The .338 RPM compared to the .35 Whelen

The .338 RPM hasn’t yet appeared on the market by Weatherby, but is simply the 6.5 RPM (which has been in production for a while) that has already been “necked up” by wildcatters as well as by Weatherby. But recently Weatherby has made it official along with specs adopted at Saami, so the PSI at 65K and resultant ballistics of a 225gr at 2820 fps is no longer a mystery. That is proposed from a Weatherby Mk V “Backcountry” with a 20″ barrel and weight of 6.2 lbs ready with scope, ammo, etc. The case (a necked up 6.5 RPM) is said to hold 83.4 grains of water – a bit less than a .338 Win Mag. Generally, the idea (having been reviewed by a sufficient number of potential buyers) has a positive rating. The goal by Weatherby is a rifle weighing less than the typical .338 Win Mag by a couple of pounds with near identical ballistics for hunters who want power with reach in typical mountainous regions. That’s attained from a 20″ tube at 65K psi whereas in the .338 Win Mag it’s standard ballistics are reached from a 24″ barrel at 64K psi. “But the same or similar ballistics is from a much lighter and handier package”, says Weatherby and hopefuls.

So one is tempted to ask: What does this achieve that is not already achievable in the Win Mag that’s been around since 1958? And the Weatherby Mk V isn’t a “cheap” rifle, as well as Weatherby’s ammo and components – when you can find them. My Sako FS in .338 Win Mag with a 20″ barrel came very close to those results from the powders of the day at less than 65K psi.

And then the “kick” from such a beast will be on the order of 60 ft-lbs (if the total package is 6.2 lbs) compared to about 40 ft-lbs for a typical .338 Win. Granted the Win will weigh 8.5 lbs (or should). Is 2 lbs going to make or break a hunt in the mountains?

<Odaray Mountain in the background of Lake O’Hara, located in SE British Columbia in the Canadian Rockies. This is a famous hiking area.

But this comparison is between the .338 RPM and the .35 Whelen firing the same weight bullet. As stated, the RPM is made to fire a 225gr at +2800 fps for any range, shooting in mountainous terrain – according to Weatherby’s promotional material. Depending on what brand and model of a 225gr will, of course, determine the outcome at both near and far distances. Since the avowed purpose of the cartridge is mountain game (wherever hunted globally) that could include some wildlife that attains 800 lbs or more.

My question then would be: What is the best short-range to long-range bullet that makes at least 2000 ft-lbs at up to 500 yards from a 225gr in .338-caliber? Since mountain hunting doesn’t always imply “long range”, the hunted animal may be no more than 65 yards from the muzzle when the trigger is squeezed. So whatever be the brand, it must be well constructed for high impact into a shoulder bone at close range of, say, 40 yards (impact velocity around 2750 fps) out to ~500 yards where the velocity has dropped to ~2000 fps/2000 ft-lbs at an elevation of 5000 ft in the mountains. At about 1200 ft elevation the retained velocity will be around 1870 fps/1748 ft-lbs. So atmospheric conditions (temps, elevation and wind) ALL will influence the story to be later told – not even to mention the hunter’s condition and abilities.

There is a Barnes MRX BT in 225gr with a .433 BC. Then there is a 225gr Nosler AccuBond with a much higher .550 BC giving it a distinct advantage in range. And the 225gr Partition at .454 BC. Since I’d choose the Partition, we’ll pit that against the 225gr, .358″ from my rifle in .35 Whelen.

<Those are three 225gr Partitions loaded in the lower right corner for my .35 Whelen, with the 225gr AccuBonds in the background. The Partitions will be kept for backup if needed. Only two more remain in the original box. Being unable to locate more, I’ve settled on the 225gr AccuBonds at about 2850 fps.

The .338-cal, 225gr Barnes at 2820 fps grants 1987 ft-lbs at 500 yds

The .338-cal, 225gr Nosler Partition at 2820 fps gives 2056 ft-lbs at 500 yds

Which would be your choice, and why?

Some would choose the Barnes, others the Partition and still others would favor the AB, all for their own reasons.

Mine would likely be the 225 Partition for no other reason than I have more experience with Partitions.

But whichever is chosen, any of them should give the desired results for mountain game at typical ranges if the bullet is placed into the heart-lung region.

Any of those two should be more than adequate for a 300 to 800 lb animal at up to 500 yards.

The knowledge that a minimal impact velocity of ~1800 fps is deemed necessary for some bullet expansion, limits the range to about 500 yards.

But the bigger issue for me, and likely for many others, would be the recoil without a brake. Therefore, I expect that Weatherby will include a brake on such a light rifle. That should bring recoil down to around 48 ft-lbs. Other than that issue, they’ll likely be snatched up by some adventurers with thick wallets and thick skins.

But… I wanted to know how my “cheap” .35 Whelen would fare (single-shot G3, at 7.75 lbs loaded with a 225gr AccuBond in the chamber and 3 in a buttstock shell holder) against this new .338 RPM in a fair fight under the same conditions proposed above – not that I might be climbing the Rockies anytime soon.

< This blind was for a bear hunt over bait at 55 yards out front. My partner shot a 400 lb black bear from here at 65 yards as it came to the pond for a drink, slightly off to the right. I was alone at this site for one afternoon/evening while he was absent and prior to him killing the bear an evening later. My intent was not to shoot a bear, as I did that the previous day at another site one mile away. I used a .45-70 for that 6-foot bear. On the day I was attending this site for observation purposes, I toted my CZ 550 in .458 Win Mag. It weighed (ready to shoot) about 10.5 lbs. Resting as it was, it was no burden to me – no more than my NEF .45-70 I’d killed the bear with on the previous evening. That rifle ready weighed 8 lbs. Both rifles were equally suitable for the purpose at hand.

The point of this is: a rifle’s weight and ballistics can usually be adapted to a great variety of situations. There’s little need to own a particular rifle dedicated to a single task… especially a powerful “Mountain Rifle” that could easily kill grizzly that when purchased barely weighs 5 pounds! In my mind, there’s something definately bizzare about that concept when considering the exchange of two pounds weight for 50% more recoil! OK, that’s 32 ft-lbs from the .338 Win (with brake) vs 48 ft-lbs recoil from the proposed .338 RPM (with brake). Just do the math! It’s quite apparent that Weatherby’s ploy is more sales… and who could blame them? Well… I could on the issue of complete honesty! Any rifle from any manufacturer could be made the same to do the exact same thing… if chambered in .338 Win Mag!

Here’s the complete story: At my last trip to the range this past Monday, August 1st, 2022, I loaded one grain more (70) of CFE-223 under the 225gr AB. Conditions were not perfect (sort of hunting conditions), but 3 went into MOA at a corrected average MV of 2865 fps without drama from cases that had already been used five times in the same rifle working up loads for the .35 Whelen.

Here’s the dope on that (if we are to believe Nosler):

MV = 2865/ 4101 ft-lbs

BC = .430 (Yes, I know that .421 was printed in their manual and .430 for the 225gr Partition – but some have said it’s much higher than that from their rifles – so on Nosler’s wedsite they give the same as for the 225 Partition – .430 BC. And it may be higher or lower from any particular rifle. My choice would have been the 225gr Partition but none were available in this area. (Zero is for 275 yards)

100 = 2684 fps/ 3598 ft-lbs/ +3.3″

200 = 2509 fps/ 3146 ft-lbs/ +3.5″

300 = 2342 fps/ 2740 ft-lbs/ -1.9″

400 = 2180 fps/ 2376 ft-lbs/ -13.6″

500 = 2026 fps/ 2050 ft-lbs/ -32.6″

*** All that from a “cheap” single-shot that shoots MOA and can basically do what the “new” .338 RPM from Weatherby is proposed to do! (The conditions for both rifles were 5000 ft elevation at 50*F and 50% RH)

In addition: It’s as light as I want with less recoil, and less than 40″ OL. And 1-shot is all the Weatherby can fire at a time – same as mine! Ha!

But this particular view commenced when reading about the .338 RPM, and I began to make mental comparisons with the results from the same weight bullet in my .35 Whelen, well knowing that a comparible 225gr in .338 would have a better BC and SD, but the .35-cal has a larger cross-sectional area by 12.6%. That means that the .35-cal would make a bigger wound cavity (all else more or less equal) and the .33-cal would give better penetration (all else more or less equal). Things don’t always work out that way but those are sort of rules of thumb. Whatever we believe, there’s not a lot of difference between the two except the .358-cal will be more efficient in the use of powder than the .338-cal assuming the best powder for each at the same or similar psi. Yeah, I know the SAAMI standard for the 35 W is 62,000 psi, but who is going to be present to test the PSI of “their loads” or mine?

However, the .338 RPM will use considerable more powder than the .35 Whelen for the same or similar results – meaning more recoil and, in the long haul, more expensive to feed. It will have a big appetite!

So go get yourself a .35 Whelen and pretend it’s a .338 RPM on a diet… that’s what I’d do, or doin’.

<Dieting?, this ain’t! This was FD Roosevelt’s favorite dish (the menu said so!) when living at their estate on Campobello Island, New Brunswick, Canada – within 300 yards of the Maine coast. In 2017 my wife and I visited Campobello where we grew up and graduated from high school together in 1954. 2017 was our 60th anniversary and, among other activities, we had a meal at the former Roosevelt guest house (for American friends and politicians) – now an elite restaurant on the Roosevelt International Park — it’s a haddock chower (lots of haddock in creme and butter) with biscuits, and it was yummy!

A look out the window of the restaurant toward the main Roosevelt residence, now a museum.

See ya next time…

Shalom

BOB MITCHELL

Which is better, a .375 H&H or .375 Weatherby ?

Better for what?

That’s sorta like askin’ “Which is better, a .30-06 or a .30-06 AI ?”

Depending on who you ask, and a whole lot of other details, a guestimate might be “Weatherby” because of the name. On the other hand the H&H is more popular by a country mile. There are probably good enough reasons why that is so.

< I saw one of these Sakos for sale recently at my favorite gun shop – in .375 H&H.

Yet, in checking Nosler’s #6 manual of handloads for the ’06 and ’06 AI, the grand distinction in firing a top load of a 150gr from their 150s (from 24″ barrels) is 3056 fps from 58 grains of propellant in the “regular” .30-06 Springfield, and 3075 fps from 60 grains of a different powder in the AI. Those were averages so it’s more than likely that at least one of the shots from the AI fell within the group of the “regular” .30-06, and at least one of the shots from the “regualr” .30-06 came within reach of the AI’s average! In truth – an animal would never notice any difference!

Likely, that would also hold true in any comparisons of our nominees.. at the same psi and barrel length. However, one must give credit if credit is due. So let it be: both now, henceforth and forever more.

In checking as many manuals available at my elbow that give a credible average of each, only two: Hornady Seventh Edition and Barnes No. 3, give data for each. I’ve only considered their 300 grain bullets, and Hornady’s reflect an advantage of 200 fps (2500 fps vs 2700 fps) for the Weatherby version (that was dropped for several years when the .378 was introduced, but has more recently been resurrected by Weatherby). On the other hand, Barnes No.3 grants only about a 50 fps advantage.

I do have some experience handloading three versions of the renownwd .375 H&H and none in the Weatherby version, but I have researched the matter and have reason enough to assume a maximum advantage to the Weatherby of 100 fps, all else equal (barrels and psi).

When it concerns the “Improved” version of any cartridge, or wildcatting it, there are several issues involved to make it truly “better than” the original.

< The long and short of it: The bigger the case and the more powder used requires a barrel long enough to efficiently burn all the powder and effectively use the increased psi.

Firstly, the barrel: It must be longer. My experience with three distinct barrel lengths in .375 H&H, reveals that the “general rule” of 25 fps per inch, loss or increase, isn’t a fixed “rule”. On the contrary, when a 26″ barrel was hacked to 22″ the loss was 170 fps = 42.5 fps per inch. Of course, there were some variables depending on powder and bullet, but that was an average. In the 24″, M70 Winchester, I never reached 2600 fps from any load for 300s. Although factory ammo ballistics were readily attained at 2530 fps, with a high of around 2565 fps. On the other hand, Weatherby advertises their 300gr from a 26″, .375 Weatherby at 2800 fps. But the 2530 fps (not “premium ammo”) from the H&H is given from a 24″ barrel. From my 26″ Browning A-Bolt in .375 H&H, I attained 2700 fps from a couple propellants (RL15 and IMR4320). So… it would appear to me, at least, that about 100 fps distinction is close to expectations, with equal barrels and psi, favoring the Weatherby.

Secondly: In “wildcatting”, usually higher psi is allowed. The .375 Weatherby is likely running around 65K psi, whereas the H&H is SAAMI approved for 62K psi. I asked my gunsmith to give my M70 a rechamber to the Weatherby version. He (typically) asked: “Why? You’ll get maybe 100 fps more and perhaps spoil the resale value of your rifle! And, as it is, it will do anything you need or want.” I headed his advise.

Later still, I became somewhat fascinated with the ballistics of the .375 RUM, also 65K psi at SAAMI. But that would have meant much more expense for rifle and components in addition to hastles finding a handy store for cartridge cases – and more weight and recoil. It’s not far behind the infamous .378 Weatherby in ballistics and recoil, with handloads.

< The humongeous .378 Weatherby cartridges.

So back to the drawing board…

Which is better? A .458 Win is better than both, but between those two it’s a toss-up depending on what one has in mind for either. Big and dangerous game are not generally shot beyond 300 meters (330 yards) anyway, so any distinction in effect would depend on the shooter’s ability to correctly place the shot and the animal’s cooperation.

And a .375 RUM generally has more recoil than a .458 Win. Yet when appropriate loads are used in each to 300 meters, the .458 will have a distinct advantage in terminal effect = 118 TE vs 93 TE. Those are the results from a .458″ Hammer 404gr bullet at 2590 fps, and a 299gr Hammer bullet in .375″ at 2900 fps from a .375 RUM.

And the .458 Win will likely weigh about 1 lb more than the typical .375 RUM when each is ready for action (That will surely help somewhat in the management of recoil of the .458).

But this discussion began with a comparison of the original .375 H&H with an “improved” version. My recommendation would be the same as my gunsmith – all matters considered: Why spoil the value of an historic icon by trying to “improve it” – for 100 fps? Though improvements are readily at hand anyway in the form of modern bullets and propellants.

<This is the Nosler AccuBond with a heavy jacket and bonded core. The BC of .485 will dramatically improve downrange ballistics over the 300gr TSX, for example, from any .375-cal, including the H&H.

The following ballistics could be possible from the above 300gr AccuBond in a 26″ .375 H&H with a good barrel:

MV = 2700 fps/ 4855 ft-lbs/ -1.5″

100 = 2524 fps/ 4245 ft-lbs/ +3.3″

200 = 2356 fps/ 3699 ft-lbs/ +2.6″

300 = 2194 fps/ 3207 ft-lbs/ -4.3″

400 = 2038 fps/ 2767 ft-lbs/ -18.5″

500 = 1889 fps/ 2378 ft-lbs/ -41.1″ – has “enough” potential for most thin-skinned large animals.

From a 9.5 lb rifle ready to shoot with scope and ammo, recoil should be in the neighborhood of 44 ft-lbs. With a brake that number should be around 35 ft-lbs, or about the same as a .300 Win Mag without a brake. I can’t see where anyone would need more than that for most soft-skinned game under most conditions. (And of course… it’s a capable rifle and cartridge for DG using appropriate projectiles at typical ranges)

That’s it from this brief and to the point analysis…

Being an analyzer depleats energy, so…

Shalom

BOB MITCHELL

Mediums and Big Bores for Big Game Hunting – Why?

“Big Game” in the areas of my hunting world would include: whitetail deer, bear, elk and moose. Feral hogs have recently moved in but are not yet legal game.

That’s BIG GAME, not small game, varmints or predators which I also hunt at times…

Potential ranges in the “Far North” of our province might be up to a kilometre or more, and down to a handful of metres as the terrain is extremely variable. Black bear in those areas could include some that are huge since few are shot. They feed on calf moose and even some adults, along with beaver kits and adult beaver that they can catch on land. That’s in addition to anything else they might pounce on, like deer or rabbits. As well, bugs, berries and grasses help fill their avid appetites. Moose can go to 1400 lbs and elk to 750. Whitetailed bucks can hit 400 lbs.

Farther south into Central Ontario, the situation is not totally dissimilar, except there are more people and all that involves.

Southern Ontario is where most of the 13 million inhabitants dwell, with a mix of urban, suburban, industry and agriculture, spotted by small and large lakes, towns, villages and cottage country.

My hunting over the past +40 years, since 1980, has mostly been in Central and Northern Ontario, away from the masses. There is no hunting of antelope or mule deer in Ontario that is found farther west on the Prarie Provinces and/or Western Canada – otherwise, mostly the same species, but not necessarily identical in size. Some provinces farther west have similar terrain in their northern regions to Northern Ontario. And the western coyote is smaller than the hybred wolf-coyote of Ontario (now called by the MNRF: The “Algonquin wolf”, which, against sound science, is protected as a “rare species”, that is based on nothing more than political bias).

All that to help clarify my leaving sub-mediums (25 to 30 calibers) in favor of mediums (.338 – .375) and big-bore calibers for big game.

While not the same context, yet the following was received from a correspondent, not long ago from “David”:

“Bob, I recently built a .35 Whelen solution for a big game timber hunting rifle that can be used by my son. We hunt very big pigs in NC and bear/moose in Canada. I found that these trendy small fast bullet fads are not working for us.”

“However, we have had lots of bullet failures – from Nosler, Hornady and Barnes over the past five years. My conclusion is, at these very high velocities, a bullet has to perform perfectly to result in a quick kill, and worse than that, no bullet/load works perfectly at 50 AND 700 yards…”

“I bought an old 30-06, Rem 700 for the action, then a new stock, trigger and barrel chambered for the .35 Whelen (which had been recommended by a retired 84 year old gunsmith – bold italics mine). Using 250gr Partitions and Varget powder I’ve gotten 2645 and MOA of 0.70.”

“We took it pig hunting last weekend and devastated 4 very large animals weighing over 350 lbs from 125 to 381 yards. They just fell over.”

“Based on my ballistics calculator, this rifle will deliver a tremendous punch out to 400 yards – enough to drop any animal in N.A.”

And he praises the 250gr Nosler Partition.

My take away from David’s commentary/summary is exactly what I’ve been preaching for the past 1/4 century or more.

However else we may want to measure it, some of us have “discovered” through experience that smaller-bore rifles don’t compete well with larger-bore rifles in “punch” at any reasonable range on large game when psi, sectional density and bullet build and profile are equal. Construct any kind of physics we may want, but the final proof is found in honest observation of results in the field.

And I’ve had similar experiences with bears.

< This 286gr/9.3mm Partition fell to the ground on skinning a 6′ bear that was hanging from the tree my stand was located in. It was a head-on shot from 68 yards. One and done. The bullet fell from the right flank after penetrating from just below the chin, and retained 210 grains. It was fired from my 9.3 (.366-cal) x 62 Mauser at an MV of +2600 fps.

Let’s just do some physics: Assuming equal placement of bullets, and their construction, a 7mm (.284″) has a cross-sectional area of .063 sq. in. compared to a .358″ caliber with .101 sq. in. The 7mm has only 62% of the size hole it would make compared to a .358-cal IF shot into a hardwood tree! No doubt exists, when viewed objectively, that the pressure exerted inside that tree would be significantly more in a .358″ hole than a .284″ hole. And those wouldn’t be bored holes, but holes where the wood, under great pressure, isn’t removed from inside the tree but pressed against the existing natural hardwood structure of the tree. It’s nearly impossible to imagine that kind of pressure, though I suppose it could be scientifically calculated.

Several years ago, I did such a test in a 9″ white birch. Everything wasn’t exactly equal, but similar. The two rifles were a .340 Wby Mag firing a 250gr Partition at over 2900 fps and my #1 Ruger in .45-70 LR firing a 500gr Hornady RN at +2100 fps.

The bullet constructions were somewhat distinct, so also the profiles and sectional densities. But energies were similar at around 5000 ft-lbs. The range was ~ 15 yards.

Results: The 250gr Partition gave full penetration with an approximate bullet-size hole. The 500gr didn’t make a complete exit, but it’s nose was sticking out the far side of the tree. The big difference was in the “size” of the .458″ hole, and the fact that the hardwood tree was cracked both above and below that hole by upwards of 5 inches in each direction! And that wasn’t a dead tree but one that was very healthy! (I hope you’re not a tree hugger!)

A similar event had previously occured at a bear camp: My son and I, along with a friend and one of his friends were together at that camp. To while-away time before heading out to our blinds or stands, we did some chores, chatted, ate food and created mischief. Phil (my son) and I dreamed up the idea of bullet penetration tests into a stacked pile of maple wood (for the stove). These were big chunks – about 18 inches in length by 6 to 8 inches in cross section. The idea was to shoot into the exposed ends of the maple wood, and we each picked a chunk that was similar to the other. Distance from the muzzles to the wood pile was about five yards. Phil was shooting his .338 Win and I my first (unmodified) Ruger No.1 in .45-70. His bullet was a 250gr Hornady and mine (again) a 500gr Hornady (this time about 1900 fps). In this case a 250gr Partition wouldn’t have penetrated more than the Hornady as the wood “would” hold it together in form. He shot first… his wood was down a couple of layers under those piled on top. The stick moved back a few inches and was later retrieved. He split it open with an axe and found the bullet, mostly intact.

Of course, I didn’t wait for him to pull out his chunk of wood from the pile before I fired into mine. The piece I fired the 500gr into was also down under a couple of layers of maple and flew from the pile and landed about ten feet beyond. That bullet was never found as it was a mammoth task even for Phil to find his. But that was a lesson in the effects of momentum. Kinetic energy was nearly the same, but from the virtual and visual effects, the 500gr/.458-cal won the day!

That was a near maximum load from the .338 Win, and also from the Ruger in .45-70 (pre LR version), but had that 500gr been fired from the parent case of the .338 (a .458 Win Mag), we might never have found that chunk of harwood maple! So bore size (all else about equal) does make a difference… and sometimes a huge difference! (assuming proper bullets and placement).

Recently,I’ve been writing on this theme quite often, but I find it more than just interesting, but also informative and even inspirational, that numbers of hunter-shooters are returning (or turning) to the “ancient” .35 Whelen over fast-small and sub-medium, “long-rang” cartridges when game gets heavy and tough. Although, the .35 Whelen seems very capable at both roles.

<My Traditions OUTFITTER G3 single-shot in .35 Whelen. It sure likes that 225gr AccuBond at 2850 fps MV!

.35 Whelen: the 225 AB is calculated to make 1805 fps/ 1628 ft-lbs at 550 yards = good for an 800 to 1000 lb animal with a good hit.

9.3 x 62 Mauser: the 250gr AB is calculated to make 1852 fps/ 1904 ft-lbs at 550 yards = good for a 1000 to 1200 lb animal with a good hit.

.458 Win Mag: a 400gr “X” (I still have enough for a moose hunt) is calculated to make 1623 fps/ 2340 ft-lbs at 575 yards = good for a 2000 lb animal with a good hit.

All of the above MVs are based on actual results from my three big-game rifles. Ranges and results have been determined from their published B.C. s and ambient normal conditions for September-October in my hunting areas. And… results at the suggested ranges are NOT based solely on kinetic energy, but sectional density, momentum and bullet cross-sectional area are important factors as well.

But all of the above is obviously much more than I’ll likely need for the rest of my hunting life, and I’ve never shot big game at anywhere near 550 yards. However, those calculations would have been in effect when I did a lot of moose hunting in the “Far North” of our province. There were areas where a 600 yard shot was viable, and moose were crossing within that range.

Those are good enough reasons for me to like ’em! I don’t have to keep a dozen different cartridges fed with too many cans of powder and thousands of bullets… especially in these uncertain times.

And that’s the view from here …

Til the next….

Shalom

BOB MITCHELL

Getting Jaded with the “Usual”?

That’s normal for a society with an over-abundance of “stuff”!

Of course, this article will focus on rifle cartridges and the rifles that shoot bullets from them.

In following some Internet chatter on hunting rifles and bullets, I’m somewhat put off by how much of “the same” goes round and round! I mean, there seems no end to chatter these days over the various renditions of the Creedmoors in general hunting discussions. But that’s not surprising since there are tendencies in human nature toward overindulgence. Then getting jaded! We want something NEW, FRESH and EXCITING to keep us interested and upbeat. When life gets boring or depressing, humans tend to spend money if they have it, and credit if they don’t! Those are not praiseworthy facts of the “liberated” West.

As all that, in this space, pertains to rifles and their various cartridges in particular, I’m as guilty as anyone else! I may choose larger bore rifles, but it’s the “feeling” of missing something “special” or “a new venture on the horizon” that impels me, but reflection on reality helps put on the brakes!

< A rifle like this would more than satisfy and meet all my expectations. Wait a minute… I already have one like that! This one was for sale at my favorite gun emporium a few months ago. It was snatched up by someone soon after it appeared on the website. Yes, it’s a Ruger No.1H in .458 Win Mag. The tag said $1799.

Learning to appreciate the “status quo” is no evil invented by the devil to deprive us of happiness!

At another time and different circumstances, I could have been very happy to own and use a British .303 Jungle Carbine as my one-and-only firearm. It was offered for $35 from a friend in nearly new condition.

In visiting with our oldest son and family in Senegal, Africa, about two decades ago, as a licensed big game hunter he took me on a one-day hunt in the “outback” where they had lived and worked as missionaries for many years. While they were then living and working in Dakar, I had the unique privilege of visiting and sleeping in their former “huts” made of mud brick, thached roofs and dirt floors!

The hunt… Brent’s firearms were a very used and well worn single-shot .22 LR (that was used for protein gathering) and a Stevens pump 12ga that was equally “well worn”! It was loaded with Brenneke slugs when he could get to Dakar and afford them. Understand: that well used (before it came into his possession) .22 LR, single-shot cost as much in Senegal as a new centerfire .308 Win would have cost in Canada at the time. Then there were multiple governmental hoops to jump through to get possession of it even after it was purchased! Same deal with the 12ga Stevens. To become a LICENSED BG hunter was akin to becoming a licensed guide. He took me on my hunt to his “old”, remote “outback” for a day of “whatever” might come our way! Why didn’t he bring new firearms from Canada? Just about impossible – the import would have been delayed for months – bureaucratic red tape, paying off those in charge and “regular” import fees of about 100%, etc. After all that, they might “get lost” in the fracas… if you know what I mean!

< The Stevens in hand with Madi leading the way. I was trying to decipher what was plain and clear to him as he pointed to it with his stick.

Hey! Brent was content that he had a well-worn single-shot .22LR with which he shot multiple warthogs and various other “small game” for protein and recreation. I was there when he shot a young baboon with that rifle, within a troupe of fifty or so, at the request of the village chief for meat for a family of a dozen, including a couple of wives!

On our day hunt we were also accompanied by a resident of the village who was a friend and guide. Madi efficently demonstrated what it meant to see and read spoor. I managed to shoot a warthog that day with the 12ga and a Brenneke slug. It was young, lean and excellent eating. But, I was warned by my son to be prepared for a lion or woods buffalo in the immediate area that could be mean spirited. I’d never previously handled or fired that shotgun.

… back to “Getting Jaded with the Usual?”

What more could I say or add? Back home, in Canada, I did have possession of another rifle owned by our son – that he didn’t want to “loose” in import to Africa: a very nice M94 XTR in .356 Winchester that he had used, and would use again when they returned home permanently. With that rifle he successfully harvested last fall’s whitetail buck.

As we age, our circumstances change… and I think we become more appreciative of the opportunities we’ve had and not just those we might yet have. We are a relatively few who have been blessed so richly out of about eight billion others, a majority of whom don’t even have the freedom to hunt, or the means to do so!

Madi, our guide, was given a single-shot 12ga by our son when he came into the luxury of taking possession of that 12ga Stevens pump. I asked Brent how I could reward Madi for the day’s hunt. “Give a gift that will make it possible to purchases a few Brennekes for his single-shot 12ga. He wants to kill a buffalo with it” (for food). When Brent could get them from Dakar they were very costly. That single-shot had taken all manner of BG in the hands of our son. And it was “well worn” before he got it from a shop in Dakar. He said he liked it better than a .375 H&H that he’d borrowed from a fellow missionary on one occasion.

When younger, Madi and his brothers used home-made spears to kill buffalo after driving them into a pit.

Being born near the end of The Great Depression and a few years prior to WW2, it took several years for our family, and others, to financially recover during the 1950’s. By the fall of 1954 I was in college and had never owned a big game rifle. After graduation I married and still didn’t own a centerfire rifle – though I still had a single-shot .22 LR.

The account of how I came into ownership of my first BG rifle has been told a few times in some blogs that are archived, so I’ll not retell it here. But suffice to say that I actually bought a new12ga bolt-action, magazine shotgun for big game and small, as well for birds, prior to my first owned centerfire BG rifle. I was then in my twenties. In the meantime I’d used some borrowed rifles for deer hunting. My first two owned rifles were military castoffs: an Argentine military in 7 X 57 that was new in grease – one of the most beautiful rifles I would ever own. But because I needed to mount a scope, I just couldn’t bring myself to mutilate the rifle to accomodate a scope, so it got traded for a used military ’98 that was chambered in .30-06. That got a scope and was the first to experience my handloads. After that…. I’ve lost count! The first real sporting rifle (not ex-military) was a used – but in very good condition – Winchester M70, push feed, in .30-06. From there I got into magnums and Big Bores. All were handloaded. So, to quote King Solomon: “There’s nothing new under the sun”. That is, for me, I’ve no need or desire for another rifle – new or old! “Enjoy what you have rather than desiring what you don’t have. Just dreaming about nice things is meaningless; it is like chasing the wind.” – King Solomon

<A 7 x 57 Argentine Mauser

Am I jaded? Perhaps, but I’ve yet to experience the many possibilities that any one of those still in my cabinet could offer. Can’t say: “I’ve been there, done that” regarding even my two .22 LR’s. So little time… so much to learn… I’ve not even shot a grouse with a .22 LR… and my son has shot tens of warthogs with his single-shot .22 LR! Have you ever shot a warthog with one of your .22 LRs?

But in life I’ve learned this: One can satisfy, but ten can’t! That is… One God and Saviour (See King Solomon’s essay in Ecclesiastes – the Bible).

Are we still jaded? (jaded – “dulled or satiated, as from overindulgence” – New World Dictionary of The American Language)

Till the next…

Shalom

BOB MITCHELL

The .338 Winchester Magnum – What are its Positive Features?

For medium to large and dangerous game, it is a favorite. Why?

I’m not about to rewrite history or even to research it, but at least since Elmer Keith, with friends, came up with the .333 and used it successfully on some large and dangerous critters, .33-caliber has found a solid niche for “large and dangerous critters”.

And since Winchester presented the .338 Winchester Magnum for large and dangerous Alaskan fauna in 1958 (based on the .458 Winchester Magnum of 1956, necked down to .338″), it has proven to not only be timely but exactly what many hunters were looking for in not only hunting big and nasty Alaskan game in very challenging environments, but universally large and hazardous creatures.

.338 magnums have been one of my personal favorites, starting with a few .338 Winchester Magnums, and finally with a .340 Weatherby Magnum. And today, they still hold a lot of respect on my part.

<Sako must have gotten feeback from owners of their FS in .338 Win that the two-piece stock in the forearm couldn’t withstand the recoil longterm as this one (much later) has a one-piece FS. Otherwise it is nearly identical to the one I had owned.

The very fact that several other .338 magnums have appeared on the scene since Winchester’s, is proof positive that Weatherby and Nosler, et al, have chosen to “get in” on the action (pun intended – sort of). Research by those companies has confirmed that sales would be profitable. And that meant that many potential buyers were – and still are – looking for a powerful medium magnum despite negative press to the contrary.

Frequently, when I get a report on a favourite theme for the week, other than the .45-70 vs the .450 Marlin, the .338 Win is most popular. So, I’m writing again on .338 magnums as it seems that’s what many readers are interested in – the .338 Win in particular. I suspect some of this newfound interest in .338 magnums is due to newer hunters and handloaders rediscovering these cartridges, and especially the newer ones. An old adage says: “What goes round, comes round”, not originally intended in this sense, but it fits. Some want to discover and experience history: “Why was (and is) the .338 Win Mag so popular, and why is it so criticised today by our grandfathers who thought, and think, it was unnecessary?” That kind of questioning is not doubt but curiosity! And curiosity most often doesn’t “kill a cat”, but in this application it’s “I must try one of those”. It has largely replaced the .30-06 for dangerous Alaskan fauna. But with today’s proliferation of premium .338-cal bullets from 160gr to 300gr, a valid argument could be made that there’s really no need for anything else – did I really say that? – unless one makes regular trips to Africa for their mega fauna of the dangerous sort. But even then, where legal, it’s plenty for the lot of them using appropriate projectiles. If the 9.3 x 62 is sufficient, then so also would be the .338 Win Mag, except for the distinction in caliber which slightly favours the 9.3 x 62.< This one is also offered by Sako in .338 Win Mag, plus .375 H&H.

I’m a huge fan of powerful mediums, but IF I were to return to a .338 magnum as “my medium”, it would likely be the original Winchester version. As much as I liked the .340 Weatherby, it was reserved for special operations. It wasn’t deemed an “all purpose rifle”. A .338 Win Mag could easily become that in a relatively “light-‘n-handy” rifle using 160 to 210 grainers for most “things”, and 250 to 300 grainers for heavy and/or dangerous game…. though some choose the 210gr Nosler for “everything”! A friend did that on a big black bear at 3000 fps!

In my first .338 Winchester Magnum, a Sako FS with a 20″ barrel, I could still make factory specs from handloads. I loved that rifle, except it had a serious flaw in the two-piece stock, that had to be replaced by a fiberglass one as the forearm in two pieces wouldn’t hold “together” under maximum recoil . Other than that, it was handsome, powerful and handy. Finally, it was swapped (with both stocks) for a nearly new .375 H&H, M70 at a rifle show, with no cash exchanged. I thought that was “just” compensation for the loss of a rifle I’d “fallen in love with”. But, as it turned out, I never “loved” the M70 in .375 H&H! It was too heavy and bulky without much, if any, improvement in ballistics, and not nearly as handsome!

In the Sako FS I’d tried about all available bullets except the Partitions that I considered too expensive. Nevertheless, it went on a moose hunt to Northern Ontario that proved to be a very wet one! And the two-piece stock soaked up water like a sponge. I had to disassemble the stock, remove it from the rifle, and wipe water from inside and out, letting it dry over nights. The load it liked most was the 250gr Sierra SBT at ~2700 fps. But after the various dismantlings, I had zero confidence in its accuracy. Later, when the inletted metal strap that held the two-piece forend together broke, and the nose cap (held on by a short wood screw) fell down over the muzzle at the range, I decided it needed a new stock, so purchased a fiberglass Carlson – which cracked under recoil! That was replaced under warranty but I’d “had it” with that rifle! It was traded at a “shot show” for the .375 H&H. But in my spirit I was still mourning the loss of that .338. I’d kinda fallen in love with that cartridge-caliber. I thought it ideal for my personna, style and needs.

There were several reasons for choosing the 250gr Sierra for the moose hunt: It shot best from my rifle – highest velocity and best accuracy. Secondly: It had the highest BC of any 250gr at .587 from 2300 fps and above, which I thought was important since I wasn’t familiar with the area of the hunt and didn’t know possible ranges that might be called for in taking a shot. Third: It was highly recommended by Sierra at “full throttel”, even from a .340 Weatherby, due to the tapered .05″ jacket shank and .027″ mouth. Then, as mentioned, it was much cheaper for developing a load, and for practice, than Nosler Partitions. That was back in the mid 1990’s.

Several years had passed, and several trades and purchases, when I decided to get a .340 Weatherby. Again, the purchase of any Weatherby rifle was an expense I really couldn’t justify. So the plan was to purchase another .338 Win Mag and rechamber it to .340 Weatherby. I’ve told that story enough times already, so I’ll not reherse all the details again. The rifle was a new .338 Win Mag by Browning in the A-Bolt, SS, lefthand with a 26″ barrel. An ideal candidate for becoming a .340 WBY.

But as a .338 its ballistics were surprising: 2840 fps from the 250gr Hornadys. I had second thoughts over having it rechambered. That from 74 grains of RL19 and very accurate! Hmm… Anyway, I decided to go ahead with the intended project and never looked back. I kept that rifle for 10 years as a .340 and during that period it fired the 250gr Partition at an average-corrected MV of 2997 fps, and 1.25″, three shots at 100 yards. That was plenty good enough for a bull moose at 165 yards. As it turned out, that rifle as a .338 Win Mag would have done the same thing.

In the meanwhile, our son, Phil, purchased a Rem 700 Mountain Rifle in .338 Win and took it on that same moose hunt, loaded with the Hornady 250gr Interloc SP at 2735 fps from a dose of IMR4831. He finished off the moose with that – and the Hornady bullet did its job. I had a hand in the development of that load.

So after considerable experience in handloding three .338 Win Mags and one .340, I might be qualified to offer some suggestions and make a couple of recommendations.

My FIRST would be that a .338 Winchester Magnum has a deserved reputation as a Medium Magnum. It is highly respected in Alaska for their big bears and extra large moose. That in itself should errase any questions over its suitability for comparable creatures world wide.

< Ted’s Yukon grizzly. He used his 9.3 x 62 and a 270gr custom bonded bullet. Any good medium that makes 4000 + ft-lbs at the muzzle with a heavy bonded bullet should accomplish the same thing – including a .338 Winchester Magnum.

My SECOND would be that a .338 Win Mag should have a barrel length of between 23″ and 26″. Why? To get best ballistics while keeping recoil manageable. A 20″ might be handier under certain conditions, but ballistic potential can’t be attained for that cartridge, and both recoil and noise level will be accentuated.

My THIRD, and last, is that as a MEDIUM MAGNUM there are more options available in .338-cal bullets than for any others – suitable for small, medium, large and dangerous game, making it one of the best choices of a handful for a one-rifle travelling hunter after a variety of “trophies” from small to large and dangerous. And that is especially true for the handloader.

Sure, there are more powerful MEDIUM MAGNUMS, but, in my view, none as all-around friendly when we take into account recoil, economics and availability of rifles and components. Check out cost and availability of Weatherby’s rifles, loaded ammo and brass for handloads, as well as Nosler’s and any other pretender to the .338 magnum crown! Oh yes, there’s the Lapua and RUM… If you can find ammo and/or components. Make an honest evaluation based on costs and availability of rifles, ammo and components. I turned down a nearly new .338 RUM in favour of a 9.3 x 62 due to an honest comparison, and the fact that it’s ballistics were similar to my former .340 WBY. The difference in recoil between the two while a simple .338 Win Mag and after it became a .340 WBY was 42 vs 54 in foot-pounds of energy, or about 29% increase of the 340 over the .338.

But… YOU intend to shoot mega fauna farther away than the effective reach of a .338 Win Mag? Tell me about it! The 250gr AccuBond has a .575 BC, and at up to 2800 fps will still make 1862 fps/1925 ft-lbs at 700 yards – enough for a 1000 +lb animal… IF YOU CAN HIT IT IN A VITAL PART! No? Not as large? A 250 lb deer, you say? The vitals are within an 8″ circle… Once you get set up for the shot, with all calculations in place – in a dead still wind – will that deer be waiting on your next move? Oh! And you wounded it? Then what? Oh… but you intend to get the Lapua version of a .338? That might work to 750 yards… all conditions perfect… except the shooter? I see…

<That was about 400 yards from where I took this pic to the farthest trees on the horizon, in Northern Ontario on a moose hunt. There was lots of both bear and moose sign in the whole area, but we were a week too late. Other hunters had been in the area the previous week. And someone wants to shoot something (not you or I, of course) at nearly twice that distance? Really!

Till the next…

Shalom

BOB MITCHELL

Being “FIT” for your hunt

Having a new laptop these days, I’m impressed with how fast it is compared to the “old”. And material from the old has been downloaded to the new, including my favorite YouTube and video programs. A couple of days ago as I went on YouTube, Billy Molles (Mountain Man) video of the Alaskan Panhandle brown bear hunts I described a few months ago were presented for view again – all two plus hours of two hunts by two different men in which both 10 ft brown bears ended up in a stream at the bottom of a mountain. It was a nightmare of retrieving the hides of each!

While the hunts and running commentary of Billy were memorable, yet the awareness of fitness was dominate throughout, and was a powerful theme in Molles’ presentation of events as they were happening.

Too often we may have experienced how unfit we were for the physical challenges of particular hunts. That shows up in various ways: fatigue, lack of strength for climbing rugged terrain or toting necessary equipment, heart pounding or shortness of breath. And that’s not a full list. The worst for me was slogging across a bog we didn’t know was there on a moose hunt.

My whole life from childhood to college was active with much involvement in the outdoors as a regular feature. Never was I weak or fearful of getting hurt, so I tended to push myself to the limit. I thought nothing of riding my bicycle for ten miles over rough gravel and dirt roads. I engaged in multiple sports like hockey, baseball and basketball. But when I followed my career in becoming a pastor, that involved a lot of sitting in a “study” (pastoral definition of an office), driving my car hundreds of miles per week, talking with people, and public speaking at lest a dozen times per week… not much time left for recreational activities. But I was rescued by two brothers who were university students at UNB, and given a break for a hunting week by the university. They invited me to hunt deer with them. While I lost a lot of weight during those years – which I couldn’t afford to loose – I survived and learned some necessary lessons on how to avoid burnout.

Later on, at my best I weighed 185 – 190 lbs at 5′-9″ out of the shower. And I could spend 8 – 10 hours a day scouting during a deer or moose hunt in “walking it up” in typical Eastern Canadian rugged landscapes. But then again, I added too much weight as a result of becoming Senior Pastor of a multi-hundred congregation with several assistants under me. Then I went on a moose hunt to N. Ontario with a few friends. No longer could I put on endless miles of trudging unfamiliar territory without sore muscles, weak and tired legs, and sweating like a prisoner being interrogated by the KJB. After another “burnout”, I finally realized that health fitness was the number one priority, no matter what else I was doing!

< I was 185 lbs stripped. With gear and rifle over 200 lbs. I did a lot of walking during this trip for moose in N. Ontario and never felt weary or out of shape. The 10.5 lb CZ550 in .458 Win Mag was never a burden. I was 72 at the time, closing in on 73.

It should go without saying, I know, but many men have died while hunting… and moreso from heart attacks and falls (due to poor fitness) than Cape buffalo and brown bears!

Apart from normal health concerns, being fit aids in successful hunting in these ways:

1) No anxiety over those concerns. We then can focus on the hunt free from worry over “not keeping up”, or having a heart attack, or unsteadiness that may cause a serious fall.

2) Toting a 9+ lb rifle days on end while holding it steady in aiming:

3) Being aware of sorroundings.

4) Being able to deal with a downed animal.

5) Confidence in being alone in the bush if circumstances are such.

6) Being sure of our location and finding our way to safety if need be.

7) It aids in helping us to maintain optimism in the face of negative circumstances. Negative people will find a way to be negative in the best of circumstances. But confident and optimistic people find a way to help lift the spirits of everyone in the worst of situations. If we’re not “fit” we’ll tend to be far less enthusiastic about conditions than we need to be.

As an added commentary on the above, I’ve been fortunate to mostly have partners who were helpful and optimistic, but also a few who could always find something to be critical of and negative about… Does that affect our own moods? In team sports (and I’ve played in several) it’s a given that “team spirit” is the most important element for winning! And that’s true today in pro sports! But it’s also valid in solo sports, such as tennis or boxing! So whether it’s sports, business or relationships – spirit or attitude can make the difference between success or failure – and both mental and physical fitness, or lack of it, can tip the scales in one direction or the other.

< These were very helpful partners in both bear and a few deer hunts, and a joy to be with! Brian on left and Ken on right.

Of course, the subject of “FITNESS” has been discussed, written about, and both courses and training given with programs developed for anyone, anywhere from childhood to old age. So I won’t attempt to improve on any of that here, except to highlight a few points for hunters:

Be AWARE of your conditioning and health needs – and that also involves the type of hunt, when, where and how. Some hunts involve one day at a time close to home with the companionship of family and/or friends. Another may be hundreds or even thousands of miles from home, in a strange environment, for large and dangerous game! We need to be FIT for any scenario!

Know your limits – How old are you? So, you’re not 21 anymore? Your body deteriorates beyond that… slowly but surely. Pro sportsmen and women are at their best in performance in their twenties! Their speed and agility go downhill after that! Exceptions? Sure, but few get contracts past 35. There’s a reason for that – they’re not what they were when younger. Neither are we!

Stay safe – not fearful, but wise.

Have a means of communication within “the group” and/or the “outside world” – I have a GPS, a cell phone and have used hand held radios for communication with a partner or team.

Don’t attempt “the impossible”- only God can do that!

Have a “support system” for getting in shape and staying there – I have a personal system that works for me. It involves extra walking and working out with weights 3 – 4 times a week. Then, of course, there are other routines and chores that go with living. When I frequent my hunting areas, I do a lot of walking that is challenging. I also maneuver my rifle a lot for pretense shooting of game.

This has been short but”sweet”, I hope… basic reminders without tedious details.

Til the next…

Shalom

BOB MITCHELL

Eight Practical Loads for the .458 Winchester Magnum

The following eight loads consist of seven handloads I’ve developed for my rifle, which worked ideally, plus one Hornady Factory load.

My rifle is pictured on the header and is a Ruger No.1H in .458 Win Mag. The Hornady load hasn’t been fired from my rifle, but I chose it because it appears to be a decent load that actually fulfils its purpose.

Some have complained about the poor performance from factory products. However, some tests of those products do confirm their manufacturer’s claims. Likely, what happened in the past is that some factory .458 Winchester Magnum ammo wasn’t tested before it went to market, and was simply assumed to be both safe and adequate based on the amount of a particular powder loaded before seating bullets. It was also probably assumed that hunters would never notice any differences in effect from a 500gr at 1900 fps or at 2125 fps. In fact, recent tests of some vintage factory ammo, as well as some of more recent manufacture, by Ron Berry (Riflecrank) and “Jerry” (gunner500) on the 24hr Campfire, leaves no doubt that the fired factory products lived up to manufacturers’ claims – and is good ammo.

However, I’ve yet to fire a single factory product in any of my three .458 Win Mag rifles. I’m not adverse to that, but it has to do with the fact that I’m an inveterate handloader, and have no need to purchase factory fodder, or any interest in doing so.

<Some of the bullets I’ve handloaded for my .458s and .45-70s: L to R – 480 DGX, 465 hardcast, 450 Swift AF, 450 Barnes X, 405 Rem, 405 Win, 400 Hawk, 400 Barnes Buster, 350 Hornady RN, 350 Speer, 350 TSX, 350 Hornady with double cannelure, 330 Barnes brass solid, 325 Hornady FTX, 300 Hornady and 300 Sierra. This isn’t a full list.

Here are some others not included in the above:< L to R: a 600 Barnes Original, a 500 Hornady FMJ, 500 Hornady RN, 9th from L, a 400 Barnes Original, and 2nd to right of the 400 Barnes O, a 300 X.

And more: <These are 450gr TSX’s

The following seven handloads fired in my Ruger No.1H reflect something of the excellence of this cartridge in a suitable rifle – primarily its great versatility:

A 500gr at 2300 fps

A 450gr at 2400 fps

A 400gr at 2600 fps

A 350gr at 2780 fps

A 300gr at 2975 fps

A 250gr at 2700 fps

A 550gr at 1650 fps

And a 500gr Hornady factory DGX/DGS at 2140 fps

The last two handloads are reduced loads, and any above those could also be reduced by 25% to bring them in line with the potential of an 1895 Marlin in .45-70 shooting top handloads.

Following are some details of the selected loads presented above (there are several others that could have been chosen):

The 500gr Hornady RN (or DGX/DGS) – often this is selected for developing handloads and their accuracy, and for sighting-in a .458-cal rifle. Sometimes it has been used for hunting (I killed a bear with one), but often a “better bullet” is chosen for the actual hunt that involves DG. But it did give 20 fps higher velocity than a 500gr Speer AGS from an identical load of 81 grains of H4895 in Remington brass, ignited by WLRM primers and 3.58″ COL. Corrected to MV = 2297 fps for the 500 Speer AGS, and 2317 fps, corrected to MV for the 500gr Hornady.

< At 5 yards from the muzzle. Add 14 fps for correction to MV.

Since Hornady lists the same results for the 500gr RN and 500gr DGX/DGS employing the same powder and amount, I’d assume 2300 fps would be close enough for the 500gr DGX as for the 500gr RN from my test results, having yet to fire one (or more) from my new box of 500gr DGX’s.

The DGX bullets are excellent in my view, based on a test of their 480gr DGX that went completely through 15.5 inches of very tough media, impacting a ledge behind the setup, leaving a perfect imprint of the nose of that 480 DGX. By comparison, the 500gr Speer AGS was defeated at 6.5 inches into the media and lost its front core with 62% remaining (310 grains).

< The 500gr Speer AGS is on the far left. The one in the center was a 350gr Hornady RN, and on the right is a 350gr TSX that retained 350 grains after having penetrated 15.5 inches of the media and stopped just inside the last panel of the second box. It retained more weight than the 500gr Speer at 310 grains, and outpenetrated it by nine inches.

I only have 1/2 dozen of those 480s left so went looking for more without success, and came home with a box of the 500 DGX’s. These are bonded and the 480s were not. Since the unbonded penetrated the full test media without expansion, what could we expect from the 500s that are bonded? The Cape buffs should head for cover…

2300 fps from a 500 = 5872 ft-lbs KE at the muzzle.

The 450gr Swift A-Frame at 2403 fps: COL @ 3.53″; 84 grains H335; WLRM primers; Remington brass. This load hasn’t been tested in media (yet), but I’ve no doubts of its utility on large game – it simply doesn’t need more tests to prove itself based on feedback from African safaris, including PH’s. This is presented to show what’s possible from a Ruger No.1H, or a magazine rifle like the CZ550. Of course, in the CZ a second cannelure must be created midway between the manufactured cannelure and the bullet base. Or, because the 450 AF’s jacket is relatively “soft”, one could use a LEE crimp die that will make a groove for crimping, and/or a tool that makes cannelures wherever we need ’em. Though not specifically called for in a single-shot, I use my LEE crimp die anyway for those 450gr Swifts (under the 550gr Woodleigh box above).

A 400gr Barnes X-Bullet at 2590 fps: I still have eight of those, and saving them if ever I should do another moose hunt… which is unlikely. However, I’m still in the game for a possible big bruin! I already know the load I’d use, so I’d practice with a bunch of other 400s (Speer, Remington, Barnes, etc), use a couple for sight in and reserve the rest for the hunt.

This bullet had, and has, such a reputation that is was pronounced “the best” for all-around hunting of BG from a .458 Win Mag by none others than Finn Aagaard and Phil Shoemaker! And I would add my vote to theirs.

Just do the math! At nearly 2600 fps and a B.C. of .457, and a sectional density of .272, we have an energyof ~3300 ft-lbs at 400 yards!

So, I’ll hang onto mine until I sense I’ll need ’em for a bear or moose… or until I can get my hands on some of those new 404gr Hammers that have replaced the long-gone 400 X’s… Thanks to Sir Ron on the 24hr campfire!

COL for the 400gr X-Bullet at 2590 fps from my 24″ Ruger No.1H barrel was 3.61″. Powder was a “max load” (for my rifle) of H4198. I’ll not give the load as it may be too much for some rifles, especially if they use a shorter COL. I’ll simply say: “It was borrowed”, wiith some extrapolation on my part. The primer was what I always use in my .458 (WLRM).

The 350gr TSX: Don’t discount this bullet as a bit light for dangerous game like lion or large buffalo! It has been very effective on both! I know of one cull of Australian water buffalo that took over 100 by a Canadian, and he pronounced the 350gr TSX at about 2650 fps MV as effective as a 450 AF and better than the 420gr CE at max ranges to around 200 yards. Close in, the 450 Swift was best, followed by the TSX and CE (the 420 CE was no better than the 350 TSX at close range, he said). I killed one bear using this bullet at 2750 fps. It zipped through from frontal chest to right flank so quickly that it didn’t have time to expand much. And the young bear didn’t know it was dead until nothing worked anymore.

< I load the 350gr TSX to a COL of 3.44″

The 300gr TSX: And don’t discount this one either! It’s one of my all-time favorites! With the increased scarceness of component bullets these days, if all I had left were some 300gr TSX’s, I certainly would’t feel forsaken or undergunned! At up to nearly 3000 fps it can take anything coming it’s way, including buffalo, lion, the big bears and giant moose, etc! It’s main fault, of course, is a rather poor profile for long-range shooting. But at 2975 fps from the muzzle, it’s still going over 1600 fps at 400 yards. Nearly1800 ft-lbs (whatever we might think about KE) from a .458-cal bullet that will still expand and retain near 100% of its unfired weight, isn’t going to be laughed at by a mature elk or moose! It has been successfully used on grizzly at “in your face” range, and DRT!

The 250gr MonoFlex: In my rifle it is sighted dead-on at 150 yards. As said already, it’s a reduced load at about 2680 fps. It could be pushed out the muzzzle at over 3000 fps. But the purpose of the load is for bear and deer where I mostly hunt these days around an hour’s drive from my house.

It’s a mono bullet without lead, and has a smallish cavity with a red-pointed poly tip for slightly improved ballistics at range. Yet, it’s also a very tough bullet, made especially for lever-action Marlins in 450 Marlin and .45-70. Said to be by Hornady “made for large game like moose and elk”, and big bears. I’m pushing it quite a bit faster than a Marlin lever-action could make – that’s obvious. From bench tests that I’ve recently done on a bunch of .458-cal bullets, it’s as tough as the best! Obviously, despite the pointy tip, it has a very poor B.C. of only .175 – but even then it’s BC is better than a shotgun slug! For my intentions, it’s perfect!

The 550gr Woodleigh: I didn’t need a bullet this heavy with a bonded core. Yet, I wanted to test its potential in media at a variety of speeds, and at the current load’s velocity it could be useful on bear at the ranges I hunt them – 50 to 150 yards.

The 500gr Hornady factory DGX/DGS: Dr Ron Berry has done tests that reveal Hornady’s claims are exact: 2140 fps/5084 ft-lbs KE. There’s really no need for anything else if an African safari for elephant, rhino, hippo or Cape buffalo is on the agenda.

RECOIL of the various loads above from my 10.6 lb rifle (with a few cartridges in a stock ammo holder). My rifle has Mag-Na-Porting so I’ll put those approximate results in brackets:

The 500gr Hornady handload = 66 ft-lbs (56 ft-lbs)

The 450gr Swift AF handload = 61 ft-lbs (52 ft-lbs)

The 400gr Barnes X handload = 57.5 ft-lbs (49 ft-lbs)

The 350gr TSX handload = 55.6 ft-lbs (47 ft-lbs)

The 300gr TSX handload = 51.4 ft-lbs (44 ft-lbs)

The 250gr MonoFlex handload = 28.4 ft-lbs (24 ft-lbs)

The 550gr Woodleigh handload = 32.9 ft-lbs (28 ft-lbs)

About recoil: Many factors influence “felt” recoil: The above numbers can only be compared with one another because they are all from the same rifle, same basic weight for all loads, and how I hold it.

<This was my CZ550 in .458 Win Mag. The Burris fixed 4x scope had a long eye relief of 5″, and often for a relative long shot the sling went over my right elbow, acting as a brace for increased steadyness.

Generally, the physics of these loads is adjusted to the ballistics. A relatively “slow” moving projectile will give a sense of a heavy push from a heavy rifle, whereas a “fast” relatively light bullet from a “light” rifle will give a quicker – sharper recoil effect even though the numbers say the recoil should be less than a “big bore” shooting a heavy bullet. The difference in “felt” recoil? The recoil from a heavy big-bore rifle shooting a relatively “heavy” bullet is spread over more time.

Hoping this provides some insights into the exceptional serviceability of the grand .458 Winchester Magnum.

Til the next…

Shalom

BOB MITCHELL

Single-Shot big-bore rifles for dangerous game?

Dangerous Game… How shall we identify and describe them? Some identify the “Big Five” of Africa and the Big Bears of Alaska as DG, but surely there are others! What about muskox, bison, wolves, mountain lion, moose and elk… and the North American black bear in particular? It’s apparent from records, plus uncounted incidents, that the black bear is potentially a very dangerous animal not to be taken lightly! As to size, many not only exceed the weight of leopards, but lions as well! 250 lbs might be average for a not yet fully mature young adult male, but many seven to ten year olds have surpassed 500 lbs and others 700 lbs.

< This one was well over 500 lbs with guts out!

Some think that such heavy black bears are toting too much blubber, but I’ve witnessed some heavy bears “move out” from a bait site and in two bounds were hitting about 30 mph. One behemoth that was regularly hitting my primary bear bait site kept all other creatures at bay – nothing else, small, medium or large, came within sight or hunting range. He came at night and left lots of markings that this was his turf, and for no others! But the bait disappeared on a regular basis. He left claw markings on trees that my tall partner (over 6′) couldn’t reach by stretching on tip toes. But, without explanation, he appeared to have left the country. Shortly thereafter, I was at a local gun shop where a large man was telling the shop owner of a very large bruin that was killed by some local hound hunters in the vicinity of my bait setup. I asked a few questions and he said the bear was weighed with guts out at 567 lbs – which means: that bear’s live weight exceeded 600 lbs!

Then, Bill Vaznis’ book: Successful BLACK BEAR Hunting, on page 8, gives the following description of a New Brunswick black bear (my home province): “According to the third edition of The Guinness Book of Animal Facts and Feats, Joseph Allen killed a nightmare of a bruin near Millstream in 1976 after it killed his pet German shepherd. The bear measured seven feet eleven inches from nose to base of tail and tipped the scales dressed at 902 lbs. Its live weight was later estimated to be 1100 pounds!” There’s no mention of how the bear was killed by Mr. Allen, but it’s assumed he used a rifle or shotgun. Millstream is a little more than an hour’s drive from where I was born and grew up.

The point of this is to define and identify dangerous game. Even a cow moose can be very aggressive and dangerous in the protection of a calf… except they seem to know better when a bear is involved! And a bull moose is notorious for attacking anything, and I mean anything, during the rut, even automobiles, transport trucks and trains!

Several years ago, on a major highway north of Superior, a married couple had been driving their motor home all day and decided to pull over for a rest as darkness fell. Sometime before daybreak they were jarred awake by something crashing into their RV. This continued for some time from various angles, while they tried to discern what was ramming them! They attempted to turn on some lights but nothing was working, including the motor! Finally, as daylight started to emerge, the wrecking stopped. With a lot of trepidation, they went outside and could hardly believe the wreckage on their motor home… headlights were missing, dents, scratches, holes and other pieces missing! But the moose tracks all around the vehicle was unmistakable. Finally, a police cruiser stopped and they were rescued!

So, what then is a “dangerous animal”? In my strong opinion, it’s any creature that could kill me! Or you.

Now, as to our question: Are single-shot, big-bore rifles suitable for hunting dangerous game?<This was my Ruger No.1 in .45-70 LT. As seen here, it weighed a little over 8 lbs, and just over 38 inches in length. It would fire a 500gr Hornady RN at 2200 +fps and a 450gr Swift A-Frame at 2300 +fps. So it wasn’t lacking power for any living creature, including elephant with a solid 450 or 500gr making upwards of 5430 ft-lbs. But the issue is: Would it have been suitable?

The best document I’ve read on this issue was written by Randy D. Smith. In fact, I read it at least twice a few year ago, and, then again recently. In my view, it addresses every possible concern. And, I must add this: His favorite single-shots are Rugers in No.1. Additionally, his favorite among them is a Ruger No.1H TROPICAL in .458 Winchester Magnum, which he uses for multiple North American BG, downloaded to equivalent “hot” .45-70 loads. And he amply describes why he chooses that particular rifle and cartridge. (Pic of mine on the header.)

He does not recommend them for dangerous WOUNDED game if followup in thick bush is involved, especially if hunting solo. But then, he points out the several fallacies involved in putting full trust in a repeating magazine rifle, which I recently addressed as well.

It’s a good read, and I think you’ll not find better anywhere on this subject.

To summerize:

1) The Farquharson falling-block type action is the strongest of any because of that solid block of steel in the breech – the type adopted in the No.1 Rugers. More metal is involved than in the bolt-action type.

2) Because of the above, the largest bores and pressures can easily be handled.

3) Doubles (break action) can’t safely handle the pressure that the falling-block type can, nor the number of shots longterm without issues.

4) Even bolt-actions may begin to develop some weaknesses from “over abuse”.

5) The Rugers have been chambered in several Big Bores, including the formidable .458 Winchester Magnum that with its extra-long “freebore” allows seating of bullets as far as possible depending on their lengths and weights, with about .25″ to .30″ seated in the case. There’s obviously no magazine constraint to COL. That means it can easily match or exceed the ballistics of the Lott – upwards of 6000 +ft-lbs at the muzzle!

But then, as with Smith, others and myself, it’s often useful and easy – for several reasons – to download ballistics to the level of factory .45-70 loads. For example: a 300gr at ~1886 fps, or 400gr at 2000 fps or even 1330 fps. In a Ruger No.1 (or any .45-70), at 2000 fps/3552 ft-lbs, given a well constructed bullet like the 404gr Shock Hammer, or even a 405gr Remington (if you have some) can do the job on anything in N.A. within 150 yards or so. Of course, the 404gr Hammer bullet can also make upwards of 2600 fps/6064 ft-lbs from the muzzle of a 24″ barrelled .458 Win Mag – with some knowhow.

If I could have only one bullet for my Ruger No.1H, it would be the 404gr by Hammer. Started at 2000 fps, at 150 yards it still has around 1780 fps/2814 ft-lbs – plenty for the largest moose at that range. If a big bear might be met, and on agenda, I’d up the MV to around 2400 – 2600 and fear nothing within range.

In practice, if we get’em here in Canada, I’d load ’em to about 2250 fps for bears or lesser game. That will still give over 1800 fps at 250 yards/~3000 ft-lbs, more than enough for anything I’ll hunt from now on to eternity.

In practice, and Smith concurs, using ballistics like that, rarely is a second shot ever needed as we become more conscientious in the use of the first shot. Also, the number of times I’ve fired a second shot at a game animal was rare indeed. We develop a mindset akin to bow hunters and those who use BP. Though, reloading a Ruger No.1 can be relatively “fast” compared to those. And with practice, in keeping a second round “at hand” (different methods for that), one can load a Ruger No.1 by feel and not by sight.

You know the arguments for loading followup rounds: a semi is the fastest, a lever is second, a bolt is third, and a single-shot the slowest. Yet all of it can be, and has been, debated. Some claim they are as fast with a bolt-action in an aimed second shot as a semi, and others claim a lever-action has no advantage over a bolt-action, and so on it goes… Some claims are stunning indeed… until faced with a bull elephant charge, or a grizzly in your face! Emotions play a much larger role in reloading a rifle than most understand. I’ve watched at least one professional fumble his ammo, dropping it on the ground after firing three at, or into a “dugga boy” from a bolt-action repeater. Later he pulled the trigger on an empty chamber as a result of too much emotion in running after the wounded buff. And all that in the presence of his PH and assistants. But he’s still a TV personality!

Then other “stuff” happens: floor plates open (that happened to me on a bear hunt that dumped the load on the ground after bouncing off the lip of the plastic chair I was seated on with a loud “racketty -tak – tak” that would awaken any sound-sleeping bear a mile away!), sights fall off, cross-hairs disappear; then the forbotten JAM!!! That also happened to our “TV personality” – all from an M70 Winchester!

Sooo… it’s true after all is said and done, that the ultimate safety for the hunter of DG, and any entourage, is between his/her ears, not what he’s holding between his hands!

No rifle is perfect. Any can fail – and have! I was unloading my CZ550 in .458 Win Mag at the end of hunting light. There was one in the chamber, and three in the magazine. It was getting dark and I was backup for my partner, Ken. There was also another observer. I pointed the rifle at an embankment a few feet away, and had to move the “safety” forward to release the bolt for opening to extract the one in the chamber. When I thumbed the safety “off” the rifle went “BOOM!” What if…? <This is a different time and location, but the same rifle that went “BOOM” when the safety was pushed “off”! The problem was the set trigger that when adjusted to remove the “set” feature, according to book instructions, made the rifle vunerable to fire when the safety was pushed off. It had never previously malfunctioned. So, with additional “work” I insured that would never happen again… but who knows? NEVER PUT FULL TRUST IN ANY “SAFETY”, NO MATTER ITS MAKE OR MODEL!

A lightweight Big Bore sporting rifle (.40-cal to .577-cal) is an anomaly! That means at least two obvious and serious faults if ballistic potential is also the goal:

1) Physical abuse of the shooter.

2) Weakness in the structure of the rifle.

3) Period.

There’s simply NO WAY to make such a rifle comfortable to shoot, and there’s NO WAY that such a rifle can be as strong as it needs to be if shot regularly in the long haul at its full potential!

And there is some ambivalence and hypocrisy in the industry. As more demand (lust?) has developed for light rifles, so has complaints over recoil. The result? Smaller bores and sleeker bullets that are purported to do the same jobs that were formerly assigned to even .30-06’s, 300 magnums, etc. Now, I’m reading on the Internet things like: “Which has the most recoil, the .243 Win or .260 Rem?”. And this is common, and growing! And the market provides (and often is dominated by) what shooters and hunters seem to think is adequate or even “best”. And, in my view, it’s the result of an overindulgent generation who “want their cake and eat it too”! They want the “biggest and best” with bragging rights but without the pain!

But in life, pain is unavoidable! And I’m not necessarily speaking only of physical pain. There is pain from loss: of a job, of abilities (as we age), of a family member or loved ones, of respect that we may have enjoyed at other times and circumstances. There are aspects of pain that’s healthy and for our good to keep us from living undiciplined and ungrateful lives, or becoming narcissists!

<I had full confidence in using the single-shot Ruger No 1 in .45-70 LR when hunting the bruin that did this to the blind. That bear was a brute, mean, ruthless and crafty. He came in behind the green chair, unheard, when I was seated in it. The bush that hid him was about ten feet from the chair, and I was alone. When I stood to take the pic, he chrashed through the brush as though it wasn’t there. And that was calculated to frighten me! He did the same act the week prior when I had a partner beside me! A week later, I did get a shot on him but he was on the move. In a followup the following day I found where he’d spent the night watching his back trail. There was matted down grass with a patch of blood about a foot wide. My friend, Ken, followed pin pricks of blood through thick briars on hands and knees while I stood guard with my 1895 Marlin in .45-70. The spoor petered out in thick tangles that made further progress impossible. All evidence suggested that he survived.

So learning to shoot a Big Bore in a single-shot might move us out of “our comfort zone”, but so what? There are a lot of things in life that “make us uncomfortable”: getting a degree or three, raising children, overcoming a disability (I lost sight in my right eye at age six, and I became somewhat shy of other kids and meeting new people. I worried over meeting a beautiful gal that would love and accept me, or becoming a public figure, playing sports, etc. All of that was overcome despite the physical loss – and, actually, it helped develop me into a stronger, somewhat fearless person, by the grace of God.)

Taking on the challenge of a single-shot Ruger No.1 in a Big Bore, such as a 450/400, 404, etc, might very well be good for an otherwise awkward or somewhat shy person if they’re not a cripple or have a debilatating disease: a) It’s a fresh challenge, b) Learning something new about ballistics can raise their confidence, c) It disciplines mind and body, d) It opens up new possibilities, etc.

Why is it that current culture believes that when “I’m not comfortable with that”, it should be rejected as bad or unhealthy – as in a request, a change from the familiar, or any other challenge to present circumstances or thinking?

One challenge overcome or defeated trains us to face others, and so on.

Walking alone in the bush with a single-shot rifle was the experience of many who conquered their fears and developed “The New World”.

At the age of 86, I’m facing challenges that nobody wrote a book on “How to face life at age 86″… neither did they when I was 6, having just lost an eye. And nobody is going to feel sorry for you/us! So let’s get up, get dressed and go on with living… Life is tough sometimes, for everybody. So, lets grow up and stop complaining over “small stuff”!

Say, is there a growing pandemic of “every man for his own interests and not those of others”? (2 Timothy 3: 1 – 5)

Til the next…

Shalom

BOB MITCHELL

Does Accuracy Matter in a Hunting Rifle?

That’s a very broad question that invites multiple answers, depending on what is intended by the question and the perspective of those who might attempt an answer.

First of importance is what is intended by the question. It might be interpreted by some as: “Inherent accuracy” of the rifle employing factory ammo. On the other hand, is it asking about the best handloads regardless of muzzle velocity – as in what many reloading manuals cite as the most accurate load for a particular bullet even though it might be 150 fps slower than the best in muzzle velocity. Then, to others they might be thinking 3″ – 4″ groups at 100 yards because they never shoot beyond that! So their answer might be: “As long as it kills deer at a hundred, I don’t care what the MOA is!”

And so on…

In my view it does matter for the following reasons, and this will likely be the opinion of at least a majority:

1) The accuracy of rifle loads – factory or handloads – that are intended for game from small to large, at ranges to 400 yards or so, must be consistently accurate enough to hit within the vitals of the intended game with the rifle zeroed appropriately.

> This whitetail buck was shot by our son, Brent, last fall (Brent is 6′ tall without boots). The .356 Winchester was zeroed at 100 yards and he shot it at 70 yards. The load was a 220gr Speer that I handloaded and zeroed for the Winchester M94 XTR. The bullet went through both shoulders and made exit. They were shooting MOA, so that part of the hunt was without angst.

< Zeroing the rifle at 100 yards.

If the rifle load chosen can only make 3 to 5 shots within a 2″ circle at 100 yards from a bench rest, then at 400 yards that would be approximately an 8″ circle. Given the possibility of some difficulty in having or finding a solid/stable rest, a wounding shot or miss is highly probable. On the other hand, 3 to 5 shots into a 1″ circle or less, has a much higher potential, under field conditions, of hitting vitals at 400 yards – depending, of course, on the class of animal. On a mature moose, for example, the vital area is at least a 12″ circle. On a 200 lb whitetail it might only be 6-inches.

In other words, using a rifle load that’s incapable of MOA for long-range shooting of game becomes a wild-guessing game. In Toronto there was a particular gun shop that I and a son used to visit on a semi-regular basis. The owner did his moose hunt annually in Northern Ontario. At the end of one such hunt, my son and I paid a visit, and I asked about his hunt – was it successful? He told us in his own Italian way ,with gestures and humour, that he took a very long shot on a moose with his “300 magume”, and it disappeared into some timber. “Did you hit it?”, I asked…. “Don’t know!”, was the reply. “Did you go after it?” – “No, it was too far!”. “How far?” “Far, far away!” was the only answer we got! Then: “My 300 is very good for long shots, you know.”. End of that discussion – except on the way home we had a good laugh, but also pondered the matter of irresponsible shooting at game animals.

To my way of thinking, not knowing the ballistics of my rifle, including its accuracy, is tantamount to criminal behaviour if I go afield to kill game.

2) Good accuracy – or the best possible – breeds confidence in the field so that becomes a matter of NO concern! I can then focus on making the shot!

3) There’s a real sense of satisfaction in owning an inherently accurate rifle, and in making handloads that complement its accuracy.

I’ve owned several of that nature, and there was real joy in producing ammo that brought the best from them. One was a single-shot NEF in .45-70 with a very stout barrel. It would shoot almost any load into MOA or better. That gave real confidence in sitting in a tree stand and firing a single 465gr semi-hardcast into the frontal chest of a trophy black bear at seventy yards. DRT! It never moved so much as an inch!

Another is my Tikka T3 in 9.3 x 62. All loads shoot sub-MOA. And the best is the 250gr AB into sub- 1/2 MOA at +2700 fps.

Still another was a .300 Win Mag… and so on.

And these were not loads tuned for accuracy, but for performance on game… like that 465gr at 1900 fps from a “cheap” rifle that would be despised by the “elite”.

Another rifle that was extremely accurate – more than I was – a Rem M673 in .350 Rem Mag, and that was after my gunsmith resolved some serious issues. It would shoot 3 of the 250gr Speer GS’s into a tiny cloverleaf of .375″ at a hundred – at OVER 2700 fps from it’s very stiff 22″ barrel.

4) Usually I like to settle on one load for hunting purposes from each rifle. It doesn’t always work out that way because I like to fiddle with different components, but in the case of my new .35 Whelen that’s exactly what I’ve been doing – one accurate load for “come what may” in a light-‘n-handy rifle. In the past, that was generally a .300 Win Mag but I sold or traded them all in favor of “mediums”. A .300 Win is very versatile, something like a .30-06, only more so in my view. A good 180gr is all one really needs in either of those two.

My 9.3 x 62 was intended to replace all mediums and sub-mediums. Replacing all mediums it has admirably succeeded in doing. But as an “all-purpose” rifle, quality lighter bullets are lacking. The lightest bullet I use in that rifle is the 250gr AccuBond – and it’s superbly accurate at 2600 – 2700 fps, but that doesn’t make it as versatile as a .35 Whelen on the “low end” where bullets of relatively high BCs and modest weight exist. The main problem with lighter bullets in 9.3 is relatively blunt shapes that come out of Europe. What is needed for the 9.3 x 62 is an American made 200gr “premium” with a sharp, polycarbonate tip, something like a 200gr in .358. Alas, that doesn’t appear to be on the horizon. GS did make a 195 bonded-core with a BT and pointed nose but they’ve moved to another continent.

So, a light-‘n-handy .35 Whelen appeared “out of nowhere” in a single-shot at a decent price, and it has taken a month of concentrated work to come up with a single, all-purpose load in a walkabout rifle for “come what may”.

The load: a 225gr AccuBond at 2850 fps that shoots three into .65″ at a hundred yards. That’s good enough for anything I might encounter that’s in season and for which I’m licensed to shoot, from 5 yards to 400 yards. That’s about as versatile as a .300 Win or .338 Win, with recoil in the same ballpark.

An inherently accurate rifle firing a consistently accurate load gives confidence and pleasure, but effectively using all that potential accuracy in harvesting game is the greater challenge that involves the shooter and his/her use of other support systems:

Shooting offhand (either standing or kneeling): Usually, this is less than 100 yards, but from a steady, standing position may be much longer, assuming the shooter is confident based on practice. I shot my moose from a standing-offhand position at 165 yards and both bullets went where aimed. On a more uneven ground I would have knelt or found a tree to lean against.

Another “trick” is using the sling as a support over the elbow of the offside – the one away from the shooting side. Go online and you can find the details if uninformed.

In kneeling, depending on whether the shooter is left-handed or right-handed, one knee is on the ground and the other is bent with the foot on the ground. The bent knee becomes the rest for the elbow of the hand that grips the forearm of the rifle, and the other becomes the arm and hand that controls the fire mechanism. Armies have used this style of rest in long-range exchanges of fire in open areas where cover or trenches were not available in an extreme and immediate situation.

Also, shooting offhand often involves close quarters and brush where an animal appears suddenly, jumps up or even charges within a few yards. The hunter’s only option is to instinctively “shoot now!” without any concerns other than hitting the animal “in the big middle”. In brush hunting where dangerous game might appear suddenly at relatively short range, I won’t be carrying less than a medium to big bore that can deal death and destruction with a single-shot, because that’s all I’ll get, one way or another! Either the animal’s dead, crippled or fled! Or I am!

Shooting prone: The support for accuracy is the shoulder, elbows and hands. There are various nuances to this, but open and flat terrain is assumed. But, I’ll not be shooting my .458 from prone, but maybe from:

A Sitting position: Again, there are a few nuances to this, but the deal is to find as much balance and comfort as possible. This position is often used with the back against a solid support, like a large boulder or stout tree. Often, this style is used in lieu of a tree stand or blind in areas of known wildlife activity.

African type sticks, bipods, tripods and permanent rests: No doubt we’ve all used various means for resting the forearm of a rifle for steadiness in shooting game. Even for relatively short range shooting. The reason isn’t complicated. If unsteadiness is removed, we can then focus the reticle on the spot we want to hit, knowing our next job will be field dressing the animal. A solid rest can practically eliminate shakiness and the effects of extreme emotion from excitement or nervousness.

< There’s a bear bait setup on the far side of this field. The range is 135 yards. The rifle is my Tikka T3 in 9.3 x 62. It’s accuracy gave calm assurance, but it’s also resting on an inherent rest of the ladder stand.

I’ve found solid rests to be very important in hunting bear, whether at relatively close ranges or longer ones. There is (for me at least) the excitement factor, and I don’t want to misplace a bullet as the result may become a tracking job in nasty places to find a bear that’s still alive seeking revenge – and that’s neither myth nor hype. And, very likely darkness has settled in! Tracking down a wounded dangerous black creature with sharp fangs and long claws that may outweigh me by a hundred pounds or more, and that extra poundage in the form of muscles, certainly can cause excitement that’s not of the pleasant kind! So I use rifle rests in blinds and tree stands when bruins with coats as black as coal is the pursuit.

Accurate rifles deserve accurate shooting! Otherwise, it’s a waste!

Til the next… Single-Shot Big Bore Rifles for Dangerous Game?

Shalom

BOB MITCHELL

+ + + + + + + + +

“Truth forever on the scaffold,

Wrong forever on the throne,

Yet the scaffold sways the future,

and behind the dim unknown

Stands God within the shadow,

Keeping watch above His own”

James Russel Lowell 1844

“the Present Crisis”

The .300 and .338 Winchester Magnums Compared – Which is better?

Winchester came out with the .458 in 1956, the .338 in 1958 and the .300 in 1963. Over time I’ve owned and used all three. But at one time I thought I’d like to own their complete series of four, including the .264, at the same time and all in the M70. That is a set I could have lived with throughout my hunting life — I’m sure there are those who have done just that!

There’s little doubt that the most common and popular of those four is the .300 followed by the .338. Both are still widely embraced, if the sale of rifles, ammo, dies, bullets and discussions are indicative of their use. At one time – near it’s beginning in 1958 – the .264 was quite popular, then some problems developed, real or imagined. With such a large case for a relatively small bore, large doses of powder tended to create a lot of heat with the unhappy result of throat erosion. Then an ideal slow-burning propellant was difficult to find – either they were too slow or too fast for a maximum-efficient burn. Some claimed the .270 Win was better overall. Then Remington created the 7mm Remington Magnum based on the same case as the .264 with improved ballistics. Potential buyers of the .264 Win saw the 7 Rem Mag as a more favorable choice.

Yet with the current fad and resurrection of 6.5s as “wonder cartridges”, it appears a resurrection of the .264 Winchester Magnum is due – especially with more modern and appropriate powders. If I were younger, I could “dig” that one shooting a 140gr Partition at 3200 fps without fear of a “burnt-out” barrel in less than a thousand rounds! But it needs a full dose of “the right” modern powder – like 72 – 75 grains in a 26″ barrel and some “free bore”. Nosler’s #6 manual uses a 24″ test barrel and a max load of 57.5 grains of RL-19 for 3021 fps… about the same as a .270 Win! That’s scandalous for a cartridge like the .264 that can hold 84 grains H2O compared to the .270’s 67 ! Even I could do better having never owned a .264 Win! From a 26″ barrel and a 140gr NP or AccuBond, it should go not a hair under 3200 fps! Even a 7-08 can make 3000 fps from a 139gr and a 24″ tube using 48 grains of powder! Some of the results in manuals are void of making much sense – not all, but some…

Of course, Nosler now has their own magnum in 6.5 that is not under-loaded with a 140gr advertised at 3300 fps from a 26″ barrel…

Back to our theme: The .300 and .338 Win Mags… Which is better?

<This rifle was chambered in .338 Winchester Magnum when bought new. It’s a Browning A-Bolt SS in left-hand with a 26″ barrel. In that form it gave up to 2842 fps from a book load of RL-19 and a 250gr Hornady SP. Sometime within it’s first year I had it re-chambered to a .340 Wby Mag that shot the 250gr Partition to 3000 fps. That became my moose hunting load.

Having considerable experience with each in thousands of rounds of handloads, there is quite a bit of overlap with the .338 coming out on top in sheer energy numbers, while the .300 has slightly less recoil and flatter shooting for smaller big game. I’ve tended to favor the .300 as being slightly more versatile. But with the multiplicity of component bullets for each, the handloader can tailor ballistics for anything from bambi to brown bear. Though when it concerns a hunt for the likes of large moose and bear, under all conditions, I’d choose the .338 over the .300. In such a case, there’s no substitute for bullet weight, sectional density and energy, assuming the “best” bullets in each.

To get the best all-around results from each, a 26″ barrel is mandated. I fail to understand why a majority of hunters seem to prefer 24″ barrels. I’ve owned each in Browning A-Bolts with 26″ barrels and I defy anyone to prove why a 24″ is better in any sense. 26″ tubes do give increased velocities over 24s, all else equal. From my 26″, .300 I could quite easily get 3000 fps from the 200gr Partition, and 2840 fps from a 250gr in the 26″, .338 Win Mag, using RL-22 in the former and RL-19 in the latter, using a near identical amount in each.

At one time I was faced with a choice of either one in the same make and model rifle: the Ruger SS, M77 with the “boat paddle” stock. After some dithering, I chose the .300 as I already had a “heavy hitter” that filled that niche. Today, I’d lean toward the .338. Both had 24″ barrels.

While, as suggested, there are more than enough bullets of different types and weights for each, this is how I might load them today:

< A selection of .338″ sectioned bullets from L to R: 275gr Speer, 250gr Sierra, 225gr NP, 250gr NP, 250gr Speer GS, 250gr Hornady SP Int., and 225gr Hornady SP Int. (The bullet on far left is a .264″, 140gr NP for comparison). Today, there are many others, such as Barnes TSX and TTSX’s.

The .300 Winchester Magnum (26″)

Bullet: 200gr Nosler Partition

SD = .301

BC = .481

Powder: 73 grains of RL-22

MV = 3000 fps/3996 ft-lbs

300 yards = 2436 fps/2635 ft-lbs

500 yards = 2098 fps/1954 ft-lbs

The .338 Winchester Magnum (26″)

Bullet: 250gr Nosler Partition

SD = .313

BC = .473

Powder: 74 grains of Rl-19

MV = 2840 fps/4477 ft-lbs

300 yards = 2280 fps/2885 ft-lbs

500 yards = 1860 fps/1920 ft-lbs

Analysis of results:

1) Recoil: I’ve owned identical rifles in each with 26″ barrels, so the weight was similar at around 8.75 lbs with scope and ammo. The load for the .300 WM in a 8.75 lb rifle would be approximately 35 ft-lbs recoil. The load for the .338 WM would develop about 42 ft-lbs.

2) The .300 has a flatter trajectory but not enough to make a significant difference on large game such as moose or elk. However, for small deer, wolf or coyote, the .300 has an advantage at long range. But both are adequate for moose or elk to 500 yards at least.

3) In a choice for dangerous game like large grizzle or brown bear, and large Alaskan/Yukon moose, the .338 has a distinct advantage as most will be shot much closer than 500 yards. And the .338 has greater momentum from its 250gr even at 500 yards, as well as a higher SD and larger bore by 21% in cross-sectional area at any range from muzzle to terminal ballistics. So today (If I didn’t already have the 9.3 x 62) I’d choose the .338 over the .300 if given a choice between two otherwise identical rifles.

Then, there is the matter of 20% greater recoil from the .338 (depending on how each is loaded). If someone can’t be comfortable with the “kick” of a .300 Winchester Magnum (or other .300 magnums) then I’d certainly not recommend a .338. My .340 Wby produced 54 ft-lbs of recoil from it’s hunting load and I really couldn’t say it was punishing in the least. That’s considerably more than the typical .375 H&H. But with time and experience in shooting such rifles, blindfolded, it would be difficult to discern the difference between any of them. For a time I used a local smith for some work, who formerly worked for the Canadian military as a smith. He told me: “I did so much testing that they were all just another firearm. I couldn’t honestly tell you the difference between a .458 or .30-06, they are all just another firearm to me”.

I pretty much came to that same conclusion. The biggest difference in “felt” recoil was the rifle itself – its form and did it “fit”? Weight was also a major factor. Then, how I held it in bench shooting. I learned early on to pull it tight to the shoulder WITH BOTH HANDS! And don’t slouch – sit up straight allowing the body to move with the recoil as in shooting offhand in hunting.

If one only learns to shoot small bores as in benchrest style, they’re gonna get whacked in the chops real hard if they use that “style” for a .338 Win Mag, and maybe from a .300 too!

In my view, Winchester did a great job in producing that series of four in the late ’50s and early ’60s, that have really never been improved on by their “Short Magnums”, nor other brands and iterations. The .458 is still a factory standard for African DG firing a 500gr at 2130 to 2150 fps (over 5000 ft-lbs), and handloads that equal or surpass the Lott (to 6000 ft-lbs); the 300 is a world class cartridge for big game at any realistic range as well as a favorite for target shooting. The .338 is still a serious choice in Alaska for its overgrown moose and bears, and the .264, despite a lot of negative press and more than enough competition, is still alive and capable of “getting the job done” on anything to meet Winchester’s intentions – at stretched ranges.

Long may they live!

< Three heavyweights loaded for my Ruger No.1 Tropical in .458 Winchester Magnum. L to R: a 600gr Barnes Original, a 550gr Woodleigh Weldcore and a 500gr Hornady DGX. The one in the middle was fired today (Friday, June 10/22) along with several 250gr MonoFlex’s. The rifle is sighted for those 250s at 2686 fps MV/4005 ft-lbs that cluster into a tight group at 50 yards. A .458 WM can shoot that bullet to 3000 fps with ease! The 550 Woodleigh registered 1657 fps, and corrected to MV = 1666/3389 ft-lbs, which is adequate for anything short of elephant. That’s a greatly reduced load, but within range is more than adequate for the largest and most dangerous game Alaska can throw in its direction! That bullet at “full bore” can easily register 2200 fps from a 24″ barrel at the COL presented above.

(A couple points of interest for the curious: 1) Though the 250gr MonoFlex at 2686/4005 ft-lbs appears more suitable for big bear than the slow 550gr Woodleigh at 1666/3389 ft-lbs, the 250gr would have to make 3665 fps to equal the momentum of the “slow moving” 550gr, and 2) The 550gr actually retains its velocity-momentum much better down range than the 250gr due to a significantly higher B.C. So, the effective range of the 550 on large game is better than the 250gr, though compensation for a meaningful disparity in trajectory would have to be made. Another note: Felt recoil from the 550 was noticeably more than from the 250gr – 34 ft-lbs for the 550 vs. 29 ft-lbs for the 250 – all within the range of our two main subjects, the .300 and .338 Winchesters.)

And despite its critics, the father of them all – the .458 is not only able to fulfil its promises, but is better than ever!

Til the next…

Shalom

BOB MITCHELL