is a pro in that field.

(Our youngest son, Peter’s “varment rifle” in .243 Winchester. Yes, it’s a single-shot H&R.)

As a matter of fact, if I wanted a dedicated varment rifle for the canines, this might be a sensible candidate. Though, on the other hand, I’d probably choose a .308 Winchester if most of my hunting was concentrated on wolves in remote timber regions instead of the more familiar coyotes in agricultural areas. Though I have seen large wolves in agricultural terrain as well. Usually, they are after a sheep or even a whitetail hanging around a corn field. All of the canine fraternity are very opportunistic. That goes for bears as well.

Whatever the case, I’d keep my .243 loaded with 90gr pills at least, and 100’s wouldn’t be out of place, either. When a lone 100 – 150 lb wolf can take down a 350 lb deer, I wouldn’t hunt them specifically with anything less than a .243 Winchester loaded with bullets appropriate for a supreme predator. Or, your worst nightmare might be a pack of wolves that see you as a tasty morsel. Yes, 5 – 6 mature timber wolves can wear-out and bring down a 1400 lb bull moose! It’s been witnessed and recorded.

The .350 Remington Magnum

I recall reading somewhere a long time ago that the .350 Rem Mag was a lot more capable from a ballistics standpoint than what was officially recognized in print. I found that to be very true.

There’s a lot of wasted paper with words on it that says things like “The size of the cartridge, it’s volume in other words, will tell you what to expect in ballistics — it’s energy. You can’t get more than what it’s capacity allows.”

To that, I say: N-O-N-S-E-N-C-E!

Within narrow parameters that may make some sense, but including some other parameters that is far from all there is to it!

What do I mean?

(That’s the .350 Rem Mag that would shoot “lights out”, once it was “fixed”.)

Just as a hint of where I’m going with this, consider the following data from two prestigious reloading manuals:

Manual “One”: “This data has maximum charges that develop 50,000 cup”. That’s in regard to a 500gr from a Ruger No.1 in .45-70 at 1800 fps. That’s about 3600 ft-lbs at the muzzle.

Manual “Two”: an exact same load shows 32,700 cup! Another load still at 39,000 cup gives 1879 fps/3919 ft-lbs. That’s about 46,000 psi. If I load that same rifle to 63,000 psi (.458 Win Mag level) what should I expect? There is, by the way, NO REASON not to! The brass in .45-70 has been tested to 70,000 psi without so much as enlarging the primer pocket to any measurable extent! That rifle is the same as used for mighty-magnums –just the chamber that’s of slightly smaller size! At 63,000 psi, I should reasonably expect MVs similar to the mighty .458 WM. And that’s exactly what happened when my load was tested at a reputable USA firm, which surprised even the chief ballistics’ engineer! His first sentence to me over the phone after the test was “You have just re-invented the .458 Winchester Magnum, what was the recoil like?”

So, my point is: With different parameters as a test setup, it is indeed possible to significantly improve ballistics. How? By using a different powder than the manuals used and going to a higher psi where safely warranted!

I’d NEVER go to a higher psi if the load was unstable! But if the extreme spread was no more than 10 to 20 fps, and in some cases less than 10, I have no qualms of loading to MAP (Maximum Average Pressure) psi. And in the case of the .45-70 in a Marlin, that’s about 40,000 psi. In a Ruger .45-70, it’s about the same as a .458 Win Mag according to an official at Ruger and the head ballistician who tested my load.

Also, by using a longer barrel and a longer COL will often increase ballistics by a significant margin. Then, one of the newer powders can often perform wonders in some stubborn situations. Such was the case in my second .350 Rem Mag, that also had a bad-undersize chamber from the factory! After my gunsmith fixed that, and in using the “best” powder, I got an increase of 300 fps from 250-grainers!

So back to the .350 Rem Mag we go.

My first model was one of the Remington Classic series. It had the short action, a 22″ barrel and good walnut. It was also much lighter than expected at about 8 lbs ready for action, including scope, sling and ammo. It was accurate enough and very comfortable to tote all day, but I was disappointed with it’s ballistics. That was pre- RL-15. The best the manuals could come up with was about 2400 fps from 250s. And I was having trouble getting even that from the “best” suggested powders from a 22″. I traded the gun for my first Marlin in .45-70. That was the start of a good thing.

Fast forward to many years later: I was getting bored with my .340 Weatherby, having fired a 1000 rounds or so through it and taken a nice bull moose, and having experience with a .35 Whelen using RL-15, I set my sights on a new .350 Rem Mag in the M697. It had a thick-heavy laminated stock, a thick recoil pad and the infamous “rib” on the barrel. All that was intended to add weight, which it did in pounds not merely ounces, and it appeared comfortable to handle with it’s short action and 22″ tube. I’d already decided the “rib” was a useless appendage, but I could live with it.

From the outset of attempting handloads, I discovered something had to be amiss with the chamber. It went to my gunsmith who uncovered it’s fault — a serious one! The chamber was under-size! The rifle had to be disassembled, including the useless “rib”, the chamber redone according to specs… and voila!, a brand-new rifle for $165! By “new”, I mean a complete transformation! I’d have it to this day except for the useless rib and the stock that must have added an extra one and one-half pounds over the Classic model! At least it felt that way!

But man, would it shoot! I mean, 1/2″ groups any time, any day! At MV’s I don’t dare mention lest you’d think I’m lying… and that from 250gr Grand Slams over a case full of RL-15! No .338 Win Mag was better with a 22″ barrel… I kid you not! The last group I fired from that rifle using RL-15 and the 250 GS went into 3/8″ at 100 yds at * * * * MV!!

I’d as soon have another .350 Rem Mag for a Medium as I would a .338 Win Mag! But not in a 20″… I’d want it in a 22″. But then, I have this 9.3 X 62 with a 22 1/2″ barrel, that’s lighter than even that Classic was, and shoots 286’s almost as fast as that .350 would fire 250’s. But let me put it this way: It would trump my .35 Whelen with the same RL-15 shooting 250’s from the same length barrel, by 100 fps! In addition, that .35 Whelen wouldn’t shoot the 250 Nosler Partition within 100 fps of the 250gr Speer HotCor of 250gr Hornady SP without blowing primers!

One of my manuals at the time pointed out that the .35-cal. 250gr Nosler Partition was a harder bullet than those other two, and would cause significantly higher pressure! But in the .350 Rem Mag I never experienced that problem, and apart from the fact that it was 1/8″ longer than the 250 GS, not allowing for as much powder space, it still came within 50 fps of the GS without any excess pressure problems at all!

So, there ARE MANY factors that influence psi other than cartridge volume, caliber and barrel length. And a higher psi doesn’t always translate to higher muzzle velocities, either. The bullet itself and its construction is a major factor, as well as the chamber, barrel and bore in which it is fired.

Other factors that influence peak pressure, the time and location of it — apart from the powder and primer used — are bullet ogive, freebore, angle of leade, carbon and/or copper build-up, and its location, etc.

And, oh… I did shoot something “big” with that load, a domestic mule that was intended to protect a hobby farm from wolves and bears! Instead, it beat-up on the smaller pets, like exotic goats, so the owner asked if I’d perform that duty for them — put it down! A bear did sneak in and ripped open a prized female sheep that was pregnant while the “garde mule” stood by and watched, at least that was the story! The sign was evident to both a Conservation Officer friend of mine, as well as to myself, of the presence of a large bear being on that property. That mule went about 750 – 800 lbs. One shot and it was down, and then a finishing shot. We hung it up and I took out the innards. It provided several hundred pounds of meat for a German family who were habituated to horse meat.

I’ve never owned a more accurate big-game rifle! Al Miller, former Editor in Chief of Wolfe Publications, said if he were limited to one rifle it would be chambered for the .350 Remington Magnum.

The .416 Ruger

This one is, of course, a necked-up version of their .375 Ruger. It fits within a standard-length action, and the hype is that it will duplicate the .416 Remington and .416 Rigby in ballistics even with a shorter barrel! But, it won’t make 2400 from 400s in a 20″. However, there is the 23″ Hawkeye version that should attain the promised 2400 fps/5115 ft-lbs. It compares better with the Remington than with the Rigby which has a case capacity similar to that of the .416 Weatherby. And none of the others, with the possible exception of the Rigby with handloads, can come near the Weatherby’s 2700 fps from 400s in a 24″.

The Ruger can make about 2350 fps from the 20″ version, throwing a 400gr. For general purpose hunting, the 350gr TTSX seems the best choice at between 2450 and 2600 fps, depending on actual barrel length plus some other factors previously mentioned. That bullet has a decent BC of .444, and it’s tough enough for anything short of the pachyderms.

A 400gr at 2350 is 4905 ft-lbs at the muzzle, and a 350gr at 2550 fps is 5053 ft-lbs. So, a relatively light ‘n handy Big Bore producing about 5000 ft-lbs of muzzle smash is nothing to be taken “lightly” from a rifle that tilts the scales a tad over 9 lbs! That doesn’t make it a “flat-shooter” by any stretch, but it could be put to good use on big bears, moose, bison and etc. Then, plains game come to mind as well.

So far, I don’t think their .416 is going to turn into a gold mine for Ruger. .416-caliber isn’t the most popular creation despite dire predictions that it might eventually replace both .375 and .458-calibers. That’s yet a long way from happening. But still, it looks like a workman like tool for the right jobs.

But is the .416 Ruger really that much of an improvement over their .375? I predict that the .375 Ruger will outsell it at least 10 to 1.

And that’s my take from here…

Hmmmm… yet it’s obvious from a practical view, that this trio could cause some real havoc for anything from nasty canines to the large bellicose sort of beasties!

Next time, one more and final trio…

Shalom

BOB MITCHELL

Three Rifles for World-Wide Hunting of Big Game — Part 1

This is a very nice grizzly taken cleanly by one shot from one of Rev. Ted Wagner’s 9.3 X 62’s. He’s a resident of Whitehorse in the Yukon with his wife, who also hunts with him. The bullet was a fused 270gr Matrix — http://www.matrixballistics.com — out of British Columbia. Though Ted has been using the 9.3 X 62 as his main big-game rifle for over thirty years, it has only recently been gaining much attention in the rest of North America. In fact, it is now a hot commodity.
(Photo credit: Rev. Ted Wagner)

In comparison to the famed .375 H&H, Ted expresses his appreciation for the 9.3 X 62 this way: “After using both for almost forty years, and putting literally tons of game in the freezer, I am fond of saying that the 9.3 X 62 is a .375 H&H with five in the magazine.” He has shot all of the big game in The Yukon several times over, including sheep at over 6000 ft.

Ted and his wife moved from Ontario to Whitehorse in The Yukon forty-four years ago, one year after they were married. He still travels over 70,000 miles each year by air in North America speaking in conferences. He officially retired five years ago from being pastor in Whitehorse.

Ted currently owns four 9.3 X 62s, two Husqvarnas and two customs. The customs have 21″ barrels and one of those only weighs 7.5 lbs ready for action, about the same as my Tikka T3 Lite which goes 7.4 lbs all-up. He also favors heavy-for-caliber bullets for the heavyweight game of The Yukon. While the grizzly was shot with a 270gr, as noted, he recommends the 290gr Matrix, and has received a special order of 300s and 320s in 9.3mm from Marshall, who is the owner and chief operator at Matrix. Ted has owned many fine rifles over the years in several other cartridges as well.

In conversation over the phone, he also pointed out something that I was completely unaware of: Ruger produced a “special run” of No.1s in 9.3 X 74R quite a few years ago (not the more recent “run”), of which several are in the hands of hunters in “The North”.

(This is the Matrix bullet that terminated that big grizzly — Photo credit: Rev. Ted Wagner)

Consider these facts regarding the current popularity of the 9.3 X 62: The interest and demand for rifles and components for reloading are well in advance of production. Favorite sites for bullets in 9.3mm, such as Swift, Barnes, Hornady, Nosler and Tradex Canada, often list 9.3s as “sold out” or “back ordered”. There’s a reason for that, and it isn’t because sales are slow and therefore dealers don’t stock them, it’s rather due to this fact: They are sold out and dealers didn’t count on that happening so quickly! My gunsmith friend, Edwin, said recently “I’ve seen more 9.3 X 62’s in the last few months than I’d seen in the previous 40 years!”

In a recent series of articles I wrote on “One Rifle and One Bullet for All Big Game Hunting”, I stated that if I were limited to one rifle for all big game, in a medium it would be a 9.3 X 62. And that is after having owned and used numbers like .338 Winchester Magnums and .375 H&H’s! In my experience so far, there are good enough reasons for that.

When I started experimenting with a new 9.3 X 62 in a Tikka T3 Lite in 2011, there was little reliable handloading information out there. And what was available was of the stiff-upper-lip conservative type that conveyed the definite notion that to pass 2400 fps from 286’s was a prediction of something very bad about to happen! However, never being one to follow the masses, I tried their conservative approach until patience yelled “Enough already!”. Then, my experimenting nature took charge. Eventually, within the first year I came across a couple of hints that RL-17 might wake up the sleeping cartridge, and breath new life into it. As expected, the protesters came out of the woods (woodwork) flinging their anathemas, declaring it was insulting to the cartridge to try and get more from it than was either necessary or historical! Ha! and Ha! Ha! Well, never being too obedient, I listened to the hints.

(This result is from the combination of the 286 Nosler Partition over RL-17. Corrected MV = 2622 fps/4365 ft-lbs. Quick Load says it’s just under 64,000 psi.)

Within a year, my loads were embarrassing the 9.3 X 64 Brenneke, and challenging the .375 H&H, to say nothing about surpassing the famed .338 Winchester Magnum, which I like and respect, incidentally. Every once in a while I have a twinge of conscience that says “Am I really nuts in getting those kind of ballistics from that little case?” Well, the twinges are getting fewer as time and experience passes. Then, the case is not really that “little” either. It’s no big deal to get in 68 grains of the right powder before stuffing in a bullet. In the .375 H&H, with certain bullets in 300grs, I had to work at getting in 73 grains if the COL was to remain within specs. Same with the .338 and the .458 Winchesters. So, the case capacity of the 9.3 X 62 isn’t really little! Granted, the magazine clip and freebore allow a stretching of the COL to nearly 3.4″, and in some rifles that number is surpassed. Also, being a near straight-wall cartridge allows it to be much more efficient in the use of powder than, say, the magnum cartridges with tight “bottle-necks”.

When recently asked his opinion on the 9.3 X 62 for Alaska’s big bears, a renowned Alaskan outfitter and guide, Phil Shoemaker said “…you would have to shoot a lot of them to see any difference between the .375 H&H and the 9.3 X 62″.

The standard COL for the 9.3 X 62 is 3.291″, so the way I load mine is in effect adding about 1/10″ to the cartridge. Does that matter? Well, yes if you want to use a slower powder than RL-15 or IMR4895 which only partially fill the case before you run into pressure problems. I’ve never understood manuals or people who load modern brass in a new rifle from 54 to 58 grains of a medium fast powder when they could use 12 grains more of a medium slow one that will keep the pressure curve flatter to the muzzle. Anyway, upcoming will be a new series on EFFICIENT CARTRIDGES when this current theme is done.

How does the above fit into the current theme of “Three Rifles…”? In this way: Personally, I would always want one of the three to be a “Medium”. And as maintained in the series on “One Rifle…” for all big game, while there are obviously many good to excellent choices, mine would be a 9.3 X 62. I’ll restate my reasons later on in this series. Having said that, there are many possible “Threes” where it might not be included. One example of an excellent battery of three, excluding a high velocity .22-caliber, might be: a 7-08 Remington, a .300 Winchester and a .375 H&H. There is nothing you couldn’t hunt in any part of the world with one or more of those. I once owned a trio like that.

So let’s indulge our imagination.

At one time I thought the perfect threesome might be a .25-06 Remington, a .300 Win Mag and a .375 H&H, and I also owned such a trio. Let’s see what one could do with those.

FIRST: a .25-06 Remington

It’s considered a dual-purpose cartridge. There are varment bullets and big-game bullets available for the handloader. Mine was a Winchester M70 in like-new condition. I never fired a factory round through it, and also found it to be amenable to handloads. In fact, it was easy to develop handloads for and superbly accurate with relatively gentle recoil.

The .25-06 Remington is, of course, the .30-06 case necked to .257-caliber. Let’s consider three examples from Nosler: They produce an 85gr Ballistic Tip that can make 3600 fps from a 24″ barrel. That’s a varment bomb intended for varments, not edible game. When zeroed at 300 yards, it’s down at -8″ at 400, still making about 2423 fps/1108 ft-lbs — plenty for pronghorn, wolf or coyote. Then, of course, tougher-light bullets are made, like Nosler’s 110gr Accubond with a much better BC of .418, and according to Nosler’s Manual #6, it can be started up to 3267 from a 24″. That gives the .25-06 a flat enough trajectory for mule deer to around 400 with adequate horsepower if the bullet is properly placed.

Then for larger game, such as elk or black bear, the best choice as I see it is the 120gr Nosler Partition at about 3200 fps (from a 24″). I could get 3175 fps from 120’s in my 22″ barrel.

While I never used my .25-06 on black bear, there are those who have, with success, I might add. But then there are “bear” and other “BEAR”! The same goes for elk. In my view, the .25-06 is at it’s best for game between about 40 lbs to 400 lbs, always at responsible ranges.

Since I consider black bear as dangerous game (DG — some say “potentially dangerous”, but that also might aptly apply to whitetail bucks that can go 400 lbs here in The North!), the formula I use for my personal bear hunts under all conditions would be a TE of 32 for a bear of 400 lbs. A 120gr Nosler would need be travelling at 2984 fps at impact to produce a TE of 32. That means I might use it over bait at not more than 100 yards, but for free ranging bear of trophy size where a 200 yard shot, or more, might be called for, I’d NEVER be toting a .25-06 for a trophy quality bear of any kind!

While I’ve owned and used only one rifle in .25-06, I enjoyed it for developing loads and shooting it at the range. But I never shot any game with it, nor varments that I can recall. It was for experimentation and sport shooting, though I’d still recommend it as part of a threesome, especially in the West where it seems to find a natural home.

Next, the middle of The Three:

A .300 Winchester Magnum

With this one I have considerable experience from six bolt-action rifles. I’ve recently written of them in some detail, so will not do so again. However, there must be a reason somewhere in my psyche and experience that tells me it’s one of the best all-around cartridges for just about anything in North America under most conditions.

As some extreme examples of that, I shot a big jack rabbit in an open field in March, with still lots of snow around, at a measured 286 yards with one shot. I was leaning against a sturdy hardwood that was the last one between me and the rabbit! On the other end of things, also with snow on the ground in November during a deer hunt, I wacked a fat nine-point whitetail as it was coming up a ridge toward me through a relatively new fir bush. The range was 35 yards! The buck folded in its tracks with no external signs of a hit! The 180gr Hornady SP landed where intended between neck and shoulder (It was quartering toward me.). The bullet never made exit and I only found the entrance when the hide was pulled off in my garage. It was pencil size through the thick winter coat with a 3″ hole punched through the ribs. No meat loss or bloody mess as many would describe the results of using a 300 Win Mag on a whitetail, and post that as their excuse for not using one.

Then, there is a bunch of crybabies who complain vociferously over its recoil! The first time my friend and hunting buddy, Mike — who used a BLR in .308 Winchester — fired my Winchester M70 in .300 Win Mag, he said “That doesn’t have much recoil at all!” Later, he purchased a new Browning in .338 Win Mag and shot a very nice black bear with it over one of my baits at about 100 yards. He used the 210gr Nosler Partition at around 3000 fps. One and done.

As a matter of fact, Mike not only expressed his feelings about the recoil from my M70 in .300 WM firing a 180gr at over 3000 fps, but mine as well. Truth be told… the most recoil I’d experienced prior to my first .300 WM was a 7mm Rem Mag in a BAR, which also in my view was little more than my .30-06! There was an incremental increase from the .30-06 to the 7 mag and from the 7 mag to the .300, but certainly nothing like what I’ve read about from a noted writer — John Barsness, who is a very good writer, but I disagree with him at times, and on that point in particular. My personal view, after reading most of the popular writers over many years, is that many writers are by nature sensitive people and, therefore, sensitive to the IDEA of recoil.

Many intellectuals shudder at such a thought! I once knew a Doctor of anesthesiology who was a competitive target shooter on the international scene. He often shot beside me, prone, at our range. I was shooting some heavy loads in one of my .45-70’s, and he was shooting a heavy-barrelled, single-shot .223 Remington. He complained when he had to shoot his heavy-barrelled .308 Winchester, and could never understand how I could tolerate shooting a 400gr at 2000+ fps from an 8 1/2 lb rifle! The problem was not that I was a muscular “he-man” while he was a “shrinking violet”, but rather the difference was in perception and ATTITUDE! Of the various .45-70s, including my No.1 Ruger (Improved), I had the attitude that “Sure, it’s gonna punch me, but so what? There are things in life that hurt far, far worse!” And: “I’m not going to let this thing beat me… I’ll master it, and it’ll not kill me in the process!” Today, after thousands upon thousands of rounds down range from mega loads in .300’s, it’s not much more to me in recoil than a .223 Remington! Really? Well, I’ll concede it’s a little bit more, but to me I’d as soon shoot a .300 WM as a .223 Remington. Honestly. But then, I wouldn’t be shooting it a hundred times in a day at gophers, either! That would be way too expensive!

It’s perhaps obvious, a .300 Winchester Magnum is one of my all-time favorites. Then, on the other hand, I could just as easily live with a .300 Weatherby if it were as economical and practical.

The .375 H&H

I’ll not give a history lesson on this one, as that’s been done a few million times includig a couple of times in my articles. But I’m not unfamiliar with it, having owned a couple. One was an M70 Winchester with a 24″ barrel and the other a Browning with a 26″. That story has been told a few times as well, so I’ll not retell it here other than to give a few specifics.

The .375 H&H is a favorite of mine. The M70 (push feed) had beautiful wood, was well made and accurate. It went both bear and moose hunting without any sense of being “too much gun” even though the trigger wasn’t squeezed on either animal. I was on a guided hunt for bear and it was a bit ironic that my outfitter, Norm, moved me to a private property for a one-day stand. I’m not sure why, but with the week-end coming up he thought there might be too much ATV traffic in the area that would disturb the hunt, so he moved me again to another location. The next week a new hunter on the private property site shot a 500 lb trophy male!

For some reason, I thought a left-hand bolt action might be a better deal for me since I shoot from that side, so the M70 got traded for a 26″ Browning SS (LH) in .375 H&H with a 26″ barrel, and a magazine clip attached to the floor plate. It also had a 60* bolt lift from a three-lug bolt. While that rifle was lighter than the M70 by about a pound, it was also longer by a couple inches. And it was fast! A 300gr would leave the muzzle at 2700 fps! But… the accuracy was very poor no matter what I did with it or to it! In desperation, I had my gunsmith cut 4″ off the barrel in hopes of curing whatever ailed it. Besides losing 160 fps, that didn’t work either. In that process it was revealed that the bore was 8 thousandths off-center! That was it’s ailement for which there was no cure! It went back to the dealer and for another $100 I picked up a new, otherwise identical .338 Win Mag for which I’d planned to have it reamed to a .340 Weatherby. That worked out very well, but that’s a different story.

A longer story made much shorter… in hindsight I should have kept the M70.

Today, there are .375 H&H’s to be had for a handsome price from SAKO in their model 85. Go to http://www.sako.fi to see the SAKO 85’s and there are some beauties there, a few with even a 21 1/4 inch barrel weighing 8 lbs! There are 4 in the “Bear” series. A practical KODIAK with a grey laminate stock, SS action and fluted 21.25″barrel, clip magazine that holds 4+1 has been offered at our local gun emporium for $1600 and change.

On the left, from top to bottom in the SAKO 85 BEAR SERIES: 1)The Black Bear in 9.3 X 62; 2)The Brown Bear in .375 H&H ; 3)The Grizzly in 9.3 X 62; and 4)The Kodiak in .375 H&H. Those four are in a few other suitable cartridges as well.

Any of those four could serve as “A One Rifle for Everything” candidate for sure! All up the Kodiak should go about 9.2 lbs. That’s about a pound lighter than the M70 Winchester. There’s nothing you couldn’t hunt with that, since there are now sensible lighter bullets for smaller big game, like whitetails, that have decent BC’s. A challenge for all .375s has been to find bullets with good ballistic coefficients. Nosler has again come to the rescue with their AccuBonds, and even their solids with good aerodynamics.

If I already had a .375 H&H like the Sako 85 KODIAK, I’d have no need for a 9.3 X 62 since they would be too close in format and ballistics. Yet of the two, I’d probably choose the 85 BLACK BEAR in 9.3 X 62 at 7 lbs naked, as I also have the ballistics of a .458 Win Mag in my Ruger No.1 in .45-70 Imp. But my TIKKA is half the price and fits better with a true Big Bore than a .375 H&H does, in my view. In other words, if I had a .375 H&H that was amenable to all hunting, I’d never bother with a Big Bore as it does have a slight edge on the 9.3 X 62 with today’s better ballistic profile bullets, and it is close enough to the true Big Bores. But that depends entirely on how one loads a .375 H&H. Unless loaded with the 300gr AccuBond at 2600 fps+, the 9.3 X 62, as I load it, beats the .375 H&H in ballistics past about 250 yards. Using solids of 300grs for the really big DG, a 300gr at 2500 fps is exactly the same whether in a .375 H&H or a 9.3 X 62.

That’s a Threesome that, in my view, could cover any hunting anywhere from mountains to plains, and from brush to bogs. Also, nothing more would be needed for any wild thing from a 40 lb warthog to a 7000 lb Hippo!

Next time: Another Trio. (Incidentally, this is my longest blog ever, at just over 3000 words! So, little wonder if you are suffering from eyestrain!)

Shalom

BOB MITCHELL

Testing Loads — 12-gauge Slugs and Other Stuff (Cont’d)

It’s 9:30 a.m., and I’m looking out my office window… the sun is shinning brightly! I like sunny days in mid-winter. That also means it’s cold outside, but I don’t mind cold days in February if the sun is shinning and the wind isn’t howling! We’ve had enough snow already with five of the last seven days adding to what was already on the ground. But it’s highly unlikely that it’ll catch up with last year’s Yukon-like winter.

What I do appreciate about a day like this is a motivation to get out my snowshoes and visit the bush about 90 km from home to see what’s on the move, and do some predator calling. But with the increased depth of snow even the predators are facing a much greater challenge to move around. Yet the coyotes and wolves are smart and opportunistic. They have learned to use the snowmobile trails and when they cross a rabbit or deer track, they dive off the trail in hopes of soon catching up with the prey.

A few years ago, in the same area and about this time in the season, I was moving up a long ridge in several inches of freshly fallen snow in my snowshoes. I soon came upon two sets of tracks crossing the trail from my left to right before disappearing in thick alders. They were heading toward a small stream before climbing up over a 75 degree rocky escarpment that I couldn’t climb even without two-feet of snow on the ground and an icy ledge 40-feet high! Yes, I followed the fresh tracks to the bottom of that escarpment, which is a common feature of the Haliburton Highlands. The heavy buck was closely followed by a healthy, mature wolf. Since the deer season was already three months over, I was after the predator.

The area was well known to me, and I had to retreat down the trail to the main dirt road where I’d left my van. Still in my snowshoes, I walked up the hill of the dirt, snow-covered road until I crossed the two sets of tracks again. I followed them into the woods on my right. They went through a very thick tangle of young fir and cedar where the wolf tracks separated from those of the buck. It was evident to me that the wolf was circling the buck, planning an ambush. I had to be very alert as I could only see 20 yards directly in front where the buck’s tracks were heading. I wasn’t nervous, though I knew from the evident signs that this was a mature predator of around 100 lbs. I continued cautiously. Shortly, I came across what was obviously the encounter between big buck and big wolf. There was no blood but the battle signs were unmistakable, and the buck won the day, at least for a while. The tracks then separated with the buck continuing on its way toward another stream and another steep ridge. The wolf went off at about 45-degrees from the buck’s trail toward the same stream and ridge. But I was certain they would meet again for round two!

What’s the point? I was so confident with my rifle and load that to this day I don’t remember which one I had with me! It was likely a .300 Win Mag, but I can’t be sure. It doesn’t matter, does it? But THE point is that whatever I was using for a firearm that day, I had no concerns over that part of the hunt.

This interlude of blogs IS about assurance and confidence on the hunt of whatever because we’ve fully prepared ourselves for all contingencies, including the weapon and load. That ONLY happens through spending the time necessary in practice so that our focus is more on hunting the game in whatever conditions, than on the firearm itself. In a sense, we need to be so familiar with it that we forget about it, giving our attention rather to what may be, or become, unfamiliar to us such as terrain or other conditions like a predator showing up when the hunt is for deer, rabbits or birds. Too many get caught offguard by a bear, wolf (wolf pack), cougar, or other supreme predator when hunting small game with a .22LR or shotgun with #5’s up the spout. THINK ABOUT THAT!

Tere was a potentially very dangerous incident which involved our oldest son when he was a missionary in some of the remotest parts of Senegal, West Africa: Brent became, among other things, a licensed big game hunter while there. He was qualified and licensed to hunt any legal big game, medium or small game within season. Of course he had to pay the trophy fees. But he could also act as a guide. That meant he could shoot a lion or buffalo, in addition to anything else, if he wanted to. But mostly he hunted alone and with a single-shot .22LR.

On one occasion, he was alone late in the bush with his .22. Why wasn’t he toting his 12-gauge pump? Economics. The .22 was relatively cheap to shoot compared to Brenneke slugs at nearly $5 per, and there weren’t any Walmarts around the next bush! They were only available to him when a trip was made to Dakar, a two-day’s journey away by ground travel, or one day by hiring a flight on the Mission’s plane, which only happened in emergencies. On the edge of darkness, he started toward the village that was a couple of miles away (They didn’t have street lights!). He pulled out his flashlight, turned it on and….. nothing! The batteries had died! He knew the general course to take, but in the darkness he lost his sense of direction. But the worst nightmare was that within about 1/4 mile he heard lions roaring! I’m sure he really prayed like he’d never prayed before! Then he heard sounds from the village and was able to get oriented and followed those sounds until he saw the glow of embers from an outside fire.

Do you like “reality” shows? How real was that? Well, the fact of the matter was that around that same time there was lion predation of the villagers’ free-roaming cattle! And, a 15-year old lad from his village was pulled from a tree by a lion that killed him and carried of the corpse! Brent gave the “Coup-de- grace” to that lion from his lowly .22LR single-shot after the men of the village tracked the lion and put it on the ground with their home-made spears and home-made muskets! And they insisted that he shoot it because they thought his rifle was somehow supernatural — he had shot and killed dozens of warthog for protein that was often shared with the villagers, with that little .22LR single-shot! He brained them with .22 “solids”. Brent smiled when he told that episode. He said blood was pouring from several wounds in the beast and he merely put the muzzle to the side of the lion’s head and pulled the trigger. They credited him with killing the lion!

Today’s blog is to emphasise that one can never be “too ready”. And in this context — that means the weapon we choose and use.

Whenever I’m out-and-about with a shotgun (and I’ve owned several, including a semi) with birdshot, I always have a few slugs in a pocket… or, whenever with a slug in the barrel, and a couple in the magazine, I carry some shotshells in # OO and #5’s in various pockets. Just don’t tell the officers! The point is NOT to shoot something out of season (I’ve never done that knowingly), or illegally, but as a contingency. Of course, birdshot will put a bear out of commission temporally, or any other predator when hit in the face, but you may have to finish it off with a slug! Then, you can have a talk with the officers with your whole hide intact.

One of the reasons I prefer a smoothbore over a rifled barrel shotgun is that it’s far more versatile. It seems to me that is the main purpose of a shotgun. And that’s how I began serious hunting of big game… with a 12-gauge smoothbore.

‘Till the next…

Shalom

BOB MITCHELL

Testing Loads — 12-Gauge Slugs and Other Stuff

To get a break from winter blahs, I thought it a good idea to get out my old dusty bolt-action 12-gauge. I’d been wanting to put it to good use as a possible back-up for bears, and even wolves, when out-and-about by myself in some wilderness area. Well, you know, it’s been discussed more than a few times on the forums as a potential self-protection device when hiking or camping in some remote area, so I thought maybe it was time to give my thoughts (opinion) on the matter.

Before doing that, however, I recollect it was promised to give a series on “Three Rifles for All Hunting Worldwide”. That will be up-coming shortly, so don’t go away! I want to give some more study and reflection on that theme before diving into it. In the meanwhile, a short series on testing loads — including shotguns for backup, scouting, hiking and camping — seems like an ideal subject to launch.

How I do that, and what I’ve been doing lately, will occupy us for two or three weeks.

Testing loads, whether factory or handloads, is very important before going afield after game, whether it be birds, rabbits, groundhogs, deer, bear, elk or moose — or anything larger, tougher or more dangerous.

In considering my 12-gauge in the context of a backup and/or a walkabout firearm in scouting, hiking, etc., I needed to know which slugs it would shoot with decent accuracy to 50 yards, and the slugs that would penetrate adequately to stop a bear inside 10 yards, especially, since it might also see action as a follow-up on a wounded one in thick brush. It also needed a scope of relatively low power that could handle magnum cartridges producing 3000 ft-lbs, or more, at the muzzle.

So, the next step was to do some serious research on slug-power. Two came to mind that would be a good place to begin, as I had used both several years ago. The first was a 12-gauge Brenneke that I’d used in Africa in my son’s pump shotgun, and a Quebec manufactured DGS (trademark) 12-gauge magnum that fired a 504gr/.731″ at 1610 fps that I’d used during a special deer harvest several years before that. Since that time, my 12-gauge has only seen action a few times for grouse hunting. I thought it was time to let it see daylight again.

A couple of boxes of those Quebec made Challenger slugs were located at our local Canadian Tire store; and one was bought which contained 10. Then, I proceeded to our range and fired a few to get on target. But the scope hadn’t been mounted yet, so all I had was the front bead to go by, and I did manage to get a couple within 3″ to 4″ of the aiming point at 50 yards. By then, I needed more of those Challengers and the last box at Canadian Tire had been purchased by another customer. So I phoned Cabela’s in Barrie and they had some in stock. The rather long trek all the way around Lake Simcoe was made to get ‘em. But none were shot until the scope was mounted by my gunsmith. Then, it took 3 shots to get centered at 52 yards. They proved to be very accurate as the last 2 were overlapping at that range, and were separated by only 1/2-inch (12.7mm) center-to-center. That’s good enough for my purposes. More testing will take place the coming spring, God willing. But they are not inexpensive at about $2 each, so testing will be limited to a 5-shot group if all goes well.

I also have a bunch of old Imperial slugs, and a box of new Federal 3″ that I’ll be doing some practice with to get in some trigger time.

The DGS slug (Dangerous Game Slug) is made somewhere in Italy and exported to Canada and the USA for manufacturing purposes, or for self-loading. Challenger, out of Quebec, imports them. They also are manufactured as a complete unit 12-gauge shotshell in Germany by RWS Rottweil, and they in turn are exported to other countries such as Canada. I found some recently at one of my favorite gun shops with the exact same slug as found in the Challengers. That was good news. The Challengers are noted for their accuracy in smooth bores which, obviously, my shotgun is. It doesn’t need a rifled tube to get more accuracy. But I may have the barrel cut to 22″ from it’s 26″. However, that decision doesn’t need to be made immediately.

In my testing of the Challengers for accuracy and sight-in, I also put a box of dry magazines and books behind the target to test for penetration and slug integrity. Unfortunately, or fortunately, depending on purpose, the second slug demolished the first one somewhere inside the thick-heavy manual, and about destroyed itself as well in the process! Now that I know they are likely to hit the same place on target, I’ll shoot one at a time and retrieve it before it gets demolished by another one. As mentioned, for now that test is done.

A few days ago, I was in the same semi-remote area and fired one of my last-year’s bear hunting bullets into the same media. At about 10 yards it impacted at slightly more than 2600 fps. You can see some of the results in the pics. At 4500 ft-lbs of impact energy, it was impressive to say the least. As penetration progressed, it did increasingly more damage until it was finally arrested by the rest of the dry-glossy magazines, which were severely bulged and blown out the end of the box and strewn across the snow behind it! I didn’t take a photo, but should have.

4500 ft-lbs made much more of a spectacular visual impression, as well as a physical one, than the approximate 1600 ft-lbs from the previous slugs! Of course, had the slugs hit at 10 yards instead of 52, that would have been a more interesting and favorable comparison at 2500 ft-lbs from the slugs. Nonetheless, from previous experiences from a similar test involving a 180gr Nosler Partition at over 3000 fps into a box of dry-glossy magazines at 10-yards, I have an idea of what expectations should be using the 300 Win Mag and the 180 NP as a benchmark. It penetrated about 7″ of box and magazines, and demolished itself in the process. The 300gr TSX from my Ruger No.1 did much more damage and blew the rest of the magazines out the end of the box, ripping off the end! Of course, the 180 was not making 4500 ft-lbs at impact either! My bear load last year was that 300 TSX at 2645 fps/4660 ft-lbs from the No.1 Ruger (that one on the header). I have pushed that bullet about 80 fps faster but it wasn’t as accurate. At 2645 fps it’s sub-moa. That’s why testing at a range for muzzle velocity and accuracy is supplemented by shooting slugs and bullets into media for comparative purposes. (The damage done by the TSX is evident compared to the 12-ga. Challenger below it. The next pic shows the magazines on the left that were blown out the back end and scattered across the snow.) (The thick pharmaceutical manual weights 7.4 lbs and is as dense as a piece of maple hardwood. It belonged to my wife when she was a nurse dispensing medications. She donated it to the cause.)

The 300gr TSX penetrated 7.5″ and the Challengers were just barely poking through the manual — about 3″. The venue was this area where I’ve hunted deer, bear and varmints for a generation.

As with my shotgun, it all begins with a research program. What do I want to hunt? And how do I want to hunt a particular game? That determines the weapon. Since several types of weapons are suitable for harvesting anything in North America, including archery, shotgun, BP rifle and centerfire, smokeless powder rifle cartridges, obviously, there are multiple choices. Since these articles are normally about big-bore rifles, I thought it appropriate to include the largest of all, the 12-gauge slug since they are often a substitute for centerfire rifles. And in several places it’s the only permitted firearm for deer, for example. No, I’ll not make comments about hand-gun hunting as it’s not permitted in Canada and I have no experience in such ventures. But, having said that, it’s something I’d definitely try if it were legal.

Research: the cartridge first? Not necessarily because there are usually several that will do the same things from coyote to moose. If it’s factory only (not a handloader?), then I feel sorry for you on several counts. Yet, all is not lost! There are many good cartridges that can meet several hunting needs. But, the point is: we need to research costs of factory ammo! I do spend some time during each week (in winter) at Canadian Tire as they’ve brought rifles, shotguns, ammo and scopes, as well as archery tackle, back into inventory since registration of firearms in Canada has been cancelled by the current Federal Government. Though I have no need to purchase their factory rifle ammo, being a handloader, I scan the locked-up, glass-covered cabinets that contain a variety of factory loaded ammo for the most common North American cartridges. For example: pricing of a box of 20 factory loads in 180gr Winchester Power Points in .30-06 were about $28. The “premium” variety, without giving names, were $51! .243 Winchester premium factory loads aren’t “cheap” either at over $40 for 20!

The point? Research costs of factory ammo if you don’t want to become a handloader! Why is that important if one doesn’t shoot more than 1, or possibly 2 game animals per annum? A box of 20 will last ten years, right? Not if you intend to become a rifleman! To become a rifleman, or even an expert marksman with a 12-gauge, trigger-time is a must! There’s no way around that fact! Plainly stated – PRACTICE with the same shotgun or rifle is absolutely essential to become so familiar with it that it seems like an extension of your body! Not only that, but the ammo used, factory or handloads, must bring the best from both firearm and shooter. We need to be as familiar with the load we use as we become with the weapon itself… there’s no way around that, either!

Far too many go afield with unfamiliar weapons and/or unfamiliar loads! They have an attitude which says: “I know what I’m doing, it says right here on the box that if this ammo is sighted at +1.5″ at 100 yards it’ll be dead-on at 200!” Yeah, right…. have you sighted it dead-on at 200?

I used to shoot thousands of rounds of high-powered, self-made rifle cartridges for several calibers per annum. Since I passed the 75 moniker in age, a few years ago, I’ve cut back from that amount of shooting by quite a bit. However, it’s not because I think PRACTICE is no longer a pre-requisite before going into the woods or field after game. No, it’s because of other priorities and the fact I already know my loads. But I STILL need to visit the range for practice. Today I paid my membership fee for 2015. And, I STILL like to try something new once in a while.

So should you if you want to be more than a “duffer”! Becoming a rifleman is a skill acquired, not an in-born talent!

‘Till the next…

Shalom

BOB MITCHELL

One Rifle and One Bullet for all Soft-Skinned Game Animals — Final Part

Objective thinking is somewhat of a lost faculty in today’s post-modern era. What does that mean? It implies in general that the education systems of the Western World are trapped into stereotypic ways and means of spoon-feeding information at various developmental levels without training the mind to reflect, test and evaluate that information. Instead, evaluations tend to reflect opinions that replace hard facts or data. Evidence? Election time! TV, videos and anchor men/women shape thought and opinion to such an extent that the same process is applied as a science of mind management. Evidence? Hitler!

I could elaborate this principle in many practical areas of concern, but as a hobbyist I’ll restrict it to objective thinking on the use of big-bore rifles for all hunting of big game — tough-skinned as well as soft.

So far, we’ve only applied our evaluations to the world of soft-skinned game, including the hazardous sort. Though there is little doubt that several of those viewed could be, and have been, effectively used on the pachyderms. Where appropriate solids are available, there’s little room for a contrarian to debate what size is best. But in such a case the one who pays the piper doesn’t always call the tune… er, the shots!

However, the primary aim of this theme is one rifle for all God’s creatures where legitimacy is not abused. So, we will want to put to good use a Big Bore for soft-skinned game as well as the potential for taking it abroad for the nasties with tough hide, sharp teeth and out-sized toenails or horns! As to the “abroad” scenario, any will do from 9.3/4000 ft-lbs (5200 JOULES) on up to whatever we can learn to shoot as well as we can shoot a .308 Winchester standing on our own hind legs!

So far, I’ve gone on record in stating that I don’t consider any Big Bore above .458″ to be a one-rifle do everything legitimate candidate. The reasons are objective and should be self-evident to those with a modicum of knowledge on these matters. So I’ll not elaborate.

Yet I will elaborate as to why .458-caliber IS a legitimate candidate for hunting any big-game animal. Notice, I did NOT say “Why I BELIEVE .458-caliber may be considered for all big game.” That’s opinion. The facts are these: Both the .45-70 and the .458 Winchester Magnum HAVE BEEN effectively used on ALL medium and big game that may represent all other types, including the pachydermes. That’s NOT opinion! The keys are two: 1) The maturity and experience of the hunters, and 2) The bullets employed.

That there is a greater variety of bullets available in .458″ that are appropriate for all big-game animals, again, including the DG, isn’t opinion! That’s a fact! There is no big-bore caliber extant that matches .458 in its ability and appropriateness of bullet weights and construction to legitimately harvest diminutive deer at one end and mega-ton elephant at the other.

And that MUST as well take into consideration the weight, handiness and recoil of such a firearm, and the intention of the bullet employed. In the simplest of terms to illustrate our point, it would be an extravagant stretch of imagination to suggest a 12 lb .505 Gibbs could be made appropriate for small deer on the bottom end of game harvesting under all conditions, especially in using a 525gr bullet! On the other hand there are dozens of manufactured and potential cast bullets available in .458″ among which I could chose one as a “one-bullet-do-everything”. Well, to be honest, if elephant or rhino are on the list, a good solid is indispensible! We can’t get around that fact! But what expanding bullet would I choose in .458″ for everything else?

One for everything isn’t ideal, but it could be done, though I must admit I like the variety in .458. In reality, that’s the attraction of four-five-eight. There are at least twenty from 300gr to 600gr that I have some experience with, and another three or four that I’d like to experiment with. Later in this piece, I’ll pick one that I could get by with for now and perhaps in any foreseeable future scenario.

But first, the rifle itself: These criteria would be mandated in some cases and preferred in others if it were to be a one-rifle do everything that I hunt in my contexts, or any future possibilities, in .458-caliber:

1) Because the rifle would be expected to perform equally well in a variety of regions and terrain, including brush, woods, ridges, ravines, lakes, swamps and open fields and clear-cuts, it must not weigh less than 8.5 lbs or more than 9.3 lbs ready for action including scope, sling and ammo. Those weights are in consideration of the fact of it being a probable .458 Winchester Magnum or my own Ruger No.1 in .45-70 Improved. It also must not exceed 42″ in overall length as a .458 WM. At one time I owned such a rifle in a Ruger M77 with a factory 22″ barrel. Its weight all-up was around 9.3 lbs, but that included a 3-9X40mm scope. Today, I’d opt for a smaller, lighter scope.

2) As a one-rifle-do-it-all, I’d prefer an SS action and barrel, plus a good quality synthetic grey or black stock with a shape and finish that would endure hard use but also provide a solid grip on fore-end and pistol grip.

3) I much prefer a tang safety, but I’ve learned to live with others.

4) As previously mentioned, I also prefer a clip magazine as in my current Tikka or Sako’s “Bear”.

5) Then, if a bolt-action, I prefer a 55 – 70* bolt lift, whether left or right-handed.

6) Adjustable trigger.

7) A tough, bright scope of at least 2-7 x 32mm.

8) And last but by no means least: A Decelerator butt pad, or something of equal or better attributes.

There’s no currently manufactured .458 Win Mag that fits the above criteria, so it would have to be a custom build. My nearby friendly/expensive gunsmith could quite easily accommodate such a vision. But could I afford it? Sure, if it were to be a one-gun thing, why not? But then, if Ruger had continued to make their original M77 in .458 with a 22″ barrel, that would be close enough. But starting with a used Ruger M77 in .338 Win Mag at around $650, and screwing in a new 22″ in .458 Win Mag could become a candidate. I do see some used Rugers in .338 at Epps from time to time.

But hey, my Ruger No.1 in .45-70 IMP comes close to perfection as is! With ballistics that match a 22″ .458 Win Mag, and weight at 8.6 lbs ready, overall length at 38.25″, what’s not to like, if you like single-shots? Which I do. So does my Swiss-German friend-the-gunsmith! About a month ago, while in his shop to pick up my 12-gauge after he’d installed a scope for me, he asked: “Bob, would you like to see my 8mm Mauser”? Of course, knowing his workmanship and his tastes, what could I say other than “Sure!” But what a surprise when he pulled out of his soft gun case a beautifully-crafted, engraved receiver, 26″ slim barrel with a receiver peep-sight and banded fore-sight, SINGLE-SHOT in 8mm Mauser! With it’s handsome dark walnut two-piece exquisitely-crafted stock, it was a near breath-taking break-action, sans scope!

Moreover, he told me a story of when he had first used it in Switzerland: He shot an European Stag in the Alps of 400 lbs at 400 meters with iron sights! That was ranged, not guessed at… 400 meters is 437 yards! With irons! A single shot… one and done! He used RWS ammo of 196gr at 2487 fps, and that’s not Remington or Winchester 8mm junk! He brought that rifle with him when he moved to Canada, and later took it on a moose hunt. Some hunters laughed when he pulled it from its case: “You’re not gonna hunt moose with a single-shot are you?” He laughed: “I only need one shot!” He was not laughing, though, when he shared with me his Alps adventure.

Now, before a reader laughs at the notion of cleanly taking a 400 lb animal at about 450 yards in the Alps using an iron-sighted, single-shot 8mm Mauser… That load, by the way, had a residual energy of about 1200 ft-lbs, which is plenty for a 400 lb game animal from a .323″/196gr projectile. But the most important fact is this: he is a precision craftsman who believes in precision shooting. He builds precision rifles, but has no appreciation for all the gizmoes that modern hunters believe will make them experts in the field, like 8 – 24 X 50mm scopes with turrets, tripods, etc. He’s Swiss-German, and if we want to know anything about their culture, spell it this way: P-R-E-C-I-S-I-O-N.

Yes, I agree, SINGLE-SHOTS are not for everyone, but it works for me.

Here’s a potential one bullet for all soft-skinned game animals from wolf to water buffalo that I have experience with in both my Ruger No.1 .45-70 IMP and a CZ550 in .458 Wincherter Magnum. Cartridge overall length for the CZ was at 3.45″ (crimped into the bottom cannelure), and 3.07″ in the Ruger No.1 (crimped into the bottom cannelure). The same primer and powder was used in each. The CZ had a 25″ barrel and the No.1 has a 22″. The CZ was max loaded with 80grs powder and the No.1 is usually loaded with 66 for that particular bullet, though it will hold 70grs of the same powder. Employing a ball powder in the .45-70 case, I can and do use up to 76grs with the heavy-weight 450’s and 500’s.

The CZ550, with it’s true magnum-length action, allowed it to be loaded like a Lott at 2750 fps/5877 ft-lbs from the 350gr /.458 TSX.

At 3.07″ COL in my No.1 Ruger, my standard load is 66grs for an MV of 2470 fps/4741 ft-lbs from the 350 TSX. I have loaded it to 68grs at 2550 fps/5053 ft-lbs. I can also load it to 70grs with that same powder, as mentioned. That should give 2620 fps/5334 ft-lbs. In fact, if I were to use one bullet for everything soft-skinned, including buffalo of any sort, that 350 TSX at 2470 to 2620 would be it depending on the animal and the anticipated terrain.

Consider the following in Africa as a potential scenario: Elevation: 1000 ft; Temp: 120; Humidity: 48% (On the right is the 350gr TSX loaded for my No.1 Ruger. Left-click on pic for enlargement, and click return arrow to return to blog.)

Bullet: 350gr TSX Zero: 250 yards
SD = .238
BC = .340 (as tested)
MV = 2620 fps/5334 ft-lbs/momentum = 131/TE = 209/traj. -1.6″
50 = 2506 fps/4881 ft-lbs/momentum = 125/TE = 192/traj. +1.8″
100= 2395 fps/4459 ft-lbs/momentum = 120/TE = 175/traj. +3.8″
150= 2287 fps/4066 ft-lbs/momentum = 114/TE = 160/traj. +4.2″
200= 2182 fps/3701 ft-lbs/momentum = 110/TE = 145/traj. +3.0″
250= 2080 fps/3361 ft-lbs/momentum = 104/TE = 132/traj. +/-0″
300= 1980 fps/3047 ft-lbs/momentum = 99/TE = 120/traj. -5.0″
350= 1883 fps/2757 ft-lbs/momentum = 94/TE = 108/traj. -12.3″
400= 1790 fps/2490 ft-lbs/momentum = 90/TE = 98/traj. -22.0″
450= 1700 fps/2246 ft-lbs/momentum = 85/TE = 88/traj. -34.4″
500= 1614 fps/2023 ft-lbs/momentum = 81/TE = 79/traj. -49.8″

This load could be considered as from a .458 Win Mag or my Ruger No.1 in .45-70 IMP.

And yes, the 350gr TSX from a 24″ .458 Win Mag at 2650 fps has been used in Australia to cull literally dozens of Water Buffalo at up to 200 yards, in the hands of a fellow Canadian.

But here is another useful load for the heavy soft-skinned including Cape buffalo and lion, as well as Water Buffalo, moose and the big bears:

This is a load from my Ruger No.1 (22″) in .45-70 IMP.
76grs ball powder
450gr SWIFT A-Frame
SD = .306
BC = .325
MV = 2317 fps/5364 ft-lbs/momentum = 149/TE = 271/traj. -1.6″
50 = 2207 fps/4865 ft-lbs/momentum = 142/TE = 246/traj. +1.7″
100= 2099 fps/4404 ft-lbs/momentum = 135/TE = 222/traj. +3.2″
150= 1995 fps/3978 ft-lbs/momentum = 128/TE = 201/traj. +2.7″
200= 1894 fps/3586 ft-lbs/momentum = 122/TE = 181/traj. +/-0″
250= 1797 fps/3226 ft-lbs/momentum = 116/TE = 163/traj. -5.1″
300= 1703 fps/2898 ft-lbs/momentum = 109/TE = 146/traj. -12.9″
350= 1613 fps/2600 ft-lbs/momentum = 104/TE = 131/traj. -23.7″ (That’s from the 450gr Swift A-Frame in my Ruger No.1 .45-70 IMP. Add 12 fps for correction to muzzle)

With either of those bullets, the manufacturers suggest 1600 fps as minimum for some expansion, therefore I’ll not push matters beyond that point.

My fellow Canadian who used the 350 TSX from his .458 WM in Aussie Land, also used the 450 Swift at 2365 fps. He pointed out something that intrigued me: At distance (150 to 200 yards), the 350 TSX worked as well as the 450 Swift and better than a 430gr CEB Raptor! It also gave less recoil, of course. Next time he goes, he’ll still take some 450 A-Fs, no CEBs and more 350 TSX’s! And that was after shooting 112 Water Buffalo in a cull!

As stated, a good solid would be used in 450 or 500gr when and where needed at around 2250 and 2200 fps respectively.

In 2014, I used a 300gr TSX at 2645 fps in my Ruger No.1. That was a very accurate sub-moa load, but not max. (Pic at top of page)

A .416 magnum has the power but not the format, with the possible exception of the .416 Ruger, for all hunting everywhere. It also currently lacks sufficient variety of projectiles to make it as versatile as a .458-cal. In other words, it would be suitable for the larger soft-skinned animals of the world using the 350gr TTSX, such as bear, moose and larger plains game. While it would certainly work on the smaller game, to suggest it as a world-class cartridge for everything is certainly a stretch in consideration of the poverty of suitable bullets currently available. It also uses about 20% more powder than a .458 or my No.1 Ruger with the concomitant recoil.

The .458 Lott adds 50 to 100 fps to what the .458 Win is capable of in the same format and psi. But it truly is too heavy and un-handy for a do-it all rifle.

The common complaint against the .458 WM of cramped quarters for powder, is actually a blessing in at least two ways: 1) Being a straight-wall case, it is much more efficient in the use of powder, especially the faster burning variety, than is usually used in the humongous African calibers with a shoulder and/or too-tall variety; and 2) The .30-06 length action allows for a much more handy rifle.

Hence, as a one-rifle scenario, I’d choose one of the mediums that meets the criteria set out previously, including an appropriate bullet, or the .458 Winchester Magnum, or its equivalent, in a handy 22-23″ package at not more than 9 1/4 lbs ready for action.

I could live happily with either, or both, which I do.

Hey, one also needs a .22 and a 12ga, right?

Next time: Three are better than one! I’ll make some suggestions for a balanced 3-rifle battery for hunting the world. Will my favorites be included? Maybe, maybe not! But for sure the .375 H&H will show up! And, at least one of my sub-mediums will be there as well.

Shalom

BOB MITCHELL