The .35 Whelen and Other Medium Calibers

While certainly one of the most useful all-around cartridges, yet for obscure reasons it remains “the ugly step-sister” to the .338s which currently seems the darling of the mid-bores. But it was not always so.

In Auckley’s HANDBOOK FOR SHOOTERS & RELOADERS – Vol.1, pg 463, he makes this statement regarding the introduction by Winchester of their .338 magnum: “It is somewhat of a mystery why this odd size bullet was selected when so many fine .35 caliber bullets have been available for so many years. Certainly there could be little ballistic advantage. This can be seen by comparing the ballistics of the new .338 Winchester Magnum with those of any similar .35 Magnum cartridges.”

How different in our time from the situation in P.O. Ackley’s day! In his era .35 Magnums were “in” and he found it strange that Winchester opted to use the “old .33 Winchester bullet size” instead of .333″ that wildcatters had been using for some time. And that introduction by Winchester in 1958 as the .338 Winchester Magnum Alaskan seemingly changed the perception by both hunters and handloaders that this new magnum would forever be superior to .35-calibers. So bullet manufactures followed rifle makers, and then Weatherby introduced their .340 Wby Mag in 1960, leading ultimately to a proliferation of various competitor versions of .338 magnums, including the .338 Lapua.

And that is a very short version of many details involved as to why the .35s have continued to play a catch-up game to the .338s.

But, despite the competition, various versions of the .35 Whelen have remained strong among the cognoscenti. It is perceived as one of the best among mediums – and with good reason in my view.

< Some bullets tested in my .35s.

Let’s face some facts: The .35s have better expansion ratios than .338 magnums or those based on the same .30-06 case. Given the same amount of powder at the same psi and barrel length, the .35 Whelen will exceed the .338-06 in MV by about 100 fps for 250s. This result is the product of physics. Many have claimed the opposite for their .338-06s. Yet there is a huge “BUT” involved if that claim be true! They have had to be using the best powder for the application, a longer barrel and higher psi! Real, non-prejudiced results for the .35 Whelen happens when the best powder is used, the same length barrel, same psi, and the same bullet weight and construction. 2700 fps from certain new powders and 24″ barrels are now realised at standard psi for particular 250gr bullets from the .35 Whelen cartridge. That is the equal of original claims for 250s from a 24″, .338 Winchester Magnum! Of course, since the original claims for the .338 Win Mag, the standard MV has been reduced to 2660 fps for factory 250s. We know, however, that the .338 Win Mag has also attained new status from safe handloads employing better powders. 2800 fps is now safely possible from certain 250s and 24″ barrels, so the .338 Win Mag is still about 100 fps ahead of the .35 Whelen using identical bullet weights. Still, the .338 WIN gets that from (SAAMI) 64,000 psi, whereas the .35 Whelen attains 2700 fps from (SAAMI) 62,000 psi. Expansion ratio (again) is the key.

That I could attain an average of 2710 fps from the 250gr Speer GS in my .350 Rem Mag with a 22″ barrel was great, but no mystery. It, again, was a combination of factors: Expansion ratio, the right powder and bullet, chamber and barrel. That load would shoot better than I could… into 3/8″ when I was shooting as well as it deserved.

As previously written in my blogs, I’ve owned .338 Win Mags: one with a 20″ barrel (SAKO FS) and another with a 26″ barrel (Browning A-Bolt that later became a .340 WBY). Back in those days, after a lot of work, I managed to extract up to 2715 fps from the 250gr Sierra BT in the SAKO FS. Most 250s made the factory claim of 2660 fps. The 26″ Browning surprised me at 2841 fps from the 250gr Hornady and RL-19 before it was rechambered to a .340 WBY. Then, I had helped our second son develop handloads for his Rem 700 in .338 Win Mag. It had a 24″ tube and made 2735 fps from the 250gr Hornady SP Interloc. That was in using around 73 grains of IMR 4831 and magnum primers. In general, I found RL-19 best overall for the .338 WIN and RL-22 best for the .340 WBY in using the 250s or heavier bullets.

In the .35 Whelen and .350 Rem Mag, RL-15 was the ticket. Today, there are other powders that work better ballistics in the Whelen at least.

Of course, as you know by now if you’ve been following my stuff, a 9.3 x 62 has replaced all other medium bores. It’s close to both .35s and .375s — about midway between. So best ballistics reflect that.

But the appeal of non-magnum mediums is fourfold:

1 – Less recoil for “magnum” effect!

2 – Less weight for “magnum” effect!

3 – Less cost for “magnum” effect!

4 – Better ballistics than could be obtained from a medium magnum at the same recoil, weight and cost!

A return to the .35 Whelen is apparent among many who’ve previously experienced medium magnum’s weight, recoil and costs!

And the general North American perception of the 9.3 x 62 is as an alternative to a .35 Whelen, .338 Winchester Magnum or even a .375 H&H.

Whatever the case, it should now be apparent to hunters, shooters and handloaders that some popular mid-bore, non-magnum cartridges can accomplish anything for which medium magnums had previously been chosen… with less work, pain and $$$.

I’ve no regrets over making my .338 Win Mag Browning into a .340 WBY. I learned a great deal from that experience. But in shooting a bull moose with it as a .340 Wby Mag, at about 165 yards, I’m quite sure that a .35 Whelen would have worked just as well at that range. In replacement of the .340, I chose a .350 Rem Mag that ultimately gave the ballistics mentioned above. In looking for another .35 Whelen, I came across a 9.3 x 62 on sale.

The first thing I did after purchasing the TIKKA in 9.3 x 62 was to compare potential ballistics with the .340 because of anticipation of using it on moose in the north of our province. Of course, my results from the .340 was a process over time… So also for the 9.3 x 62.

Rifle: A-Bolt Browning SS/LH converted from a .338 Win Mag to a .340 Wby Mag (26″ barrel)

Bullet: 250gr Nosler Partition

MV = 3000 fps/ 4995 ft-lbs/ 140 TE/ -1.75″

100= 2808 fps/ 4377 ft-lbs/ 123 TE/ +2.35″

200= 2625 fps/ 3825 ft-lbs/ 107 TE/ +2.02″

300= 2449 fps/ 3329 ft-lbs/ 93 TE/ -3.36″

400= 2280 fps/ 2884 ft-lbs/ 81 TE/ -14.5″

500= 2117 fps/2487 ft-lbs/ 70 TE/ -32.5″

XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX

Rifle: TIKKA T3 Lite in 9.3 x 62 (.366-cal), 22.44″ barrel.

Bullet: 286gr Nosler Partition

MV = 2640 fps/ 4425 ft-lbs/ 142 TE/ -1.75″

100= 2466 fps/ 3862 ft-lbs/ 124 TE/ +3.37″

200= 2299 fps/ 3357 ft-lbs/ 108 TE/ +2.75″

300= 2139 fps/ 2905 ft-lbs/ 93 TE/ -4.47″

400= 1985 fps/ 2502 ft-lbs/ 80 TE/ -19.3″

500= 1838 fps/ 2145 ft-lbs/ 69 TE/ -43.0″

XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX

The results of best ballistics (TE = terminal effect) from each is given to 500 yards, including emphasis on momentum, SD and cross-sectional-area (CSA) of each bullet. It turns out that the 9.3 x 62 is about the same as the .340 in real effect with all matters considered. But there are physical distinctions that might matter to some: The .340 was using 90.5 grains of RL-22 under the 250gr Nosler Partition for an MV of 3000 fps. The rifle was 46.5″ in length and 8.8 lbs ready. Recoil was 54 ft-lbs. In my 9.3 x 62, the load intended for moose in the “Far North” was the 286gr Nosler Partition over 70 grains of RL-17 for an MV of 2640 fps. The rifle is 42.44″ in length and 7.7 lbs ready. Recoil is calculated at 48 ft-lbs. Each rifle has a clip magazine that holds three. A fourth could be added with one in the chamber.

The advantage of the .340 was in trajectory. It’s comparative negatives were it’s length, weight and recoil. Though, at the time, I never noticed any of that as negatives. I shot it well from offhand at 165 yards and bullets went exactly where intended.

< The bear was 6′ from nose to tail and the 286gr Partition penetrated 30″. The bear was field dressed where it died. My partner, Ken, was 3 Km at another site and heard the shot. He radioed asking if that was my shot and did I need help. I responded positively and in about ten minutes he arrived. We hung the bear overnight in the same tree as my stand. Early the next morning he took this pic, following which the bear was skinned and the 286 Nosler fell to the ground from the right flank near the hip.

My current 9.3 x 62 has been used on three bears: Twice from tree stands at 68 yards and 85 yards. The other was the first. It involved the final killing of a bear that had been wounded by a young friend. That load was the 286gr Hornady at about 2400 fps. At his first shot from a tree stand to my right, he hit the bear in a leg. The range was 135 yards to the bait on the edge of thick bush. The bear immediately headed into the bush and I fired my first shot at a fast disappearing bear — in fact when I fired his quickly disappearing butt was all I saw. But that frightened the bear (the Hornady never hit it!) and it came running back in our direction not knowing where the fire was coming from! I waited for my friend to shoot again… Nada! He never fired a second shot the whole time the bear was by then almost hobbling through the long-thick grass toward the tree line we had our stands in! I was unfastening my safety harness and yelling at him to “SHOOT!!” When I landed on terra firma, I was still yelling at him to “SHOOT!” He didn’t, and the bear made it through the tree line into the pasture of the other side. I then could see the bear about 50 yards beyond the tree line, struggling in the tall thick grass — and slowing. I said, calmly, “Ben, shoot the bear!” He fired two more shots from his .300 Win Mag and hit another leg! I asked him to shoot again… he said something in a whisper… I asked with some indignation, and loud enough that the bear could hear, as well as any neighbors, “WHY ARE YOU WHISPERING?” “I’m out of ammo….” was his meek reply! Then… I chased after the bear that was still plowing through the tall grass like a porpoise in the ocean! I fired another shot while running and missed! Then the bear stopped… I fired again and that was that. I fired a total of three 286 Hornadys and the last connected and finished the job on a bear with two broken legs.

Did someone mention “recoil”? That… believe me, wasn’t even a thought… the last thought went something like this: “Is this cripple finally dead!?”

The other two were clean, one-shot kills, though each bear ran off for 20 yards or so. The first of those was the “moose load”, and the second a 250gr Nosler AccuBond at around 2700 fps. The recoil of each was fast but not punishing from tree stands, and they hit where aimed. Both were body, non-shoulder or CNS, hits. The 286 Hornady did take out at least one lung and several inches of spine before going off somewhere into the bush. No bullet fragments were found. The 286 Partition was a frontal shot when all I could see was the head above the grass. I aimed below that and hit the chest frontally and that bullet stopped in the right flank retaining 73% of initial weight. The 250gr AccuBond was from the treestand to the bait setup at 85 yards. The bear was on top of the bait in a barrel, angling slightly away. The bullet hit high in the back about mid-body, taking out lungs and heart before exiting between chest and left front leg. The loss of blood was massive for about 20 yards where he died in mid-stride. I was very impressed with the results from the 250gr AccuBond, and the Hornady worked very well also. The Partition simply did what was expected. < The 286gr Nosler Partition retrieved from the right flank of the bear shown above.

I see no reason why my experiences from the mid-bores cannot be replicated by knowledgeable and dedicated handloaders of the same. They are good enough for anything to be hunted in North America, including the “big bears” plus most things in the rest of the world.

Til the next…

Shalom

BOB MITCHELL

Why Cartridges of the 19th and 20th Centuries are Good Enough

With the current proliferation of “new and better” rifle cartridges, why would anyone choose a rifle cartridge of over a hundred years old? Yet, some of those are still favorites among many knowledgeable hunters and handloaders. Here’s a short list: .45-70 (148 years old), .223 Remington 1957), .243 Winchester (1955), .25-06 Remington (as a “cat” to 1920), 6.5 x 55 Swedish Mauser (1894), .270 Winchester (1925), 7 mm Remington Magnum (1962), .30-30 Winchester (1895), .30-06 Springfield (1906), .300 Winchester Magnum (1963), .338 Winchester Magnum (1958), .35 Whelen (1922 as a “cat”), 9.3 x 62 (1905), .375 H&H (1912), .416 Rigby (1911), .458 Winchester Magnum (1956), and .500 Jeffery (1920). Apologies for not including your favorite.

But the point is that any found in that list can more than accomplish all that was intended for them at the time of their introduction, and they are even better today in newly manufactured rifles and in loading the best available components in both powders and bullets. In fact, it is claimed that any of those mentioned, plus some others that have not been, can accomplish with lighter bullets today than what was deemed essential in days of yore. But none of those rifle cartridges are less than fifty-eight years old and nine are over one-hundred, with the still favorite .45-70 wearing that crown at 148 years!

< A modern single-shot in .45-70 Springfield

Lest I be misunderstood, I’m not necessarily negative toward anything that’s new or better, as such! Yet, name one rifle cartridge (not the rifle) that has been introduced in the 21st century that’s “better than” anything that has preceded it! Granted, we are still less than a quarter century into the 21st, but let’s notice how many innovative cartridges were introduced during the first quarter of the 20th century, some as wildcats that became favorites with hunters and later legitimised. Of those listed, I’ve never owned (or handloaded) a 243 Winchester (though I recommended it to our youngest son), a .30-30 Winchester, a .416 Rigby or the .500 Jeffery.

A couple of .223 Rems and a .25-06 have fulfilled anything a .243 Win could do for me, and as to .30-calibers, I’ve owned three .30-06’s and eight .300 magnums. Several mediums have been owned and on the top end the great .458 Win Mag does it all, plus! All have been handloaded and taken on some hunting expeditions. So, really, I’m not fascinated by anything introduced this century or less than fifty years old!

But I do like new rifles and “best” handloading components, as well as improved methods and technologies!

If I had to choose three rifles from those listed — and I already have two of ’em — they’d be:

1 – a .25-06 Remington (for varmints and predators – except bears)

2 – the 9.3 x 62 that I already have (for deer to moose)

3 – the .458 Winchester Magnum that I already own (It can do it all — whatever I want!). There are 250gr monos to 550gr Woodleighs. My favorites thus far are: 300gr TSX’s at up to 2980 fps (that’s “up to”, not necessarily what I plan to use for hunting. My hunting load is around 2775 fps). The 450gr Swift A-Frame at “up to” 2400+fps and/or the 450 TSX at the same approximate speed. Then I’m just taken with the 480gr DGX (by Hornady) at anything between 1750 fps to 2350 fps. If it never expands, it’s still a killer with that flat point! I’d really like to have a suitable 400gr for most anything at up to 2600 fps. I’ve gotten 2590 fps from my favorite 400gr X-Bullet but, alas, Barnes doesn’t make ’em anymore! Yet, I still hold onto a handful for the right bear or moose.

So many things to do, and so little time to do it in! So I’ll be content with what I have…. there’s really nothing lacking therein!

Right now…

My load for bear come September 1st is either the 405gr Remington at 2085 fps or the 400gr Barnes Buster at about the same speed. From the same 75 grain load of RL-15 they shoot into a single hole at 50 yards! COL for the 405gr load is 3.26″ and the 400gr Buster load is 3.3″.

Following are some ballistic profiles of the 405 Remington and 400 Buster from the Ruger #1 Tropical in .458 Win Mag — keeping in mind that these are relatively modest or reduced loads, more than adequate for bear at any suitable range. And should there be need for full penetration of any large critter then the Buster will deliver that at down to 1200 – 1400 fps impact. Also, a comparison with one of the .458’s offsprings will be made for interest’s sake. Please also keep in mind that 2100 fps is a median load for a 400gr from the great .458 Win Mag. I’m sure you’ve noticed that 2600 fps is available for certain 400s from .458 Win + loads. That is with a COL that equals or exceeds the Lott. 2600 fps = 6004 ft-lbs of kinetic energy at the muzzle and about 2800 ft-lbs at 500 yards from the 400gr X-Bullet. So, my “bear” load, while not “mild” at just over 3900 ft-lbs at the muzzle is still “only” 65% of my .458’s full potential! That’s why a .458 Win Mag has to be considered one the most versatile cartridges extant for the handloader who understands and can manage its potential in either direction… up or down!

Cartridge: .458 Winchester Magnum in a Ruger #1 Tropical

Bullet: 405gr Remington; SD = .276; BC = .281

Powder: 75 grains of RL-15

WLRM primers

Hornady cases

MV = 2085 fps/ 3909 ft-lbs/ 178 TE

50 = 1954 fps/ 3433 ft-lbs/ 156 TE

100= 1829 fps/ 3007 ft-lbs/ 137 TE

150= 1709 fps/ 2627 ft-lbs/ 120 TE

XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX

Bullet: 400gr Barnes Buster; SD = .272; BC = .242

MV = 2100 fps/ 3916 ft-lbs/ 176 TE

50 = 1948 fps/ 3369 ft-lbs/ 151 TE

100= 1803 fps/ 2888 ft-lbs/ 130 TE

200= 1539 fps/ 2102 ft-lbs/ 94 TE

250= 1420 fps/ 1792 ft-lbs/ 80 TE

300= 1314 fps/ 1532 ft-lbs/ 69 TE

XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX

Cartridge: .338 Win Mag

Bullet: 250gr Nosler Partition; SD = .313; BC = .473

MV = 2750 fps/ 4197 ft-lbs/ 118 TE

50 = 2658 fps/ 3922 ft-lbs/ 110 TE

100 =2569 fps/ 3662 ft-lbs/ 103 TE

150 =2481 fps/ 3416 ft-lbs/ 96 TE

200 =2395 fps/ 3183 ft-lbs/ 89 TE

300 =2228 fps/ 2754 ft-lbs/ 77 TE

350 =2148 fps/ 2557 ft-lbs/ 72 TE

Some notes on the above:

A – Sight-ins are not included because that is a variable depending on hunting area and game. However, my Ruger #1 in .458 is already sighted with the two loads: 50 yards zero for the 405 Remington and -0.69″ at 100 yards. The 400 Buster is sighted at 100 yards zero; both for bear. At 50 yards they made a single ragged hole from two of each. The 400gr Buster could be used on anything at any practical range where velocity is still 1400 fps or better. A side brain shot on an elephant would completely penetrate the skull at 1400 fps, or perhaps even less.

B – The TE (terminal effect) numbers are a particular result of KE, SD and CSA (cross-section-area of bullet). It’s similar in some ways to TKO. But the point being that bullet momentum plus caliber and sectional density have a greater effect on larger game than KE only, however those are combined.

C – So, for bear I rely on bullet caliber and weight more than KE only. That concept has proven itself to me more times than not.

D – That .338 Win Mag load is considered max or nearly so from a 24″ barrel. Recoil from an 8.5 lb rifle ready to shoot is about 40 ft-lbs KE. The recoil from the two “bear loads” in my #1 Ruger in .458 is 31.5 ft-lbs. Of course, the .458 is two pounds heavier and has (for some) the dreaded Mag-na-ports, especially for any standing beside the muzzle which NEVER happens in the type of hunting I do. From my end of the rifle, I never notice the muzzle “blast” more than a non-ported rifle. In actual fact, my Ruger 77 in .458 Win Mag was far worse with its 22″ barrel, non ported! And, yes, those loads were “mild” too.

< Two 405s made the “hole” at target center and two 400 Barnes Busters made the hole to the right of it slightly higher. The ragged hole measures .458″ x 1.08″. Widest spread from center to centre of the four is .60″ as best I could measure with a caliper. The target was at 50 yards and shot Wednesday, July 21, 2021.

(The small holes were made a month earlier in shooting my CZ 455 .22LR at 100 yards).

Of course, you could kill almost anything with a side brain shot. Our oldest son, Brent, has taken many warthogs in Africa with such shots from his single-shot .22 LR. Warthogs were their source of protein.

< So, how well do I like the Ruger No.1 in .458 Winchester Magnum? Since I very much like the No.1 Rugers (I’ve owned several) and the .458 Win Mag cartridge, together they make an excellent marriage in my view. Of course, something nobody wants is a “lightweight” .458 Win Mag! Lightweight rifles are “in”, but idealism rarely works well enough in the real world! The problem with lightweight rifles is in cartridges that produce too much felt recoil for the light rifle! I know because I have one! As I load my 9.3 x 62, which is in a Tikka T3 Lite, it generates between 40 to 50 ft-lbs of real recoil! It’s great to carry, and get it into a tree stand, but shooting it at the bench in load development and practice isn’t fun if I shoot too many! In hunting shots from a tree stand, it’s quickness has surprised me but never hurt me. So in adding another five cartridges to a buttstock holder, plus three in the clip and one “up the spout”, it all comes in around 8 lbs. 8.5 lbs would be better. The point being that recoil from the 9.3 x 62 Tikka is faster than the .458 median loads.

But, it has been said by several “experts”: “Get off the bench” as soon as you have your loads and sight-ins! Find a place for practice from realistic positions… but NOT from prone with “heavy hitters”! Standing offhand, kneeling or using some natural object for a rest — like a mound, branch, deadfall, etc. In a tree stand usually there’s a built-in rest for the seating position. Mine didn’t have that feature from the factory so I fabricated one.

“Old” is still “IN” for some of us. After all, I seem very acquainted with that designation!

Til the next…

Shalom

BOB MITCHELL

Advanced Handloading of Rifle Cartridges – P2

Thankfully, there has always been room for improving anything pertaining to life here in our earthly “village”. For many, earthly existence is a matter of survival with a hoped for improvement of personal conditions. For others, at the other end of the stick, life is satisfying with little desire for change. Perhaps the middle ground is where most live: Life is challenging with room for betterment. Of course, we are here entering sociological – philosophical – psychological and theological fields of discussion with too many opinions for anyone to make much sense of it all, like trying to separate the eggs from the batter after they’ve been blended into a cake mix that’s been baked for an hour!

< In the summer of 2017, my wife and I did our 60th wedding anniversary celebration in a trip down east to Campobello Island, New Brunswick, where I was born and we both grew from infancy to college age. In our return trip we stopped by Pierre and Rolande’s place just north of Montreal. I had married them while their pastor in a French language church in Montreal. I also trained Pierre to become pastor after I became Director of the mission in Canada. They are now retired after thirty-five years as pastor of that congregation. Pierre is 10 years younger than I and we still keep in touch in the French language. Recently he gave me a telephone call.

But this is where I thrive! My psychological apparatus works best when and where there is room for improvement or a sense of its need. In my “calling” as a minister of God’s truth to various peoples, I have always functioned best where a new church was needed or an “old” church was dying and in need of a resurrection or relocation. Never have I functioned very well where members were satisfied and wanted to maintain the status quo… I’m not your typical maintenance man!

All that and “Advanced Handloading”? Yes! To help in understanding my psyche in whatever the field or challenge — I “must” improve or change the thinking/behaviour of some for the betterment of the whole!

It has been aptly stated that “better is the enemy of best”! Though, incremental betterment is good as long as it doesn’t stagnate in its progress toward “best” – sadly, that often happens in a Christian’s maturing process as well as in many occupations such as becoming a mechanic! One of my life’s biblical statements from the undaunted apostle Paul is: “This one thing I do, forgetting what is past, I press on towards the goal for which God has called me heavenward in Christ Jesus.” (Paul’s Epistle to the Church at Philippi – ch 3: 12 – 14). And what’s “best” in life is to truly know God in a personal way, and His Son, our Saviour if we trust him!

Then life takes on a new flavor – “La joie de vivre”! Every day, every thing is fresh! Even handloading…. God knows more about handloading or being a mechanic than anyone else! And he knows me better than I know myself! And you too!

I published loads for Marlins and the Ruger #1 in .45-70 that were never published previously. A decade later, Hodgdon began publishing loads for the Marlin that came close to mine. Later still, Bryan Pearce did a very extensive piece in HANDLOADER that was based on Ken Waters’ concepts of three levels of pressure depending on the age and type of firearm in .45-70. But Pearce’s piece went well beyond Water’s results. And so on… Actually, Elmer Keith, in the 1951 Gun Digest, despite limited smokeless powders, recommended 1800 – 1900 fps from 405s for new 1886 Winchesters. So the modern era smokeless loadings of .45-70s goes at least back to Elmer’s time.

<The article by Keith appeared in a 1951 Gun Digest. It’s the one on the right hand page.

The basic idea is to select powders that appear to give best results at +/- 100% load density. Then work from there. If accuracy is the primary goal with 50 to 100 fps indifference, then, of course, we play with cases, primers and COL in addition to select powders, etc. In 40+ years of handloading experience with many common cartridges, including magnums, I’ve generally found that compressed loads of some powders that might be considered a mite too slow works best. I don’t like relatively slow powders for certain cartridges that are less than 100% load density and “rattle” in the case with the bullet seated. If for some reason you don’t like that idea then choose a slightly faster powder that reaches MAP earlier and will also produce less psi at the muzzle. This will, however, generate reduced MV and recoil.

For example: the “old” but excellent (circa 1905) 9.3 x 62 Mauser can greatly profit (in a new rifle) from powders that historically have been considered too slow in burn rate. I tried the typical numbers, like RL-15 and H414, but always came up “short” of what I thought the cartridge should be capable of in a mint rifle. And, much like the .30-06 that’s limited by SAAMI to 60,000 psi (50,000 cup), while there’s no reason in the whole-wide-world that it should NOT be loaded to the same PSI as its decendant, the .270 Win, so also the SAAMI equivalent of CIP for the 9.3 x 62 is about 58,000 psi, which is a relatively mild load by today’s standards — particularly in a newly manufactured rifle such as a Ruger, CZ or Tikka. I’ve already expounded on how I load my Tikka, but for those who have yet to become aware of that I’ll do it one more time for their benefit – I’m hopeful!

But the two powders mentioned (RL-15 and H414) looked promising but missed expectations based on considerable experience with a .35 Whelen and a .350 Rem Mag. So I “suffered in silence” until a friend suggested a powder new to the scene that was being used with great success in some non-magnum traditional cartridges such as the .30-06. He got my attention and I was able to find a 1 lb can of this new and unfamiliar powder that was not yet mentioned in any common handloader’s manual. That power was RL-17, which was claimed by the producers to have a burn rate similar to IMR4350, BUT producing higher velocity, clean burning AND better temperature stability! AND also higher energy due to being a double-base powder, though still of a “log” type which meant compression was doable if wanted or needed to obtain optimum performance without fearing a spike of excessive pressure.

All of that appeared to be just what I was looking for, maybe… Yet when I tried my first “batch” of 286gr Hornadys, starting at 65 grains of RL-17 and ending at 67 grains, I was a bit more than disappointed because 67 grains matched 60 grains of RL-15 in both MV and accuracy but with greater recoil! 60 grains of Rl-15 behind the 286gr Hornady gave three in .80″ at +1.25″ @ 100 yards. MV was 2460 fps, and that was absolute max on Dec. 13, 2011 with temps at 0* C. (During warmer climes that load “fell apart”!) So back to the drawing board! I informed my friend of the disappointing results from what I then considered a “max” load from RL-17. He urged me to go on with more RL-17.

I did with these results on March 12, 2012:

Rifle: Tikka T3 Lite/22.44″ barrel

Bullet: 286gr Nosler Partition

Powder: RL-17

Hornady cases

WLRM primers

3.36″ COL

MVs instrumental @ 15′

64 grs = 2432 fps

65 grs = 2473 fps

66 grs = 2506 fps

67 grs = 2527 fps (average of 2)

68 grs = 2581 fps (average of 2)

*For correction to muzzle add 9 fps.

While there was a dramatic increase in recoil from the “lite” rifle, compared to MVs in the 2400’s using RL-15, never were there ANY signs of excessive pressure! That became my “bear load” for 2012, though I never shot a bear that year.

In the spring of 2013, I increased RL-17 to 70 grains, after having tried 69 and 69.5, and that became “the sweet spot” with an average MV of about 2620 fps @ around 12*C/52*F. As ambient conditions grew warmer over the summer to 20*C+/70*F+, MV increased by around 10 – 12 fps at 2631 fps average (corrected to MV). Since June/2013 that has been my main hunting load until last fall (November, 2020) when it was reduced again to 68 grains at about 2585 fps. That was to reduce recoil as well as knowing I’d not be going to “the Far North” for moose again. I have other loads for the rifle but all use RL-17 except the lightest, a 232 Oryx at about 2450 fps that uses a relatively light dose of RL-15 (62 grains). The others are 286gr Hornadys (68 grains RL-17 @ about 2600 fps), the 250gr AccuBond (70 grains RL-17 @ 2700 fps+), and the 320gr Woodleigh (64 to 66 grains RL-17 @ 2420 to 2460 fps). All are safe and accurate.

The Tikka T3 Lite is somewhat “light” for the recoil of those loads (except the 232gr) so I add extra ammo in a cartridge holder on the stock which increases overall weight to just over 8 lbs. Recoil is still in the 40+ range, which isn’t bad for offhand shooting but at a bench it isn’t pleasant either! I may yet have some weight added to the stock.

The above is an example of how I progressed from a “book load” to an “advanced load” not even yet published in typical handloading manuals. In fact, I’ve yet to see RL-17 listed as a suitable powder for the 9.3 x 62! And to answer the main question of many who have adopted a 9.3 x 62 in recent times: Yes, those loads are ALL sub-MOA when I do my part. The 250 AccuBond is the “star” of that challenge at 0.44″ for three @ 100 yards on a few occasions when I was having a good day! However, I believe the best overall choice as a BG hunting load is the 286 Partition at 2631 fps/4395 ft-lbs at the muzzle that is still making about 2100 ft-lbs at 500 yards. That was my intended load for the “Far North” should I ever decide to go for a bull moose again. If Nosler’s BC (.482) for that bullet is about correct it should still be hitting at over 1800 fps at 500 yards. That should be plenty for expansion and penetration. It has the same SD (.305) as a 300gr/.375-caliber Partition but a much better BC, meaning it will hit at 500 yards at around the same velocity as the 300gr/.375 Partition will hit at 400 yards when started at the same MV.

< The weight of the Tikka T3 Lite with scope and four cartridges is 7 lbs and 11 ounces (7.7 lbs.)

< This is a typical instrumental velocity for the 286gr Nosler Partition. Add 9 fps for correction to MV.

So, let’s dissect the above procedure that finally produced a very acceptable ADVANCED HANDLOAD for my 9.3 x 62.

Step 1: a newly manufactured rifle never previously used.

This process is NOT recommended for 9.3 x 62 Mausers manufactured sometime in the early 1900’s. While those were excellent in design and quality, yet there is no certainty as to their previous use and their current strength. While the CIP standard MAP is about 58,000 psi that dates from 1905, I don’t know the rationale for that. Likely it was the brass cases of the era, but could other matters such as metallurgy have been a factor as well?

Whatever the case, newly manufactured bolt rifles by CZ, Ruger and Sako (Tikka), plus some others, are as strong as any modern bolt-action repeater, including the Ruger #1 in the same chambering. In such a situation, it is today’s brass cases that determine ultimate safe, maximum psi. In addition we look for case brands that can withstand 60,000 to 65,000 psi wiithout failure within five to ten firings. Brass for the 9.3 x 62 has traditionally been made by several European companies in different countries, so, if possible tests should be performed for the safety of each if PSI is to exceed 60,000. In my situation, only new Hornady cases have been used with complete satisfaction, whatever their source might be. From certain correspondents, I’ve learned that not all brands will: a) handle the pressure I use or, b) hold the amount of RL-17 that I use without undue compression. Still, I can’t speak as to their methods and procedures. In new Hornady cases, once fired, load density for 70 grains of RL-17 at a max COL of 3.37″ (max for reliable function from the clip magazine) is 108% – 109% which is certainly acceptable for today’s safe handloads in using a powder that is deemed by some to be on the “too-slow” side of matters.

Step 2: Thinking outside the box:

In practice that means looking for additional information that’s not found in typical reloading manuals. But, also, it means comparing manual with manual – several of them. There will be differences, and at times somewhat extreme! As you analyse this, ask yourself “why?” The answers to “why?” can often be obvious: different rifles, different barrel lengths, different barrels made to certain specs by several companies for testing purposes. And lots of powder! Ambient conditions; who did the tests? What were the standards? For some powder companies, they will test bullets from various sources; for bullet manufacturers they test their own in saying “don’t use these loads for other companies bullets”! And so on.

The point is simple: think, think, think for yourself! Then do some tests of your own! I’ve found some of Nosler’s tests spot on for certain cartridges firing their bullets, whereas for others it’s like they were on another planet! Or maybe I was!

Step 3: Work up loads at the top end in 1/2 grain increments for magnums and some other big-game rifles.

And DON’T push certain relatively “fast burning” propellants in larger cases beyond a certain point!

In comparing AA1680 with H4198 in the Barnes #4, for their 400gr Original FT for a Ruger #1 in .45-70, it appeared they were nearly identical in results. I have a lot of experience with H4198 (NOT IMR 4198 – they are not the same!) in both .45-70s and .458 Win Mags, but in looking for the BEST suitable powder for the 300gr TSX in my Ruger #1 in .458, I though “Just maybe AA1680 might be a better choice than H4198 — that is more “bulky” being a stick powder while 1680 is a ball powder — H4198 is just a tad too slow for the 300 TSX without heavy compression, so a similar ball powder could be used without compression…. was my thinking. So I started relatively “low” on June 11/2019 with 83 grains of 1680 under the 300gr TSX. Only one load of the 300 TSX over 1680 was made and fired. It recorded 2836 fps at 15′ from the muzzle. One load can tell you more than you might think! On the same day I also fired three 500gr Speers, a 450gr AF, a 480 DGX, a 450 TSX, a 405 Rem and a 400 X-Bullet. These were all distinct loads, and so was the 300 TSX load. I’d only owned that rifle for a month and wanted to “get a feel” for it.

On July 2, 2019, I loaded and fired three 300gr TSX’s over 84 grains of AA1680. All else was the same including a COL of 3.327″ crimped into the bottom cannelure. They made an average of 2846 + 20 for correction to MV. On that same day I also fired two 300 TSX’s over 84.5 grains of 1680 and two more over 85 grains of 1680 with the following results:

84.5 = 2906 fps corrected to MV

85.0 = 2926 fps corrected to MV.

Those loads were NOT compressed and showed no evidence of being excessive in pressure.

Two weeks later I shot three more of the 84.5 grain load with “normal” results. Then one each of 85.5 grains and 86 grains which had not previously been tried:

85.5 grains = 2954 fps corrected to MV. (1/2 grain more gave a normal increase of 18 fps over the 85 grain load)

86.0 grains = 3100 fps corrected to MV. That was a jump of 146 fps using 1/2 grain more of AA1680 ! And that load was making 6400 ft-lbs at the muzzle!

I’ve not used AA1680 in my Ruger #1 in .458 since! But I have returned to H4198 and either 75 grains or 82.5 grains give the results I want with the 300gr TSX: 2775 fps and 2980 fps corrected to MV. Both loads shoot sub-MOA without any hints of excursions into the stratus sphere!

The amazing thing about that 3100 fps load is that there were NO hints of excessive pressure on the brass! But ANY load that “jumps” nearly 150 fps from an increase of 1/2 grain is absolutely NOT to be trusted, and so by implication that powder is suspect in that application.

The best powders will give a relatively consistent increase in MV and psi with 1/2 to 1 grain increase in load development.

< I switched back to H4198 for the 300gr TSX, and 82.5 grains gave 2958, 2961 and 2959. Add 20 fps for correction to MV with Chrony at 15′ from muzzle. BC of that bullet is .234, so average corrected MV = 2979 fps/5911 ft-lbs. Recoil from the Ruger #1 with ports @ 10.3 lbs = 45 ft-lbs

I measure the case heads of every new load after the initial firing. This was recommended in Speer’s manuals for a long time. But a micrometer in 1/10000’s” is essential, not a caliper. From the same load for the 350gr Speer and 350gr Hornady in my .458 Win Mag, at the same approximate MV, the Speer shows somewhat less stress on the brass than the Hornady. So, the manuals are correct: we can’t just assume, that if all else is the same, a change in bullet type or brand, though being of the same weight, will result in equal PSI even though MV says pressure must be equal! You know the basic formula: BW x PSI = MV… NOT necessarily so! There are too many variables, and the handloader being the main variable!

I’ve given results from a couple of my rifles, but NEVER assume that your results will be the same. We must ALWAYS work up loads in 1/2 to 1 grain increments of propellant while keeping all else uniform. Then, without any hint of hesitantcy, I strongly recommend: WATCH FOR and LISTEN TO THE MESSAGES the BRASS and RIFLE are clearly sending us about the safeness of the load — whether that be 50,000 or 70,000 PSI !

And if ‘accuracy” is the watch word, then you can always load a .300 magnum “down to” a .30-30 if that’s the “main thing”! But if I wanted .30-30 ballistics, I’d buy a .30-30 and not a .300 magnum!

And I have to disclaim responsibility for your actions! Of course, you already know that…

Til the next…

BOB MITCHELL

Advanced Handloading of Rifle Cartridges – P1

Twenty-four years ago I published my very first handloading journal on the .45-70. With time and more experience this was the title of that manual: SUPREME HANDLOADS for the .45-70 Ruger No.1, 1895 Marlins, New England Firearms and the Ruger No.1 IMP (Improved) — for the Advanced Handloader

The writing of that manual evolved over time and a lot of experience. Not only did the writing and editing involve a period of three to four years, but I “hand made” those manuals. So production was limited to those who wanted it, and finally, I couldn’t keep up with requests so ceased publishing it. But one ballistician (who will not be named) commented: “Don’t they all think they’re “advanced”? That being ALL who purchase one of their manuals or others. My answer is still “NO!” to that comment. Reloading or handloading manuals are written for two classes of handloaders: beginners and “regular”. By that is meant that most handloaders just want data from manuals that they can try and use right away.

All manuals discourage any tinkering with “their loads” above and beyond “max loads”, but with this caveat: “Don’t exceed listed maximum loads. If high pressure is experienced decrease loads by at least two grains”. Of course, this strongly implies that while they “say” it’s not possible to discern “too high PSI” from mere “signs”, yet we are told that if we detect PSI that’s “too high” from their suggested “loads”, we should then reduce them by 2 grains! Confusing?

I wrote my .47-70 manual for “advanced handloaders” because they exist and want more details and information than could ever be published in “generic manuals”. That’s why Internet forums exist that potentially answer questions from raw beginners to those with forty or more years experience. It SHOULD be obvious that the one with 40 or more years experience is “advanced” over the one just starting out!

I never wrote my manuals on the .45-70 and .458 Win Mag for those “just starting out”! There were several editions on the .45-70 and at least three on the .458 Winchester Magnum, with progressively “advanced” material in each edition.

To become an advanced handloader involves time plus experience with multiple cartridges and rifles. But I would discourage owning a dozen or more rifles, all in distinct cartridges, while hoping to learn more than the basics for all of them in a relatively short time — like five or six years. It has taken me over twenty years to learn more than the basics in handloading several distinct .45-70s. And all of it involved “advanced handloading” techniques, plus serious dedication to such an undertaking. While the .458 Winchester Magnum has had a “slower” beginning, yet the same attitude and procedures have been applied — and I’m still learning from that experience – as well as what was learned from the .45-70s being relevant to the great .458 Win Mag.

< Testing some handloads at the range for my CZ 550 in .458 Winchester Magnum.

But those are not the only two that have been successfully employed in hunting activities using handloads advanced beyond what many would consider as “normal” or “regular”. For example: Where would you find a factory load, or loads, that exceed 4200 ft-lbs muzzle KE from a 9.3 x 62 Mauser? Or 4000 ft-lbs KE at the muzzle of a 24″, .300 Win Mag? Or over 4000 ft-lbs from a 250gr in a 22″, .350 Rem Mag? Etc. You don’t learn that in a day, week or month! And all were safe, reliable, accurate loads. How about 6018 ft-lbs from a 350gr TSX at the muzzle of a 24″, .458 Win Mag?

NOW, let’s talk about Advanced Handloading of Your Own Ammo.

The point of the above is NOT to only emphasise the potential for better ballistics than what’s considered “normal”, but to show potential for experimentation and creativity. “Regular” manuals would keep us bound to their contents, and any excursions beyond that is anathema and considered NOT advanced but “extreme”!

If somebody’s venture into handloading their own is limited to a couple of rifles over two or three years, then they might also think this piece is extreme. Yet, I’m still on a learning curve for the .458 Win Mag that started for my first twenty-eight years ago in 1993. Now, I’m learning the benefits of cast bullets at around 1427 fps/2102 ft-lbs KE! Sooo… I may yet reduce that load down to around 1300 fps – we’ll see, as I’ve yet to test the current load for accuracy. (That was to reveal some of the necessary attitude in becoming an “advanced” handloader – we never have all of the answers but we are always on a learning curve.)

Some “experienced” handloaders may never become “advanced”! Why? Because they’ve become content with “average” or “normal”, whatever those adjectives imply. “Advanced”, on the other hand, implies “outside the box”, experimentation, trials for what’s not just “better”, but BEST! “Best for what?”, you might ask. Did you know you don’t NEED a .458 Lott for something “better” on Asian buffalo in Aussie Land? A correspondent successfully used his .458 Win Mag on over 100 culls of Australian buffalo. Then he wanted to return for a second try, but this time he had his .458 Win “rechambered to a .458 Lott thinking it to be better! What he didn’t know (though he’s evidently a very accomplished hunter) is that rechambering to the Lott doesn’t necessarily improve anything. In fact, it might hinder favourable results depending on how both the WIN and the LOTT are handloaded. He was unaware that ADVANCED handloads for the great .458 Winchester Magnum could potentially better the Lott by several hundred ft-lbs at the muzzle.

By that I’m NOT suggesting that “better” ballistics than the Lott is needed for anything, but some, like the “correspondent” (who was unaware of what he had in his M70 when a .458 Winchester Magnum, even though already a handloader) believe that improvement is available, based on professional promotions of a “new and better” cartridge than the “old”, when in truth it’s mostly for increased business for the promoters and manufactures! So, what has been created in recent years that’s really an improvement over what we had available a lifetime ago?

In handloads, the .300 Win Mag is still “better than” — whatever that may mean to some — the .300 WSM when each is handloaded to the same PSI in equal length barrels. OH, but… you save 1/4″ in action length!?

And the 6.5 Creedmoor? How much “better” than the famed 6.5 x 55 Swede when each is loaded to the same PSI in equal length barrels? I’ve owned two 6.5 x 55 Swedes and made handloads for each, and will not own a 6.5 Creedmoor just because it’s “hot” right now!

However, there are improvements in bullets and powders over the past few years that potentially increase the performance of ALL cartridges, old and new! And, it’s true, the “new” are factory loaded with better components than the “old”, BUT the “old” can be HANDLOADED with those same new and better components, improving results over what they were in days gone by, assuming they are loaded to the same PSI as the “new”!

And that’s a huge assumption when most “new” cartridges are already loaded “hot” from the factories to “prove” their superiority over the “old”. The .458 Win Mag vs the Lott is a prime example of that. The .458 Win is held to 60,000 psi whereas the Lott is 62,500 psi! That’s not logical as you could have your .458 Win rechambered to the Lott (as a WIN it’s limited by SAAMI to 60,000, but as soon as the same rifle is rechambered to a LOTT, voila, a miracle happens… it can now be loaded to SAAMI 62,500 psi?). But that’s for promotion and sales of the Lott over the .458 Win. In truth, the LOTT has no advantage over the WIN when each is handloaded to 62, 500 psi! In actual fact, the WIN wins!

< In this comparison of the .458 Win Mag on the right and the Lott on the left, there is virtually no distinction between the two, as each has a 3.6″ COL leaving the same volume in each for propellant. But the .458 still has a longer “freebore” or leade, reducing psi similar to Weatherby concepts.

An apt illustration of how old laws impede progress, and are being flaunted in our time, is Ontario’s speed laws! Most super highways, like the 401 (16 lanes in places) that passes through Toronto going east or west, has a posted limit of 100 Km/h (62 mph), when all officials know that at certain times and conditions, 100 Km/h is impossible… at others it’s ludicrous! When I leave our major two-lane highways (80 Km/h limit) and merge with the 401, I have to pick up speed to at least 120 Km/h or I’ll be slowing traffic behind me! A few days ago I had a doctor’s appointment in the GTA and had to take the 401 if I wanted to make it on time. Often traffic in the center and passing lanes were hitting 130 to 140 Km/h! A main 4-lane highway that merges with the 401 is posted at 90 Km/h, and during “rush hour” in the a.m. I was doing 120 in the “fast lane” of two. I was “caught” in a “train” of about 25 cars and trucks when we passed by a parked police cruiser – and he never ventured! With today’s super highways in excellent condition, and the number of new vehicles that can easily exceed 200 Km/h, 120 to 140 seems the “new normal” while 100 Km/h is still being posted!

… and that simply to remind us that some “old rules” from SAAMI need adjustment to current realities!

Newly manufactured bolt-action repeating rifles can easily handle more than 70,000 psi… but even then it’s the brass cases that show signs of being over-stressed! The same is true for some single-shot rifles, such as a Ruger No.1.

The ADVANCED handloader knows that already and, like myself, will choose the .458 Win Mag over the Lott when either is available in the same rifle, as in my CZ550. It was through handloading that rifle that I learned the truth about the .458 WIN vs the .458 Lott! I could seat the 450gr Barnes X-Bullet to 3.78″ in the CZ550 chambered in .458 WIN, whereas in the same rifle chambered for the .458 Lott, I’d be limited to 3.6″. At 3.78″ I had more room for powder plus more “freebore” allowing greater MV at the same PSI or lower PSI at the same MV. (Go to 24hr campfire on “The great .458 Winchester Magnum” for more details where Dr Ron Berry, “Riflecrank”, takes us on a long journey down a trail of truth in favor of the .458 WIn vs the .458 Lott. Not only that but there are detailed photos with descriptions, plus information and loads you’ll NEVER find in any other publication!) The SAAMI throat of the .458 WIN is much longer than the Lott (SAAMI) and for the handloader allows seating of longer/heavier bullets that can easily equal the Lott or surpass it in long magnum-type actions or the single-shot Ruger.

< These four are all loaded with the same bullet – the 450gr Barnes X-Bullet. The one on the far left was loaded at 3.78″ COL for my .458 Winchester Magnum in the CZ 550 (the same is now loaded for my current Ruger #1 in .458 WIN with the 450gr TSX). Next to it on its right is the .458 Lott at 3.6″ COL, followed by another .458 Win loaded to 3.6″ (same as the Lott) and, finally, a .458 Win load at “normal” handloading specs for shorter bolt actions.

The above is simply to demonstrate what “advanced handloaders” already know.

So, if one wants to become an “advanced handloader”, start with one rifle and handload it. That is, explore all possibilities, but NOT in dedicated varmint cartridges. There is only so much to learn and do with one. Choose a big-game rifle and explore its full potential. Did you know that a new .30-06 can simulate some 300 magnum factory loads if best bullets and powders are used from a 26″ barrel at 64,000 psi – the usual PSI (SAAMI) recommended for .300 mags? That’s the kind of thing I’m talking about – like the “correspondent” that didn’t know how to get the best from his .458, so he, unnecessarily, had it rechambered!

< Here is the long action of the CZ 550 loaded with the 450gr X-Bullet at 3.78″. The same rifle was available at the same shop in .458 Lott… I chose the .458 WIN.

If you are an advanced handloader, you already know that the brass will tell the truth (the brass cases are the weakest link – NOT the rifle!) Or that 63,000 psi isn’t too “hot” for a Ruger No.1 in .45-70 (according to a ballistics engineer)? Or that 58,000 psi isn’t the only “safe” max for the 9.3 x 62 Mauser? I’ve set a limit to 64,000 psi (based on Quick Load) for my 9.3 x 62, as the exact same rifle has been chambered in .338 Win Mag by TIKKA, and the brass is just as strong as .338 brass!

New .45-70 cases have been lab tested to 70,000 psi without failure! I used the same nickle-plated Remington brass in my Ruger No.1 in .45-70 LT until the necks became “case hardened” and tiny cracks started to appear at the mouth of the cases. Often, those cases were used 10 times with never a hint of head expansion… at what psi? Well, 2200 fps from Hornady 500s were common from the 22″ barrel!

And so on…. An advanced handloader knows stuff that some ballisticians don’t yet know, or won’t confess knowing, or NOT to a “regular guy”! They must stick to company policy (even if it’s outdated), and company policy that’s mandated — not necessarily on “advanced” learning, but FEAR of litigation! And perhaps…. that makes some “business sense” as far too many are looking for an opportunity to sue somebody!

BUT! If you’re lucky, you may get a chance to talk with a “real” ballistics engineer who knows “stuff” that he’ll not share with a “regular guy”, but will with somebody who shows evidence that he’s a true advanced handloader! In truth, some advanced handloaders get jobs as “ballistic engineers”.

Til the next….

Shalom

BOB MITCHELL

Unexpected Encounters with Dangerous Predators – P3

If we live and hunt where any of the Dangerous Six of North America are in residence, what should be our attitude and how should we prepare ourselves?

I’ve shared both research and personal experience of having lived and hunted in both provinces of New Brunswick and Ontario. And I’ve also lived and hunted in both Nova Scotia and Quebec. That pretty much covers Eastern Canada, which is not totally distinct from the Northeast of the USA in topography and ecosystems.

According to The Encyclopedia Britannica, the black-phase cougar migrated from Florida up through the Appalachians, and that was its last recorded location. This mountain chain goes on through the New England States and into Maine and the top half of New Brunswick. That’s were I saw, and also my oldest son about a decade later, a black-phase cougar! The years were 1975 and 1985. Then, according to the witness of a former friend and hunting guide in the Nashwaak River Valley of New Brunswick, he was aware of so-called “devil cats” in the area according to the testimony of local rural residents.

< This is a fair representation of what I saw — and that close. I made the same mistake of calling it a “black panther” until the late Finn AAgaard corrected me in correspondence with him. I had used an image of a big black cat on my letterhead, and he enquired about it. In return I wrote about my experience on the Nashwaak River of N.B., and called it a “black panther”. He told me that it was not a “black panther” but a black cougar. I then checked matters in The Encyclopedia Britannica, and he was correct — as usual! I believe this photo was taken in Arkansas.

So, the six dangerous predators of N.A. that I’m aware of, and/or have had some contact with, are: cougar (mountain lion), wolves, coyotes, bobcats, bear and feral hogs. Domestic dogs that have gone wild could also be added to that list making a total of seven. Still, there are those who contend that domestic dog DNA has been found in some of the eastern coyotes or “brush wolves”, so who knows the whole truth?

Whatever the case, in my various hunting adventures, or simply scouting out an area, I’ve come to be wary of various potential scenarios as to what I might encounter, especially when conducting such activities solo.

Much has already been written and verbally stated on the matter of safety while camping, hiking or fishing alone in remote areas. So my approach to the matter is in using a clean brush — not merely repeating what has already been stated a thousand times… though, surely some repetition is unavoidable, though I’m not reading someone else’s manuscript!

FIRST: Be AWARE of your surroundings at all times! Out of place noises – loud or little. On the other hand, dead silence! There are sounds to be expected while woods walking: light wind in the trees, the rustling of leaves, squirrel chatter… SQUIRREL CHATTER! Why? Squirrels give away your presence… or maybe the presence of a bear! Yes, they do! The faint cry of an animal in distress! Do you recognise a bear cub’s cry for it’s momma? The sound of running water.. note that, it might be important for quenching thirst, or simply as a location to be added to your GPS.

The point is: just be aware of your surroundings! And, even more importantly (if possible) be aware of yourself. How you’re feeling physically and your mental state. How far have you gone? How far back? Do you have enough daylight? Enough drink and food? A compass, GPS, flashlight, knife… and a firearm?

SECOND: Be PREPARED! Some of that is in the above paragraph, but what if? If no one knows where you’ve gone how can they find you if you don’t return as planned? Medications? Basic first aid kit? Overnight stay in the woods? Rain wear? Boots or shoes? PLAN AHEAD! Don’t just assume that everything will be “just fine”!

THIRD: Know YOUR LIMITS! Be honest with yourself and your experience thus far! Sure, you could push it a bit – but be wise in your estimation of the situation vs. your abilities.

FOURTH: Know YOUR FIREARM! By practice and use. A .22LR revolver might be OK for smaller critters, but what about a bobcat, mountain lion or bear?

The other potentially dangerous predators on our list include:

The DOMESTIC DOG THAT’S GONE WILD!

They aren’t usually in packs but many hunters and others have encountered them in the wild! Many “pet” dogs have been bred as hunting dogs for birds, small game and even larger game as bears, elk and other antlered species. Some get lost in a remote area, and in loving the chase fail to return to their owners or operators. Several just “leave home” for the excitement of a wild life! Others are “dropped off” in a remote wildness area since they’ve become a burden or nuisance to the owner! And there are likely other reasons why certain canines turn “wild”.

One of my bear hunting partners and I were Norm’s clients for a spring bear hunt. After giving us “the scoop” for the day, Norm departed for the Pearson International Airport in Toronto to pick up his daughter who would be involved in a wedding. He would be gone for the day and we were on our own! He assigned two distinct locations, and it was up to us to decide where each of us would go. But since I was travelling with my friend in his pickup, he’d have to drop me off at “my” site before returning to his. In the process we heard the howling of a hound dog. We remained in place until this hound showed up with a radio collar! It then seemed to adopt us for the day, so my partner locked it in the back of his pickup until our hunt for the day was over. We knew it was a lost dog, but who owned it and how did it get lost in a remote wilderness? Long story short, it got returned to it’s owner who lived in Whitby, a suburb of Toronto. It was “rented out” for a hunt and the “renters” failed to retrieve it for unknown reasons. Thankfully, the phone number of the owner was on the collar. But the point is: actually many domestic dogs get lost for one reason or another and turn wild for survival in wilderness areas.

How do we recognise them and what do we do? In the case of that hound, it was looking for human help, but would it have survived on its own through the months ahead, especially the winter months? Not likely with its short legs in 2 to 3 feet of snow and – 20*F. So, most domestic dogs that actually turn wild for survival may resemble a wolf! Yet, usually they don’t look like a mature healthy wolf. There’s something about them that makes you feel uneasy! They might be following you or looking at you as though you could become their prey! That’s NOT a lone wolf that’s unhealthy and famished but a dog gone wild! Don’t try to save it! Put it out of it’s misery as efficiently as possible! And some become predators of domestic animals such as sheep. Not all are the result of becoming lost in a remote wilderness. Some from “good” suburban homes are “dumped” into farm country in the hopes of them being “adopted” on some farm. Instead, farm owners simply see them as stray dogs that may cause problems, so the rejected dog turns into a predatory canine! Often they do get shot by farm hands as a predatory creature. I knew one cattle rancher nearby whose tractor driver always kept a firearm in the cab with him.

But they could become a danger to those who are unprepared to recognise them for what they are and deal wisely but decisively with the situation.

BOBCATS:

Bobcats and lynx are of the same species. Bobcats tend to be the larger of the two. They are found in many parts of the world and throughout North America. I’ve been very close to one and another was unexpected in location and size. A big mature bobcat is fully capable of bringing down some whitetailed deer, though usually they feed on lesser prey. They are muscular and agile with keen senses. Rarely will you see them in daylight and up close.

But I did on two occasions. The first: I was deer hunting on the back of a farm with a woodlot, being invited by the owner who was a deacon in our main church in New Brunswick, and on in years. I was barely in my twenties, and his son was the main operator of the farm and older than I. He directed me where to hunt in the bush of their property. I headed out, early morning, over a very old bush trail. That took me over a knoll, and at the peak I met my first bobcat coming my way. In fact, we both were startled! It was a close encounter of the first order – about fifteen feet between us! How did I calculate that? I didn’t have time to, but it was about the length of a dorey… what’s that? Dories were made famous in the Atlantic Ocean when sailing vessels used them as weather-worthy small fishing boats for hand-lining cod, etc. My dad always had a couple for seigning nets and handlines, etc. They were relatively large row boats, which, as young men we borrowed to cross over a harbour to court our girlfriends! They were fifteen to sixteen feet in length but unsinkable! That’s how I knew that bobcat was about fifteen feet from me when we met! I stopped in my tracks, though I had a Brit .303 in my hands, and that feline took off like… well, a scalded cat! It wasn’t a big one but there were no doubts as to its genes!

< a decent image borrowed from the net.

The second occasion was in the same general area, but separated by twenty miles and a few years. There was a lumber mill on the Nashwaak River, near Stanley, owned and operated by wealthy members of, again, our main church. I was driving by (with my wife) the main entrance to the mill and saw, standing still, a huge bobcat! It didn’t move as I passed within a few yards of it. I could not have believed a bobcat could be that big had I not seen it — with my wife – first hand! I’m glad I didn’t meet that one at fifteen feet at the back of the farm! Maybe it would have skeedadelled as well, but I doubt it — that cat never moved when I passed within 20 yards of it! It looked well fed — likely on the best deer of the area! And being that close to the mill in operation with men “milling” around, and traffic passing by, I’ve no doubt it was indeed quite fearless!

There’s something that urban dwellers, and even suburban types, don’t understand about rural Canadians: Rural Canadians dwell on a land mass that’s eight to ten times that of city and suburban dwellers. Yet, the city types have more clout – through politicians – than rural people, many of whom are as well educated (they have to be for successful entreprenureship in whatever their occupations) and very knowledgeable of their ecosystems — more so than even the so-called “professionals” because they experience on a daily basis what’s going on there in real time. New Brunswick, in sharp contrast to Ontario, for example, has about 1/2 its total population living in rural New Brunswick. Ontario has about 85% of its total population living in urban areas! How much do they really know about the rest of Ontario that’s 10 times larger? Over eleven million Ontarians basically live just north of the American border that stretches for 1678 miles (nearly 2700 kilometres). That’s a very thin slice along the southern border of Ontario, which reaches all the way up to James Bay in the north!

The long and short of it is this: I’ll trust the word of a rural New Brunswicker, in his/her experience of wildlife over that official in government office at Fredericton, the capital. The same applies here in Ontario. Our Provincial Capital is in Toronto, and the Federal Capital is in Ottawa. And I (we) have lived in rural Canada as well as it’s big cities. And I have known some key people who have worked for the Ontario Government in wildlife management, so that all I think and say isn’t totally based on my personal experience alone.

FERAL HOGS:

I don’t profess real hands-on experience other than what I’ve read and seen in videos. Though I did see six or eight on a rural farm about 45 minutes drive north of here. That was my first sighting several months ago, and I did see them for a second time on the same farm about a week later. Since then, I’ve not sighted them again though I pass by that property on a fairly regular basis. They were coal black and the pic I’ve previously published was representative of what I saw, though not of the group itself.

It has been “officially” recognised that “wild hogs” are now Ontario residents! Though hunting them was initially discouraged (“It might send them into hiding”) it seems the MNRF has recognised the error of that logic and now simply ask for reports of sightings.

They are not only a nuisance but very destructive of agriculture properties. And they are very invasive! They’ve become “wild hogs” with no respect for fences or other man made boundaries. They also can be aggressive with their sharp tusks! Some attain 400 + lbs, so they are potentially dangerous in any encounter.

Since I’m a “bear hunter”, and some of these critters are of the approximate size — and perhaps disposition — I’ll “be loaded for bear” just in case I meet up with one (or more) as I did with that bobcat just over the knoll!

My motto: “Always be prepared for what could happen – not for what should happen!” If you are hunting – and expecting a 25 – 30 lb coyote, be prepared for a 100 lb wolf! Don’t assume that you know all the details of your future — before it happens… but just in case, be prepared by putting your hope in God who alone knows the future because He controls it! (The apostle Paul’s letter to the church at Rome, ch. 8). You don’t know that? Then read “The Good Book”, there’s a map there for your future! Some people like maps while others wet their finger to test the wind’s direction!

“A philosopher is like a blind man in a dark room looking for a black cat”! (I picked that up somewhere)

Human philosophies are like droplets of rain on an umbrella in a wind storm looking for a consistent reality. (This one is original)

And then, there are:

CAPTIVE WOLVES THAT HAVE ESCAPED OR BEEN RELEASED:

The penning of wolves has been a practice in Ontario for several years, at least until a woman who tended them at one location was attacked and killed. I don’t know the current status, but several years ago there was a resident who built a pen for wild wolves in one of my prime hunting areas in Haliburton Highlands. I saw the pen several times when I passed by on one of the dirt sideroads from the main paved highway that went north from Gooderham to Hwy# 118 going east out of the town of Haliburton.

That stretch of highway from Gooderham to Haliburton has several dirt sideroads on both the east and west sides, and much of it is Crown Land with several lakes and wilderness. That’s where most of my hunting activities have taken place over the past three plus decades. It is beautiful country with high hills, valleys, ravines, streams and lakes. It is also cottage country around many of the lakes. Both hunting and fishing are active recreational pursuits in season. Then, tourism is encouraged and participated in during all four seasons, especially when the fall colours are in full display from late September to near the end of October. Just a drive through the area gives fresh life to the soul. I’ve spent many enjoyable motorcycle trips in that whole area, and there is wildlife galore, including wolves.

On one trip in late March for wolf hunting, I pulled into a sideroad that was just beginning to thaw. It had been snow covered with the formation of ice underneath due to snow melting and freezing several times over late winter and early spring. This particular sideroad was not maintained during winter months as there were no four-season residences on the lake at which it ended. But I could drive in over the slush and ice for a hundred yards or so. At that point the road widened so that during other seasons vehicles could pull off to the side for parking. Just beyond that point there was a woods trail on the left, the beginning of which had a clearing large enough for parking a few vehicles. We often used it during hunting seasons for deer and bear. Opposite that, on the other side of the road was an old clear-cut that went up over a ridge, then descended sharply into a ravine below. On top was one of our prime bear bait setups.

< This was the location of that “prime bear bait setup” I was seated behind the blind, but was deer hunting. This is just above where I encountered the two wolves.

I knew this area well and since March is mating period for wolves, I planned on some calling. But just after turning off the main highway to this sideroad, in my driver’s side mirror I picked up the presence of two animals that clearly looked like wolves to me. I slowed nearly to a stop and pulled as far as possible into the widened area of the road. The two creatures cautiously followed and then stood still at about thirty yards behind my parked van. By then I was quite certain they were wolves (too large for coyote), but why were they seemingly following me? My Ruger 96/44 was in the seat behind me, separated from the clip with ammo. I continued to wait them out as I didn’t want to spook them – or be attacked by them before I had access to my loaded rifle. They then circled my vehicle at a distance. Then I noticed further details: one was larger than the other, and a distinction in colour and behaviour was obvious. The larger one ( perhaps 80 – 90 lbs) was very wolf-like in appearance and behaviour. It stood at about 35 yards from my vehicle while the other was smaller, and darker in colour, but approaching my side of the van, it stared up at me. I then noticed it wearing a tracking collar! Looking more closely at the larger one, that seemed in charge, I noticed it too had a tracking collar (NOT a radio collar). Ah-ha! Two wolves that had been tranquillised, or in captivity, and then either released or had escaped.

< A perfect image of the larger of the two wolves. The title for this wolf was “Timber Wolf”!

The pen I’ve already mentioned for captive wolves was only one sideroad – about 1/2 mile (.8 Km) on the same east side of the highway from where they showed up in my rear-view mirror. I’d previously seen wolf tracks crossing the highway from deep snow on the west side going into deep snow on the east side not more than 200 yards from the pen. Sooo… 1 + 1 = 2 wolves having escaped from that pen OR possibly had been released for tracking purposes. It was evident that a human presence (and a vehicle) was not totally novel to them — but they (especially the older and larger) were not ready to become friendly. After a “standoff” for what seemed like 10 minutes, they left for their – no doubt – hunting adventure down the road and around a bend out of sight. Legally, I could then have shot at least one, but decided against it for several reasons, and with them out of sight I decided to follow their tracks as far as my van permitted in the uncertain road conditions. As it turned out, they only went a couple of hundred yards before turning off the road and down into thick woods and brush country — well known to me.

I was alone in that venture, but later discussed it with friend Ken the CO. He had not policed that area so was unaware of the specifics for penned wolves there, but conceded there were laws involved. The enclosure was made of chain-linked fencing about 12 ft high without a roof. Therefore it might well have been possible for certain wolves to have escaped over the top. It was quite obvious that those two were on the prowl for prey. Were they potentially dangerous? Yes – if that had been an unwary and unfamiliar person who pulled in there for a rest stop, and got out of their vehicle thinking that these were two lost dogs that belonged to someone, he/she may have attempted to get them into their car or truck! The result of such actions could well be tragic!

Til the next… and last, when predatory bears will be discussed…

Over the past dozen years I’ve written more on this theme than any other. So, if you R – E – A – L – L – Y want to, it’s all recorded in those 400+ pages – somewhere in there…

Shalom

BOB MITCHELL

Dangerous North American Predators – P2

If you’ve not yet read P1 (June 19), I’d recommend that you do so since some statements in this piece will flow as a continuum of what has been written there. Especially is that so due to conflicting analysis of the evolutionary model for the “eastern wolf” and “eastern coyote”. Then, there are those who are adamant in their disbelief of a “black-phase cougar” in Eastern Canada – even to a good friend and fellow hunter who’s daughter saw a black one behind their barn late one night! That was explained away as “a pet that got loose”. And his hobby farm was only two miles from where I’m typing this in south-central Ontario, not New Brunswick where I saw one as well as my oldest son several years later in the mid to late 1970’s! Am I to think that all three sightings were of “a pet that got loose”, when separated by 1500 miles and thirty years? Plus occurring in remote, near wilderness type areas?

Despite multiple reported sightings of cougar in New Brunswick, the officials said they wouldn’t believe it until they had a dead carcass in their hands that they could do a DNA test on! Well, that happened but it took at least 25 years for them to “get their hands on” a dead one! After that an official statement was issued that the Province of New Brunswick did indeed have cougars in residence! Then they asked for more sightings! They didn’t accept the former sightings, but now they wanted more “proof”! And “they” became the final authority?

At the current time, we in Ontario are going through similar political hoops! Though Ontario has a land mass 14.76 times that of New Brunswick and over 18 times its population, with the largest city in Canada – and one of the largest in the world – YET we are apparently behind N.B. when it comes to our “official” understanding of the wildlife within our borders!

<New Brunswick is one of the three Maritime Provinces and one of four of the Atlantic Provinces. N.B. is bordered on the north by Quebec, on the east by the Atlantic Ocean, on the southeast by Nova Scotia and the Bay of Fundy, and on the west by Maine. 83% of the province is forested and the top half by the Appalachians. 1/3 of the population is francophone (mostly in the north and northeast) and the rest is anglophone. The French population is known as Acadian French. Both French and English are official languages – the only province with two official languages. The two major cities are Moncton and St. John, with Fredericton as its Capital on the St. John River about 100 Km north of the city of St. John on the north shores of the Bay of Fundy. Nashwaak Bridge, Mcgivney, Stanley and Napadogan were the areas of my work as a young pastor. The sighting of the black cougar was near Nashwaak Bridge on the highway from Stanley. (For a larger view, right click on image for “Open in a new tab”, then left click on it and then left click on the “New Tab”)

With that as a preamble, we’ll now proceed with a discussion on “Dangerous Predators” of North America which includes:

The Cougar (or Mountain Lion):

I know that cougar are hunted in several Western States of the USA, often using dogs. There are also cougar in Western Canada but I don’t know if they can be hunted, and I’ve not yet done the research as my current concern is the ongoing debate in Ontario and east of here.

Cougar are big cats that sometimes attain 200 lbs in big males. So any wildcat that can attain that size isn’t your typical house pet! They are carnivores! They eat meat! Sometimes big meat! So, they have to be treated as potentially dangerous! I’ve yet to read any stories to document this except one on “TV news” that described a cougar that snatched a baby or toddler from it’s crib or playpen outside the house in a somewhat remote area of the Western USA. That sounded a bit like a leopard snatching a young African child in daylight from just a few feet from the mud hut – which still happens in parts of Africa! So, in my thinking, any big wildcat has to be given due respect and caution. After all, they are wild felines, not toys or pets!

Media types, and “soft-hearted”, sophisticated North Americans (including any others of the type) think and hope that harmony can ultimately be achieved between such wild species, with big claws and sharp fangs, and the human species. “We” need more education so we “see” their sophisticated and progressive ideas about the natural world, and that creatures with big teeth and claws will gradually evolve into mild-mannered pussy cats when they feel “safe” and not threatened! REALLY! I didn’t know all that! Thanks for letting me know the truth about wildcats “true” nature, and human’s need to become more like cats when they’ve evolved a more gentle disposition with short teeth and claws!

As an aside, I happen to like “house cats”, having had my own since I was a four-year old! One of the “tricks” performed by “our” cats was to drop them out of a second-story bedroom window and watch them land on all “fours” before they reached the ground. Of course, my brother and I were not much more than toddlers at the time. See, I’ve evolved into liking them! In fact, I had my own black and white that somehow climbed the lilac tree beside our house, got onto the sun-room roof, jumped eight feet across to the roof of the bay window over which was the window to my bedroom! She’d beat on that window til I let her in where she’d snuggle under the covers to sleep with me! She faithfully did that until I left for college! So, I’m not a cat hater, but I respect the big-wild ones for what they are that can bring down whitetail deer and cattle-size game! And I’d have no intention of letting a cougar (mountain lion) or leopard eat me for lunch! The way I’d “not let them” wouldn’t be in “sweet-talkin'” them! No-sir! I’d let my rifle do the talking!

< Now that’s a BIG cat!

“Real” WOLVES?

I’ve gone into some detail over the current state of affairs in Ontario where we’ve lived for the past forty-plus years. In Lynda Rutledge’s paper modelling the evolution of the “eastern wolf” and “eastern coyote”, one is left with more questions than answers in my view. How could it ever be possible for a “pure-bred wolf” to remain “pure” from intimate contact with “wolves” of any other genre unless isolated in a zoo or some other impenetrable barrier, man made or natural? No human race or nationality remains “pure” from any other. Hitler attempted to create a pure Arian race and we all know the tragic results of that! But, nonetheless, there may be what is now known as “wolves” in Ontario. Whether they have some coyote genes or not – that might be debatable – the MNR has vacillated over time on this issue. Personally, as described in P1, I know I’ve encountered what could only be described as “real wolves”. In size, they are larger than the so-called “eastern wolf” and “eastern coyote”. Some also tend to be loners, at least those I’ve encountered. Are they “Grey Wolves”? I tend strongly to think so! In fact, the second encounter mentioned on a highway going east in which my first impression was “That’s a wolf”, still lingers. I said it was probably a hundred pounds, at least. It looked very similar to the one in our back yard, but about 25-30 lbs heavier. If I had any doubts over its genetics, that was due to its location in which denial by the “authorities” would be firm that “real wolves” would not be found that far south! Of course, I was driving my car at about 55 mph, and the animal came out of a field to my right, bounding across the highway about 30 yards in front of me, leapt over a fence and disappeared into the woods beyond. Was it an “eastern wolf”, or a traditional Grey Wolf? Being farm country, it was evidently chasing either domestic animals or white-tailed deer – and was in familiar territory – being in a very healthy and mature condition. No, it was NOT a coyote, eastern or otherwise. And it was alone, in which all things considered I sensed it to be a male.

< In an Internet search of Grey Wolf pics, this one comes very close to what I saw bounding across the highway. I detected no red or brown flecks, only white, grey and black with a dominant white coloration. And it was big! The time of year was late summer – early fall with no snow. And where is the wildlife biologist who has done DNA testing of the type of canines of which I am a witness?

And that was not an anomaly. Don’t believe it if you don’t want to, but I had a very similar experience at a different location and time (actually earlier by a few years) in travelling a major highway going south to Pearson International Airport (Toronto) at 3 a.m. to catch a flight for my brother and wife returning to New Brunswick after a visit with us. So they also were witnesses. That was late fall. In descending into a narrow valley in farm country a huge wolf (same coloration as the one above) ran across in front of us with the beams of my headlights clearly revealing it to be a wolf. And it was larger than the one described above… in fact it was huge! Lest someone thinks I’ve lost it, within a few months one of our church elders, having never heard my story, told me of nearly hitting a huge wolf an early morning of the past week on his daily trip to work at General Motors in Oshawa. And it was the identical location where I saw, without too much doubt, the same animal. In his words: “It was as high as the hood on my truck” (a pickup). So Grey Wolves (Timber Wolves) don’t just live somewhere in the remote north of our province, hunting in packs with a dominant pair. So who is researching the Grey Wolf (Timber Wolf) of SOUTHERN Ontario!? So how much do these “trained professionals” REALLY know? And what is the distinction in DNA tests between the Grey Wolf and “Eastern Wolf” – the presence of some “coyote” DNA?

And what explains the distinction in the average weight of northern Manitoba’s black bears and those of Ontario across the border? They are all blacks, but those of Manitoba are bigger on average! Yet, there is great speculation in the answers given! Then, how does one explain the very apparent distinction in size between two human families in the same small fishing community in which I grew up? One man from one family was 6′-5″ at 280 lbs, and another from a different family weighed 1/2 that at 140 lbs at 5′- 6″? Can all that be explained based on genetics? To complicate matters more, how can genetics explain the real fact of two men from the same family being distinctly disparate at 5′-4″ in one while the other was 6′-1″? Simple DNA — how far back?

Little wonder that there’s confusion and disagreement over where a particular “dog” came from, and to what “family” it’s related!

My background is said to be English and Scottish – and who, but God, really knows what else! The truth of that matter is that we ALL came from the same man and woman, created by God, who disobeyed Him and caused not the “rise” of the human race, but its “fall”! And evolution hasn’t improved that situation no matter how “educated” or “uneducated” a person might be! Just look around you, and within, and tell me I’m wrong! John Newton, the former slave trader, had it right in his famous gospel song “Amazing Grace” – Amazing grace, how sweet the sound, That saved a wretch like me; I once was lost but now am found, was blind but now I see…” What ever that “wretch” IS or might have been, I have the same blood, and, if honest, I have to say: “There go I but for the grace of God!”

What about the moose of Ontario and Quebec, and throughout all of Eastern Canada: Moose hunters of Ontario – and there are about 100,000 of them — rarely, if ever, witness a moose “harem”! I never have and I’ve seen quite a number of moose in the areas I’ve hunted! The bull I shot was all alone with one cow and her calf. Yet that is not the common “news”! All TV and other sources show bulls fighting over a “harem”, which, I concede, may occur further west in Canada and the USA. And then there’s the”Alaska-Yukon” moose and the “Canada” moose. Did they simply know where the borders were and shouldn’t co-habit with those east or south of there? Some moose in Ontario have been weighed at 1400 lbs!

“What’s the point?”, you may ask: All wild creatures have surprises for us in their adaptations to physical realities. And some don’t cater to too many of their kind in the same area. Adults of species, as well as their offspring, move out the same as humans mostly do. I didn’t want to live a married life with kids in my parents home! Neither do moose! Nor, apparently, wolves. Bears go where there’s food, and by times that might be your front lawn with an apple tree growing on it! We are surprised, if not shocked, in seeing wild animals where they’re not supposed to be according to conventional wisdom, and often their colours and sizes don’t fit what “the book” says they’re supposed to be either!

Once in travelling south of here in the Bethany Hills in the dead of winter, as I crested a hill there stood two large whitetail deer in the middle of the highway. That was not entirely strange, but it was obvious that since they were travelling together and of equal size that they should belong to the same family of deer being born the same spring. Yet there was a great disparity in their coloration: One was a pale tan and the other was a dark red-brown! I didn’t determine their sex as both were antlerless, and bucks would have shed their antlers by then anyway. They obviously wanted to get out of the deep snow of the woods they emerged from as they were just standing there on the highway. I had to swerve a bit to miss hitting them. But they both looked healthy and strong at close to 300 lbs each!

Wildcats typically are loners, and black bears don’t like the same turf as their aunts, uncles, cousins or even siblings! So, why not wolves? So, “learned” types tend to think that one “model” should fit all wild canines — you know a big family of wolves hanging together! And because they haven’t yet discovered a different “model”, it’s a “one size fits every foot” sort of thing… or as regarding the early Model “T” Ford, you could have any colour you wanted as long as it was black!

I don’t bother telling them so, but I saw cougar in New Brunswick at least 25 years before “they” – the official know-it-all’s – “discovered” them there!

(Less than an hour ago our son, Phil, phoned to wish me a happy Father’s Day – I’m writing this on Monday, June 21 – and then asked about my physical state. After saying I have improved about 75% in regard to the arthritis, and had been to the range last week for the first time this year, I shared the basic contents of this blog. He then told me that he saw what could only have been a wolf in one of his recent outdoor recreational adventures at a Conservation Area about an hour south of here. From first impressions he thought it might have been a German Shepard dog crossing the road and expected the owner to be following, then realised it was wild and likely a wolf! A mature male German Shepard is usually between 75 and 90 lbs. A big “eastern coyote” might attain 35 -50 lbs, and a so-called “Eastern Wolf” about the size of a German Shepard. A mature male Grey Wolf, on the other hand, is usually a bit taller and can attain 100 – 125 lbs. One that has not attained full maturity, out on its own, could very well be significantly less than 100 lbs. Phil was a hunter with me on the bull moose kill in the far north of Ontario, and has hunted on his own in widely different ecosystems in Eastern Canada and Africa, so he is not inexperienced in his assessment of what he witnessed. That would have been at least an hour south of here.)

So, is it just possible that the Grey Wolf has migrated into Southern Ontario with a few altered genes and behaviour that fits their “new” environmental realities, and that we have cougar in our province?

I have zero doubts on both accounts. After all, moose have been shot within the city limits of Oshawa! Oshawa is the headquarters for General Motors and on the shoreline of Lake Ontario!

As to the so-called “Algonquin Wolf”, that’s now listed as an “endangered species” in Ontario, and off-limits for hunting: I along with many others seriously doubt its “pure bred” or “hybrid” image of an endangered wolf species! The term used by Rutledge is “hybrid”, like a hybrid horse? A hybrid horse is the result of two dissimilar horses, a male and a female, being forced together in the same stall or enclosure, or a mare artificially receiving the semen of a particular stud! Is that how the “Algonquin Wolf” came about? No! It was likely the result of two “dogs” doing what comes naturally, and it doesn’t really matter what neighbourhood they came from!

< When I did a search for a photo of an Eastern Wolf, this was one prime example. Then, when I did a search for a photo of an “Algonquin Wolf”, one guess is all you get! This “dog” is significantly smaller than what I witnessed of the two that crossed southern highways in front of my vehicles in widely separate locations and times!

If you asked your teenagers “what have you been up to lately?”, I wonder what their answers might be if they told the truth? Similarly, if wolves could talk, and you asked them what they’ve been up to lately… what stories could they tell us! Not pretty ones, no doubt! Many humans tend to make wild animals superior to themselves, and idealise them!

But certain types seem fully capable of making “silk purses out of sows ears”, especially if they have an office in Ottawa!

By the way – the other Provinces and Territories, plus the States that border Ontario, and New Brunswick, Nova Scotia and Quebec totally disagree with the MNRF of Ontario, and tell them to get back to real science! The decision to protect the so-called “Algonquin Wolf” is based entirely on emotion, the control of one prejudiced wildlife biologist in the MNRF, vested interests with lots of money, and VERY POOR judgement!

Til the next when we discuss domestic dogs gone wild, bobcats and feral hogs.

Shalom

BOB MITCHELL

Dangerous North American Predators – P1

These are both from the canine and feline species. And here they will be limited to those that are potentially dangerous for attacks on humans. And I will not be speaking of rabid animals that in a healthy or normal state shy away from humans, such as the fox.

In general, I’m writing about those of the North American varieties, such as bear, wolves, coyotes, wild dogs, cougars and potentially bobcats. There are, of course, other dangerous animals in North America, such as adult moose and feral hogs, but this will be limited to those known as predators.

Africa, of course, has its own kind that are generally known to those who’ve had the privilege of hunting there, but usually in combo with a hunt of other species that may be non-dangerous. These, of course, include two of the “Dangerous Five”, the lion and leopard, as well as a few others that under certain conditions may become a threat to humans such as the hyena and the African wild dogs that go in packs. These are, of course, predators of other animals and may become a threat to humans. While I have opinions and have watched many videos and read literature, I’ll make no further comments here. But I have been exposed to, or in close proximity to, the North American varieties mentioned above, so I’ll limit my discussion to those creatures of which the bear is unequaled in strength and ability to take down the largest antlered species North America has to offer by a single blow to its neck! Since predatory bears act solo, versus the wolf and coyote that act in teams or packs, I’ll nominate the bear as No.1 in predatory ability.

So in order of the most dangerous to humans:

The bear is No.1: In terms of the number of official fatal attacks, the bear is the apex predator! Of course, there are three main species of bear in North America, and not all historical attacks on humans, both fatal and non, have been recorded.

< There were four and now there are three horses. The fourth was killed by the bear my partner and I were hunting. That happened in a ravine beyond the trees in the background.

< It’s partially consumed carcass was found here.

My personal experience, of course, has mostly been with this top predator as recorded in many of my blogs.

But my nomination for No.2 in potential threat will likely surprise you!

The EASTERN coyote-wolf is No.2!

This creature is part wolf and part coyote, but sometimes listed as “wolf” in parts of Ontario, and in other parts as “coyote”. All I can say at the moment is that politics is involved, without any doubts whatsoever! There has been an ongoing “battle” in our area between those who own sheep or cattle and the Ministry of Natural Resources and Forestry over the designation of this particular canis species. What are they? DNA research has confused the issues because of disagreement over methodology and interpretation. Some suggest them to be hybrids with a mixture of wolf DNA and coyote DNA while the Government insists the “Algonquin Wolf”, so-called, is a threatened Eastern wolf species! Lynda Rutledge, who has done DNA work at both Trent University in our area and Princeton, in collaboration with others, has without doubt greatly influenced the main wildlife biologist in the Ministry of Natural Resources and Forestry within our Provincial Government. But other independent tests (from the Government) have not shown them to be “pure” Algonquin wolves” that are threatened. They are, without much doubt “Eastern wolves”. Such an “official” position doesn’t bode well with the herders and ranchers, as you can well imagine, since they lose both sheep and/or cattle to these wolves.

<Tracks of the “Algonquin wolf,” or “brush wolf”, or “Eastern wolf” — all three, or any one of the names could now be applied to the same animal that I was hunting. They were minutes ahead of me.

I’m now more limited as to where I can hunt either wolf or coyote since the MNR, in their “infinite” political wisdom, must protect the “Algonquin Wolf” that has been decreed such by a particular wildlife biologist – Lynda Rutledge. Is she an anti-hunter of both species? And, if truth be told, of all hunting? It’s parallel to the fox guarding the hen house! In this case, it’s the antithesis of that – it’s the dog in the hen coup protecting them from the owner!

And that’s the shared view of some farmers who face the possibility of ruin due to Provincial politics, essentially the result of one wildlife biologist’s personal conviction that has influenced others! And, of course, the liberal (read: left leaning) media is sympathetic and the politicians are well aware of that! As proof, just ask your local politician what he/she knows about “The Algonquin Wolf”, that supposedly is “threatened!

Whatever the case, I’ve come to not trust every opinion of wildlife biologists. Why? Because they’ve been wrong too may times, and are on a “learning curve” themselves. Plus the fact (according to a close friend who should know) they spend too much time at the office “studying” the opinions of their peers and NOT in the field!

And I’ve also had personal reason to seriously “doubt” their so-called expertise. A former, now retired, professor of wildlife biology at our local college “authoritatively” argued with me over the presence of cougar in Ontario. When he denied their presence, and I asked why, he said “Because the snow is too deep here for tracking and catching game!” How then, do they survive in Montana with deeper snow and colder temps? Or British Columbia? He apparently doesn’t know! And New Brunswick, my home province, where I’d seen one, and my son another a few years later, and a close friend another, and another friend who had been a guide for hunters, and the N.B. Provincial Government finally acknowledging their presence 20 years before my argument with the “distinguished” professor? I’d been a pastor in central New Brunswick where we had at least three feet of snow annually, and my field covered 3000 sq-kms! Plus, here in Ontario, I’d seen their tracks in snow in late March just a few years prior to this argument, not far from a winter residence where both the man and wife had witnessed a pair outside their window. This residence was on a frozen lake where I’d hunted wolf in the winter. Canine and feline tracks of these predators are distinctly different, and altogether distinct from bear tracks.

< bear tracks<wolf or brush wolf or Eastern coyote? Algonquin wolf?

<Cougar tracks, nearly identical to what I saw in snow. (Borrowed from the Internet as “Mountain Lion tracks”.)

So, I don’t trust the “wisdom” that comes from the mouth of someone, anyone, who is ignorant of the facts, but pretends to “know it all”, whomever they might be! And that includes some government officials and elected representatives of “the people”, who mostly look out for themselves!

One time, when I was a mere youth, my dad helped a local get elected as a Federal Member of Parliament for our county. He disappeared for four years in Ottawa (that’s our Federal Capital in case some Americans don’t know)). He never showed up in the county until the next election in which he sought help from my father once again. I was there when this happened: On the fishing boat dock, a few hundred yards from our house, my dad turned and walked away from him! After the election that man was sitting at home sucking his thumb!

If I had my way, and rural Ontarians had their way, half the elected reps would be sitting at home sucking their thumbs! But it’s the Big City (Toronto) that elects the majority and they know little to nothing about wildlife, except for the infestation of coons and coyotes that no one can get rid of because that might harm the ecosystem!

The facts are these regarding the “Algonquin Wolf”, ” coy dogs” , “brush wolves” and the Eastern coyote: They can go in packs, have killed moose, deer and lesser game, killed and ate part of Taylor Mitchell, a young lady and musician on the Skyline Trail of Cape Britain a few years ago, and have caused solo hunters to climb trees. A pack of eight to ten were driven into by a truck owned by our good friend Mr. Wallace on his way to our remote camp in New Brunswick that he made available to my brother and I. On arrival he told us (my brother and I with our wives) about it with a warning to evade them if possible as they were aggressive and dangerous — THAT WAS BACK IN THE LATE 1980’s! That man knew of what he was speaking because he owned a lot of remote land with wildlife, and had collected dozens of trophies that he showed to my brother and I with our wives in his own trophy room! Apart from dealings in real estate, he was a guide and outfitter in New Brunswick! Hello! Lynda, where are you?

So, who do I believe? Not the political lackeys, but real hunters and those who spend their lives in the outback!

Therefore, I list the “eastern coyote” or “eastern wolf”, so-called, as No.2 on my list of “Dangerous Predators” of Eastern Canada.

It is nearly as big as a grey wolf – at least the two that I’ve seen close up but not in a hunting context. And they are aggressive — not in the least shy! I saw loners, but they do hunt in packs as well.

I’ve also seen a “grey wolf”. They look very similar except for these distinctions: The eastern wolf/coyote has a variety of colours from near red to off-white, and an individual specimen may have mixed colours or mottled. They are also smaller on average than grey wolves — but some are as big as a mature male German Shepard, 75 to 90 lbs, and at least 2- ft. tall. A friend’s neighbour shot one that weighed 90 lbs.

The one that visited our property – here in Ontario – was estimated at 60 to 75 lbs. We live in a constantly developing area of a mid-sized town that dates to the late 1700’s. The growth around us right now is phenominal. People are getting out of Toronto due to immigration and Covid-19, and moving to towns like ours about 1 and 1/2 hours away. In consequence, the price of housing has quadrupled in the last 30 years! But about 20 years ago there was only vacant fields behind our property. One morning in late March, with a few inches of freshly fallen snow, I was in the kitchen preparing breakfast when I looked out the back patio door and there standing broadside to the right of the shed was a beautifully furred coyote – or was it a wolf? It simply stood there looking in the direction of the fresh rabbit tracks. I didn’t have my camera handy, so just watched. Then it left in the direction of the rabbit tracks. In hindsight, I believe it could have been a so-called “Eastern Coyote” and/or an Eastern wolf, or both. As stated, I estimated it at 60 to 75 lbs. After it left, I went to the front of our house, looked out the “picture window”, and there were its tracks coming over the front lawn in brilliant daylight following the rabbit tracks. To the north of us, at about 100 yards is a local farm and it came from there – fearlessly! NO! It was NOT a local dog!! I knew every local dog in the community

< This is a fair representation of what I saw, only in fresh snow. And the second was larger still.

The second occasion was early Fall, again in bright sunshine in early afternoon. I was travelling east on a major highway through farm country, slightly going uphill when “out of nowhere” a large, beautiful furred, grey, black and white “canine” ran across the highway a few yards in front of my vehicle. It was larger than the first mentioned — close to 100 lbs, or more. My immediate reaction was, “That’s a wolf!” Was it a wolf or eastern coyote, or a wolf-coyote? I’ve tracked a real wolf in snow in the area where I do most of my hunting on Crown Land, and did it for 3 – 4 years in winter.

My friend and fellow hunter, Ken, who was also a Conservation Officer with the MNR, were hunting wolf in the Haliburton Highlands in January – February several years prior to that trail becoming an official snow machine trail. I had hunted wolf in that area for a few previous years, and very well knew the trail of a particular solo wolf. On that particular day, I invited Ken along and mentioned I knew where a particular wolf was travelling, having followed its tracks in snow for a couple of seasons, at least. On one such occasion, I went to the same trail that had about three inches of fresh snow cover over a hard crust. I didn’t take my snowshoes because the crust under the fresh snow was supporting me. I soon came across fresh wolf tracks that had been made just moments before. So, I continued on across those tracks to near the bottom of the ridge, rested against one of the huge snow covered boulders of the area and began my simulated wolf call – no, it wasn’t a bought one! I used my hands and mouth! I waited for only a couple of minutes and decided to return to those tracks and follow them. The wolf was breaking through the crust every third or fourth step! I was not! Using my rifle I measured the forward steps from the rear. The wolf was only walking, not bounding or running. The space between front are rear prints in the snow was six feet! Add the tail and head, and that beast was about NINE feet from snout to tail tip!

Getting back to my hunt with Ken a year later: Again, there was several inches of fresh snow, and it was still snowing. We were slowly increasing our elevation over a tall ridge when we came to a sharp right-hand turn that increased the degree of difficulty. On several occasions at that corner I’d seen where the wolf came up from a ravine and crossed the trail and went into the hardwood above. I knew the area well having hunted whitetails there for several years, as well as black bear. But on that day, due to fresh snow and early in the morning, there were no tracks of any kind, anywhere! We continued on over the ridge down to the bottom on the far side where I wanted to call wolf. This was at the end of Koshlong Lake that was frozen and snow covered. We were on snowshoes, stepped off the trail into very deep snow on the edge of the lake. The plan was to wolf call, hoping that the lone wolf would respond in coming across the end of the lake. After about 1/2 hour of calling, and snow coming down continuously, and getting into late afternoon (3 pm), I said to Ken, “Perhaps we should get out of here before we’re unable to!” He agreed. We got back onto the trail and within 50 yards there were the fresh wolf tracks that had crossed behind us while calling! It went down into the ravine on the opposite side and from there I knew its route! It would come back up over at the corner on the other side of the ridge. The ravine was choked with blowdowns covered by over two-feet of snow. I removed my snowshoes thinking I might go in as far as possible and catch it going up on the opposite side. Ken decided to backtrack to find where it had come from. We decided to meet up on the trail in ten minutes. I had no luck in trying to navigate the blowdown choked ravine, so returned in time to meet Ken returning with a black hair in his mitt. The wolf hair was a black one and he found it on the frozen carcass of the deer it had been feeding on. (Later, another hunting buddy, told me he’d seen a black wolf in that area. And, the following spring as I was returning to my van from putting bear bait in my favourite site, the driver of the grader who had been smoothing out rough spots and pot holes on the dirt road, stopped, asking if I knew there was a black wolf in the area? I said “yes, I’m aware of that”.)

Back to the hunt with Ken: After a brief discussion about Ken’s findings, I said, “We need to try and intercept the wolf that will most certainly be coming back onto this trail on the other side at the corner!” So, Ken went up on top of the ridge into a small cluster of young hardwoods, and I continued down around the corner for about 35 yards beyond it to a big maple where I hid myself and could still see the corner that the black wolf hadn’t yet crossed. The snow was still coming down and it was late afternoon (4 pm) with darkness beginning to set in within an hour. I didn’t want to get stuck in snow back there in my vehicle. So, I left my spot, went past the corner (still no wolf tracks) uphill and whistled to Ken. He turned and greeted me. We had a very brief talk about needing to leave. So we did. At the corner, 50 yards from where we had our brief talk about leaving, there were the fresh tracks of the wolf crossing into the hardwoods above. He knew where we were at all times and waited me out until I met up with Ken 50 yards away! Then he crossed, and we could clearly see his tracks up through the hardwoods! All within 7 – 8 minutes from the time I left my post behind that big maple, went past that corner, uphill about 50 yards to talk in low whispers about leaving our hunt!

< This pic was taken from that trail near the corner which would be a bit further along.

How well do we know wolves? Loners? Black ones? And what about the MNR, what do they really know from their conflicting DNA studies?

Such wolves are no threat. They are loners and try to evade humans – which that one always did. Not so the “brush wolves”, or coy dogs, or the “Eastern coyote”. There were at least three involved in the killing of Taylor Mitchell. One was still standing over her body in a defiant mood (something like a bear claiming its property) when an officer shot it with a 12ga slug. Another was shot that had human flesh in its gut. That was considered the matriarch. Another killed had the same DNA as the female. The one standing over the body had a slightly different DNA that was considered the male partner of the female. They were the leaders of the pack.

If you should be an eastern coyote/wolf hunter as I am, or just a hunter for small game in Ontario and east of here, and run into a pack of “eastern coyotes” or “wolf-coyotes”, that appear aggressive, don’t run, but start firing, especially at the leaders of the pack. Safety first! Questions later!

The use of DNA testing has significantly altered official views of the Ontario coyote and wolf, and those east of here. As pointed out, however, it has been known by hunters in Ontario, as well as the Maritime Provinces, that the so-called “coyote” of these areas was often wildly different, not only from those of the west, but from each other. Some appeared to be “normal” coyotes, while others were non-descriptive. Unusual. Therefore the alternate “handle” of “brush wolves”. I knew a man whose brother, with fellow hunters, hunted them, and was shown some photos. That’s where I saw, for myself, the extreme variations of fur colours and sizes. These were mostly designated differently than mere coyotes. When questioned, often there was uncertainty of how to designate them, but “brush wolf” seemed the appropriate term.

If wildlife biologists would only become aware of what real hunters experience in their trips, I think at least some of them would begin to question some of their “book-learned” assumptions! But, apparently, most of them consider themselves better informed than the hunters “who really didn’t see what they thought they saw”, according to the arrogance of these so-called “professionals”. It appears that a majority of them who received their education a number of years ago have not yet caught up with more recent conflicting DNA research and uncertain conclusions. There are still varied opinions over those findings! In my research I’ve discovered that there may well be several hybrid coyotes and wolves, and wolf-coyotes in this area alone, as well as in the north and northeast of our province. I usually now have a tag in my wallet designated “Wolf/Coyote” for certain areas where a tag is mandated for Fall and Winter hunting.

Concerning cougar or the “mountain lion”: I came within six feet of a black cougar in New Brunswick while driving the Nashwaak River Valley late one night. It was silhouetted against the ridge that went steeply upward behind it. I slowed nearly to a stop beside it before it slipped into the ditch and disappeared. I questioned a well-known local guide and hunter, who also was a former friend, and he said: “Yes, they are well known here (among woodsmen, hunters and farmers) as “Devil Cats”. I did the necessary research and found that a black sub-species of cougar had migrated north out of Florida into the Appalachians, just a hop, skip and a jump into Northern Maine and New Brunswick. Ten years later our eldest son and wife saw another in plain daylight crossing the highway in front of them, not far from our lake property. They were travelling by auto down the “three-mile hill” and sighted what they at first thought to be a black bear until they got closer and saw the very long black tail! Prior to the New Brunswick MNR giving official recognition to the presence of cougar in the province, a co-worker witnessed another in the outskirts of Fredericton, the Provincial Capital, late one night.

Cougars are predators. The same animal is often referred to as a “mountain lion”, which is a misnomer, but are they dangerous to humans? What is your experience or the experience of those known to you that you trust — not just in theory but in truth and reality! Personally, I have no experience other than those mentioned – the sighting for perhaps a dozen to fifteen seconds from about 50 yards down to 2 yards in which I nearly stopped beside it. And the tracks in the snow that were definitely a BIG cat, but too long from front to rear to be a bob cat or lynx. It had to be cougar. And then… not much later, a friend (a Boeing test pilot) cited that he and his wife saw a pair of them outside their window in the snow on the shore of a frozen lake (They weren’t ready to go outside to feed or pet them!).

That’s all for now, until the next when we’ll discuss cougars, real wolves so recognised historically, wild dogs and bobcats… and being prepared for an unexpected confrontation with any of them.

And lastly, the APEX PREDATOR – the bear!

Shalom

BOB MITCHELL

Does Ignorance of certain Big-Game Rifle Cartridges Matter?

The obvious answer is: It depends. Yes, and it depends on what is understood or implied by the question. So we’ll have to elaborate on the parameters. I could, for example, pose a slightly different question that has the same intent within a more narrow context that might give an idea of how far reaching the original question turns out to be.

For example: How much do we really know about America’s most common big-game rifle cartridge, the .30-06 Springfield? That’s one cartridge that “everyone” knows something about, but few have ever explored more than a few factory loads, or even very many handloads. Usually, contentment with a few is “more than enough”. And that’s one cartridge only! Do we know in practice what a good handloaded 220gr might be on a variety of big game at varied ranges and conditions? And what is meant by “a good handloaded 220gr” in the thousands of .30-06’s used annually during hunting seasons?

Therefore, when we begin to explore the full range of possibilities for this one favourite cartridge only, we begin to realize something about what we don’t yet know! It appears to me that knowing what we yet don’t know about what we thought we knew, might serve as a lesson in humility. Have we got the significance of the original question yet?

Instead of what we think we know, how about choosing a small handful of rifles that shoot different cartridges and become intimately familiar with them instead of going out to buy a “new rifle” just to say we have one of those also?

<I’ve owned a few 1895 Marlins in .45-70, not as a collection, but each one replaced another. There were legitimate reasons for that, but never “just to have one”. The first was chosen for a particular bear hunt, and all since have mostly been for the same reason, NOT for image sake or “I’ve got one of those too!”

That’s not to condemn buying a new rifle “just because”; God knows I’ve been guilty of that too, but hopefully we learn from mistakes and experience. Thankfully, I think that I can now say that as far as finding pleasure in a particular rifle is concerned, I want it to be a very good one (not necessarily estimated by dollar value), accurate, reliable, tough, accepting of variable loads and conditions, and non-offensive to the eye or shoulder. Over the years I’ve learned what I want in a BG rifle, and what I don’t want! It must take good glass and fit like a glove, and it must prove its companionship — I would like it around like a good friend who understands me… and accommodates our friendship. Sure, it can have a few blemishes as all friends do, like a few too many pounds or a bit underweight, but they go unnoticed because we fit comfortably together. But a 200 lb friend that should loose 20, is a mere 10%. Ten percent off of a 9.5 lb rifle is a mere 0.95 pounds, making it an 8.55 lb rifle. Would we reject it for that reason if all else was near perfection in our eyes? How much difference would that really make if it were only 90% perfect in weight? In recoil a loss of 1 lb would amount to 42 ft-lbs vs 38. Can your shoulder tell that difference? Not mine! Some prefer a heavier rifle to help with a bit too much felt recoil, while others prefer a lighter rifle for toting purposes — You know, “We carry more than we shoot” sort of thing. Two other things: It must still challenge me after a lifetime together – I’ll never get bored with a lifetime of friendship. And last, but not least, it must never let me down in a crisis situation.

How much do we really know about our rifles?

< I was 78 when this 6-footer was flattened by a 465gr hardcast from my NEF single-shot .45-70. It left the muzzle at about 1900 fps and impact velocity was over 1700 fps. Recoil was calculated at 47 ft-lbs from the 8-lb rifle with scope, one in the chamber and five on the stock in a cartridge holder. I was in a tree stand and the range was about 70 yards. The recoil was surprising but not hurtful.

That .338 WIN? Do we complain about its recoil, so it sits lonely in a safe?

That .223 Rem? Have we explored its full potential from all possible handloads, so that now we’re unhappy and want a 22-250?

Today, I’m left with two big-game rifles: the Ruger No.1 in .458 WIN that I need more time with to say “we’re friends”! And a 9.3 x 62 that satisfies many challenges for handloading, and has exceeded expectations in that department, but I’ll not live long enough to fully explore its potential. I’ve loaded bullets from 232gr to 320gr with fine accuracy. But, so far, only a 250gr AccuBond, a 286 NP and a 286 Hornady have tasted flesh and blood. In the hands of another, younger man, what could be its destiny? Well, there’s Africa and Alaska!

This is where I’m coming from when I asked the original question!

I’m certain, as I write this, that you have your favorite rifles. Why? That depends on what they have done in your hands: Are they reliable, sturdy, accurate, friendly and companions? Have you explored there full potential? Not likely. Not yet.

All of that depends on available resources, as well as time, money, other commitments, health and places in which to do it all. But depending on when, where and how, it takes time and availability to build friendships. How much that matters to us will determine our commitment to know and be known.

Currently, as you’re probably aware, the historic and still very healthy sixty-five year old .458 Winchester Magnum is again shining in the Sun… many of us feel that there is yet much to be learned about its versatility and prowess. Maybe you’d like to give one a try! It might become a lifetime friend as it can accommodate whatever we want from a good companion!

<Scouting for bear sign in October, 2020 with the Ruger No.1 in .458 Win Mag. The load was a 405gr Remington at about 2085 fps. That mimics a load I had used in an 1895 Marlin in shooting a bear at 100 yards from a ground blind. That 405gr was a pass-thru from left flank to behind the right shoulder and flattened the bruin on the spot.

As to commitment for my friendship with the Ruger No.1 in .458 Win Mag, I’ve put together what I deem a suitable black bear load: a 350gr Speer FT bullet at around 2350 fps. The goal is decent accuracy as I know that load is friendly in recoil and plenty in power for the largest of black bears within practical ranges. Physical recoil from the Ruger will be a modest 32 ft-lbs. But more importantly the velocity of recoil will only be 15 fps compared to an 8.5 lb .300 Win Mag firing a 180gr at 3150 fps creating 35 ft-lbs of physical recoil at a velocity of 16 fps. So all matters considered, the 350 Speer load would be similar to that .300 Win Mag load in physical effects, though a tad slower in ” felt recoil”. I’m not as young as when I was shooting thousands of rounds through various .300 Win Mags, but I found them to be mild in comparison to several others like a 340 Weatherby and various .45-70s. And I’ve already experienced what a CZ 550 in .458 can dish out in heavy recoil: like 500 grains at 2283 fps (66 ft-lbs of “free” recoil), so 32 is about half of that. The former Ruger No.1 in .45-70 LT attained 77 ft-lbs from some loads, so 32 is still “mild” by comparison. Still, I’m not as young as I used to be in my 50s and 60s. And, I’m recouping from a serious setback from several months of severe arthritis. I’m not trying to prove anything to anybody other than to myself!

Another projectile that’s become a project for acceptable accuracy in my Ruger No.1 in .458 WIN is a 465gr cast bullet at around 1400 fps. In my gun the recoil would be like 17 ft-lbs in physical recoil, but more of a mild push of about 10 fps. Say, is that good for a big bear of 600 lbs at 75 yards? TE = 93, and 73 TE at 200 yards. I’d have no reservations using that load on the biggest bears of Alaska at up to any reasonable range! For a charging big bear inside 50 yards there’s little doubt it would penetrate from frontal chest to the hams – and likely exit! I’m beginning to like that idea — little “kick”, and a bullet that will take down the largest game North America has to offer within the danger zone!

< Three years ago I fired a 54-caliber Hawkins BP for the first time. It belonged to a Vet of the Canadian military just a few years younger than I (I was 82 at the time). He was into vintage military stuff and BP. He wanted me to “give ‘er a try” to notice the “heavy recoil”. The ball was a conical 385gr cast at about 1100 fps. The Hawkins was relatively light for a 54-caliber, but “felt” recoil was very mild. My Ruger No.1 Tropical shooting the 465gr hardcast at 1400 fps will be a bit more in “felt recoil”, but not by much as it’s about 2 lbs heavier. At the time, I had just been introduced to my “new” to me Ruger No.1 Tropical firing 500s at around 2200 fps… hardly a comparison for the Hawkins!

I’m still making friends with my Ruger No.1 in .458 WIN. And that’s NOT to suggest it’s a difficult companion to like — on the contrary, I love the Ruger No.1s, especially in .458″ caliber – both in .45-70 and .458 WIN.

“Strange”, you say? No, what I find “strange” are hunters and shooters who stop trying something “new” or different when they reach 60 or 65 years, and are content not knowing what they don’t know, but could if they tried a 220gr in that .30-06 they’ve owned “forever”! I’m sure some Alaskans have, like Phil Shoemaker! I get it… you don’t guide or hunt Alaskan grizzlies or brown bears! Have you lost your imagination at 65? Go, shoot one of those 600 lb behemoth blacks of North Carolina! That would get the juices flowing again… and do it with a 220gr from your bored friend and faithful companion. She might surprise you!

Cartridge: .30-06 Springfield

Bullet: 220gr Nosler Partition; SD = .331; BC = .351

MV = 2600 fps/ 3302 ft-lbs

50 yds = 2485 fps/ 3016 ft-lbs/ 74 TE (Plenty good for a 600 pounder that’s “upset”)

100 yds = 2370 fps/ 2744 ft-lbs/ 67 TE (almost enough for that 1100 lb black bear killed in my home province way back in the “Dirty ’30’s”! — as long as it wasn’t charging!). And with recoil that’s only 40% more than my 465gr “big-bear” load from the Ruger No.1 in .458 Winchester Magnum! Yes, that was 40% more recoil, NOT less from a rifle that’s a mere 2 lbs lighter. I work out with a 15 lb weight in each hand in doing my exercises before retiring! That’s 30 lbs extra weight! Do you think I’m gonna consider an extra 2 lbs in rifles some kind of great “burden” when it reduces recoil by 40%! Well, maybe if I were climbing mountains all day! But that VERY MILD LOAD from the .458 Win Mag is potentially more effective at 200 yards than a max 220gr load from the .30-06 at 100!

Question: So, how much do we NOW KNOW that we didn’t when we thought we did?

Til next time

Shalom

BOB MITCHELL

These BIG-BORE-Rifle articles – for whom?

< Preparing for a bear hunt requires some strength and lots of strategy. This bait barrel will be stood in place in this niche of trees in a field not far from thick woods directly behind and to the right. Within a couple of kilometres is a Provincial Conservation Park with lots of wildlife, including bears. The strategy was to attract some of those bears to the bait. I managed to take three bears on this property and a young friend shot two.

I write these big-bore rifle commentaries for whoever wants to read them. But, of course, they are not reserved to BIG BORES only. I’ve expressed my experiences and views on MEDIUMS and even SUB-MEDIUMS from time to time since there is only so much to say on big-bore rifles for hunting purposes. Even so, the point has been made more than a few times that those of .458-caliber, namely the .45-70 and .458 Winchester Magnum, are arguably the most versatile big-bore rifles for big-game hunting due to the vast array of component bullets and powders available to the handloader. And there’s no shame in employing the .458 WIN in lieu of a BP rifle. I was informed by the manager of the shop where I purchased my Ruger No.1 Tropical that the former owner mostly shot cast bullets through it. The bore is pristine.

Nonetheless, where I’m coming from is the middle of middle men. In other words, perhaps the average hunter, so those are likely the ones who identify most clearly with my prose. Educationally, I’ve completed five years post secondary. Those are facts only, never intended as boasting or demeaning in any sense of others. It’s also a fact that I identify with the “common man” as that has been my heritage from birth – being born into a small fishing community on the East Coast of Canada next to the American border.

Adventure and hunting was inbred. I make no claims to superior knowledge or experience, though I might legitimately be described as a “specialist” in a few areas as there are those who have made comments of that nature in regard to the .45-70 and black bear hunting. While I sincerely appreciate such “comments”, my goal has never been to be other than honest and factual in my experiences, however that might be taken by others.

Therefore, I write for the “common man”, the average hunter who may never have his or her name made public. I think that I know what I know as well as knowing what I don’t know. If I don’t know “It”, I’ll say so. No pretence will be made here that I “know it all”. That’s for others who have a name and status to protect.

Some of my hunts have been cheerful and satisfying even though I shot nothing. I suspect you have experienced the same. As the saying goes: ” It’s not always about shooting something… It’s the total experience that matters”.

Rarely have I used a pro guide, though I did for eight tries early in my bear hunts. My outfitter/guide was known as “The Bear Man”, and I really, really appreciated those experiences in the northeast of our province as that educated me about black bears and primarily hunting them over bait, but not exclusively. I learned their habitat, habits, dispositions and intelligence – though learning their intelligence is still ongoing. When you think you know bears, there will be surprises because, like humans, they are individualistic in behaviour and therefore in thoughts and reactions. It has been said: “If you know what a bear is going to do next, you know more than the bear does”! Some apparent truth there but, of course, fallacious. A bear has been programmed to react in certain ways, but NOT necessarily in predictable ways.

One bear might take flight while another might stay for a fight! Or “shoot first and ask questions later” – the equivalent of a human reaction – known as “a charge”. So, the first lesson for the rookie bear hunter is: DON’T ASSUME TOO MUCH! JUST BE READY FOR THE UNKNOWN, AND, IF POSSIBLE SHOOT THEM BEYOND 30 YARDS. That’s because they can cover 30 yards in less than 2 seconds!

<Friend, Dave, shot this 300 lb class bear at about five yards from a tree stand using his .35 Remington and a 200gr Rem Cor Loc bullet. It went nowhere. After lots of research and experience he knew what he was doing!

What is the best weapon? Recently, I wrote a few articles on that, but it amounts to familiarity with your weapon – it needs to be handy and ready, and powerful enough to STOP a bear, not just kill it! Beyond 30 yards, if a bear isn’t charging, a .30-30 might suffice depending on bullet selection and placement. In other words, the bear must be still and unaware of your presence for careful shooting. If thick brush is handy, or it’s a thick timbered area with deep ravines, I’d never knowingly go to such an area with a .30-30, or something akin, because of the strong possibility of wounding or needing to follow up. If you have a skilled partner with adequate firepower, who won’t panic, your .30-30 might be adequate but there’s still higher risk involved than if you’re toting a .45-70 with good loads, for example. Much better than a .30-30 would be a handy medium like a .350 Rem Mag in a 660 type of thing. And a handy .350 Rem Mag loaded with quality 225s, or preferably 250s, makes a handy firearm for most other North American big game including grizzly. So does a .35 Whelen, .338 Win or 9.3 x 62 Mauser if they are kept relatively light and handy.

Because of costs today, the average hunter will pick and choose his/her annual hunts carefully. It’s likely he’ll never make it to Africa or even Alaska. But there’s still lots of local hunting available in states and provinces. My wife and I were recently invited by our oldest son and wife to visit them this fall in their new home in the Province of New Brunswick, our native province – where we grew up and where I was born. They were living on the lakefront of downtown Toronto in a condo until the end of May. It was sold to another couple who have already moved there. But they have one month left before they both retire so have rented “space” until they move at the end of June. The moving van has already taken their “stuff” to N.B.

Brent, who has been involved in missions, with his wife, in Africa for two decades, then as a rep for another mission that took him to most of the worlds troubled areas for another decade, has more recently been VP of Operations and Personnel at the famed Yonge Street Mission in Downtown Toronto (200 employees and 600 volunteers under him) until he retires the end of this month. He now wants to do fishing, hunting and painting in their new location on an island in the Passamaquody Bay, an inlet off the famed Bay of Fundy. Access to the N.B. mainland is via government ferry that is only a few hundred yards across salt water. There are scores of whitetail deer in the area, and he has invited me to hunt with him this fall, acting as my guide. I will use a borrowed rifle. He has inherited several from his deceased FIL, as well as the one I’ve handloaded for him – a Winchester M94 XTR in .356 Winchester. I’ve loaded it with the 220gr Speer over 47.5 grains of W748 at about 2200 to 2250 fps. That’s somewhat better than the .30-30 from his FIL that I may end up toting! Any black bear in New Brunswick? Tons! Will I get a license? Probably. And factory loads only, but I’d choose the 170gr over the 150. Typically, the 170 leaves the short 20″ barrel around 2100 fps. A male black bear in N.B. should go on average around 350 lbs, though it’s possible for a monster bear to show up. The largest from that area was shot back in the 1930’s and estimated at 1100 lbs. And that was less than 100 miles, as crows fly, from where I grew up! What would that factory load in the 30-30 look like at 60 yards? Brent would likely offer the .356 Winchester, but I think I’d stick with the .30-30 for educational purposes (for myself).

< Brent’s .356 Winchester.

Rifle: lever action M94 in .30-30

Barrel = 20″

Bullet: 170gr RN

SD = .257

BC = .304 (Speer)

MV = 2100 fps/ 1664 ft-lbs/ 31 TE/ -1.6″

30 yds = 2022 fps/ 1543 ft-lbs/ 29 TE/ -0.19″ (With a “good hit” in heart-lungs should put down a 230 lb bruin that’s charging.)

60 yds = 1947 fps/ 1430 ft-lbs/ 27 TE/ +0.45″ (A “good hit” in heart-lungs should do for up to a 480 lb bear at rest.)

90 yds = 1873 fps/ 1324 ft-lbs/ 25 TE/ +0.26″ ( A decent quartering away shot should handle a 300 pounder walking away.)

Who says we need more than a .30-30?

At 60 and 90 yards are what might be described as normal hunting situations of bear that are NOT agitated or charged with adrenaline. When a bear (or other larger game species) is upset, angry or in a predatory mood it’s often charged with adrenaline as in the 30 yard scenario — THAT bear is a different animal than one that’s relaxed or just curious! I recently watched a video of a 400 lb calf moose that revived after it had been sedated for study and examination of its physical status by Conservation Officers and wildlife biologists. Rather than running off, as expected, it viciously attacked the CO cameraman several times! He was knocked to the ground and severely beaten up before the beast fled! All that from a 400 lb calf moose!!

So, what about a 400 lb black bear than can kill a 1000 lb moose?

I had a close friend, who deceased a couple of years ago, who owned in his younger years to retirement a honey business with apiaries scattered around the countryside on private farms with woodlots. Often they were dismantled by bears, and he would usually await a troublesome bear near darkness in some brush nearby. His firearm was a trusty .30-30 with factory ammo. He did in more than a few.

And there’s an interesting story about the .30-30 inherited by Brent from his father-in-law. It was told to me directly, firsthand. And you’d really have to have known Mr. Braun to fully appreciate the story because he could keep you rolling on the floor! In his youth he was a poacher with his brothers living in rural N.B. They lived amongst the wildlife: bears, bucks and moose. Later, after marriage and family life he became an entrepreneur par excellence! He built his own home and worked with wood as few can. He had heavy machinery along with a mill for making lumber. He also owned other properties. On one of them he built a cabin for hunting and fishing. On that property he often had visits from bears. One day as he was out scouting amongst the trees he literally came face to face with one. They stood facing each other on opposite sides of a young fir tree… eyeballing each other. The bear, standing on hind legs, sniffed him as he raised his .30-30. He said “I didn’t really want to shoot it, but figured that maybe I should just in case it decided to attack! My rifle’s muzzle was about on its nose when I squeezed the trigger! Nothing happened! The hammer crawled slowly toward the firing pin while the bear blinked, dropped down and walked away!” Then Mr. Braun gave one of his memorable belly laughs! That .30-30 was special as it was one of the Centennial editions. But for some reason on that occasion some dirt had collected around the channel for the hammer that prevented it from firing. In some peculiar way he was relieved! That .30-30 was to him enough for any beast in New Brunswick. Of course, ranges were short at best.

So, if I get to use it this fall, it will bring back a flood of memories. While living in Ontario for the past forty plus years, we shared ownership of a lake property with my brother and wife in N.B., not far from the Brauns. Often we had visits with them and greatly appreciated their hospitality and his story telling that would bring you to tears of laughter. And, by the way, he became a Christian in later life, and a good one that delivered him from a life of alcoholism. <This is Lindsay Sporting Camp in New Brunswick, Canada, almost directly across Indian Lake from our property that we sold several years ago. It’s the dark spot on the opposite shore line just to the right of the pine tree. If you’re interested in a bear hunt there (there’s also moose, deer and small game) I can send more information. The border is now closed due to Covid-19 but may be opened by the fall. They have both spring and fall bear hunts.

So he was one hunter that I personally got to know rather intimately, and respected his character, testimony and savvy as a hunter, though his main firearm was that .30-30 Winchester. He also owned some old shotguns and, if I recall, a Brit .303.

He was about a year younger than I but he deceased about ten years ago due to an abuse of alcohol in his younger years – to his mid forties when he became a Christian. Through our daughter-in-law, I came to know him shortly thereafter, and my wife and I became friends with Ron and Elizabeth Braun. He was a successful business man and highly respected in the area, even getting government contracts. But alcohol took its toll in later life, cutting it short by at least ten years. A lesson for all of us. Though he never completed high school he was unusually intelligent and could discuss many topics with knowledge and insight. His wife is still living in N.B., sharing a home with her sister. Their son has a doctorate in aquaculture, living and working in one of the Maritime Provinces.

Til next time…

Shalom

BOB MITCHELL

Comparing Rifle Cartridges – How that can be done – P2

Please note that I’ve slightly changed the title from “How that might be done” to “How that can be done”. “Can” is more explicit whereas “might” is more suggestive.

As an example of “can” let’s go along with noted author, rancher and gun guru, Brian Pearce who claimed in an article that the .44 Rem Mag in a rifle was as effective on elk (not being specific as to sex or size — but assuming he meant same sex and size) at 150 yards as a .30-06 (again assuming he meant appropriate loads in each). Since Brian has been both a student and user of multiple firearms (both rifles and pistols) for testing and hunting purposes, I have confidence he wasn’t blowing “hot air”. If any writer can be trusted in their statements and analysis of firearms in the field, I’d personally put Brian Pearce near the top of that list.

His statement was not a suggestion, but a statement of fact, a bold declaration based not on theory but experience. So what I want to do here is test that by my formula and based on my knowledge of both cartridges having handloaded each.

< In scouting with my Ruger 96/44, I came across these fresh tracks in wet mud!

For the .30-06 I’ll choose a standard profile 180gr NP at 2750 fps with a BC of .474 which I’d consider a “normal” or average load for any elk. And for the .44 Remington Magnum I’ll go with what I have experienced from my former Ruger 96/44 lever action with an 18″ barrel. A 300gr Hornady XTP at 1650 fps with a BC rating of .245. (I’m aware of Hornady’s MV for the Ruger Carbine of 18″, but that was a semi-auto, not the lever action). I also attained a maximum of 1700 fps from both the 300gr Hornady and Speer 300gr but 1650 was more accurate. Though I considered the Speer a better choice for tough game, the Hornady has a better BC rating and I shot a couple of crows with that bullet giving better accuracy.

I think we all should be aware by now that the famed .30-06 Springfield is more than adequate for a mature bull elk of 700 – 800 lbs at up to 400 yards with a good hit from a good load. We’re not comparing a .44 Rem Mag with that but, rather, at 150 yards which could be somewhere close to average for a mature bull elk. Apart from Brian, how many elk rifle hunters would choose a .44 magnum? There’s little doubt that many American hunters have done so with a handgun in .44 mag… but in a rifle? At 150 yards? Well, it’s obvious to me that Brian has.

< My friend Roger’s elk from N. Alberta.

The point of these analyses and comparisons is to confirm that a large-bore rifle shooting a heavy bullet at modest velocity can be as effective within most realistic hunting ranges, or more so, than more modern high-velocity cartridges in use today for most common big-game hunting.

Without giving the data for the .30-06 load, which we’ve already assumed to be more than adequate for elk at 150 yards, what about Brian Pearce’s claim for the .44 Rem Mag? In reading the piece, the first thing I did was to test it by my formula… or maybe to test my formula by Brian’s claim.

Rifle: Ruger 96/44

Cartridge: 44 Rem Mag

Bullet: 300gr Hornady, .245 BC

MV = 1650 fps/ 1813 ft-lbs/ 61 TE/ -1.6″

50 yds = 1524 fps/ 1547 ft-lbs/ 52 TE/ +1.1″

100yds = 1408 fps/ 1321 ft-lbs/ 44.4 TE/ 0.0″

150yds = 1304 fps/ 1132 ft-lbs/ 38 TE/ -5.5″

I multiply TE (terminal effect) by the following values to get an estimate of animal size/weight: 12.5 for going away shots; 18.5 for quartering shots away or toward; 20 for heart-lung shots; and 25 for shoulder and CNS hits.

Kenitic Energy at Impact x Sectional Density x Cross-sectional-area in sq-in = TE (KEI x SD x CSA = TE)

Assuming a heart-lung shot on an elk at 150 yards, 38 TE x 20 = 760 lbs; a CNS/shoulder shot, 38 x 25 = 950 lbs.

I claim no magic for this as there are many variables, but it has been tested against many reports where adequate detail has been provided, and my own experiences as well as similar formulas – notably by the late John Wootters — and it therefore seems a reasonable concept in preparation for field work and analysis.

Based on these concepts, I’d have to agree with Brian Pearce’s claim that “a .44 Remington Magnum is as adequate for elk at 150 yards as a .30-06.”

The end result is kinetic energy modified by bullet cross-sectional-area and sectional density. John Wootters used classes of game and nominal bullet diameter. I use animal size and cross-sectional-area of bullet instead of bullet caliber.

In terms of momentum, a 300gr at 1500 fps is equal to a 150gr at 3000 fps. And a 500gr at 2000 is equivalent to a 250gr at 4000 fps. In the rush for kinetic energy figures (velocity squared), momentum (force= velocity x mass only) is regarded as irrelevant. However, in practice, it has been proven too many times that momentum is a vital factor that can’t be ignored, especially in big-bores with heavy bullets. Of course, bullet construction must match the desired effect whether in high velocity or low and anything between.

Let’s take two more rifle cartridges having different kinetic energies (KE) at impact at the same distance on a 2200 lb bison, and decide which of the two we’d choose for the job, and why. The two are: a Ruger #1 in .458 Win Mag firing a 475gr cast bullet (#2 Alloy) at 1623 fps. Range to the bison is 200 yards. SD = .322, and BC = . 477. Those numbers are from Lyman’s 48th Edition and 40.5 grains of 5744 at very low pressure. – page 296. The test rifle was like mine on the header.

The other choice is a typical .338 Win Mag with a 26″ barrel. Its ballistics are a 250gr NP at 2750 fps from the muzzle. SD = .313, and BC = .474.

We assume that accuracy is adequate for the task in each.

First up:

The .338 Winchester Magnum (based on the .458 Winchester Magnum necked down to .338-caliber.)

MV = 2750 fps/ 4197 ft-lbs/ -1.60″/ 118 TE

50 = 2656 fps/ 3917 ft-lbs/ +0.75″/ 110 TE

100= 2565 fps/ 3652 ft-lbs/ +1.85″/ 102 TE

150= 2476 fps/ 3402 ft-lbs/ +1.64″/ 95 TE

200= 2388 fps/ 3165 ft-lbs/ +/- 0.0″/ 89 TE (Estimated maximum weight = 2225 lbs – rounded to 2200 lbs)

Next:

The .458 Winchester Magnum

MV = 1623 fps/ 2778 ft-lbs/ -1.60″/ 148 TE

50 = 1557 fps/ 2556 ft-lbs/ +2.64″/ 136 TE

100= 1493 fps/ 2352 ft-lbs/ +3.27″/ 125 TE

150= 1433 fps/ 2165 ft-lbs/ +/- 0.0″/ 115 TE

200= 1375 fps/ 1994 ft-lbs/ -7.50″/ 106 TE (Estimated maximum weight = 2650 lbs – rounded to 2700 lbs)

** This is not an endorsement of that particular cast bullet, as its hardness and actual diameter are both critical to its accuracy and performance — and that depends on the knowledge and skill of the one who casts them, as well as the mould itself.

It is to show the potential of a BIG BORE, notably the .458 Win Mag, in using a relatively cheap, low-pressure, heavy cast-bullet load for large game at practical ranges. Of course, the same has been accomplished in generations past by the 1873 Springfield (.45-70) using BP.

My analysis:

The .338 Win Mag would be marginal for a 2200 lb bison at 200 yards from a single maximum load fired. Recoil from an 8.5 lb rifle = 40 ft-lbs. In a case of needing a second shot, that’s 40 ft-lbs recoil x 2 (or more).

The .458 Win Mag load would be more than adequate for a 2200 lb bison at 200 yards from a single very mild load fired. Recoil from a 10.5 lb rifle = 23 ft-lbs. With Mag-na-ports = 19.5 ft-lbs (Mine is Mag-na-ported) or about 1/2 the physical recoil of the 8.5 lb .338 Win Mag.

The pros and cons:

Cons: – The .458 is 2 lbs heavier but 6″ shorter. It’s a so-called “single-shot”, though multiple cartridges can rest in a buttstock holder making it a “repeater” of sorts.

Pros: – It’s obvious to aficionados that the .458’s potential ballistics are superior on both the high end and the low end. Try loading a .338 Win down to about 35,000 psi for a bison hunt at up to 200 yards and we’ll soon realize why Big Bores have the upper hand in versatility! That is ONE Big Bore in particular, being the .458 Winchester Magnum due to the great proliferation of ready made component bullets, and myriads of moulds to make your own.

Cartridge comparisons? That’s for losers to bet against the .458 Winchester Magnum! It’s versatility has yet to be fathomed. 250 grain projectiles to 600 grains — at MVs from 1000 fps to 3000 fps! What other nominal cartridge can boast that kind of performance for the dedicated handloader?

From my Ruger #1 in .458 Win I’ve attained approximately 3000 fps from the 300gr Barnes TSX, though I load it to about 2750 fps for hunting purposes. That load shoots into sub-moa. The Ruger has a 24″ barrel that about equals a 26″, .378 Weatherby firing a 300gr, but using only 2/3rds as much propellant. On the other end, a bullet that weighs twice the 300gr can attain 2100 fps. I’m quite sure of that from my former Ruger #1 in .45-70 LT with a 22″ barrel easily attaining 1900 fps from the 600gr Barnes Original without any appearances of undue stress on the rifle or cases.

< Yes, from this rifle the 600gr Barnes made 1900 fps.

Hey, I know that I’ll never get to use all that a .458 Win Mag can deliver other than in range testing, but that experience has had its own rewards in its uniqueness… sort of like the finding of a rare gem. To a gemologist that would be the experience of a lifetime. Again, similar to a unique piece of art to an artist. In either case, the joy is in the finding and possession of something rare and beautiful in their eyes, not just the potential monetary value. For myself, the personal discovery of the .458’s potential, without and before the findings of others that I was aware of, has been like an astro-scientist discovering secrets of the universe that hadn’t come to light previously! Especially is that so when so much denial and negativity falsely surrounded the history of the .458 Winchester Magnum so that lies were manufactured to justify the creation of “new” Big Bores such as the .416 Remington and .458 Lott. Not only so, but a resurrection of “old” Big Bores were flooding the market, such as the .404 Jeffrey and .416 Rigby that were said to be The Answer to the failure of the .458 Winchester Magnum. Talk about a rush by authors to deal a death blow to the .458 WIn, as well as digging holes to bury it! Ross Syfried, noted gun guru and author, predicted it’s demise as soon as the .416 Remington was announced! Not that there’s much wrong with the .416 Remington, which I’d prefer over the Rigby, but it isn’t a .458 Win Mag in versatility!

Then there are those spokesmen and authors who have done harm to the perception of the .458 WIN with faint praise, and in making excuses for it! If anyone NEEDS more than 5000 to 6000 ft-lbs of muzzle energy from a 300gr to 550gr/.458-caliber for any earthly creature, then they need to be excused!

.458 Winchester Magnum owners are now coming out of their closets, no longer needing to be embarrassed for owning one! Rather, they can hold their heads high knowing they have the finest of all BIG BORES!

Check out the 24hour campfire forums: Express Rifles and Big Bores Only/ The great .458 Winchester Magnum. Dr. Ron Berry (Riflecrank) is now the chief “scientist and engineer” in demonstrating the greatness of the .458 Winchester Magnum. And all that in full colour with a dash of Irish wit!

Shalom

BOB MITCHELL