Handloading — when and why I got into it — P2

Please read P1 at the bottom of this page, if you’ve not done so, as it’s the background for this page. (Left click on pics for a better view)

At the end of that four-year stint as pastor in the wilds of New Brunswick, I felt the need for a break. That’s not to complain against God’s call on my life, or that I was fed up, but I weighed less than 140 lbs and needed a complete renewal in body and spirit. By then we had two small boys and my wife at 5′-8″ weighed less than I did! So I had resigned as pastor and we returned to Campobello to live with my parents and I worked on the 70 ft. dragger for the next 4 months. In the meanwhile I’d applied to a mission organization with headquarters in New York City.

I’d worked during summer months as a crew member on my dad’s fishing boats since I was fifteen, but had been away from that for the last four years. So I had to get my sea-legs back again. Well, that opportunity came in a hurry as the first trip in early May, after a bad spring storm, was to a fishing grounds somewhere between the New England States and Nova Scotia. After a storm with 60 mph gale force winds the Atlantic Ocean doesn’t suddenly become calm again. It takes days for the whitecaps and 20′ waves to become mere 8′ rolling swells. After twelve hours of an 18 hour trip to get there, I was seasick… and I mean never had I been as sick before in my life. In fact, I’d never been previously seasick in my life to that point… and it was for the whole week! Yet by the end of that first week I was over it and had my sea-legs again.

(My cousin’s lobster boat in the foreground which he gave to his son. Pic on our visit to Campobello in summer of 2018)>

By the end of the summer we headed for New York City in my British Consul, a 4-banger, loaded with my pregnant wife, two small boys and everything we owned. That also included a roof rack with a huge box-shaped container that allowed a top speed on the super highways of 60 mph, max — that was with the gas pedal nearly floored !

From September to a few days before Christmas we were introduced to big city living in Brooklyn, just off Flatbush Ave.  Classes from Monday to Friday were attended. Saturday was for ourselves, and Sundays I was sent to preach in various churches of the greater New York area. That was interesting since we were in the process of becoming acquainted with The Big Apple. One Sunday I was the preacher in a corner store converted to a church in a black community. Another in a black community with a white pastor! It was a huge church, all black, and the pastor was away for the weekend. I was on my own preaching to several hundred, and often heard, “Preach it brother!” But the one church I spent most Sundays in was on Long Island in a very wealthy, sophisticated all white community.  The congregation was several hundred Presbyterians who were without a pastor at the time. It was suggested that I might consider becoming their pastor — and I was in training for missions in another language!

The followup to all that was 18 years of missions work, including ministry in two languages — French and English. Eventually, that led to becoming director for Canada, which involved speaking engagements in both languages and International travel for the same purposes. I was rarely home. We then had a growing family with three teenagers and one preteen. When I was home, that meant a lot of administrative duties. I was responsible for the home office, meetings with the international committee, and representing the mission that sometimes meant conferences with other mission leaders, etc. We were a member mission of the IFMA (Interdenominational Foreign Missions Association) which numbered around 100 mission organisations scattered around the world, that in turn was in a working relationship with another +100 evangelical denominational mission organisations (EFMA). We were non-denominational (not supported by any particular church affiliation such as Methodist, Baptist, Nazarene, Pentecostal, etc.).

But I had to make a decision regarding our future as a family. I needed to be home more to support my wife in looking after a family of teenagers. And I was not really cut out for hours of administration when home. My heart was in people work, not in numbers and finances. So while in the Alps of France in meetings with fifty coworkers, God gave me peace to accept an invitation to become pastor of a Toronto church. That was in the fall of 1977.

During those two decades of missions work, I hunted once in Quebec, and that was it. I gave my 12-gauge to a couple headed to Northern Canada for missions work. All that was early on in years living in the Montreal area. I didn’t have time for a break. Starting a new church in the French language, training a pastor to succeed me, attending conferences as speaker, travelling internationally, etc. was my life. Guns and hunting were the last thoughts on my mind.

But my hobby — yes, I did have one — was astronomy and telescope making. I became a member of The Royal Astronomical Society of Canada, joined a telescope making club with a colleague. This club was associated with the RASC of Montreal. I made five personal telescopes, starting with a 10″ Newtonian. Then another 10″, and finished the 10″ mirror of my colleague-friend’s by correcting it from a 10″ sphere to a 10″ paraboloid. (A telescope mirror – reflecting type –  after the front surface has been ground and polished to a perfect spheroid, must then be corrected to a perfect paraboloid for all light rays to focus properly to within at least 1/10 wavelength of light. Otherwise a concave spherical mirror of less than f10 will not focus light rays from an image to the same point.) I also made a compound 12.5″ reflecting telescope (that’s the diameter of the mirror, not length of telescope) with a total of three mirrors — one convex for increase of overall F rating. That was the best telescope I ever made but too heavy to be toted. It eventually became the property of a grandson. But any of the 10″, and the 12.5″ in particular, was optically superior to my current commercial 8″ Celestron that is worth 4x what they cost! (That was a gift from a friend with mobility problems)

I had learned from my experiences as a young pastor in New Brunswick that long-term ministry, and its success, depends not only on sweat and tears, but also on rest and relaxation. A complete break from our “work”.  And that rest is primarily in God Himself as we learn that He is not expecting us to self-immolate (self-inflicted martyrdom), but to rest in Him by trust and hope for Him to do what we cannot. I’m still learning that.. by leaning on my Heavenly Father in a relationship through Jesus Christ.

So a hiatus of nearly two decades intervened between hunting in New Brunswick in my twenties and becoming a pastor in Toronto in my early forties.

No call to be a pastor in a city like Toronto will be “a piece of cake”, but I was home with my wife and two teens — our daughter and youngest son. The two older boys were in college “Down East”! The daughter and youngest son were in high school at a campus just behind our home, literally, with only a line of mature trees between.

A good salary with benefits, and a month’s vacation whenever I wanted was graciously provided. Plus, I had a lot of weddings, several of whom were motorcyclists — and they got me into that at age 45! And then our two sons, coming back from college, were excited about hunting “down east”, and that stirred the embers of the fire in my own soul again.

Not long did it take for the purchase of a rifle at an army surplus store in downtown Toronto. That was a military Brazilian Mauser in 7 x 57 still in its grease. Once I cleaned it up, its beauty and craftsmanship were stunning!

Yes, it went hunting, but when I missed two shots on a bounding buck through forest and brush, I realized that with only one good eye, wearing glasses (for protection and minor astigmatism) and unable to focus on both front and rear sights at the same time, I needed a scope. But the 7 x 57 Mauser had a bolt handle that stuck straight out horizontally, and when lifted to eject a cartridge it went straight up vertically! Not good! So, I made a choice to change that situation by returning this elegant piece of wood and beautiful metal to the same dealer for a well used military Mauser ’98 with laminated stock that had been converted to a .30-06. The bolt was “bent” down so it could be manipulated in a familiar fashion without interference with a scope. I purchased a scope (3 – 9 X 40mm “something”) and a “contraption” for mounting it. I also bought a Lyman manual, some .30-06 brass, powder, primers and bullets! I was on the road to becoming a “handloader” in 1979 — forty-one years ago. I never shot anything live with that rifle but I became active at a range north of Toronto with one of my sons (Phil). In producing .30-06 ammo, and being frustrated with that rifle and scope setup, the next year it got traded at a west end Italian, upscale, gun shop.

I forget the exact number, but I think the owner/manager gave $75 credit on a slightly used M70 Winchester in .30-06 Springfield.  The owner and dealer said the former owner of the M70, .30-06 decided for a new .300 Winchester Magnum.  I now had a REAL rifle in .30-06! Shortly thereafter a series 340 Winchester semi was added in .22LR (sometime later that became a collector’s piece). It was later given to my son, but it had knocked-off quite a few woodchucks prior to that. After the gift-giving, I purchased a bolt-action .22 Win Mag, and that one was really awesome on chucks! Later still came my first center-fire single-shot for which I also developed handloads in .22 Hornet — that eventually became the property of Phil (that was not a donation!).

I was learning the handloading game — about powders and bullets. That meant more books, manuals and magazines. I had swallowed the hook, line and sinker! That also meant visits to gun shops and auctions. But deer are not usually hunted on Bay Street, Toronto — I obviously needed a place and permit to hunt big game.

Back tracking a year or so: It happened that an elderly bachelor member of our church told me of an older couple living far- northeast of Toronto, who were relatives, and they might be willing to entertain son Phil and I for a week of hunting on their property. He was/had been a bee keeper, and they were childless. It was arranged for us by the elderly bachelor, and when deer season arrived in that area we headed northeast, about a two-hour drive from Toronto. It turned out to be within the area of my current hunting activities over the past thirty-one years! It was there that I fired the two shots from the 7 x 57 that missed the fast-moving buck.

Due to quick paced changes taking place with our two oldest sons, Brent leaving for Africa, and Phil going into training for same, our daughter getting married to a young man from our church, hunting (not handloading) took a back seat for a couple of years until we (my wife and I) moved to Halifax, Nova Scotia for pastoral work in a relatively younger congregation.

We’d been in Toronto for six years and two months. During that period our two oldest sons had finished college and both were married and headed for missions in Africa. Our daughter had also graduated from the same college with her fiancé, I’d married them, and the youngest was still in college. (All since have gone on to earn Master’s degrees in their fields, except Phil who is the head IT with the Salvation Army nationally.)

The four years in Halifax allowed me to deer hunt annually, and with some success using the M70 Winchester. But I’ve written in former blogs about the emotional loss of a huge buck while using that .30-06 with handloaded 165gr Nosler BTs. Because of shooting RH bolt-actions from the left side due to my blind right eye, I decided for a semi-auto to get off a faster second shot — it’s always bad timing to make changes when under stress!

In those days I didn’t own a chronograph nor a range finder, but the “book” said the 165gr Nosler BT bullet should be leaving the muzzle at about 2800 fps. At a paced off 153 yards it broke-up on the probable 400 lb buck’s shoulder. From the middle of a wood’s trail on private property, in one bound he was gone into the timber and brush where I expected to find it dead. Instead, I found a few droplets of blood that soon petered out. I followed it’s trail over piles of brush and dead-falls to a bog that it crossed. On the far side of that bog were rifle shots that I was certain would mean the finish of that great buck that I’d wounded.

I literally lost sleep as I rehearsed that scene and probable causes. I found a small pool of blood with some bone fragments, and that was it! To this day, I can still “see” that big buck as it appeared out of nowhere staring me down from the top of that hill 150 yards away.

The highly regarded M70 was turned in for a new BAR in 7 Rem Mag. It was a beautiful gun with a Leupold scope that someone ordered but never came to pick  up. The manager of the shop gave me what I’d paid for the M70 in Toronto. Then it was off to making  handloads for a semi in 7mm Remington Magnum.

I took it as a challenge and liked the BAR (Browning semi-auto) very much.  It was accurate and fast with any load. That is until…

More to come on this saga…

Shalom

BOB MITCHELL

Handloading — when and why I got into it — P1

In correspondence with one of my readers who has become a friend, he suggested that I write something about my favorite bullets. So I’m taking up that cause, er.. challenge, but not only MY preferences, but those that are favored by a significant number of other handloading hunters as well.

(“Handloading” or “handloader” are coined words not recognized (or is that “recognised”, Eng. sp.?) in a dictionary. Therefore, many write this as “hand loads”, “hand load”, or “hand loader”, probably using a spellcheck (is that “spell check” or perhaps “spell-check”?). You are intelligent, so I’m sure you get the point, eh? I had to get that “eh?” in there to identify myself as Canadian. By times my spelling is Brit-English, sometimes American, and at other times pure Canadian — a mixture of British-American and French. But Americans invented everything, including “handloading”, or “hand loading”, at least that’s the impression of Canadians who “handload”. So when I started the process of “handloading” four decades ago, that’s how the American writers spelled it — so I blame them for being on the horns of the proverbial dilemma for not getting “handloading” into the  New World Dictionary of The AMERICAN LANGUAGE – that being the well worn “Second College Edition” of my one and only two-and-a-half inch thick dictionary. Slightly more than 50% of my readership is American, so I tend to defer to their spelling in most things.)

Sorry for all that, but I had to explain this quandry — not even to mention the strange expressions of those who live on The Island Continent!

<(Shooting my son’s .17 Hornet.)

Now back to the main topic: Today we have an overabundance of “super” projectiles for any conceivable purpose from diminutive .17-calibers to the great Big Bores still in use for hunting the largest and most dangerous game on Earth. Then, on the other hand, there  is still a good supply of “regular”, or standard bullets for most needs, though sadly diminishing due to a majority of hunters/shooters having “deeper pockets” and buying into the idea that “modern is better”.

While I like and use some of the “premiums”, yet I’m increasingly turning to ancient concepts of cast bullets for many applications. When done right they work wonderfully on anything, including DG. While lead is now considered hazardous material to one’s health, a large number of hunters and shooters make their own from a variety of “molds”- Eng. Sp. American? “moulds”. (My dilemma again — sometimes I type “molds”, at others, “moulds”. Both are acceptable. Most fast readers will never notice!)

These blogs are mostly oriented toward Big Bores, and secondly Mid-Bores, as you may already be aware. But my experience in actual hunting, and producing handloads for the same,  isn’t limited to big game. I’ve actually shot far more small game than large, and hunted predators (fox, coyote and wolf) with several small and sub-medium calibers. So I have preferences in cartridges and bullets for those activities as well.

All of those went hunting with handloads I’d made for them. In all cases multiple bullets, powders and primers were tried to attain best results for hunting purposes. Then there were at times different rifles involved for a particular cartridge. Also, I made handloads for friends and family that were used in actual hunting.

When I began making my own loads, the likes of Nosler Partitions were scarce and expensive compared to Speer, Hornady and Sierra products. But Noslers eventually became my preference for bear and moose. They simply got the job done without complaints.

<(A 500gr, .458 cal, Woodleigh PP) Today there is a “super abundance” of so-called “super premiums”. All manufacturers of small arm projectiles have had to join that band or be left behind. And relatively small, novice companies have appeared on the scene with their own copies of the “best”, lacking anything that would make them superior to their predecessors. We have of course, bonded pure lead cores to pure copper jackets, bonded alloy-lead to gilding metal jackets, all alloy metal bullets, all copper bullets, some with cavities filled with lead, others with cavities with no lead, others with no cavities and flat tips while some have no cavities with round noses. Many having pointed plastic tips for better aerodynamics and protection from battering in magazine rifles. The latter has to be proven, as any high-powered rifle cartridge that causes fast and heavy recoil will damage the points of polycarbonite tips in a magazine rifle.

And on and on it goes with more being added with all possible configurations and structure. But the hype from manufacturers, and gun writers who promote them, would have us all believe that their’s is the “best” and absolutely indispensable for success in the hunting fields. “Everyone” seems to have their favorites.

So how do we make our choices? In my case it was a slow process over time. Forty or more years ago there was one “premium” choice with several trying to contend. That choice was Nosler Partitions that was actually started by John Nosler in the late 1940s. He made his own with a semi-partition after a failure of a “standard” bullet on moose. News got out and the Nosler bullet company was born. And the Nosler Partition bullet became the darling of gun writers who promoted them in magazines. After the WW 2, wealthy Americans bought and used them on their safaris AND on heavy North American game.

Back then I was dreaming of getting through high school and having a girl friend!

Moving quickly into the late ’50s, I had finished college, then worked for a month on my dad’s 70-foot dragger to have money enough to get married. Within a week of our wedding I had a job as pastor of three country churches. That was in mid-summer of 1957. And again nearly penniless! But my ownership of anything were my clothes and a single-shot .22 LR. Noslers were not even on the horizon! I borrowed bank money for a $600 Chev that had more miles on it than ten taxis combined! Having to travel 185 miles/300 k per week just to cover the territory twice weekly, the Chev made it through the first winter and then died from exhaustion! “Winters”! I’d never experienced anything like them, nor since! In one snow storm, after the LeTourneau earth mover cleared our driveway and the church parking lot, I had to use a shovel to let light into the church through its windows! And it was just under the house porch’s eves! And all that meant more “borrowed money” for another car. And so on…

Thoughts of hunting only returned sometime after our first son was born and some stability to our lives.

That came about when two brothers from the community invited me to go hunting deer with them. Noslers were still not on the horizon, nor Speers, Hornadies or Sierras. In fact I didn’t know of their existence.

The brothers were members of our main church, next door to the parsonage, or manse — as some denominations refer to the house provided for the pastor and his family. So also were their sister and parents. They looked like twins — but were not. Both over 6′, blond wavy hair and blue-eyed, they were handsome and athletic, and also very intelligent. Both were students at The University of New Brunswick at Fredericton (Provincial Capital) 30 miles away. They entered the Electrical Engineering course of studies, and years later graduated with PhDs. I went hunting with them after two years of pastoral work. The University of N.B. gave any students who wanted to hunt during the deer season, a week off to do so. After a week they had to return to their studies. I shot no deer, nor did they. But I’d caught the “fever”.

After their departure, their father showed up with his trusty .30-30 M94 Winchester in hand, inviting me to hunt with him. He had been a woodsman from young adulthood, and knew deer as well as he knew the forests from which he made his living. But his intent was that I should shoot a deer with his M94 with him acting as my guide. He took me to the forest where he would hunt and where he knew there were whitetails.

I loved hunting, especially grouse as I shot scores if not hundreds — and that helped with the food budget, plus rainbows from the local Cross Creek which lent it’s name to our town. My wife loved the trout and birds so there was no objection to my recreation.

My four years as pastor of those churches, scattered over an area of 1500 sq-miles/4000 sq-klm, was akin to a four-year intense post-graduate course with all of the above circumstances imposed!

<(Campobello in the background. Pic taken from Lubec, Me. in July, 2018.)

We’d been married for one week when I received a call to candidate as pastor in those churches. During our three days away to fulfil that, my wife’s father fell seriously ill. When we returned, he was in such pain that I had to drive him to the ferry that would take us into Maine where the doctor would meet us at 1 o’clock A.M. Except the ferry wasn’t running at that hour of the morning! By phone, we had to awaken one of the ferry’s assistants to row us across very fast moving water (like a wide river at flood time) as the tide was moving out in the Bay of Fundy, and the Narrows between Campobello and Lubec, Maine caused the Atlantic tides to be squished like water from the nozzle of a hose. But this man was capable for the conditions and landed me and my father-in-law safely on the Maine shore where we met the doctor who took us to his clinic. (The Roosevelt International Bridge, connecting Campobello with Maine was built since those events.)

That all resulted in an emergency ride back into New Brunswick at the Calais/St. Stephen border where the patient went immediately into surgery at the St Stephen hospital. Three weeks later he died at age 53. That left my wife (age 20) and her mother (age 51) without a father and husband! My wife was an only child! And I had just been elected as pastor of three scattered country churches (actually a forth that I visited once every month as it was so isolated to the north, and a railroad town). So it was a rough start to married life for a young couple who still looked like teenagers!

Consequently, guns and hunting were not on the horizon either, at least for a few years. And my wife became pregnant a month after we were married — and her mom wanted her home with her.

Two months later, we both came down with the infamous Asiatic flu! Very sick with high fevers we went to bed! That felt like a year-and-a half, though it was about ten days before we could begin to function in a semi-normal fashion.

Then, I received a visit from neighbors telling us that a 3-year old girl that lived with her family on the farm directly adjacent to the church property had died of the flu — I’d been requested to conduct the funeral in our church next door!

This was to be my first funeral, and the church was packed as was normal for such a grievous situation. I’d visited the family in their home (a farm house) and saw this beautiful blond-haired 3-year old little girl in the open casket prior to the funeral the day following.

So what does all of that kind of life and work have to do with “favorite bullets”?

As far as the Heaven is above the Earth, so far removed are thoughts of hunting from such life and death realities.

I conducted many funerals during that four-year period. That, along with witnessing the aftermath of a horrendous motor accident involving the deaths of two male teenagers who had been drinking and returning from a party, and hours in counselling other teens and working with them, was mentally, spiritually and physically exhausting! I was also speaking, preaching and teaching over a dozen times per week!  Hours of driving over treacherous roads, and by times “plowing” through high drifts of snow in winter, and ice when the snow started to melt in the spring. And dealing weekly with complaints that more needed to be done…

Hunting became my “break” time! But who made the bullets, and handloading as a past time, was still not on the horizon.

The saga continues…

Shalom

BOB MITCHELL

 

 

Hunting Fitness

This article is an overview of what the term hunting fitness suggests, and what it may mean to certain sportsmen.

As I’ve advanced in years, now into my eighties, my journey has been one of near perfect fitness in years past, to progressive but slow loss of some physical strength and mobility. That’s natural due to the ageing process. Then, if we add some deterioration due to a chronic illness, that might cause some ageing hunters to quit before it’s really necessary to do so.

<(That’s me at age 55)

What do I mean? There are several ways and means of not only maintaining good health, but improving it within certain limits, depending on age, physical condition to begin with, and any inherited illnesses.

But even with some chronic problems, the otherwise maintenance of good health and/or its improvement is not only beneficial for the body but also the mind!  If we feel well there is generally a more positive outlook on life. Or, the corollary of that being: If we have a positive outlook on life, we will generally feel better.

Of course, personality or temperament enters the picture as well. For some, if they sneeze a couple of times there’re sure that’s a sign of oncoming pneumonia! For others, if they have a broken leg they’ll get a cast on and hunt with crutches! Which one we tend toward will  determine our attitude about physical and mental challenges, and whether we will accept counsel to work toward improvement of health and physical conditioning.

<(At age 72) Some love to retire, sit around, watch TV or Internet videos, dream big dreams, but DO NOTHING! Others are activists and must always be doing something — repairs, going places, building, hunting… whatever. Most are less immoderate. So am I. I like to imagine what it would be like to… and within reasonable limits considering responsibilities AND abilities, do something about it. That means being physically fit and mentally alert.

With the current Covid-19, a reality that affects daily living, it’s not easy to prepare for a hunt that may not happen. Yet mental preparation that will lead to handloading some cartridges is never a bad idea, and it could improve our mental state and keep depression at bay. Then, it may well be that by this fall hunting will return. Just now our range is closed so I can’t test loads or practice. But that won’t keep me from preparing some test loads, or loads that I’m already familiar with for hunting purposes.

A hunting load that I put together last fall (2019) for bear and wolf is already sighted-in for my Ruger No.1 in .458 Win Mag. It’s not a “max load”, but one that will serve more than adequately for its intended purposes. How about this — a 300gr TSX at 2778 fps/5140 ft-lbs from the muzzle. The reason for that load last year was to test that 300gr TSX on a live bear. I wanted to insure expansion of the bullet since it’s a tough one.

<(The 300gr TSX fired into test media from my former #1 Ruger in .45-70 LT at about 2650 fps.)

Barnes, the manufacturer of the TSX bullets (Triple-shock-Xpanding), make the claim that these TSX bullets will expand in flesh down to an impact velocity of 1600 feet-per-second (fps). When started at 2778 fps (avg), it should therefore expand on big game (BG) at a maximum distance of 360 yards. But where I hunt in the Haliburton Highlands, 360 yards is out of the question — 150 yds would be a long shot. So that load is more than ample for anything I might have a ticket for, including moose. Yet 2945 fps for the same 300 TSX shoots into sub-MOA. That’s capable for moose (a big bull) to 400 yards.

See what I mean about “dreaming” of a hunt, and preparing for it, inspiring us to get into physical and mental condition? That will actually lift our spirits to move the body from sitting all day (or night) in front of a TV screen watching old sports’ reruns or really-old movies. And the same could happen from sitting in front of a computer hours on end.

The point being that we NEED to exercise the body and mind to establish good health practices. Yes we still take our meds, but working the body more and exercising the mind with challenging thoughts, questions, ideals, etc can help restore healthy living by a more positive outlook.

I find great inspiration of mind and spirit by the late R.C. Sproul in his lecture on “Eternity”- Does it exist? on YouTube. I Google it.

<(At age 80, that’s my wife Adrienne as we visited with a French Canadian couple — that I’d married and trained, he becoming pastor of the church in Montreal 40 years prior to this photo in 2017. They’d been retired for 5 years. Now living NW of Montreal.) If you left click on the pic it will give a better view.

Now, at ages 84 and 83 for me and my wife, we try to maintain a healthy lifestyle despite “everyone” telling us to “STAY HOME”! We’ve both been very active and involved with people throughout our nearly 63 years of marriage. We are now great grandparents of fourteen great-grandchildren, the latest a boy of less than a week old somewhere in Western Canada. So with an extended family (that’s become nearly a tribe), many of whom are within an hour to an hour and one-half’s drive from us, plus maintaining pastoral responsibilities, and chores around house and home (that we’ve lived in since 1987) we manage to get “things” done and be happy by the grace of God!

Don’t leave God out of your life! For that reason Jesus came, and will come again — of that I’m very sure. Those truths add hope and assurance to living. Without it life could get quite depressing in any bad circumstances we can’t control.

Positive thinking is not only a healthy habit, but comes from hope for the future.

Where there is no hope, people despair.

“May the God of hope fill you with great joy and peace as you trust in Him” – A prayer by the apostle Paul for the persecuted churches of his time.

A few days ago my wife answered the phone to hear a voice she recognised, though not having heard it for the past 60 years! It was from a 94 year-old gentleman who knew us when in our twenties! We were from the Province of New Brunswick and so was he. I was a young pastor in central N.B. and he was a veteran missionary representing his mission that worked in the Chad, Africa. After a decade of hands-on missionary work in the Chad, the mission asked him to be their Rep in Canada. He spoke in our church and stayed in our home during that visit. He also asked me to consider becoming a teacher/trainer of national pastors in the Chad. After serious and prayerful consideration of about six-months, we decided our work in those churches in N.B. was not done. Nonetheless, we followed his career as best we could, and were thankful for his trust in us, but lost contact sometime later. Now, at age 94 he got our telephone number from our son, Brent, who himself had spent two decades in Africa as a missionary.  “Jerry”, the gentleman, knew our son, and through him made a phone call to us. I wasn’t around when he called but my wife relayed the conversation. At age 94, his voice and attitude was still the cheerful Jerry we had known sixty years ago. He had married twice and lost both his wives in death. He drives his own car and walks with a cane, but NO complaints, only a cheerful disposition as he continues to be a blessing to others.

Why are we here? To gratify self and complain that life is miserable, or to praise God and be thankful? That gives a cheerful heart and makes us a blessing to others who need blessings.

So practically speaking, I do my walks with weights in each hand. If the weather is miserable, I work out in my room with heavier weights. This maintains muscular strength and cardio-vascular health. In addition I take my meds for blood circulation and diabetes. Thankfully, I’m very mobile and have few aches and pains. I also work out with the Ruger No.1 in .458 Win Mag. It’s done inside as we don’t have seclusion in our back yard from prying eyes that could result in an unwelcome visit from the police.

<(At age 83, six months ago.)

The rifle weighs 10.3 lbs with the Nikon 2 – 7 x 32mm scope, sling and stock cartridge holder. Depending on the weight of handloaded bullets, the weight goes up to 10.75 lbs with 4 in the holder and one in the chamber.

I work with it by carrying it in one hand and then the other as in walking in the woods. Or slung over my left shoulder. Or slung across my chest using the nylon sling over my right elbow ready to aim and fire within less than one second. The rifle is diagonal across my chest with my right hand gripping the Alexander forearm with sling between the wood and my grip. The left hand (remember I shoot from that side) grips the buttstock aft of the action in the pistol grip. I’m ready to lift the rear of the rifle into position in a split-second as the right hand is already in position to fire.

Often “muscle memory” is mentioned. I practice with my .458 WM so that when the time comes for using it in actual hunting it doesn’t seem too heavy, or like a stranger to me and unwieldy.

Be safe, stay healthy, and God bless,

Shalom

BOB MITCHELL

 

Mid-Bore Rifles — the .375s – P4

.375-calibers have been considered by no small group of experts as the quintessential bore size for all-around hunting, with the .375 H&H at the head of the pack, and the .375 Ruger nibbling on it’s heels for greater recognition. The Super Magnum .375s, such as the RUM, have their place but it’s a small one.

A significant number of knowledgeable hunters and shooters say that if they want more than the H&H they will go bigger in caliber — I tend to agree. Notice, the word WANT! Hunting a diversity of game from small to large is ALWAYS a matter of WANT, not need! (Left click on pics for a better view.)

I’ve hunted a variety of animals because of “want to”. The same with rifles for those purposes. Part of it is a thirst for knowledge and experience. A larger part is a thirst for adventure in wild places where wild animals roam.

Having done that since boyhood, and to a much greater extent over the past forty-plus years, I now know what I know, and perhaps more importantly, what I don’t know. That comes with age and experience — IF WE’VE BEEN PAYING ATTENTION!

As to the .375s, my only experience from among that group is the H&H, and that in three barrel lengths using my own handloads: a 24″ M70 Winchester, a 26″ Browning A-Bolt SS LH, that was later shortened to a 22″ barrel. From a ballistic standpoint only, the 26″ gave best results, the 24″ came in second, and the 22″ was last — which probably fits expectations.

From 300gr bullets (mostly Hornady followed by Sierra) results were: 26″ = 2700 +fps; 24″ = 2565 fps avg., and 22″ = 2530 fps (max — but it was pushed a bit beyond that with poor results that I couldn’t recommend or use in hunting.)

I also tried some 270s, 235s and near the end of those trials, a few Sierra 250s. But my conclusion was — and maybe still is — that the H&H was made to shoot 300s, as they gave the best overall results.

The M70 was heavy, with a heavy barrel and stout walnut stock. The A-Bolt Browning with its longer barrel and synthetic stock was much more pleasant to handle and shoot, though lighter overall. And at 22″ for the barrel it’s handling improved but it lost 185 fps from 300s. That’s significant from a 300gr. Instead of 4910 ft-lbs at the muzzle it was making 4263 ft-lbs — equivalent to a factory claim. Not bad, but still an important loss from its potential employing the 26″ barrel. And the barrel was ample in contour. In my experience, a .375 H&H doesn’t need the typical weight of the M70, as even the 26″ Browning was lighter.

At one time I asked my gunsmith to rechamber the 26″ Browning H&H to the .375 Weatherby. He asked “Why?” Because I was going to Northern Ontario every second year or so for moose, and due to potential long shots, I figured an extra 100 fps couldn’t hurt, could it? And it might help. He discouraged it, so I abandoned the thought.

<(This was my .340 Wby, identical to the .375 H&H Browning, except the .375 had iron sights and a slightly heavier barrel.)

There was a problem with the Browning, however, which I’ve explained in former blogs, so will not go into much detail here. The bore was off-center, so it would not give adequate accuracy. I found that out when I had my gunsmith, Von Atzigen, cut it to 22″ in hopes of improving accuracy. It didn’t, so it got traded at the same shop where purchased for an identical .338 Win Mag that became my .340 WBY. Atzigen also did that work. So the .375 H&H Browning never saw a hunting adventure, but the M70 Winchester did, both for moose and bear.

The load for moose was a 300gr Sierra BT at around 2570 fps. It had a heavy .050″ thick guilding-metal jacket with a 3% antimony lead core, and had a decent reputation on large game. The load for bear was a 300gr Hornady BT with the Interloc and cannelure at around the same muzzle speed. Two days after my hunt for bear was finished, using an outfitter, an American hunter shot a +500 lb black bear at the same bait!

Sometime later my M70 .375 H&H was traded for the A-Bolt Browning because I wanted (I thought) a LH bolt action as I have to shoot from that side due to my blind right eye. That was one of the biggest disappointments I ever experienced in dealings for rifles.

So I’m satisfied that the H&H doesn’t need ballistic improvements over it’s current potential, specially with today’s excellent powders and supreme bullets. With this caveat, however: Some projectiles like Barnes’ TSX’s, or Nosler’s 300gr AB will “eat” a lot of room for powder if constrained to SAAMI COL. That will impinge to an important degree on expected ballistics. The cause being the length of those bullets.

Now, as to the .375 Ruger: From my reading of magazine articles, Internet chatter and hunt reports, and handloading manuals, I believe I’ve done enough research to have a valid — if secondhand — opinion. Though I don’t much like opinions, but for what it’s worth here it is:

The claim is that it was created by Ruger and Hornady to mimic ballistics of the famed H&H in a shorter, lighter and handier overall package. From reports it appears that might be so. Yet there are caveats:

First, and most importantly, Hornady is the sole manufacturer of ammo, and brass for handloads.

Secondly, factory claimed ballistic results are from a 23″ barrel, whereas the favorite Ruger rifle sold is the 20″ Alaskan. That might matter.

Thirdly, actual results in handloading manuals don’t necessarily favor the .375 Ruger, even with equal length barrels to the H&H.

Lastly, from a 20″ barrel there is a significant loss from claimed factory ballistics — at least as much as one would expect from a 20″ H&H.

Moreover, the favorite slug used in Alaska against its great bears appears to be the 270gr TSX, which is longer than a traditional .375″ bullet of equal weight, and has a poor ballistic coefficient. What does that mean? Poor downrange results. It’s of course argued that such bears are usually shot at not more than 50 yards. But that’s with an outfitter. And what about a DIY hunt, where there’s no help nearby, or the range might extend to 300 yards or more on a moose. Is a DIY hunter going to pass up a possible single chance on a bear or moose at +300 yds? No likely! Not I at least — in such a potential scenario, the 270 TSX wouldn’t even get inside the door of consideration!

If I chose a .375 Ruger it would be for more than bear in the alders or punching holes in paper! I’d want it for moose in the far north of our province, whether close in the alders or far in a clear cut. For such a scenario, I’d choose an all-purpose load for the Ruger with the 23″ barrel. An efficient 300gr at not less than 2600 fps might do. But a BC of well over .400 in needed to accomplish those criteria. Perhaps the 300gr AccuBond with a .485 BC at 2600 is possible from the 23″ barrel — I don’t know, it’s a long bullet (1.52″) that will go deep into the guts of the relatively short case and action, stealing potential energy from the cramped quarters intended for propellant.

All in all, the .375 Ruger is perhaps a good concept for Alaskan bear guides who use them at close range.

Other than that, they would be outperformed at longish ranges by my own 9.3 x 62 firing the 286 Nosler at 2631 fps/4395 ft-lbs at the muzzle and 2100 ft-lbs at 500 yards.

From a 24″ Wiseman test barrel*, Barnes’ Manual #4 shows a max load for their 300gr TSX at a best 2642 fps. That bullet has the same .305 SD as a 286gr 9.3mm, but the BC of the TSX is only .357, whereas the 286gr Nosler’s BC is .482. Want to see how much that affects downrange results?

*Would the 23″ Ruger factory barrel give the same results? Subtract at least 100 fps from these in using a 20″ barrel.

Conditions: 50*F/+10*C; Elev. @ 1200′; RH @ 65%

300gr TSX/.375″ at 2647 fps// 4667 ft-lbs (from a 24″ test barrel)

100 yds = 2409 fps// 3865 ft-lbs

200 yds = 2184 fps// 3176 ft-lbs

300 yds = 1971 fps// 2587 ft-lbs

400 yds = 1771 fps// 2090 ft-lbs

500 yds = 1587 fps// 1678 ft-lbs (the bullet will not expand)

 

Now, my load for the 9.3 x 62

286gr NP/9.3mm @ 2631 fps// 4395 ft-lbs (from a 22.44″ Sako target grade barrel)

100 yds = 2454 fps// 3824 ft-lbs

200 yds = 2284 fps// 3314 ft-lbs

300 yds = 2121 fps// 2857 ft-lbs

400 yds = 1965 fps// 2452 ft-lbs

500 yds = 1816 fps// 2095 ft-lbs

Do we see not only how the rifle and cartridge does make a difference, but that barrel length, powder and bullet can influence results to such an extent that success on a one-time hunt might be questionable!

The concept of a more handy rifle package that will equal the normal ballistics from a 24″ .375 H&H, that is usually heavier, is commendable. But I have no personal experience to go on.

Yet four decades of handloading experience with multiple calibers, including mid-bores, and logic, tell me that there will be a loss of ballistic performance compared to what otherwise might be equivalent performance of the H&H, if a 20″ Ruger is used, and perhaps even the 23″.

Those are matters of import that I’d want more concrete knowledge of before I’d trade a 24″ .375 H&H for one of the Rugers, IF it were intended to be an all-purpose rifle for big game.

The Others:

The .375 Weatherby is no longer in factory production, but there are several “out there”, plus some .375 H&H’s that have been “improved” by straightening the walls, adding a few more grains of powder and 100 fps or more to MV. I’d expect up to 2800 fps from 300s in a 26″ barrel.

The .375 RUM and similar wildcats: While Remington’s own factory 300gr offerings are advertised at less than 2800 fps, there’s no doubt that handloaders can extract 2850 to 2900 fps from best loads. That’s on the heels of the mighty .378 Weatherby.

At one time I thought of owning a .375 RUM. It has no belt and is based on the .404 Jeffery,(Same as the .338 RUM that is slightly shorter) having room for over 100 grs powder under a 300gr.

The famed owner of Accurate Reloading Forum (Saeed) has used a “wildcat”, about identical to the RUM, based on the same .404 case. His preceded the RUM by several years, and it’s been used in Africa on “everything”, including all of the DG — successfully so, many, many times over! He uses his own machined bullets.

The .378 Weatherby: This is truly not only a unique cartridge, created and manufactured by Weatherby alone, but humongous! No other in .375-caliber can match it in sheer size or capacity — but also in performance. It, of course, became the basis for both the .460 and .416 Weatherby cartridges.

Some claim it has greater felt recoil than even the .460 itself! Of course, physics denies that as a 500gr at 2600 fps has far greater momentum than a 300gr at 3100 fps, from same weight rifles.

The factory rifles do come with ports built in (and removable for a hunt), which is a good thing if nobody is near when the muzzle blast occurs!

For myself — I’ll take a pass on that one!

That’s it for this week on the .375″ mediums.

Shalom

BOB MITCHELL 

 

 

Medium-Bore Rifles – the 9.3s – P3

I love rifles with big holes in their barrels – within reason, that is. In shotguns I like 12-gauges. In rifles I’ve stopped short of .50-caliber, though at one time the .50 S&W fascinated me in one of the single-shot rifles. I didn’t need it as I already had a couple of singles in .45-70. While I lusted for a .458 Winchester Magnum nearly as far back as I can recall after its introduction in 1956, I knew it was out of the question both in economics and conscience — it could not be justified.

Quite a few years had passed when our economic status improved, and I was more into a variety of big-game hunting and handloading. Then I saw the potential benefit of a larger bore rifle in the pursuit of bear and moose. By then I had owned both a .300 Win Mag and a .338 Win Mag, and really nothing more was NEEDED for the largest and most dangerous in any part of our nation. Yet, my first bear hunt impressed my mind that a larger bore would make a bigger hole in and out, stopping a mean bear from escaping into thick alders or brush where I’d need to go in a followup. The solution? The nearest thing to a .458 Win Mag being a .45-70, of course. So I purchased a new 1895 Marlin for that express purpose, and was never disappointed with results from the eight .45-70s I’ve owned including the first one. In hindsight, they’ve probably exceeded my initial expectations.

But the subject of the current series of blogs is “Mediums”, right? Yes. It’s hard to put into a few sentences all the thoughts and experiences of that period that covered about two decades, but somewhere in there the idea of a medium-bore captured my mind. I’d experienced mostly .30-calibers and .458″ in .45-70s, plus a .338 Win in a Sako FS that was giving me some loss of sleep! Ah ha! At a Toronto gun show, I was able to trade the Sako for a .375 H&H in a M70 Winchester – a straight-up trade… plus $40. That became my new toy in a mid-bore! And it was an excellent rifle, though a bit on the heavy side of matters. From there I downsized to more mid-bores, including those mentioned in P1 and P2.

Yes, I went on a crusade for another .35 Whelen. No luck for either a new or used one! Then, while scanning the website of one of the largest dealers in Canada, that was only a one-hour drive from home, I spied two rifles that might fit the bill — a slightly used .338 RUM in a 700 Remington with a gray-black laminated stock and 26″ barrel, and two 9.3 x62s in TIKKA T3 Lites. As recounted in P1, I’d had lots of experiences with a .340 WBY for a full decade, so already knew what to expect in ballistics from a .338 RUM. And, I’d done some previous research and general reading on the 9.3 x 62 and figured it would be similar to a .35 Whelen, so I made a visit to EPPS in Orillia and handled each of those rifles (one of the 9.3x62s had been sold already).

Handling was important to me, and it was no contest. The TIKKA T3 Lite won by a country mile! So I came home with the 9.3 x 62. And, as I’ve reported in previous blogs, it has far exceeded expectations that were based on meager reports, handloads based on limited tests, and European factory ammo.

Not only so, but it has matched and passed results of my .338 Win Mags, .35 Whelen, .350 Rem Mag, and stepped into the footprint of .375 H&H factory ballistics!

Now to give some meat to those assertions: If there is a downside to the 9.3 x 62, it’s in factory ammo that’s mostly from Europe.  But Hornady, Nosler and Barnes, plus a few others, have come to the rescue of handloaders. (It should be mentioned that in forty-one years of “making my own”, I’ve rarely fired a factory load in any of my centerfire rifles.) So, I consider it no handicap to have to handload the 9.3 x 62, though some US companies are now producing ammo for it — but nothing to get excited over.

You could read my former blogs on all of this, including my handloads and how they came about. However, I’ll give a summary here with the caveat that these are MY handloads, and I don’t propose or recommend them for any other person or persons who do their own. No one should borrow anyone’s handloads and take them for granted to be safe/or give the same results as the originator of them in his/her setup!

Having said that, I’ve used them in hunting and know them to BE SAFE IN MY RIFLE!

Comments on the rifle: Whenever I purchased or traded for a centerfire rifle, it’s primary mission was for hunting purposes. As such I’ve always failed to understand the thinking of HUNTERS (not collectors) who handload their own with the primary purpose of getting the smallest possible groups of three at 100 yards. They appear willing to sacrifice the potential of a rifle/cartridge’s external ballistic energy for a “tiny” 1/2″ bragging group at 100 yards (12.7 mm @ 100 metres). On several forums, those who own and actually have fired their 9.3 x 62 handloads at a range, have mostly referred to the tiny groups their 9.3 x 62 is capable of producing — often without any reference to MV results!

To set the record straight: Sure, I like good groups from any of my “best” handloads from any centerfire rifle I’ve owned. BUT!! How “good” is enough for hunting purposes? First, I want the best ballistics my rifle is capable of, including MV and downrange performance on flesh and bone!

As an example of that principle: In P1, I shared some loads from my former .340 Weatherby. One load consistently shot the 250gr Hornady SP into less than MOA for three at 300 yards!  And the star performer did that at 3/4″ for three at the 300 yd. berm! And it was making 2790 fps. But it never became my hunting load for moose up north! Why? Because I had a better HUNTING LOAD! A 250gr Nosler Partition at a consistent 3000 fps that fired into a consistent 1.25″ for three at 100 yards!

In the field, what difference would it make at 300 yards on a bull moose with a target area of a 24″ circle? Not much that would make a difference in a hit or a miss. But the ballistic results in KE might distinctively matter if the bull was quartering toward or away! At 300 yds the 250 Partition load was making about 600 ft-lbs more energy than the 250 Hornady that shot 3/4″ at 300. And 550 ft-lbs more at 450 yards than the Hornady. Since I didn’t know beforehand at what range I might have to shoot a moose, my load was the 250 Partition at 3000 fps. It turned out that I shot a good bull at 165 yds.

Now my hunting loads for the 9.3 x 62 is treated in like manner. They are accurate enough for any hunting I might envision for that rifle. The 286 Nosler Partition shoots consistent sub-MOA, and the 250 AccuBond load shoots into sub 1/2″ at a hundred when I’m up to it. But that’s not why they are my prime hunting loads — that’s nice for accuracy, but those bullets give me confidence as to their ability to get the job done due to their construction and experience with them on big game. (The reason one hole in the target is larger is because it hit the hardwood plywood behind. The other two went through a void previously created by bullets from other shooters.)

And I’m talking to 500 yards on moose-size game. Over a nine-year period, the average for the 286 Nosler Partition load is 2631 fps MV/4395 ft-lbs, 2120 fps/2853 ft-lbs at 300 yds, and 1814 fps/2088 ft-lbs at 500 yds.

I’ve tested a variety of bullets and loads since the beginning, and none equal that load. It’s my all-purpose load for that rifle.

The 250gr Accubond is also an excellent load at +2700 fps, but can’t keep up with it’s bigger brother.

And the 320gr Woodleigh does very well at +2400 fps, but I’ve decided that it’s more of a closer range load for large game and not as flexible or all-purpose as the 286 Nosler. It appears that the 9.3 x 62 was made for that weight bullet and responds best overall.

What about the other 9.3s? The 9.3 x 57 is similar to a .358 Winchester with a bit more snuff.

The 9.3 x 64 Brenneke is generally considered to be the equal of a .375 H&H. However, it is a unique case and can’t be formed from any other, whereas the 9.3 x 62 has been formed from .30-06 and .35 Whelen cases in a pinch, though the head of those cases are bulged on firing in a 9.3 x 62 chamber.

And the Brenneke in factory form is equalled by my handloads. And the 9.3 x 62 is much more popular and available in factory rifles, some with full-stocks and short 20″ barrels.

I think that a 20″ barrel for a cartridge that can produce magnum-type results is the wrong way to go. Some 9.3 x 62s have 24″ and 26″ barrels, which makes more sense to me than a 20″. That might make a nice handy rifle but it will be at the expense of significant velocity from the muzzle.

But my rifle, a TIKKA T3 Lite, couldn’t be made much handier with it’s 22.44″ barrel and synthetic stock. All-up for hunting it comes in at 7.7 lbs. That dishes out more recoil than a “normal” .375 H&H!

Recoil for the two main loads (286 and 250 Noslers) are 48 ft-lbs and 43 ft-lbs respectively.  Compared to my former .340 Weatherby, that is still less. That load referred to for the Weatherby was 54 ft-lbs, but I didn’t notice it in shooting the moose. In bench shooting, I add some weight to the 9.3 Tikka that helps tame it. In shooting game it’s “quick” in recoil, but not severe. It’s a joy to tote.

Basically, whatever you would do with a .338 magnum or a .375 magnum, you could do with a 9.3 x 62 Mauser.

It has to do with that matter of efficiency. I seat my bullets a bit long in Hornady cases filled with RL-17 powder and ignited by WLRM primers. The loads are compressed to about 109%. It’s a relatively slow stick powder for the cartridge, so it can be compressed within reason. No other propellant has come close to results from RL-17. Yes, and I’ve tried H414 and RL-15, along with some others. H414 would be the second choice for the heavyweights, and I use RL-15 for the 232 Oryx at around 2450 fps for deer and wolf.

The 286gr Nosler will keep up with the momentum of the 250gr Nosler from the 340 Weatherby all the way from the muzzle to 500 yards. Of course, the 340 shoots flatter, but at the cost of 20 grains more powder from a 26″ barrel.

There you have it…

My choice of a mid-bore that has replaced all the others as it can do whatever might have been assigned to them.

Finally, in mid-bores we’ll review the .375s.

Shalom

BOB MITCHELL

.35 Caliber Medium Rifles – P2

Depending on the hunting/shooting/rifle/firearms Internet forums we may visit, and the persons who frequent them, opinions on “Mediums”, or mid-bores will vary anywhere from  .243 (6 mm) to whatever suits their fancy. Several forums have no guidelines in that regard. I recently visited the 24hr forum where the .270 Win was being discussed as a “medium”! It was apparent that the contributors were unaware that mid-bores and “mediums” were the same, and the .270 caliber has never been identified in literature or by “professionals” as a mid-bore, or medium.

Traditionally, any magnum-type .35, including the .35 Newton, has been viewed as a “medium”. Historically, when British Big Bores ruled in India and Africa, even a .40-caliber was considered a “medium” bore.

Having, therefore, (as explained in P1) commenced my own view of mid-bores or mediums at .35-caliber of the more powerful sort, I finally relented to include the more potent .338 cartridges as reviewed in P1. This time around we’ll take an overview of the more robust .35 cartridges, including best handloads. The standard is the same in kinetic energy at the muzzle as in .338-caliber, or nearly so.

From best handloads, I’ve personally attained  2635 fps from 250s in my 22″ .35 Whelen,  so I include that one as the potential is there from a 24″ to 26″ barrel. So also from a 22″ .350 Rem Mag, which actually exceeded those numbers from the Whelen by 70 fps or so.

Others to be included, based on data from a few of my reloading books, are: the .358 Norma Magnum and the .358 STA (which also represents several “wildcats”). Nosler’s No.6 manual includes the .358 STA, but Hornady’s 9th and Barnnes’ No.4 do not, so I’d guess the STA has fallen from grace by the general shooting public that favors mid-bores. Nonetheless, I’ll include it as it does represent quite a few “out there” who use it plus several “cats” of its kind. At least that’s my informed thinking, though the .35 Whelen overshadows it by a wide margin in actual usage. Likely that’s due to the Whelen being plenty in “knockdown” power, also while being very practical in doing so.

The .35 Whelen: It has remained a favorite among the cognoscente since its inception in 1922, and was made legit by Remington in 1988. During the ensuing decades it was highly respected by those chasing the big bears of Alaska as well as their over-size moose. In the rest of the continent it found additional usage on deer, black bear, caribou, elk and likely anything else that one could shoot with a rifle. Handloading was the only game for those whose appreciation compelled them to make their own. Of course, the ubiquitous .30-06 provided the cases, just as it did for James Howe who created it in collaboration with Col. Whelen. Quality bullets were available in several weights and forms, but not in abundance. Same with powders.

Remington changed the rules when they made it legitimate in 1988 at SAAMI, and introduced both live ammo for hunters and brass cases for handloaders. Their factory product in ammo was in the form of a 250gr RN at a claimed 2400 fps, and a 200gr SP at a claimed 2675 fps. Soon protests arose from among the prospective buyers that Remington overlooked loading a good 250gr SP, that would be much better for shooting large game at a proposed 300+ yards. Some months went by, and finally Remington came out with a 250gr SP CorLoc at, again, a claimed 2400 fps/3197 ft-lbs. No one among the savvy .35 handloaders were ecstatic by such meager results. Even James Howe and Whelen himself were getting +2500 fps from 250s, which was considered a standard load for a 250gr. Why build a .358-cal cartridge based on the .30-06 case that would do little better in energy than the .30-06 itself? The raison-d’etre for the .35 Whelen was to give a decided improvement over the .30-06!

My experience with a .35 Whelen in a Rem 7400 (semi) was that with improved powders than was available in 1922, I could quite easily attain 2600 fps/3752 from its 22″ barrel without problems of any kind. The late Finn AAgaard did also from his custom 22″ .35 Whelen bolt action using the 250gr Nosler Partition over 60 grs of RL-15, the same load I used for 250gr bullets.  Also 2345 fps from the 300gr Barnes Original in the Rem 7400 from a book load of BL-C2. Those are impressive results from a .30-06 case necked to .358″. And, by-the-way, that 7400 action was as strong as any bolt action I’ve ever used. Never a jam or failure to eject an empty case loaded to top safe pressures.

Experiences vary, of course, depending on several variables, such as: barrel length, condition and tightness of bore, factory produced or custom, powder used and amount, primer, lots of powder, personality of handloader and manual employed.

<(Well known back country. I was walking a familiar trail from where I took this pic. A moose on the far shore – about 350 yards – would easily be within range of a .35 Whelen.)

In brief, those were my experiences. The semi was sold after several hunts and much range time. The NEF single-shot in .35 Whelen was traded for a .45-70 single-shot. A few years later I went looking for another .35 Whelen in a new bolt-action and came home with a 9.3 x 62 (more on that later). So, I have high regard for it, and think it to be one of the most useful all-purpose cartridges when handloaded. The original factory 250gr RN proved to be much less than claimed when fired at the range (so I could get some empty cases). Ten averaged just under 2250 fps. That was because I wanted to go deer hunting with it before dies and brass arrived. Of course, the 250s would have been plenty for deer at woods ranges, but it was disappointing, nonetheless. After the deer hunt (I didn’t shoot a deer, but was close to doing so), I fired the other ten at the range, got my dies and was “off to the races” in developing handloads.

Today, there are cases and ammo available from several sources. At the very least, Remington, having legitimized the cartridge and producing rifles for it, has spurred new interest so that it appears more popular today than in its heyday! For North American hunting there is really nothing too big or dangerous that demands a larger bore or more power. Here, on our continent it has more than proven itself. But also in Africa, Asia and Australia. If it has a fault, I suppose one could blame it for being too unpretentious.

Some prefer lighter quality bullets in 200gr and 225gr. While that can’t be seriously faulted, keep in mind that for the largest and most dangerous, the 250gr was built. And a 250gr Partition brings out its best in my view. Depending on length of action and freebore, one may be able to stretch the COL by a meaningful amount, thereby significantly improving ballistics. I could do that in the clip of my 7400. I always seat bullets as long as the action and throat allows, just off the lands of course. I have never found that by tinkering with bullet seating in thousandths of an inch made any practical difference in accuracy for hunting purposes. But I have found that 1 or 2 tenths of an inch more room in the case due to increased COL, can improve ballistics by upwards of 150 to 200 fps, depending on the cartridge, bore, powder and barrel of course.

Then, there is a multitude of pistol bullets in .357″, many of which make good use for varmints and plinking.

Hail the .35 Whelen, long may it live!

The .350 Remington Magnum: Introduced by Remington in their short-action M600 with a 20″ barrel, it was the first belted cartridge to fit their short action. Case capacity was about 74 grs whereas the .35 Whelen was around 72, as compared with the .30-06 at 69. The short-action constrained COL to 2.80″ which meant that power space would be cramped when held to that COL.

In its overall relatively short package, it became a favorite for bear guides in Alaska and elsewhere where a short and handy “powerhouse” was suited to deal with wounded or troublesome bears at relatively close range.

I’ve owned a couple, both Remingtons. The first was one of Remington’s annual “Classics” with a 22″ barrel, the short action and very nice walnut. It was one of the best handling rifles I’ve ever owned. It never went bear hunting but it did for whitetails.

Unfortunately, I had trouble getting the expected results from 200s and 250s when using the powders suggested and available at the time. While I loved the rifle, I was disappointed with the ballistics — it never attained 2400 fps from 250s,  so it got traded.

Many years later I purchased an M673 in .350 Rem Mag with the heavy laminated stock, short action and silly “rib” on the 22″ barrel. That rifle also started out as another “big disappointment” with handloads. That is, until I realized there was a problem with the chamber! Even the “weak” factory ammo was leaving tooling “rings” around the fired cases. I took it to my gunsmith, VonAtzigen, and he discovered the chamber had not been finished — it was roughed-out only, and undersized! He did an excellent job, and when finished it was polished like a mirror.

From that point on it’s performance was beyond belief! It had a stout 22″ barrel that gave exceptional accuracy and ballistic results that was about on a par with a same length .338 Win Mag barrel, depending on how each was handloaded. The .350 Rem was much more efficient than the .338 Win in that a faster burning powder gave optimum results, whereas the same powder in the .338 Win would have been a poor performer. In other words, the .338 Win needed about 10 more grains of a relatively slow powder for the same results.

The 250gr Speer GS was the star performer, with the 250gr Nosler Partition not far behind. The last three shots I fired in that rifle were the 250gr Speer GS that went into a perfect 3/8″ at 100 yards, leaving the muzzle at an average of 2734 fps over a charge of 62.3 grs RL-15 ignited by WLRM primers. COL was 2.82″.  On a bitter cold (-11*C) breezy March day in 2005 at our range, I shot three 200gr Hornady SPs into .913″ at 100 yards. MV = 2975 fps corrected to MV. Powder was 65 grs RL-15, and WLRM primers ignited them.

<(The M673 was toted for bear and the load was that 250 gr Speer GS.)

These were my ideal loads for that rifle after it was properly finished by the gunsmith: Remington brass, WLRM primers, RL-15 and COL @ 2.82″. Average for 3 shots.

200 Hornady SP; 65 grs RL-15; MV = 2975 fps/3930 ft-lbs (.913″)

225 Sierra BT; 63 grs RL-15; MV = 2850 fps/4058 ft-lbs (1.1″)

225 Nosler Partition; 62 grs RL-15 = 2820 fps/3973 ft-lbs (1.16″)

250 Speer GS; 62.3 grs RL-15 = 2710 fps/4076 ft-lbs (.625″)

I’d climbed that rugged mountain and then traded it. If I’d obtained those results from my first Remington “Classic”, it would have been kept as it was lighter and much better handling than the M673. And was prettier to boot.

The M673 was traded for an 1895 Marlin GG in .45-70 with the infamous ports and an 18.5″ barrel.  After less than a month’s use, I couldn’t tolerate the noise from the ports and turned it in at the same dealership for another Marlin Classic in .45-70 with a 22″ barrel. That was in April/2005.

The 358 NORMA MAGNUM: With a case having about the same dimensions as the .338 Win Mag, which it followed by a year, the .358 NM is ideal in case capacity for the bore size. A product of Sweden for the American market, it failed to catch on because it was a cartridge without a rifle. Cases, ammo and dimensions were made available but rifles were not immediately at hand from Europe, so it was then a matter of custom work.

I’ve owned a .308 Norma Magnum, but not the .358, which was the same case necked down from the .358. Other than some wildcats, it was the most powerful commercial .358-caliber on the market. In my view, it’s a slightly better cartridge than the .338 Win Mag in that it must have a larger bore rifle for firing, thereby increasing its expansion ratio resulting in better efficiency — less powder for the same energy results, or the same amount of powder for greater results. Another way of stating that is to say that where a .338 Win will easily fire a 250gr at 2700 fps, a .358 Norma will fire a 250gr at 2800 fps, other things equal such a barrel length and psi. It’s a simple matter of efficiency from a larger bore that is 12.5% greater in cross-section-area.

Yet the .358 Norma is market strapped by not being produced in America. Still, for the handyman, it’s no big deal to use .338 Win Mag brass. And there are lots of good to excellent bullets available on this side of the pond, the same as for the .35 Whelen and .350 Rem Mag; plus all the powders that will bring the best from any rifle so chambered. I think H4895, RL-15 & RL-17 should make the reloader sing happy songs! IMR4350, or their ilk, will do no better than RL-17 in my thinking, and perhaps less. Primers should be of the magnum sort.

It should be a little more effective on the big stuff than a .338 magnum. I’d use it with a 24″ barrel to ensure best performance. It doesn’t need a 26″. A 22″ tube will result in ballistics similar to the .350 Rem Mag.

The .358 STA: Many wildcats have appeared in times past that basically shaped the mold for this creation by author Layne Simpson. It’s the 8mm Remington necked to .358″.

Basically, it’s the .375 H&H case necked to .358″ and blown out. Or, another way of saying it is: It’s the .375 Weatherby (itself a .375 H&H blown out with straight walls) necked to .358-cal.

Whatever. It was not a new creation as the .375 H&H case has been the basis for many “cats” and others that became “standard” cartridges such as the Winchester series of magnums, plus Remingtons, including the likes of the .350 Rem itself! But many entrepreneurs had used the basic .375 H&H case necked down to .358″, blown it out to create their own .358 magnum. So Simpson’s STA (Shooting Times Alaskan) was simply endorsed by SAAMI as a legit cartridge. Of course, Layne Simpson, at the time, was on the staff of SHOOTING TIMES magazine.

The point I’m making is that a .358 magnum of 3.65″ COL has been around “forever”! There are still many out there that will do the same things as the STA since they fathered it!

Ballistics: a 250gr at 3000 fps/5000 ft-lbs at the muzzle of a 26″ barrel is the standard fare for anything big and mean. Basically the same results as from my .340 Wby Mag. But an increase of 12.5% cross-section-area of a 250gr might give slightly better results — or not!

There you have it…

For .358 caliber.

Personally, my choice would be the .35 Whelen or the .350 Rem Mag. Can’t imagine I’d need more from a .358-caliber.

Next: the 9.3 mm’s(.366-cal). As a medium, it’s now my choice. Why?

Shalom

BOB MITCHELL

Medium Caliber Rifles — one more time – P1

To this point in blog writing,  I’ve treated this topic quite fully and fairly, I believe. Though I could be mistaken as the Super Mediums have barely occupied a short paragraph. The excuse being that apart from data in manuals, and the writings of a few authors, I have experience with only one — that being the .340 Weatherby Magnum. And that one has been given reasoned exposition based on considerable personal handloading and hunting experience. So anything that is comparable has purposefully been mostly ignored. This time around I’ll give them a polite nod.

For newcomers and occasional readers of my “stuff”, a timely reminder of what I consider “mediums” would be fitting.  Starting at .338-caliber and 4000 ft-lbs at the muzzle, we’ll end at .375-caliber and whatever is deemed “reasonable” in kinetic energy.

In the past I’ve excluded the super .375s, i.e. .375 RUM and .378 Weatherby, and any “wildcats” of their ilk, as they contend with the true Big Bores for recognition in kinetic energy, but NOT necessarily in effect.  I don’t believe that any .375-caliber can produce the same effect as a .500-caliber (as one example of a Big Bore) when each has done its “best”, no matter an extra 200 or so fps at most ranges for the Super .375s.

If penetration alone were the “name of the game” then a 6.5, 160gr solid would suffice in most situations. But since penetration is only part of the story, some of us believe that a larger hole in flesh and bone in a vital area is the rest of the story. So a .338 to .375 have distinct advantages over .264 caliber. And where needed or wanted, Big Bores have distinct advantages over all others in wound cavity and destruction of flesh and bone. Of course I agree… bullet speed and construction at impact cannot be ignored, even if we try to ignore them!

That was my “short ‘n sweet” preamble.

What about .323 (8 mm) caliber? It’s sort of in “no man’s land”, as I view it. At one time I was somewhat fascinated with the 8mm Rem Magnum, but few adequate bullets were available for the handloader, and factory ammo was poor in comparison with .300s and .338s.

I originally started mediums at .358 caliber but later relented to allow .338 caliber into the fold. That being .338s that could muster 4000 ft-lbs at the muzzle, which the .338-06 couldn’t do, though being a good hunting cartridge for most N.A. big game at reasonable ranges. But despite comments by noted authors to the contrary, it can’t keep up with the .35 Whelen when barrel length, psi and bullet weights are the same — AND the best powder is used in each.

So let the games begin!

In .338 CALIBER the following cartridges get recognition if handloading data is available in three of the reloading manuals of recent times in my library: BARNES, HORNADY and NOSLER, and make at least 4000 ft-lbs at the muzzle when handloaded.

Those are: .338 Win. Mag. and .340 Weatherby Mag. (my former .340 Weatherby Mag.)>

Any others basically imitate those two in ballistics, and I’ll explain my reasoning as we move along. Those are chosen as they depict the two main classes of .338 magnums. All others are similar to them with the possible exception of the .338-.378 Weatherby.  If we include it, then we have three representative cases in progression of capacity.

The .338 Winchester Magnum was introduced by Winchester in 1958, two years later than the .458 Win Mag, and based on that case, 2.5″ in length, necked down to .338″. Case capacity is only slightly less than the much longer .375 H&H and nearly as powerful in kinetic energy when the best handloads are employed.

Factory ammo has varied over the years. Standard velocities today are 2960 fps for 200s/3890 ft-lbs, and 2660 fps/3927 ft-lbs for 250s. At one time there was a 300gr advertised at 2430 fps/3933 ft-lbs, all from a 24″ barrel. There are several variations in factory ammo today. Much of it is in 225gr advertised at 2760 fps/3805 ft-lbs. Also a 210gr is promoted at 2880 fps/3867 ft-lbs. Apart from standard ammo, there have been other “premium loads” promoted at higher velocities and energies than the standard group.

As to handloads, several manuals come close to its true capabilities, always with a cautionary approach for fear of litigious actions against them.

Personally, I’ve considerable experience with two owned .338 Win Mags, and a third owned by my son, Phil. Barrel lengths were from 20″ to 26″; one of each, and my son’s was a standard 24″. From those experiences I learned that barrel length does make a difference — and sometimes a considerable difference. So, I’m reluctant to be dogmatic as to what a .338 Win Mag will “do” without qualifications, as there are many, many variables involved.

For example: from the .338 SAKO FS, 20″ barrel (similar to the pic above), and after a few years of work with it, and other powders and bullets becoming available, I was able to achieve a high of +2700 fps from the 250gr Sierra BT. Did you notice that was from a 20-inch barrel? On the other end of matters, from my 26-inch Browning A-Bolt SS, LH, it reached 2842 fps from a 250gr Hornady SP and a “book load! Now that’s nudging low-end .340 WBY territory! How many grains of “what” powder? 74 grs of RL-19, ignited by WLRM primers!

So the disparity between a 20″ and a 26″ = +/- 138 fps, or 4483 ft-lbs minus 4046 ft-lbs = 437 ft-lbs in that one example! So who wants to be pontifical over the power and reach of a .338 Win Mag without qualifiers? Not I! Phil’s moose hunting load was a 250gr Hornady SP at 2735 fps. It worked well, though I’m quite certain it could have attained +2750 fps without sweating.

(M700 Remington nearly identical to my son’s .338 WM)>

The .338 Winchester Magnum is quite popular, considering that the majority of hunters/shooters are into small and sub-medium rifles/cartridges. And that popularity for use in anything from deer to brown bear hunting in N.A. has spurred a further proliferation of light premium projectiles all the way to long-range bullets such as Nosler’s LR and AccuBonds with a BC of .575 for the 250gr. And others are keeping up with their editions of LR projectiles, as well as light-for-caliber bullets with excellent construction and shape. So it’s not only possible to employ your .338 Win for smaller game than was though “normal” in the past, but very appropriately! The .338 Win is not going away any time soon! One could do a LOT worse than choosing a .338 WIN as an all-purpose rifle for anything from coyote to brown bear — when handloaded.

The .330 Dakota fits, more or less, within those ballistic parameters with the best handloads in equal length barrels. Of course, rifles, factory ammo and brass will not be abundant nor cheap.

The .340 Weatherby Magnum: This one came into the world by Weatherby in 1962. Some say in response to, or to compete with, the growing popularity of the .338 Win Mag.  Whatever the reason, it offered considerably more in ballistics than the .338 WIN. In factory guise it claimed +200 fps over the Winchester version shooting a 250gr at 2860 fps/4540 ft-lbs from a 26-inch barrel. I have not read any reports for or against that claim. One thing we do know, however, is that across the board Weatherby’s ammo was hot-stoked!

Today, Weatherby claims 2950 fps/4830 ft-lbs for some of its 250 grain loads in the .340. While having only fired a single factory 250gr load of the originals in my .340 Wby at about 2850 fps, I well know that +2950 fps from 250gr Nosler Partitions is easily attained from best handloads. In fact, for many years my hunting load was a 250gr Nosler Partition at +/- 3000 fps/4995 ft-lbs from a 26″ Browning barrel. That exceeded the 26″ .338 Win Mag by 158 fps after it was rechambered to .340 WBY. To simplify matters, that means that what the .338 Win could do at 400 yards, the .340 could do at 500…. And so on.

From my converted .338 Win to .340 Wby, the following represents some of its established ballistics in hunting loads:

250gr Hornady SP @ 2945 fps into 7/16″, 87 grs RL-22

250gr Hornady SP @ 2790 fps into 3/4″ at 300 yards! 87 grs AA3100

200gr NBT @ 2175 fps into 1.5″, 80 grs  8700 (fireforming & hunting)

225gr Hornady @ 2855 fps into 3/4″, 83 grs AA3100

*Those represent some of the best of three shots @ 100 yds. Nonetheless, I used the 250gr Nosler for moose hunting at 3000 fps average over several years into 1.25″ for three at 100 yards. I shot my bull moose with that load. All brass was fireformed .375 H&H, once fired Remington. Primers were WLRM.

What the .338 Lapua and RUM will do is largely represented by what I achieved with the .340 Wby Mag.

A few years later I had the opportunity to purchase a .338 RUM or a 9.3 x 62. I chose the latter and have never looked back.

The .338-.378 Weatherby: I include this one because Weatherby still produces them, and there are a few out there.

Nosler’s ballistics in their Reloading Guide 6 is not that impressive. Perhaps that represents all their testing personnel could endure! Regardless, their best for the 250gr Partition isn’t much better at 3034 fps than what I was getting from my .340 at 3000 fps. But only four powders were tested and I think it’s likely that it was arbitrarily shut down at 101 grs of IMR7828 as that only gave 90% load density. If 90% represents 3034 fps, then what would 100% give? That might be another 10 grains at an additional 200 fps, perhaps? But not likely of the same powder.

I included it for speculation only, as, personally, I wouldn’t have a use for it. I’d go to something larger in bore — as I already have in Big Bores.

Next up the .35s.

Shalom

BOB MITCHELL

 

Hunting and Politics

The Spring Bear Hunt of 1999 was cancelled by the Harris’ Conservative Government of Ontario. That happened because a wealthy developer of Southern Ontario involving the Greater Toronto Area threatened to unseat the Conservative Government if Premier Harris didn’t cancel the spring hunt. Harris’ Government caved. He lost the next election anyway as most hunters were fed up with politicians arbitrarily deciding the future of this kind of beneficial outdoor recreation.

Then the Ontario Liberal Party’s leader, as Premier, maintained the same political stance as the former Conservative leader. Status quo for two more Liberal governments. However, as politics is more or less like a revolving door, the Liberal Premier got into trouble with the public on several fronts, including a stalemate on the spring bear hunt that involved the economic failure of lodges and camps in Northern Ontario — which already faced economic depression due to slumping businesses — where American hunters and fishermen were clients in years prior to the cancellation of the bear hunt. In facing a new election with the strong probability of the northern Liberal MPPs losing their seats in government — which would likely cause the defeat of the incumbents — the then Liberal Premier reintroduced the Spring Bear Hunt as a five year “pilot project” to insure their continued power in government by quelling the unrest of potential voters from the north of the Province.

Most of us didn’t care much for their motives, but the Spring Hunt was back for five years. Before the time of its extension was over they were defeated and the new Conservative Premier has announced the permanent continuation of the Spring Bear Hunt.

Great news!

However, the current Ontario Conservatives are losing favor with many who voted them into power due to a more stringent economic social agenda, and a continual battle with the powerful Teachers’ Union. The revolving political door all over again! So who knows what the next Ontario Government will propose re: “the Spring Bear Hunt”? From a strictly economic point of view it’s more or less neutral, but that’s not the only political consideration. Checking the wind of public opinion will make the decision for them no matter what a few thousand resident bear hunters may feel about the matter. And public opinion is mostly decided by urban residents, not rural. And politicians are sensitive to their views since that’s where most of their votes come from.

A just cause, or the view of a minority rarely makes it to the table! Wealth has not only influence, but power! And scarcely does that exist in rural Ontario. The principle of a matter carries little weight in today’s politics. Occasionally they will introduce legislation that keeps the few happy, but only if it will tilt the balance in maintaining their party in power — such as the reintroduction of the Spring Bear Hunt.

Hunters therefore hold their respective noses and enjoy the return of a hunt that chases away the winter blues and the cobwebs from their minds!

Hail the Spring Bear Hunt!

For many seasons it was my favorite time of year. Planning would start sometime in Febuary — about the time that new bears were being born in the winter dens with their mothers. That involved what rifle and handloads. But there must also be a backup with handloads! Choices of rifles, cartridges, bullets and powders were thought about until the dream became reality. Also, the question of where to locate bait and stand became a preoccupation.

So it was in every spring that plans were made and executed down to the finest details. Often, before the bears were out of their dens, I was out and about looking for any signs of life. It was an adventure.

Speaking of which, I have tentative plans for patrolling some Crown Land semi-wilderness areas this spring with a bear ticket in my wallet. No plans yet for baiting but will do some hiking and calling, God willing. I expect to be toting the Ruger No.1 in .458 Win Mag. Not sure of the load yet, but it may be a heavy cast lead bullet at modest speed or what I was using last fall, a 300gr TSX at about 2778 fps/5140 ft-lbs at the muzzle. The rifle is sighted for that load and a few are already loaded. Recoil is modest (for a .458 WIN) at around 37 ft-lbs that has been tempered by the Mag-Na-Porting from 43 ft-lbs. With a 2 – 7 x 32mm Nikon scope mounted, four cartridges in a holder on the butt stock and one in the chamber it comes in at 10.75 lbs. Not a big deal if I commit to keeping fit.

I’ve a “new”(new to me, but used) set of wheels that has replaced the KIA CUV that was on a four-year lease. It’s about right for my purposes being a mid-size SUV. “No pickup?” That’s truth, and have never owned one in all the years of my hunting experiences.

The year that my son, Phil, and I did a moose hunt together in Northern Ontario, I towed a steel and iron 1000 lb lawn-service trailer hitched to my bright red two-door Pontiac Sunbird 1600 kilometers to our hunting destination. The motor was a 3.1 L, V6 producing 140 horses pulling a 3000 lb sport coup, loaded in the trunk with supplies and gear, plus the back seat with more gear and “stuff”, and the two of us weighing close to 400 lbs in the bucket seats, pulling the trailer loaded with camping gear, gasoline and water cans holding 5 gallons each. How much weight was all that? I dunno, but it was a bunch. Then, we brought home on the trailer 800 lbs of bull moose after we left innards, head and legs below the knees in the woods. We also cruised the rough, muddy and water filler ruts of the old logging roads in that coup looking for moose sign (without the trailer attached). I shot the bull 350 yards from camp on opening day and we were on our way home the following day!  On the two day journey home it was most interesting in stopping at various Tim Horton’s Coffee Shops for a break, a change of diet, and gasoline, to see caravans of pickup trucks pulling long trailers loaded with gear and usually several 4x4s void of any moose!

That car and load worked beautifully together on the 1600 km trip home while getting an average of 26 mpg (Imperial)!

So, my mid-size SUV will go where I want and easily tote a bear of any dimension! I expect to get close to 30 mpg from its 240 horses — the same size motor with 100 more horses! That’s efficiency!

Speaking of which, no rifle cartridge for big game is more efficient than the eminent .458 Winchester Magnum. Say, have I not previously mentioned that? A few times? Nay, multiple!

Give her a try and bring home some bear and moose meat!

Shalom

BOB MITCHELL

The .30-06 Springfield — how good is it?

Actually, the .30-06 Springfield is better than ever, not that it was ever a poor performer. Yet with new rifles, powders and bullets its performance has been potentially elevated to match the Super Thirty of the 1920’s. That, of course, being the .300 H&H that had a standard factory load of a 180gr at 2880 fps/3315 ft-lbs from a 26″ barrel. And African loads were less than that due to the cordite powder’s inability to control pressure when heated up. Today, a good .30-06 can make that from a 24″ barrel using a premium bullet.  At a COL of 3.34″ Nosler’s manual shows a max velocity of 2872 fps from their 24″ Lilja barrel employing 61 grains of RL-22. Most of today’s magazine rifles allow a longer COL which would permit a few extra grains upping fps at the same psi, which is SAAMI standard at 60,000. For those who are experienced enough of venturing into the 64,000 psi territory, you could expect another 100 fps giving in excess of 2900 fps. That’s on the heels of some factory fodder from a 24″ .300 Winchester Magnum. Using the same procedure for the 200gr AccuBond from a 26″ tube, expect about 2750 fps which is more than the SAAMI standard for 180s.

I’d have no qualms over extracting such performance from a modern 26″,  .30-06 Springfield, and there are those who are doing just that. Such an effect puts a  26″, .30-06  into the “magnum” class of .30-calibers, and boosts it’s potential for bagging an adult moose to 500 yards if using a bullet like the 200gr AccuBond with a BC of .588 at 2750 fps. It would still be making about 1885 ft-lbs at 500 yards, and 2396 ft-lbs at 300 yards, numbers in the past that were found only in the class of medium magnums or a .300 Weatherby firing factory ammo — but still without the benefit of today’s “premium” projectiles.

Some potential results:

Cartridge: .30-06 Springfield

Barrel length = 26″

Powder = Rl-22 or similar

Primer: magnum

Bullet: 200gr Nosler Accubond

MV = 2750 fps/3358 ft-lbs

100= 2603 fps/3008 ft-lbs

200=2461 fps/2688 ft-lbs

300=2323 fps/2396ft-lbs

400=2189 fps/2128 ft-lbs

500=2060 fps/1885 ft-lbs

And that’s at my test conditions. And one could expect even better results for longer shots in the heat of Africa or high mountain hunts. With a good broadside hit 1885 ft-lbs from a premium 200gr should be adequate for a 1000 to 1100 lb average mature moose in our area (bull or cow).

Plus that load would be quite flat shooting at only + 3 inches at 100, -4″ at 300, and -38″ at 500 . Just hold 1.5 to 2 feet over the hump for a hit in “the boiler room” at 500. In other words, we must know the bullet’s trajectory regardless of what we hunt, or where.

Recoil would be a mere 26 ft-lbs from a 8.5 lb rifle compared to 35 ft-lbs from a .300 magnum shooting the same bullet at 3000 fps from the same weight rifle.

That was to show its potential, NOT a RECOMMENDATION for anyone but myself or those with equivalent knowledge and experience in handloading. The truth is, however, that few will be shooting large game at 500 yards. At less than 500 the trajectory will be flatter and the energy greater making clean hits more effective and easier for the average guy or gal.

What would I recommend to a new moose hunter who wanted to choose between a .30-06 and a .300 magnum?

That would depend on a number of factors:

First of all, my answer would depend on how well I knew the individual. My recommendation to Ben, a young friend who wanted to hunt bear with me, depended on several matters that I had eyeballed about him. I was his parents pastor when he was born. They had met in Southern Rhodesia where the father was in the military and the mother a Canadian missionary nurse in that area. They married and moved to our town in Ontario, Canada. Because of his father’s and uncle’s involvement with firearms in a military context in Africa, and due to his uncle’s hunting in current day Zimbabwe, Ben joined cadet training for two summers in the Canadian military, so he had some familiarity with rifles, and hopes someday to go to Africa to hunt with his uncle.

Secondly, Ben was a big lad who had been a participant in our floor hockey program. He was no hockey enthusiast, but his size and spirit made everyone else, including participants who had won a championship in the sport, pay attention when Ben was on the move!

Finally, he had followed me around when I was bear baiting and that meant many hours of teaching, training and discussions. He was an avid Internet researcher and could intelligently discuss most subjects. He was no dummy and showed respect as he was hearing and observing.

<(Ben with his .300 Win Mag in a tree stand watching for bear.)

So I found a slightly used .300 Win Mag in a 111 Savage, almost identical to mine, and recommended it to him. I bought the rifle and kept it for him until he did the firearms and hunting courses. He shot two bears with it, decided to go to our local college and took a course in “Drilling and Blasting”, one of the favorites for young men, and had a job waiting for him in Western Canada before the course ended. He’s been there since, found a Christian gal and they expect to be married this summer.

And, oh, if you’ve read my blogs of a few years past, you’d be familiar with this pic of Ben. He was 6-5″ and 300 lbs at the time.

Why that historical setting for my recommendation? If I need to answer that then you wouldn’t understand anyway!

The major point being that a lot depends on the individual, their age, attitude, experience and physical condition.

If they need to ask for a recommendation between a .30-06 and a .300 Win Mag, then it’s very obvious to me that their knowledge and experience is  limited. Yet we see a lot of such questions on various hunting/shooting forums. It’s too bad, therefore, that most “answers” reflect personal biases without much content that addresses the question. And often the latter end of the matter results in “shouting matches” and name calling! Nothing is learned other than a confirmation of Scripture that states “All have sinned and come short of the glory of God.”

But this is about the .30-06 Springfield and how good it is… for what? My answer will depend on the factors mentioned as well as whether one is a handloader or dependent on factory products only. There is a difference, and a potential major one.

Should a hunter be solely dependent on factory products, the cost of the best suited for large game is VERY expensive and therefore potentially limiting necessary practice with the load AND rifle.

As I’ve already mentioned several times in these blogs, the first two big-game rifles for which I made handloads were .30-06’s, and I didn’t own a chronograph at the time so there was no way of actually knowing the results. My assumption was that book numbers from Lyman were close enough, though they were not from a 22″ barrel. That first Lyman manual had a plastic binding, and I studied it with great confidence and intensity. By the way — I’ve found Lyman’s updated manuals to be among the best, if not THE best, especially for Big Bores. That’s what I studied for potential results from a Ruger No.1 in .45-70 as they gave the pressure of their loads.

Back to the current theme: In a recent blog I compared the .30-06 and .300 Win Mag with good handloads in each. The conclusion was that based on those results the .300 Win Mag had an advantage of 150 yards over the .30-06 firing the same bullet. And I didn’t skew the numbers to favor the .300 WM. Since those results don’t lie, I stand by what I wrote. Yet in this blog I’m saying that under ideal conditions, a knowledgeable hunter/handloader could pull off a kill on a mature moose (bull or cow — in Ontario there’s little difference in their mature weights) at 500 yards. However, an experienced hunter/handloader/shooter would only take such a shot under certain conditions: Using a solid rest, knowing the bullet’s trajectory, and accurately doping the wind. But that is still pushing matters to the limit from a best load in a 26″ .30-06. While the smart shooter/hunter would use the same precautions in using a .300 Winchester, the trajectory will be significantly flatter in using the same bullet, and hit with 400 to 500 more ft-lbs of energy, depending on actual range — at 300 yards it’s about +500 ft-lbs advantage for the .300 WM, and at 500 yards it’s about +400 ft-lbs. In other words, what the .30-06 will be making at 340 yards from it’s best load from the 200gr AccuBond, the .300 Win Mag will be making at 500 yards. That’s 160 yards advantage. The .300 Win Mag can make 3000 fps at the muzzle of a good 26″ barrel firing a 200 grainer.

<(On one of our moose hunts to N. Ontario we encountered this “mountain” with a lot of bull moose sign. From where I took the pic, it’s about 500 yards to the top. The photo doesn’t show it, but there’s about 250 yds to the bottom and another 250 to the top. Then a sharp cliff drop-off on the far side.)

Another way of looking at matters is this: What the .30-06 is capable of at 500 yds, the .300 WM can do at 650 yds. So for real long-range shooting of large game, the .300 magnum has a distinct advantage — undeniably so! And it will ALWAYS hit harder at the same range — undeniably so! Hitting “harder” translates to destroying more stuff — undeniably so!

Mine will always be a .300 Win Mag or equivalent.

BUT! The .30-06 is still capable of achieving +90% of what we want or need in North America under IDEAL CONDITIONS!

So, what would I recommend?

First, you must tell me who you are!

Shalom

BOB MITCHELL

Should a Christian Hunt?

The reason that such a question should even be raised is due to at least a couple of significant changes in societal thinking and behaviour in a post-modern world.

This could easily be extended into a ten-part series, and even then the surface would only be scratched. So I’m immediately going to cut to the chase and let the chips fall where they may (please excuse the mixed metaphor).

Firstly: It’s not a “Christian world” in the West anymore, and never really was but that’s another subject for another place. “Secularism”, and trending thereto has become the “new religion”. And so-called “Christians” have abandoned their ancient moorings for so-called “fresh thinking” with its concomitant behaviour. And we wonder why personal morality is up for grabs? History has its ominous lessons to teach us if we really wanted to hear or heed them! It’s recorded in ancient scripture that when Israel had no king, but were ruled by judges, that “Everyone did what was right in his/her own eyes”. That was a very sad day in the history of God’s people! (Book of Judges, last verse.)

There has been a relentless cultural shift in the thinking and behaviour of the Western World with it’s global ramifications. It began in Europe in the late fourteenth century through the sixteenth when “free thinking” replaced stifling legalistic Christianity, which brought about “The Renaissance”. That was both good and bad as unbelievers within Christian ranks could now “freely” express their unbelief in a supernatural God and the Bible. Of course, it was then necessary to come up with a “new theory” of the universe and existence of life among the cognoscente. Enter stage “left”, Darwin and his minions. If there be no God, or only a remote impersonal “FORCE” at best, why worry over such figments as MORALITY?! After all, we now know that MAN is his own GOD!! But that produces its own conundrum! Who then will rule and make decisions? Ah ha! Israel’s conundrum without a king, “deja-vu all over again”,  in the words of wisdom by the famous Yankee’s catcher!  Ahh… “Rule by the majority, that’s it! That’s the answer!” And how well is that working in contemporary America and the West? Has that produced “Weinsteins” and political leaders that don’t know what truth is? And the UN that wants to take away my “rights” to own a rifle and hunt, “for the good of humanity”?

There is an answer but “the majority” don’t want to hear it! They prefer a universe where… If there is a god, the masses prefer that he would be blind to their immoral behaviour, and deaf to their vulgarities, blasphemies, curses and thanklessness, and indifferent of truth and judgement… or incapable of transforming their nature.

You see, I’m a Christian who trusts in a real God and what He has said and done — including building a universe and giving life to every living thing, who alone is the source and sustainer of all life, including eternal life.

And I’m a hunter as a Christian. I’ve studied the Bible since my youth, having read it through for the first time at age twelve, and researched and studied it both informally and formally for the past 70 plus years, and there I find nothing that specifically forbids hunting or even implies that I should cease doing so — other than in complying with provincial/state legalities attached thereto.

And I’m a pastor — still at age 84, who has had certain Christians question the sensibility of a pastor who hunts wildlife, and who are ALSO against hunting largely because of personal sentiment and/or the cultural shift against it. No doubt the masses (majority rule) will eventually succeed in the demise of ALL hunting, AND meat eating! We see that trend today in increasing measure — also predicted in the New Testament of the Bible as a SIGN of “The Last Days” (1 Timothy ch. 4, vs 1 – 5).

I realize, of course, that I’m “preaching to the choir” in defending my recreational activity in hunting. No one here will question that “right” but it’s very possible that you may not have made the connection between freedoms that God has given and the right to choose to hunt in a so-called “free society”.  The roots for such “freedom” is traditional Christianity (Biblical Christianity), or Judaeo – Christian thinking and worldview.

Darwinism doesn’t make a distinction between the lowest forms of life and the highest, because it was “all by chance” anyway, without design or purpose. If that be so, then why be concerned about “morality”? As I once sat on a train travelling from Montreal to Toronto, my travelling colleague was a Christian Jew from California living in Montreal. Across the aisle was a Jewish businessman from Montreal who was blaming God for the Holocaust, though he claimed not to believe in Him! I said: “Since you think God is to blame, but the Holocaust is  proof that He really doesn’t exist, why does it matter? There is no judgement since God doesn’t exist, and whose morality claims are just? Maybe the Nazis were right since there’s no higher court above human opinion to appeal to. And IF there’s no after-life, then death may be better than life since all the dead don’t know their dead and have no recollection of mistreatment. But IF there is GOD, and an afterlife, and judgement, then what?” He remained silent.

Conscience isn’t enough to guarantee righteous behaviour… where is justice found, and where its foundation? And love? Is Hollow-Wood the standard?

Secondly: Where is freedom found? The freedom to hunt is one thing, but the lack of personal freedom to say “No!” to lust that enslaves and destroys is quite another! The drug cartels of South America have made countless billions from the pockets of “free” North Americans where “majority rules”, who become slaves to unbridled destructive passions! And that has included “powerful” people with millions of dollars at their disposal. There is much, much more involved in personal freedom than living in a country where “majority rules” if the majority is bent on “freely” choosing that which will destroy them!

Yes, having the right to hunt is one thing only, but living in a “free society” that is inclusive of the right to follow unbridled lust and passion is quite another! To dismiss a very serious destructive societal problem as merely “their own fault” has come to lay its eggs on our doorsteps!

A very close friend has twin sons now in their early forties. One is an alcoholic that has trouble keeping a job for which he’s amply trained. His father is constantly bailing him out! The other holds a PhD in chemistry and employed in a Western Canadian university as a professor. The father doesn’t wash his hands of helping the one in trouble, saying “It’s his own fault!”. That doesn’t make his son in trouble guiltless, but neither does it make the father free from guilt.

You cherish your freedom to hunt, as do I, but are we truly free from the “demons” that would destroy us? That could “merely” be enslavement to materialism — while turning a blind eye to others in need.

“Am I my brother’s keeper?”, asked a successful businessman of God, who was jealous of a younger brother whom he had just murdered.

Think people!

Shalom

BOB MITCHELL