Barrels, Ballistics and Baloney

There are variables in handloads (and factory fodder) and in rifle barrels. Then there is unwarranted trust in what those can do under all conditions. Any one, or all of them combined, can affect what transpires when and after the trigger is squeezed. That embraces barrels, ballistics and baloney.

< That’s a 26″ barrel on my former .340 WBY MAG. That’s a normal length for the .340. A 24″ would not be much handier, and it might loose up to 50 fps per inch. Instead of 3000 fps for the 250gr Nosler Partition, it might have given about 2900 fps.

Barrels: Apart from a barrel’s basic condition and precision, there are never-ending discussions over how long, or short, a barrel should/could be for a particular rifle/cartridge combo for both satisfactory and/or optimum results. As a preference, some choose the shortest that will give satisfactory results for their style of hunting, like an 18″ for brush, tall grasses, alders or thick wooded areas in a hunt for hogs, deer or bear. But they might also choose a 20 or 22″ for a .338 Win Mag for big game in more open areas. They just like short and handy rifles for most of their hunting, irregardless of the potential loss of ballistics because they figure that loss isn’t critical to their way of thinking and hunting.

Then there’s an opposite group that want the most bang for the buck (both figuratively and factually). They know the longest barrels available is the shortest and cheapest way to best ballistics. They say that a relatively “long” 26″ barrel for a .30-06 is equal to the ballistics of a 22″ .300 magnum, with far less powder, recoil and noise! It’s going to be a pound heavier, but they don’t mind and they can manage a 26″ barrelled rifle as well as a 20″ in thick tangles… six inches more or less is insignificant to them because of THEIR preferences and style of hunting. And they of course have a valid point as well as the short-barrel group!

Which group is right? They both are! That is for themselves.

And yet a third group:  I’m glad for this third group, otherwise I wouldn’t belong to any group! I fit here. It’s the group, likely the majority, that says I’ll choose my barrel length depending on: 1) practical ballistics for the cartridge, and 2) It’s intended use.

Ballistics: Barrel length affects ballistics. As a rule of thumb, large bores shooting heavy bullets might be affected less, but nonetheless, even a loss of 20 fps per inch from a 400gr amounts to 80 fps from a 20″ vs a 24″ barrel. Some discount that, but at longer ranges on large game that could still be significant in two ways: energy/momentum and bullet expansion. At the muzzle a 400gr at 2400 fps = 5115 ft-lbs, at 2320 fps (loss of 80 fps) at the muzzle a 400gr at 2320 fps = 4780 ft-lbs. That’s 335 ft-lbs loss at the muzzle. At 250 yards that could still be a loss of 300 ft-lbs! Does that matter? Maybe so, maybe not, depending on the bullet, it’s placement and the big animal itself. But should we choose less, in a hostile environment, or more?

From a .375 H&H, the loss from cutting the barrel from a 26″ to a 22″ was about 35 fps per inch in my experience. My top load from the 26″ shooting a 300gr was slightly over 2700 fps. At 22″ it struggled (after many tries of different propellants) to make 2560 fps from the same 300gr. Now 2560 fps is still suitable from a .375 H&H for most intended game, depending on the bullet and its placement, but knowingly would you sacrifice 140 fps loss from a 300gr by lopping-off 4″? I did it for another reason. That barrel had a serious flaw – the bore was off-centered, so accuracy was very poor. It was an attempt to improve that situation not knowing the bore was off-center til 4″ was cut off. But the real point remains: How could a 22″ barrelled .375 H&H improve the quality of a hunt by being 4-inches shorter, especially at the sacrifice of 490 ft-lbs energy at the muzzle? At 200 yards, the loss is still 400 ft-lbs!

Speaking personally, I much prefer more energy/momentum at impact than just adequate or barely enough. Why? Because of variable conditions or circumstances. The game might be farther away than thought or intended, or it might move at the last split-second, or it could be a much larger, tougher specimen than average, or we might be slightly off in our marksmanship… or whatever. Ballistics should be plenty for the worst case scenario, not scanty!

The Traditions OUTFITTER G3 above has a 22″ fluted barrel, plus a 2″ muzzle brake. OL of rifle is 39 inches. Muzzle diameter where it mates with the brake is .70″. Weight as seen is 7.25 lbs. A 22″ barrel for the .35 Whelen is customary. That will give all the ballistics expected or wanted from that cartridge using handloaded bullets from 200gr to 250gr. Lighter and heavier bullets are available from pistol bullets (.357) to a 310gr rifle bullet from Woodleigh. While I have some 300gr Barnes Originals, my main interest lies with the 200gr, 225gr and 250gr projectiles. 

The scope rings are x-high to clear the hammer from the scope zoom. The hammer has extensions on each side to cock it for either a left or right-handed shooter. The scope looks too far back but it’s just right for normal eye relief when the rifle is shouldered. It has excellent balance and quick handling. A few cartridges will be added to a butt stock ammo holder on the left side of the stock away from my face.

Then… there’s baloney! Believing the unlikely! Or, “Everything is going to turn our just peachy!” Or, “A .270 is all you need for anything in North America”, Or “All you need for African plains game is a .243 Win.”, etc.

The point is, there’s a lot of baloney out there! Now baloney is edible… just! But it’s NOT recommended as a healthy daily diet! Neither is sugar-coated breakfast cereal! There’s some truth in “baloney” or none would believe it! There’s some truth in getting by with a .270 for all N.A. game…. BUT NOT THE WHOLE TRUTH! Same goes for a .243 for African Plains game. There’s some truth in the Devil’s lies or none would be enticed by them! But WATCH OUT FOR anything that’s “a half-truth”! It’s baloney! Not something to rely on, put your dreams on or hope in!

It’s as much “baloney” to say, or believe, that we need every rifle/cartridge under the sun to be happy and/or successful as to say or believe that the 6.5 Creed (or its ilk) is all one needs for any creature under the sun. I’m sure you get my drift…

But there are a few that could do it all – from mice to moose, or gemsbok to giant elephant. And the larger the game, the larger the bore – as a common sense principle. Among the Big Bores, none surpass in overall versatility, in combination with effectiveness, the magnificent .458 Winchester Magnum -and that’s no baloney!

But “baloney” says “My dog is better than your dog”. But it’s not “baloney” to think, or say, “I like my dog best because I chose it!” The same with a rifle!

I like single-shot rifles about as much as bolt-action repeaters, and all that depends on the cartridge, purpose and functionality. I’ve had some “ugly dogs” in both! On the other hand, I’ve had some “great dogs” in both! Some of the latter I parted with too soon.

What makes a “great” rifle? To some extent, it’s in the eye of the beholder, but not entirely. Form, function and fit perhaps best describes a “great” rifle. Form is beauty and craftsmanship. Function answers to: Does it do what was intended in a graceful manner? Fit is ergonomics… it has to do with physical attributes. Is it comfortable in operation relative to my psyche and physique… does it “fit” like a glove?

And yours? Why did you choose them? All of them and reject others? Do you remember why?

As we get a couple of generations under our belt, we remember the ones that were “great”. We may still have some of those, while others got away for one reason or another.

My advice? Stick with the “great” ones – that is: In your eyes and experience. Many of those can even be improved by newer technology in gun powders. Some “new” propellants have less of a parabolic pressure curve, and a “flatter” curve from ignition to muzzle. They can safely deliver higher velocities at even lower peak pressure. CFE223 and PP2000MR are two of those, but not the only.

Then we should not discount familiar powders that have been improved! “Improved” in what way? Smaller granules for better metering and load density, such as H4831 SC. H335 was improved from being a former “dirty” military powder to a modern clean-burning and temp stable propellant manufactured at the St Marks plant in FL – the only manufacturing facility that makes ball powder in North America. I’ve been using it for many years in my .45-70s and .458 Win Mags – and it’s one of the very best for those cartridges in the heavy-weight class of projectiles. And that’s no baloney! Check recent Hornady manuals, as well as Barnes, for data relative to both the .458 Win and .458 Lott. In the Barnes’ #4, TAC is similar in results to H335, though far less common or available “North of The Border”.

I apparently discovered the greatness of H335 before Hornady or Barnes did – at least nothing prior to my use revealed any advantages in their reloading manuals. In the Hornady fourth edition, H335 shows a max of 73.2 grains for the .458 Win Mag at 2100 fps for the 500gr Hornady RN, from a Winchester M70 with a 25″ barrel”. Even IMR 3031 gives 2150 fps as max from 72.2 grains. But in their 7th Edition, they have this to say: “Most loads produced good groups, with H 335 performing exceptionally well”, and in regard to the .458 Lott: “Our choice of powder for this cartridge is Hodgdon 335.” And Hodgdon’s own manual #27 records 2163 fps for the 500gr Hornady in a 24″ barrel from 75.5 grains of H335 at 50,300 CUP (about 57,000 PSI). At the time, 53,000 CUP was considered MAP (about 60,000 PSI). MAP is “Maximum AVERAGE Pressure”, NOT as one sporting magazine Chief Editor declared it to be “maximum absolute pressure” – and he, in an editorial, made a big issue of that!

Two excellent powders for .45-70s and .458 Win Mags.

The .458 Lott’s MAP is 62, 500 psi – no reason for that other than it does no harm, and to show superiority over the .458 Win… that ALSO can be loaded to 62, 500 psi without harm!

So, the upshot of all that means it’s NOT baloney to load the GREAT .458 Win to 62,500 psi, that will, in effect, BEAT the .458 Lott at 62,500 psi with equal length barrels firing the same 500gr because of the .458 Win’s LONG THROAT!!! And that’s no baloney either! The .458 Lott, as manufactured today, has a short SAAMI throat, meaning PSI will develop much more abruptly at 3.6″ COL than the .458 Win with a “free bore” of nearly an inch! And we can seat heavy bullets as long as the Lott with still more “free bore” than the Lott! It’s pure physics! (Go to the 24hr Campfire Forums, Big Bore, and the .458 Win Mag thread for an education on this!). Two other “improved” powders from the St-Marks plant are A 2230 and A 2460 granting the very best that a .458 Win Mag is capable of.

It was the 27th Edition of the Hodgdon manual that first encouraged me to try H335 in my Ruger No.1 in .45-70 LT (Long Throat) as it had about the same burn rate as H4895, that I had previously compressed to the limit in that Ruger No.1 LT, and from that experience to do the same in my second .458 Win, the CZ550. The reason it worked so well in my Ruger No.1 with the long throat in .45-70 was that H335 was a ball powder. I couldn’t get nearly as much H4895 or Varget into the relatively short case of only 2.1″(compared with the 2.5″, .458 WM case). But I did manage 75 grains of H335 before seating the 500gr Hornady, with only very slight compression, at 3.19″. All that was ignited by WLRM primers in the Rem nickle plated brass that lasted “forever”. PSI was less than 63,000 psi from the “short” 22″ barrel. And that’s not baloney either! MV averaged 2200 fps – almost identical to a 22″, 458 Win Mag at 60,000 psi.

< Identical to the one fired over the Chrony is the 45-70 case loaded with the 500gr Hornady RN over 75 grains of H335 at 3.19″ COL.

Yes, absolutely, there’s a lot of baloney out there, BUT there’s also a lot of GREAT news for today’s handloaders that’s NOT baloney!

Til the next…

Shalom

BOB MITCHELL

What’s this thing called “RECOIL” all about?

“Kick” is another term, and some refer to it as “thump”! Then there are more unpleasant terms like “getting booted” by a rifle or shotgun.

This piece is reserved to centerfire medium and big game rifles, though, with absolute certainty, handguns and shotguns can dish out their own kind of “hurt”!

So the plan is to talk about it in general terms, then in specifics, and finally how it can be modified or managed so that we can learn to shoot rifles and cartridges that will hurt less than we imagined, or the media and scuttlebutt says they’re going to!

< When we’re facing a gang like this that can impost its own kind of hurt, recoil of the rifle quickly fades from memory!

There is that “equal and opposite momentum”, often referred to as “force”. Often it’s calculated as kinetic energy, which is a different formula than momentum or “force”. The rearward movement of the rifle will equal the momentum of the bullet when it leaves the muzzle. For example: a 500gr projectile leaving the muzzle at 2200 fps will have a force of 500 x 2200/7000 = 157 pounds-feet (The usual way of comparing it with any other rifle/cartridge load). For comparison’s sake, a 180gr x 2700 fps from a .30-06 = 486000/7000 = 69 pounds-feet of momentum/force, or 44 % that of the 500gr at 2200 fps. Then there are other mitigating factors as well, such as the amount of propellant used in each cartridge, the weight of the rifles and jet effect of the gases. So the speed of the rifle in recoil, and its weight, determines the amount of kinetic energy involved – the usual way of expressing “kick”. But heavy-slow bullets from a “heavy” rifle slows the momentum so that “felt recoil” often seems less than the KE number suggests it should be. Oftentimes this is expressed as the recoil effect being “heavy but slow”. That’s because the kinetic energy is spread over a longer time period – that is relatively speaking because it all happens, regardless of the KE number, in thousandths of a second.

That was a layman’s way of telling it… a true scientist would give us facts and numbers that would boggle the mind! Be all that as it may, the real hunter/shooter is concerned about the end product felt by his shoulder. That will be discussed a bit later, but for the moment we simply need to know that there are rather simple methods of calculating the energy and momentum of a particular rifle and cartridge in comparison with some others. A simple formula that I use is: 1.75 x pw x bw x fps/rw/7000/64.4 = R (pw is powder weight in grains; bw is bullet weight; rw is rifle weight in lbs; R is recoil in ft-lbs). Some formulas use 1.50 instead of 1.75 which may increase the recoil factor too much for smaller calibers.

< When I was moose hunting with my CZ550 in .458 WM in the far north of Ontario, any concern over recoil was far less than getting my next cup of hot coffee!

Starting out, we may have heard or read somewhere that a typical .375 H&H will “kick harder” than a typical .30-06. But the obvious question is: By how much? Then the formulas can give an estimate of “by how much”. Usually, however, one is instructed, or invited, to fire a few shots from a friend’s .375 H&H at the range. But that may not be factory loads from a standard-weight M70 Winchester, but reloads on the “hot” side of matters from a “worked-on” M70 (or other) to reduce it’s “natural” weight! That would obviously create more recoil – maybe a lot more – than a “natural” load from a “natural” M70 in .375 H&H. To put a face on that: A 270gr factory load from a 9.5 lb M70, in its original form, will have a recoil of about 36.5 ft-lbs of KE, whereas a 300gr from an 8.5 lb “custom” .375 H&H at 2600 fps could have a recoil of around 46 ft-lbs of KE (depending on the amount of propellant used to attain that number – especially if the barrel is shorter than 24″). But that’s 27% more recoil than a “standard load” from a usual .375 H&H. That increase from a particular .375 H&H may very well be enough to discourage the enquiring hunter/shooter from ever looking at another .375 H&H in the future, much less of ever thinking of getting into true Big Bores!

All that to point out that very light rifles, in whatever cartridge, are attractive to the presumed hunter that might spend one-half, or more, of his/her time in hunting on foot in terrain that’s not your typical local mall!

The trend to light rifles for all cartridges has arrived! So has the trend to fast but light bullets in smaller calibers with muzzle brakes. With ATVs in every other garage, nobody wants to “walk it up” anymore! So we have a generation of hunters with rooms full of these types of rifles that all do pretty-much the same thing. So discussions in chat rooms on the Internet revolve around whether to use a 120gr vs a 140gr in their 6.5s – as one example! So – in a sense – we’ve grown up hunters who dislike recoil more than a .308 Winchester, because life in general has treated them with the latest toy that’s painless for killing big game! Exceptions prevail in tough places like Alaska and the Yukon!

To be fair, I must admit that at my age less weight and recoil is attractive! But what is attractive is NOT always – and rarely is what’s best for maintenance of good health and longevity! Somehow society through politics believes it’s a God given right to protect us from any kind of pain! Yet the old adage is still true: “No pain, no gain”. That’s NOT to suggest that anyone should love pain, or want to inflict it on others, but it remains true for humans: We listen and learn best through a measure of suffering. While we may protect ourselves from most physical pain, but NEVER from all other kinds like failure, disappointment, loss, etc. All is either designed or allowed by God for our good, not our destruction!

So, back to our theme: We can only measure recoil by how it “feels” to us. And that’s dependant on a number of factors in addition to the physics of the matter.

< When I shot this moose with my .340 Wby Mag, physics said I was getting “kicked” by 54 ft-lbs of recoil… Strange, but I don’t remember anything about that! But I have fond memories of that hunt with a son!

1> The psychological aspect: People can’t all fit into the same “shoe box”. And that includes the people who call themselves “hunters”. Not only do we have distinct body styles but distinct psychological “styles”. That’s what democracies are all about, and why there is not only hot arguments and divisions over politics in democracies, but near hatred: “I’m always right, and those who agree with me are always right… and the others are just plain wrong!” So it is in the hunting and shooting world, if the Internet is any indication.

The solution to all that in politics and hunting is obviously compromise! Admitting our biases and agreeing where possible and when practical (the best for all concerned). Giving “the devil his due”, so to speak. But “sticking to our guns” if and when necessary for our “psychological factor” to remain intact!

For one shooter, they can’t tolerate recoil over 20 ft-lbs of KE, for another the limit is the .700 Overkill with only God knowing how much recoil that feels like because the shooter’s nervous system can’t tell him because it died at the mere thought of what was about to happen! When I had my motorcycle accident I lost consciousness just before (I’d committed myself to God) and regained it after, at 30 ft beyond the car in a sitting up position wondering what “that” was all about! Likewise for those who shoot the likes of a .700 Overkill! But, there is the sound notion that gradually being introduced to heavier recoil than we’re used to eventually leads to trying yet heavier recoiling rifles. I never started shooting a .458 WM, or its equivalent in recoil until I reloaded .45-70s around the age of 50! A decade earlier I owned my first magnums: 7mm, a 300 WM, a .338 WM, before I owned my first .45-70. And the poor shape of the 1895 Marlin booting me to the tune of 40 ft-lbs teaches a lot about handling 40 ft-lbs recoil from a very badly shaped stock with a rock-hard butt pad! But I came NOT to resent it, but respect it, so much so that it seemed “normal”. Almost anything after that seemed very respectable, like my .340 WBY dishing out 54 ft-lbs seemed mild by comparison with that Marlin in .45-70!

2> The physical aspect: Age may be a factor, health and physical conditioning is another. Size and weight is rarely a factor. When shooting at the range use a very good shield in a shoulder pad and/or a thick towel and jacket. And don’t slouch, as in “bench-rest” style. Sit up straight so your body will move with the recoiling rifle. That means a rifle rest that allows it. If using a scope, don’t “crawl the stock” to get closer to the eyepiece of a scope. Use scopes with long ER’s (eye-relief) of at least 4″. I’ve liked the Burris fixed 4x by 21mm with a long ER of 5.5″. I’ve never been “touched” by the scope on a hard recoiling rifle, either at the bench or in the field. Also, use excellent eye and ear protection, even in the field!

< That fixed 4x Burris on my CZ550 in .458 WM had an eye relief of over 5 inches, enduring hundreds of rounds of “hot” ammo without complaint or failure .

3> The rifle: Its ergonomics (see above) – how well it fits the shooter (most important). A good recoil pad. Change it, or have it changed if its too hard or thin. I had the pad on my Ruger No.1 in .45-70 LT (an infamous, hard, thin rubber) changed out to a thick Pachmayr due to loads that equalled a .458 WM. The rifle with ammo and scope only weighed 8.4 lbs. Also a good muzzle brake can mitigate recoil velocity by up to about 20% (or more is claimed by some companies). I now have muzzle brakes on all my big-game rifles. You don’t like the increased noise? There are ways of dealing with that too: Wear some suitable ear muffs, like any person does in factories, machine shops, or even driving heavy machinery! Uncomfortable? Do you shoot at a range? Without ear protection? Live with the pain of a busted ear drum then! AND pull the rifle tight to the shoulder, WITH BOTH HANDS, if it’s a big-bore rifle and cartridge!

4> The load: This can make a huge difference in felt recoil. The difference in felt recoil of two distinct loads from the same rifle can make one pleasant to shoot and the other “ugly”! That’s why some select a lighter bullet over the heavy one. We need to be practical about this, however, Though technically they may have differences in KE in ft-lbs of recoil that favors the lighter bullet, yet in practice the recoil of the rifle firing the lighter bullet may be quicker than the slower recoil caused by the heavier projectile. Remember: it’s the speed of the recoiling rifle that gives a sense of “felt” recoil. There are several nuances to this, but the speed the bullet must attain at the muzzle is quicker from a light bullet than a heavier bullet at a slower velocity at the muzzle.

For example: I’ve currently two loads I’m working on for my new .35 Whelen (22″): 1) a 225gr at about 2750 fps (3779 ft-lbs) over 65 grains propellant, and 2) a 250gr at 2565 fps (3653 ft-lbs) over 56 grains of a different propellant. The recoil based on physics of the 225gr is 36.7 ft-lbs from my relatively light 7.5 lb rifle with scope and ammo ready to hunt. Load 2) shows a recoil of 33.7 ft-lbs. For a big bear or moose I’d choose the second load (250gr) as it has greater momentum and higher SD. Both of those loads, by the way, will be reduced in felt recoil by up to 20% from the muzzle brake = 29.4 ft-lbs and 27 ft-lbs respectively. So a lighter, faster bullet is not always the best choice, especially if we think it will give less recoil!

My choice of the 225gr or 250gr will depend on what I’m hunting and where. The 225 obviously has a better trajectory for longer ranges, and insures adequate expansion all the way to 500 yards, whereas the 250gr will insure some expansion to 400 yards. In this case, recoil is NOT the deciding factor. I see the 225gr (Nosler Partition) as an “all-rounder”, and the 250gr (NP) as a more specialised weight for heavy game at closer ranges – though either will “geterdun” at any practical range.

This brief article surely doesn’t cover “all the bases” but, hopefully, will review some of the finer points in our choices of rifles and their loads for medium and big game based on management of their potential “felt” recoil.

Til the next…

Shalom

BOB MITCHELL

Traditions…

< This photo was taken in early May, 1989 when I was fifty-three years of age. That was my first 1895 Marlin in .45-70 and my first bear.

As people age there’s a tendency to look back to “better times”, especially if things are not going well or one is nearing the end of their journey here. I’ve never been a “history buff” or a traditionalist for its own sake. I’ve always had goals and looked forward to their fulfilment, with God’s help.

I believe the Bible and take its message seriously – otherwise, I’d be denying the One who has redeemed me – Jesus Christ. He said: “I am the resurrection and the life, the one who believes (trusts) in me will never die but have eternal life – do you believe this?”, he asked a friend, Martha, who had just buried her young brother.

I don’t fear death because I know The One who has given me eternal life (a gift of grace to those who believe in Him)! Between now and then, I’ll go on living here with goals – things to do that’s current for each day.

I never thought it would happen, but I’ve purchased another rifle called “Traditions”. Another single-shot! It’s similar to an H&R I purchased in 2010 but didn’t keep. It was chambered in .35 Whelen… so is this Traditions. I didn’t keep the H&R because it wouldn’t fire new handloads I’d put together using new Remington .35 Whelen brass. I believed the new cases were at fault as it would fire both factory ammo and handloads made from old brass that I’d used in my former Rem 7400 semi dating back to 1997. Whatever the problem – it was neither discovered by the gunsmith at the shop where both rifle and brass were purchased, nor my own gunsmith. I still have those 50 new .35 Whelen cases purchased for that H&R, plus dies and a few hundred bullets from 200gr to 300gr from 1/4 of a century ago . So far, the Traditions will fire these new cases with primers only. So it appears I’ll not have to fireform them to the chamber of the Traditions .35 Whelen. That will save a lot of extra time at the range, and expense in wasted powder and bullets.

Yes, I know its ballistic potential is similar to my 9.3 x 62, but I’ve been wanting a “brush gun” for some time ever since I let my Ruger 96/44 get away when it was an even trade for the H&R. The Traditions is 39″ in length with the muzzle brake and 37″ without it. It weighs 6.1 lbs without scope and ammo, which will increase weight to about 7.5 lbs when added. It’s planned to be a “walk-about” rifle.

As such, handloads of around .358 Winchester ballistics could be effective at woods ranges. Or… it would make a nice coyote/wolf rifle to 350 +yards firing 200gr TTSX’s around 3000 fps. Yep, that’s what the 200gr Hornady SPs did from that H&R single-shot when I used old, once-fired brass from my former 7400 in .35 Whelen.

So I’m not against everything “traditional” if it works!

In speaking of the .35 Whelen, you already know, if you’ve been a reader of these blogs, that it’s one of my favorites. Using “old” brass from the former Rem 7400 semi in .35 Whelen, the first load fired from that “former” H&R made 2565 fps from a 250gr Hornady SP – and that was a starting load. I’d also loaded three more in the “new” Rem brass with increased increments of 1 grain each, which all failed to fire! The 200gr Hornady SP was loaded in the “old” cases (a load I’d previously used in the 7400) that did 2998 fps/3991 ft-lbs average corrected to MV. The powder for the 250gr Hornady was RL-15 and H4895 was used for the 200gr. A 200gr at .35 Remington speed would be ~ 2200 fps. A friend killed a 300 lb class bear using a 200gr RN (Remington or Hornady) from his .35 Rem as the bear walked under his stand. MV was 2100 – 2200 fps. That bear was DRT. The .35 Rem is the typical “Mainer” bear gun. So I could easily “make” this new .35 Whelen into a “Mainer bear gun” if wanted. Then I still have eight rounds left over from when I had the 7400 back in 1997, with the 225 Nosler NBT over 65 grains of RL-15 in new .30-06 cases. My records show that five had been fired and recorded an average of 2760 fps corrected to MV. Their COL is standard at 3.34″. Sometime they’ll be fired at the range through the Traditions. The 7400 also had a 22″ barrel. I liked that rifle a lot but sold it, along with another rifle, for some ready cash.

The Traditions will not compete with my 9.3 x 62 as it’s intent is different – as a “walk-about” rifle it is light, short and handy for a quick “one shot”, mostly when I’m just “out and about” and scouting, or in wolf hunting.

A scope is yet to be mounted. Its official name is Traditions Outfitter G3, with a Premium Cerakote finish on a fluted LOTHER WALTHER hammer forged barrel and muzzle brake. Twist rate is 1 – 14″. It has an external rebounding hammer, a transfer bar safety, a thick recoil pad, drilled and tapped for a single scope base (Weaver type on order), swivel studs, and Elite XT trigger. Made in Spain, it is imported by Traditions Performance Firearms, in Old Saybrook, Connecticut, USA.

The break-action is stiff… but will improve with some work and gun oil. Trigger pull is crisp. It has an extractor, not an ejector (which I prefer, but have experience with both).

The .35 Whelen appears to be growing in popularity again. A dozen years ago when I went looking for another to replace the 7400, none could be found in this part of the world. So I came home with the 9.3 x 62. No regrets for that. But it’s a hot theme on the forums just now, especially since a couple of new powders (CFE223 and 2000MR) have come on the scene. These are supposed to boost MVs upwards of 100 -150 fps over “older” propellants at safe psi. Maybe. But my take is that reloading manuals, factory ammo and guys who loaded them were well below 52,000 CUP! Tested loads often came in around 47,000 – 48,000 CUP! That’s not 52,000 CUP! Whatever that is in psi (62,000 psi?), much setting of standards is arbitrary at best, even by SAAMI which appears very inconsistent sometimes: i.e., SAAMI pressure for the .270 Win compared to the .280 Remington, as an example: 65000 psi for the 270 and 60,000 psi for the 280!

There’s no logic for such confusion! I’ve been a handloader for over forty years and have never had a damaged rifle or had to drive out a fired case with hammer and dowel! A few loose primers and that’s been it… even then that was after several firings.

That the .35 Whelen is capable of 2600 fps firing a 250gr from a 22″ barrel is not news, and 2650 – 2700 fps for certain 250s from particular 24″ tubes isn’t exactly news either. All at safe pressures. I’m not sure I’ll bother with the “new” propellants as I think what I have – including RL-17 – will do just fine. RL-15, RL-17 and H4895 should do anything I want or expect. Then I have some 300gr Barnes, 250gr Partitions, nearly a full box of the 225 X, 225 Partitions and nearly a box of 200gr Hornady SPs. All that in addition to nearly a box of those 250gr Hornady SPs. Dies are RCBS.

.35 Whelens have long throats, and the Outfitter G3 easily handles this cartridge with the long 225gr Barnes X at 3.5″ COL. The bullet is seated only 1/4″ into the neck and is very tight there. This allows a good deal more of an appropriate powder. I expect that with the right propellant 2800 fps is possible for that bullet from the 22″ barrel. For a single shot there’s no need for a crimp. The 225-X bullet is seated over 67 grains of RL-17 (lightly compressed) for an expected ~ 2700 fps, primed by WLRM. I’ve used 70 grains of that powder under the 250gr AB in my 9.3 x 62 at +2700 fps for several years without issues. Accuracy in that rifle is typically less than 1/2 MOA for three.

Recoil will be fast from those 200s at ~ 3000 fps for wolf, in such a light rifle! I shot a bear using the 7400 firing the 200-X at 2835 fps. I still have a handful of the 200 Xs. Recoil wasn’t noticeable since that rifle was a semi and nearly 9 lbs with scope and ammo.

What is a .35 Whelen good for? It might be simpler to answer this question: What is it NOT good for? If solids were available (super-hard cast?), and it was legal, it could certainly take any game in the world. Yet with pistol bullets, it’s not a bad varmint rifle either.

“But it’s a single-shot”?, some might argue! Since I’ve written on that theme many times over, I’ll simply reply: “SO WHAT! Do you use a BP rifle for deer, hogs or elk?” This Traditions would be much slower to reload than my former semi, on which I never pulled the trigger twice on any game, but much faster than a BP rifle for a second shot if ever needed!

It can make +4000 ft-lbs at the muzzle from several loads, so it qualifies as a MEDIUM (.338 – .375 magnums). It’s at least the equal of a .338 Win Mag in effect with its larger bullets in cross-sectional area, and depending on how each is loaded it might be more effective on particular BG at certain ranges.

Whenever I do a search for a particular rifle for “Dangerous Game” on my favorite emporium, any .338 Win Mags are always listed, while none of the 9.3 x 62s are… same with the .35 Whelen! I’m wondering… “Who is doing the listing?” Certainly not someone who’s knowledgeable!

But really, my intention is to load it from 35 Remington to .358 Winchester ballistics for relatively close ranges. If I ever loaded it for a big bear on purpose, it would get the 250 Partition at about 2400 – 2500 fps.

Hmmm… let’s see… The recoil of such a load – the 250 Partition – from a 7.5 lb rifle ready to go “bang” would be around 30 ft-lbs, minus 15% – 20% for the muzzle brake? About 25 ft-lbs… or somewhere around that. That’s standard .35 Whelen fare, but much more than a .35 Rem and somewhat more than a .358 Win. But I said “If I were preparing specifically for a big bear”, otherwise for big game at any range, it would likely be loaded with a 225 Partition or 225 Barnes X at ~ 2700 fps. For brush “busting”, a 250 Hornady around 2250 (same as a .358 Winchester).

The scope is a 2 – 8 x 32mm Tasco World Class. It’s one I had on hand… very bright and sharp. The scope and rings, plus four cartridges, weigh 22 ounces, or 1.375 lbs. Add the base, plus cartridge holder on the butt stock, a sling and total carry weight ready to hunt will be slightly in excess of 7.5 lbs. At that weight and length of 39″, it qualifies as a walk-about “brush gun”. Scope will be kept on 2x, until more is needed.

And I’ll be wearing my WALKER’S ear muffs at all times in walking about to enhance hearing of game, but shutting down when the rifle goes “KAPOW”!

Not to worry… the 9.3 x 62 will maintain its place as a “true” medium in the echelon of rifles under my care.

Til the next…

Shalom

BOB MITCHELL

Hunting in Good Times and Bad

This is a simple message to friends who read my blogs, and others who may drop in now-and-then for a “look-see”.

Because of two full years of the Covid-19 pandemic, with the possibility of more on the horizon, and now Putin’s brutal War against Ukrainians – with nobody knowing where it will end or when – most of our thoughts could be drawn away from pastimes and focused more on current world and personal issues, including safety and future well-being that includes world economics and its effects closer to home. I think we all understand that those issues are much more ponderous than “my next hunt”.

< I was toting my .458 Win Mag – I’m dreaming of getting back soon to shooting and hunting!

Yet,  we need to continue living, having certain attainable dreams and goals. Some of it will be simple daily chores, and others of a longer term that may include a next hunt, while never closing our eyes or hearts to others in desperate needy situations.

In our context, my wife and I are not housebound,  and continue with a significant range of activities. I’m now officially retired as a pastor at the age of eighty-six. But that doesn’t mean cutting myself off from friends long associated with our ministry. Then a major part of our family is within an hour or so driving distance.  We also have the Internet and phone service which keeps us in contact with family scattered as far as the East is from the West – literally – in Canada! And how could we neglect our most intimate friends – who are still living – made over the years since our marriage, soon to be sixty-five years ago this June.

Unless days are very distressing due to physical pain, or depressing due to emotional issues such as a dying partner or loved one, advanced years seem to pass more quickly than younger years. Every day, week, month and year seems to fly by! And that’s the experience of most seniors. It’s not that we are free from aches or pains, or even chronic illnesses, but there’s plenty to occupy our minds with “good stuff”, and our bodies with healthy activities!

All that was mentioned to simply encourage others to continue with or find activities that they might enjoy in a safe place outside the confines of home. I still have tentative plans for a bear hunt in May — God willing. In the meanwhile I can do some reloading at home, practice at the range and testing of bullets. And bird watching. Then I’d really like to get out the CELESTRON for a glimpse of the heavens in good weather now and again. Plus there are spring chores to be done inside and outside the house. Gardening will be less demanding as we’ll cut much of it out this year for sure.

Our hope and prayer is that life will get back to “normal” sooner than later for all concerned. If so or not so, God is still the same, “yesterday, today and forever”, and we are invited to call upon Him for help in all seasons and whatever needs or conditions that may prevail within or around us.

“It is better to take refuge in the LORD than to trust in humans.” (Psalm 118:vs8)

Shalom

BOB MITCHELL

THREE RIFLES for All Hunting? My thinking…

From the rear-view mirror of an eighty-six year old – who’s still hunting and making handloads for rifles, and six decades of hunting experiences with over forty years in the handloading game (from .22 Hornet to the mighty .458 Win Mag) what would I keep as a three-rifle battery for all global hunting, including “dangerous game”?

The three rifles, not including a .22LR or 12ga shotgun which would be in addition to the three center fire rifles, would all be multi-purpose. That is, they would be capable of taking two classes of game in suitable contexts. So there would be some overlapping.

I’d want one of the three to be a bolt-action repeater with specific purposes. And at least one of the remaining two would be a single-shot. The one remaining could be either a repeater or a single-shot.

The three classes of game, including DG, is generally sorted as small, medium and large. However, within that broad spectrum there are several sub-classes and multiple physical conditions that must be accounted for in any planned hunt. So if we do much hunting of a variety of game in various regions, while one rifle could possibly satisfy, I’d choose three from those I’ve experience with to better suite any given game and physical location.

The FIRST: for small game, including varmints, to medium game, including wolf and WT deer.

CZ 455 in .22 LR

Though I’ve owned a number of .22LRs, and still own a couple (a Remington semi and a CZ bolt), I’d not purposely take them hunting for anything more than woodchucks, rabbits and fox – and maybe the occasional grouse. But they would not be my first choice for a variety of hunting conditions. Coyote, wolf and WT deer – a deer license is costly and includes the specifics of sex, and might go to 400 lbs in this area that requires much more than a .22LR has to offer.

So that also excludes for me the .223 Rem – of which I’ve owned a couple. And I’ve passed by the .243 Win in favor of .25s, .26s and .28s (7mm).

I was very impressed with my M70 in .25-06, so that would be my first choice of a center-fire rifle to fully meet the demands and expectations for taking, for example, a possible 150 lb wolf to 400 yards, and any whitetail to ~400 lbs. While a bolt rifle like my former M70 would be an excellent choice, so would a Ruger #1. It would get one load of a 120gr Partition at 3175 fps for coyote, wolf and WT deer.

However, in a mixed bag that might include black bear – which is often my situation in a fall hunt – I’d go with my second rifle as a bear can come in any size and I might need to stop it in it’s tracks as I’d be on the ground in a wolf or deer hunt and not in a stand. Even though a .25-06 shooting a 120gr NP from a tree stand with careful placement, is adequate for most any bear at a bait setup, yet that’s not the same thing as any bear under all conditions! My deer hunting and wolf hunts are in very mixed terrain that might involve shooting across the end of a lake or marsh. While a .25-06 has killed many bears, yet it still would not be my first choice under all conditions.

The SECOND: a rifle for medium to large game – including some DG, as in any size bear under all conditions, would be a bolt-action repeater of a medium-bore (.338 – .375) caliber in a magnum cartridge, or equivalent.

Since many of my blogs have been dedicated to this theme, I’ll spare as much repetition as possible while still giving a rational for my choice. Most of you who read my articles are already aware that I’ve chosen the 9.3 x 62 Mauser to fit that bill. It has replaced all other mediums, including: .338 magnums, .35 Whelens and .375 H&H’s. Why?

Because it can do what any of those three can, or could do! And that’s been proven too many times for well over a century in Africa – including elephant and Cape buffalo – as well as on other continents – for any realistic argument against it to have a sound footing! It’s main shortcoming is lack of awareness in North America, but that’s been changing for the past decade or so. It can, and has done anything the contemporary .375 H&H has accomplished. And that knowledge has come from renowned African PH’s as well as a famed Alaskan Master Guide for Brown Bear, Phil Shoemaker.

My experience is much more limited to three black bears, and ballistics at the muzzle that just about equal most results from the .375 H&H or .375 Ruger, using optimum handloads.

There is nothing in the world I couldn’t hunt with it. Some say it’s not legal for the DG of Africa, yet there are actually a number of countries where the historic 9.3 x 62 is legal for DG, including elephant, lion and buffalo (there are different sub-species in some countries):

Senegal

Benin

Burkina Faso

Cameroon

Ethiopia

Mozambique

Namibia (5400 joules = 3982 ft-lbs) minimum for DG. With handloads the 9.3 x 62 is more than able.

Zimbabwe (5300 joules min for DG.) Minimum cal. = 9.2mm

My 9.3 x 62 in a Tikka T3 has produced 4300 ft-lbs (5830 joules) from the 320gr Woodleigh and 4427 ft-lbs (6003 joules) from the 286gr Partitions.

Just sayin’…

Having a very slick bolt-action repeater with a match grade 22.44″ barrel, it’s a go-anywhere, do-anything rifle from coyote to….?

The THIRD rifle is no surprise to anyone who is a reader of these pieces: It could be either a bolt-action repeater OR a single-shot. I’ve owned a couple as bolt-action repeaters and three as single-shots. They could shoot .458-cal bullets from 250gr all the way to 600gr!

The first was a Ruger M77 bolt-action repeater in .458 Win Mag.

The second was a single-shot Ruger #1 in .45-70.

The third was a CZ550 in .458 Win Mag.

The fourth was a single-shot Ruger #1 in .45-70 with a long throat (LT).

The fifth is my current Ruger No.1H in .458 Winchester Magnum.

All of that covers a history going back for over thirty years. Mixed in with that are several other .45-70s, some with lever-actions and others with single-shot break-actions.

It should be obvious that I’m very impressed with .458-cal rifles AND their projectiles!

That fourth single-shot Ruger with the long throat (LT) was something I had done by my gunsmith so that longer-heavier bullets could be fired at meaningful velocities. That succeeded admirably! In fact, so much so that ballistics from the heaviest bullets (450gr and 500gr) from the 22″ barrel were equal to those from a .458 Win Mag with a 22″ barrel.

I would still have that rifle if I were still sixty! But it only weighed 8.4 lbs with a scope, one in the chamber and four in a stock cartridge holder. Recoil was getting up around 80 ft-lbs with the heaviest loads! So considering eye surgery on my one good eye and arthritis in my hands and shoulders, it got traded for a 2 lb heavier Ruger No.1H in .458 Win Mag. If wanted, ballistics are, on average, about 150 fps faster than in the Ruger #1, .45-70 LT. In truth, however, I’m slowing things down rather than speeding them up. All together, with the heavier rifle (10.65 lbs ready to hunt) and reduced loads, it’s quite pleasant to shoot!

That’s current history, but all things considered and reviewed, I’d still choose the three I’ve nominated, if they’d been available thirty-five years ago… Let’s see, hmmm… I’m cogitatin’… that would make me the age of when we moved to this part of the world!

Yet going back in history with my current experience and knowledge, a .25-06, a .35 Whelen (almost a 9.3 x 62) and that first Ruger M77 in .458 Winchester Magnum would have covered all bases – wanting nothing, needing nothing more!

Afterthoughts… There was a debate in my mind between the .25-06 and the 7-08, which were both favorites. I’ve chosen the .25-06 in this classification that would make a trio of a .25, a .35 and a .45. Interesting…. The 9.3 is .36 caliber, and if I were to replace the vacancy of the .25-06 today, it would likely be with a 7-08 Rem. The .25-06 is rare today, and very costly compared to a 7-08. The 9.3 x 62 is a half-step up on the .35 Whelen which it has replaced – and I’ve never looked back!

So, after a lifetime of using rifles, the ballistics of a .25-06 (or 7-08), a 9.3 x 62 (or .35 Whelen), and a .458 Win is what I’d choose today, hunting anywhere under all conditions, for small, medium and large game.

With current new rifles and powders, plus new-premium bullets, and psi equal to so-called “magnums” – in equal length barrels – older cartridges such as the 9.3 x 62 and .35 Whelen can easily attain “magnum” status of well over 4000 ft-lbs at the muzzle! Someone from Alaska has recently reported +2800 fps from a 250gr in his .35 Whelen. It was a book load for the .350 Rem Mag using a near max load of CFE223. However, the barrel length of his rifle was 26″. Personally, if I chose the .35 Whelen it would likely have a 22″ tube, making about 100 fps short of 2800. But 2700 fps is realistic today, at safe psi, from a 22″, .35 Whelen using CFE223 or 2000MR. Then there are heavier bullets in .358″ – all the way to a 310gr! Likewise, my 9.3 x 62 at 64,000 psi (same as a .338 Win Mag) can easily make 4200 to 4400 ft-lbs from bullets of 250gr to 320gr. But it’s the one in the middle (286gr NP) that can make just over 4400 ft-lbs (2643 fps avg corrected to MV). All from a relatively new powder: RL-17.

The 250gr AB is my second choice, and it can make 2761 fps (average corrected to MV) from my 22.44″ barrel, but I’ve settled on about 2700 fps. The 320 can do 2464 fps, yet I’ve chosen 2425 fps/ 4178 ft-lbs as my accuracy load.

And what more could be said of the wonderful .458 Winchester Magnum? I really can’t add much to what I’ve written over the last year or so in these blogs – but go to 24hr campfire, “Express rifles and Big Bores Only” section, and select “The Great .458 Winchester Magnum, why everyone should own at least one”, and there you’ll find encyclopedic information not found anywhere else! Hey! What could 6000 ft-lbs from a 600gr do for ya?!

And still… it’s unbelievable that there are a few who think themselves “experts”, and write “articles” in magazine “rags”, who are really quite ignorant of the facts going all the way back to 1956! Or they are very prejudiced in favoring the .458 Lott over the .458 Win.

I say it’s “unbelievable” that today such drivel could still be spouted by those who make their living as “professional writers”! They are either very lazy or idiots! Or both! They deserve a big fat “F” on their homework! They should have known – without excuses – that the earliest tests of both Winchester factory 500gr loads and independent handloads, done by an independent lab (White’s) as reported in a LYMAN Reloading Handbook (the 2nd one from Lyman that I owned), revealed that not only were the claimed ballistics (in a 24″ barrel”) by Winchester fully met, but were EXCEEDED at less than 60, 000 psi! (The Lott is granted 62,500 PSI by SAAMI !) Yet the Win Mag is it’s equal or even better depending on how each is loaded, barrel lengths and psi! (I’ve written ALL that in my .458 Winchester Magnum manual back in 2008!)

I KNEW, from my experiences in handloading two Rugers No.1 in .45-70, that since the first (unmodified in any way) with it 22″ barrel could make over 2000 fps from the 500gr Hornady RN, at a tested safe psi, then surely a .458 Win Mag with the same length barrel could make 2200 fps from the same bullet within safe psi! And when my 2nd Ruger #1 in .45-70 with an improved throat could make 2200 fps from safe handloads of that 500gr, then surely my CZ550 in .458 Win could do 2300 fps from its 25″ barrel without undue stress, using several appropriate propellants! And not only did it accomplish that, but so will the Ruger No.1H in .458 with a 24″ barrel do the same… and a bit more!

A .25-06 (or 7-08) can make about 2700 ft-lbs from the muzzle firing a 120gr at 3200 fps. A 9.3 x 62 can make 4300 ft-lbs from a 320gr at 2460 fps from my rifle. And the .458 Win can make 5900 ft-lbs from a 500gr at 2305 fps. Those are top loads from those rifles firing those weight bullets.

< Recorded at 15 feet from the muzzle of my Ruger No.1H (24″ barrel with Mag-Na-Porting), firing the 500gr Hornady RN over 81 grains of H4895, COL @ 3.56″, WLRM primers, Win cases and 54*F/+12*C.

It’s intriguing to me that there’s exactly an increase of 1600 ft-lbs from the 25-06 to the 9.3 x 62, and another 1600 ft-lbs from the 9.3 x 62 to the .458 Win Mag. To me, that gives a balanced selection and meaningful versatility in a “THREE RIFLES for All Hunting” battery.

Til the next…

Shalom

BOB MITCHELL

More on Testing Big-Bore Bullets

*** The following theme was partly written prior to the present crisis in the Ukraine, which is fast developing into a potential world crisis… So, I considered to NOT post it as it seems trivial in comparison. Yet the rest of the world must go on with it’s usual activities while still freely giving aid and encouragement to the Ukrainians… AND heaping condemnation on Putin and his regime through every means available without sparking a nuclear world war!

So, I’ve decided to publish it anyway as it may give some temporary relief from the present crisis for those who read these blogs. It’s important from a psychological standpoint to not spend hours on end focused on the current crisis over which we have no control.

This blog is about twice the length of my average blogs, so will take from about 15 to 20 minutes to read unless you are a speed reader. Then time spent on the photos and descriptions may lengthen into an hour. So you may want to take a break here.

________________________________________________________________________________

A lot of my life’s work has involved getting to know and understand people, and spending endless hours in counselling some of them. I’m intrigued by what’s on the inside of a person — not their physical “guts” but their thinking, moods, reactions, hopes, dreams, fears, goals, etc. And especially how they perform under life’s variable stresses: relationships and work environments, sickness, loss and a multitude of other causes that affect their psychological, emotional and spiritual self. I’ve had to be professional in that while still recognizing that many factors are involved in a person’s makeup physically, mentally and spiritually. And these are so entwined that one “part” can dramatically affect the others! A prolonged sickness, for example, will often negatively affect a person’s psychological state. Being deprived of normal social interaction during the Covid-19 pandemic has caused serious depression even among many who otherwise would be of a more “upbeat” personality type.

I cite those matters as a reminder that just “living” in a world of potential trouble at any moment is not a simple matter with simple solutions, like “Get with it!”, or “Change your attitude!” Much of the world’s population is crippled by circumstances they didn’t ask for or even want! So to understand what’s going on and why requires a willing to learn attitude, some humility, and a generous spirit.

_______________________________________________________________________________

Parts of the following have been previously presented, but they form an historical background for additional material that together provides a better understanding of why and how we should become students of the bullet we select for a particular hunt. And the fact that bullets by times seem to mock us, or laugh at OUR antics should cause a smile in return.

While a bullet doesn’t have “a mind of it’s own”, though by times it would seem so, it’s construction (“genes”) and circumstances (that it didn’t ask for) will determine it’s future. It’s predetermined for either failure or success by destruction (which it knows nothing about and surely didn’t ask for).

So while the exterior may tell us some things of importance (just like in humans), it’s what’s “under the skin” that ultimately will determine it’s future. And the future of any bullet is determined both by the mind and experience of man.

So this dissertation is concerning modern projectiles, known to us as “bullets” for hunting purposes. Some are referred to as “frangible”, that is they loose their shape and sometimes they lose “parts” or even “blow up”! Others are called “solids”- meaning, the intent isn’t to “blow up” but retain their weight and shape while giving “deep penetration” even after plowing through tough tissue and stomach matter, and even smashing heavy bone, then exiting thick hide with a triumphant shout of “Hallelujah!” (“Praise God!” – after all, no bullet would even exist if God didn’t!)

But due to the fact that in 2022 “we” have available (IF we can find some) more and better bullets (somewhere in the universe) than ever since Cain slew his brother Able with a “Barnes Original”. No? Must have been an invention by Joyce Hornady then… No? Well somebuddy did something bad to his brother that started all this thousands of “premium” stuff that nobuddy can find in super markets anymore… well… anyway, at least since Barnes and Hornady came up with them “originals” somewhere!

So this week we’re gonna discuss them big-bore bullets that do a terrific job wherever on whatever….

Some are “frangible” and others are… well… “non-frangible”, er, solids? My plan is to do more testing of each.

From this point on I’ll try to be less frivolous about something that’s as serious as “Your life might depend on it!”

Really, really Big Bores originally fired lead balls larger than a 12-ga slug! With stronger metals due to war experiences, and the invention of smokeless powder used in self-contained cartridges, it was learned that lead bullets contained in copper-alloy jackets could be safely driven much faster when fired from much smaller calibers. So by the early 20th Century, calibers as small as 6.5mm to .30-caliber were plenty potent in military “small arms”, to be toted by infantry men who were fighting men, but not primarily for “thick-skinned” machines or animals.

Of course, this isn’t about killing “thick-skinned machines”, but big, dangerous and thick-skinned beasts! Or those that can stomp, chew, hook, maim and/or kill the man-hunter! < From “Ted” in the Yukon… a retired pastor and savant of the mighty 9.3 x 62 effectively used on this Yukon grizzly! The bullet was a 270gr “custom”. One and done!

And, obviously, that’s with due respect to Africa’s dangerous fauna, and Alaska’s… but NOT reserved to those that immediately spring to mind… What about a big-bad 3/4 ton bull moose in rutting season? Or a 1200 lb momma moose protecting her calf? And there are others, are there not? Many a citizen has been chased by an irate elk in national parks like Yellowstone and Banff!

Then… if I may again mention my own passion for hunting the American Black Bear…. There is the potential for serious hurt – even death to anyone – who stumbles into the path of one that is hungry and mad, or hurt and vengeful, or generally having a bad day! Or, you might have an encounter with one that is a “sniper” – from long distance he smells you and plans an unseen stalk…!

As I’ve written more than a couple of times, if you have such an encounter it might already be too late, as in the case of two young women working alone in a clear cut for a remote mining company in North America. The one who got killed by a medium to large black bear never saw it happening until the bear was on her! Bear spray from her co-worker didn’t help as it only made the bear angry that then attacked her! She managed to get away for help, but by the time that arrived it was too late. Her partner was dead and partially consumed, and the bear was gone and never caught up with!

People who have a gambling habit know they’re taking a very slim chance of actually winning more than they lose, but they do it anyway because of lying to themselves (Do you know of any casinos going out of business because of losing money?). And humans who hunt, fish or hike in remote North American wildernesses without some form of personal protection are gambling with their welfare and lives!

<At 90 miles from home in this remote area my only companion was the CZ550 in .458 Win Mag. An approximate 600 lb black bear was an attendant to this bear bait-site. It was seen by a cottager travelling by auto over the dirt road about 75 yards downhill from this ridge. He said it was five feet to the top of its shoulders standing on all fours. Then it was seen approaching the bait site by my partner (while I was at my primary site 3.5 miles away) who squeezed the trigger on his .270 Win that resulted in a misfire that spooked the bear! Another friend was with him at the time and a witness to all that transpired.

In this pic, sometime later, I was alone, hoping for that bear to show up again… It didn’t happen, but just in case it did my rifle was that CZ in .458 WM. That bear would be close to the size of the grizzly shot by Ted according to three witnesses.

I’ve said it before, and will say it again: I’ll not go into any of our nearby or remote wildernesses, or even semi-wildernesses, alone or with another companion, without some form of ADEQUATE protection! My closest firearm to a big-bore revolver was my Ruger 96/44 carbine in .44 Remington Magnum loaded with heavy bullets that I personally handloaded. In many lonely wilderness walks, this was my faithful companion. I chose it over my 1895 Marlin in .45-70 because it was much faster in handling and getting off multiple shots with the short-slick 45* opening of the action (rather than 90*) to rechamber another round from the rotory clip. And the recoil was much less than from a handgun, allowing faster followup shots if needed. And it was plenty potent for black bear at close quarters with 300-grainers from Speer or Hornady leaving the muzzle at over 1600 fps. Then Federal made a DG load of a 300gr hardcast at 1550 fps. Those were all accurate loads.

Since were’re talking close encounters, a 300gr/.430″ leaving the muzzle at 1600 fps, inside 15 yards is still hitting at about 1550 fps/ 1600 ft-lbs/ that’s adequate for a pretty good-size bull moose from a .430-caliber/ 300gr if one can shoot! The momentum alone is equal to a 150gr at 3100 fps impact! But there’s also a bullet frontal area of twice that of a .30-cal 150gr. Penetration, of course, would depend on the profile and structure of each. The much higher velocity (2x that of the 300gr) of the 150gr is no guarantee of greater penetration — it might be less! So that’s where what’s “under the skin” of a bullet counts!

I’ve “tested” bullets in live game and in “test media”. Each bullet would have a story to tell if it could talk. But through testing we “hear” much of their stories anyway.

No plans to purchase another box of 400gr/ .458″ Speer bullets is on my agenda. At the time of its use on my first ever black bear, it was one of very few available for my 1895 Marlin in .45-70 that, according to SPEER, was suitable for not only a black bear hunt but elk and moose as well! I’m surprised they didn’t suggest it for Cape buffalo as it was the only bullet they made available for the redoubtable .458 Winchester Magnum with a top load at 2410 fps!

It worked well enough on my bear with an impact speed of over 1500 fps. Even then the entrance behind the right shoulder was 3-inches in diameter revealing dramatic over-expansion!

<Here the bear had been hanging overnight in a rainstorm with its guts out. When I found it in the alders at about ten yards from where it was shot, its whole right side from shoulder to rump was saturated with blood! The rain had cleaned that up. The Speer bullet was found in the offside armpit. It was taken down from hanging and skinned by “the crew” who found the bullet. It would have been that “perfect mushroom” except for the fact of a collision with a heavy bone…. likely the offside shoulder bone that spoiled the “mushroom”, giving a very distinct .55″ perfectly round and flat surface on the opposite side of what had been a 1″ diameter “mushroom” of pure lead.

I’d suggest MV should be limited to not more than about 1800 fps for the 400gr Speer, and reserved for WT deer. But because of the presence of bull moose and bear in those environs, I’ll never load that bullet again, even for bambi! Speer has made a very good lighter but tougher 350gr in .458″ that they proclaim is better than their 400gr (that is still produced in their facility) for larger and tough game — in fact they claim it was made for the .458 Win Mag. I’ve shot one bear with it and was impressed, so I purchased a couple more boxes of 50 each for my .458 Win Mag.

Another bullet I can recommend in .458″ without reservation for larger-tougher and potentially dangerous game is the 480gr DGX that was made by Hornady for the 450-400 NE. I’ve been testing it in my Ruger #1 in .458 Win Mag for velocity. In initial tests, it made 2353 fps/ 5900 ft-lbs. Prior to that I tried it in my former Ruger #1 in .45-70 LT for penetration in tough media along with several others. Impact into the media was about 1700 fps and it passed completely through 15.5 inches of two boxes of hard cover books and dry glossy magazines, plus two 2″ planks as though it were passing through air, and impacted a granite ledge behind leaving a .458″ imprint! It was never found.

That was prior to Hornady bonding the core and jacket. I still have a few of those left, and went looking for more ending up with a box of the 500gr DGX with the bonded core. I couldn’t find any more of the 480s. For anything this side of the world, I doubt the bonding process is needed. I’m convinced that whether it’s the 480 or 500 DGX, they’d be bad news for bears or moose even if they never expanded with that 1/4″ flat tip. And the velocity matter is a non-issue – only for range purposes.

God willing, I intend to do some testing of the 500 DGXs for comparative purposes with the 550gr Woodleigh Weldcore and 600gr Barnes Original. Actually, I’ve already started that process by a stress test using a vise (which I’ve also done in the past). This is primarily done this time to help with a decision over which bullet to load in my .458 Winchester Magnum for a possible bear hunt in May, 2022.

<From left to right: 500gr DGX; 550gr Woodleigh Weldcore; 600gr Barnes Original; 405gr Remington; 405gr Remington; 250gr Hornady MonoFlex and 400gr Speer.

This test was done on Tuesday (March 1). The amount of pressure on each bullet was all that my vise (and I) was capable of by extending the handle of the vise by twice it’s normal length. So each bullet experienced the same pressure.

Results:

The 500gr DGX experienced no deformation and lost no weight.

The 550gr Woodleigh lost a very tiny piece of lead from the tip that would weight less than 1gr. The case mouth was slightly bulged. Had more pressure been possible the copper jacket at that point would have begun expansion. It was obvious that the jacket was more ductile than either the DGX or Barnes O.

The 600gr Barnes O. experienced a complete flattening of the rounded lead tip so much that the case mouth ridge is visible, loosing no lead but came close to a “donut” of lead falling off. Otherwise it proved itself to be very tough without a glimmer of the copper jacket expanding.

The 405gr Remington acted similarly to a previous test. It stood up very well compared to the others with much heavier jackets. It lost no weight, was bulged at the mouth without splitting the case or collapsing the walls. Several years ago in a bear hunt on Crown Land, a 405gr Remington impacted a bear at about 1845 fps, hitting it in the left flank as it was walking away, and made exit in the opposite side just behind the right shoulder. That bear was DRT! This 405 Rem (4th from left in the pic) was shinny and new compared to the one following.

The second 405 Rem (5th in the lineup from L to R), on March 1, 2022, was quite old and badly discoloured due to exposure to the elements, and had a damaged nose (don’t know from what). It started to split on one side but did not collapse like the 400gr Speer, retaining about 100% of its weight.

The 400gr Speer acted the same as in a much earlier vise test. As seen, it flattened into a 1″ disc, much like the photo in Speer’s Manual #11, but retained nearly 100% of its weight, except for the small half-ring that fell off. In the following pic it is compared to the one that was shot from my 1895 Marlin at ~1865 fps into my first black bear (a trophy) at an impact velocity of about 1565 fps.

< From Speer’s Manual #11

The 250gr Hornady MonoFlex is a very tough bullet – don’t let anyone try to fool you on that point! It lost a small ring of plastic from the nose, but the red tip showing is very hard and the alloy sharp points of the case mouth were blunted and slightly expanded there from .243″ (Yup, same as a .243-cal) to .312″ by all the pressure applied! My Ruger #1H in .458 is already sighted for that bullet and it may very well be my no.1 choice. If the bait-site is ~ 80 yards (approx. 73 m) then impact velocity should be about: 2247 fps/ 2802 ft-lbs/ 52 TE. With bullet well placed that should be a dead bear right there! Hornady claims that expansion begins at about 1400 fps in media, so I’m assuming that the pressure applied by the vise was similar to an impact of nearly 1400 fps in big game or media. Starting at 2610 fps, 1400 fps would happen at just past 300 yards.

< This pic shows the bulge beginning at the mouth of the 550gr Woodleigh. In some ways I’m encouraged by the bulge as that’s an indication of expansion starting.

The main reason for testing the 400gr Speer (last on right) is that it provides an estimate of velocity at impact based on observed results in comparison with the one fired into a bear and Speer’s photo of the same bullet in their #11 manual fired into test media. The velocity of that test isn’t given but it resembles the two I’ve tested using a vise. And since the pressure was apparently similar for all bullets, by extrapolation (and some fancy math) I can make calculations as to approximate impact velocities of the others. The pressure applied is an independent factor. Resistance to that factor is a variable depending on the material under pressure, it’s duration and the area of resistance.

So, I’ll assume – both by the shape and retained weight of the 400gr Speers tested in a vise, and the one retrieved from the bear, plus Speer’s test and photo – that the flattened approximate 1″ discs that remained were all approximately equivalent to an impact velocity of the one retrieved from the bear = 1565 fps/ 2176 ft-lbs.

While it’s not possible to extrapolate all the potential variables, yet I think it is possible to get a “ballpark” estimate.

In making some inquiries concerning that 550gr, and reading all that I could find on results from its use in Africa, I think it will give some expansion well below the recommended minimum of 1800 fps for expansion on big game. In planning to start that bullet from the muzzle at 1800, impact velocity at 80 yards (to bear bait) should be about 1650 fps/ 3326 ft-lbs and if momentum means anything, that’s equivalent to a 400gr at 2269 fps… which is far more than the 400gr Speer into that bear at 1565 fps – about 700 fps more!

At the same pressure as the others, and the duration of the pressure being approximately the same, the 400gr Speer was “pancaked”. That resistant “pressure” was greatest at maximum expansion that appeared to have happened immediately in the bear – and when it contacted bone it was flattened on one side of the mushroom. Even then it retained 374 grains (93.5%) of its original weight.

In 2017 a test involved eight .458″ bullets (I’ve written about that test a few times) two of which were a 500gr Speer African GS and a 480gr DGX (No’s 1 and 2 on the left of the photo.) In the same media at the same distance and time, the African GS was defeated at 6.5 inches into the media and lost the softer front core leaving 310 grains intact (62%). The 480 DGX at approximately the same impact momentum penetrated the full 15.5 inches of a very tough media, impacting a granite ledge behind, leaving a .458″ impression – as mentioned, the bullet was never found. I think it went off into the atmosphere, or at an angle that took it outside the search area. It wasn’t bonded and it was very apparent that it didn’t need bonding.

In the above pics of the recent vise test, the 500gr DGX (bonded) as it is after the vise test could be fired from my rifle. There was no loss of weight and the nose remained totally unchanged like a solid. I’ve no doubt it would sail through the biggest bear the world could offer from rump to snout, or visa-versa given about 1600 fps impact. That bullet is not going to expand until it meets with very heavy bone.

The 550 Woodleigh should give some expansion at around 1600 fps impact, but it too should give complete penetration from any angle on moose, elk or bear.

I’m hopeful of more tests in media when the snow has departed and spring arrives with its promise of better times!

Some parts of this are repetitive of former blogs, but there are those who will read it for the first time.

Shalom

BOB MITCHELL

“But I trust in you, LORD; I say my times are in your hands…” -Psalm 31: 14 – 15

Big Bullets for BIG GUNS – their Advantages

Big bullets have this advantage: They don’t need to be going very fast to accomplish great things! And, of course that implies they exit from muzzles with big holes in them!

I’m fascinated by gun barrels with big holes… have always been! A big hammer can drive a tack as well as a 10″ spike, but you don’t use a jeweller’s hammer to drive spikes! A big-bore rifle has several advantages over smaller bore rifles – that’s a fact!

<This target was shot with a .22 LR at 100 yards and my .458 Win Mag at 50. Three from the .458 made that impressive ragged hole compared to twenty shots from the .22 LR, nearly half of which were wiped out by the three from the .458. (A cheap way of saving on targets.)

To start things off, let’s consider a single example: a 600gr Barnes Original in .458-cal can make 1000 fps from my Ruger No.1H in .458Win Mag, or over 2000 fps. A 300gr from a .375-cal would need to exit the muzzle at 4000+ fps to match the momentum of that 600gr, and a 400gr from a .416-cal would need 3000 fps to match the 600gr, .458″. Obviously, not even the .378 and 416 Weatherbies can come close to that! In truth, my .458 Win Mag can do about 2100 fps from that 600gr and it’s 24″ barrel. That means a 500gr from a .460 Wby would need 2520 fps to match the 600gr from the .458 Winchester, but even then it would come short in terminal effect (TE) due to the significant disparity in sectional density: .409 for the 600gr vs .341 for the 500gr. Of course, that’s possible from the 460 Weatherby, but I’m making a significant point here: The .458 Win Mag is much more capable than generally thought by most “gun nuts”! Of course, the .460 Wby can fire that 600gr at about 2496 fps/8302 ft-lbs, according to Barnes’ #3 manual. But does anyone want the recoil of that load – 115 ft-lbs of “kick”! However, we know that the 460 Wby sports a muzzle brake claimed to reduce that a full 20%… down to ONLY 92 ft-lbs !!

A “slow moving” 600gr of 2100 fps MV still has more momentum at 500 yards than a .375 Ruger has at the muzzle firing a 300gr at 2660 fps!

Bullet: 600gr Barnes O.

SD = .409

BC = .454

MV = 2100 fps

100 = 1941 fps

200 = 1790 fps

300 = 1648 fps

400 = 1516 fps

500 = 1394 fps x 600 = 836400/300 =2788 fps for the .375 Ruger – not even possible at the muzzle!

So I could slow the 600gr Barnes to 1394 fps MV and still surpass the .375 Ruger’s effect on game to any range where such an MV could be useful, based on TE or TKO.

The TE at 500 yds (2100 fps MV) would be 186.5 compared to a .30-06 that would have approximately 40 TE at 300 yards from a 180gr at 2700 fps MV (about 2237 fps/2000 ft-lbs at 300 yards). That being sufficient for an average 1000 lb moose (or equivalent) at 300 yards, according to a trainer of would-be moose hunters in Ontario.

Moreover, the recoil from my rifle would be less than from a .375 Ruger!

So that’s a second advantage!

A third advantage is the variation and sheer number of bullet types and weights in .458-caliber. No other Big Bore comes close to .458″. Game bullets from 250gr to 600gr at unseemly muzzle velocities increase beyond imagination the utility of .458-caliber projectiles. Let’s look at some examples of usefulness:

The following 250gr MonoFlex load is currently sighted for my Ruger No.1H in .458 Win Mag at +1.24″ at 100 yards. That bullet could be driven at +3000 fps from the 24″ barrel but I’ve loaded it to 2611 fps from 65 grains of AA 5744. It shoots three into less than 1/2″ at 50 yards.

250gr Hornady Monoflex: 2611 fps/ 3784 ft-lbs. Recoil: ~ 23 ft-lbs

50 yards = 2379 fps/ 3143 ft-lbs/ TE = 55.1 (good for an approximate 1400 lb game animal)

300 yards = 1418 fps (limit for expansion)/ 1116 ft-lbs/ TE = 33 (good for 800 lbs max weight)

**I could use this load, as it is, for my spring bear hunt. Bait will be ~ 80 yards = 2245 fps/ 2798 ft-lbs/ TE = 52 (plenty for any big game up to 1300 lbs with a proper hit to heart-lungs).

< 250gr MonoFlex

How does the .458 Win Mag fare in 400 yard shooting of large game against the “super magnums” of .338 and .375 calibers, including recoil?

The .458 load will be the 600gr Barnes Original at 2100 fps. It’s competetor will be the .375 RUM with a 26″ barrel (since that’s Remington’s barrel length for MV claims). We know from the start that the RUM will shoot “flatter” to 400 yards, but will it hit as “hard” as the .458? Not many large game are shot beyond 400 yards, so we’ll set that as our limit.

First up: The .375 RUM (Remington Ultra Magnum).

300gr Hornady BTSP, because it has a very good BC of .460, and is tough enough for soft-skinned game like elk or eland. Hornady lists a max load for that bullet as 2700 fps since that’s Remington’s claimed factory load. But “we all” know the RUM is much better than that, don’t we? So let’s give it 2800 fps (and likely even 2850 is possible).

Bullet: 300gr Hornady BTSP/ BC = .460/ SD = .305

MV = 2800 fps/ 5224 ft-lbs/ 114.3 TE

100= 2615 fps/ 4556 ft-lbs/ 106.8 TE

200= 2440 fps/ 3967 ft-lbs/ 99.67 TE

300= 2275 fps/ 3449 ft-lbs/ 93 TE

400= 2120 fps/ 2994 ft-lbs/ 86.6 TE (adequate for a 2000 lb Eland from a good hit)

We’ve already compared the .375 Ruger with the 600gr/.458 at 2100 fps. Again, the point is that the .458 Win shooting the 600gr Barnes (or 550gr Woodleigh, or 500gr Hornady DGX) has greater effect on large game than the “Super Magnums” in .338 or .375-cal., at no more recoil, and even less than some. The recoil of the RUM would be about 55 ft-lbs at 9 lbs of rifle. That would be around 5 ft-lbs less than my Ruger in .458, but the TE of that 600gr load at 400 yards is 200.7, making the .375 RUM’s load only 43% of the .458 Win Mag’s load!

That’s not saying a max load of the 600gr is needed, but even a reduced load by 300 fps (1800 fps) will still exceed the .375 Rum at 400 yards by 171.13 TE vs 86.6 TE or by about 2x as much! Granted, the trajectory would not be stellar, but recoil would be reduced to about 41 ft-lbs in my rifle with Mag-Na-Ports. The actual load I’m aiming for from that 600gr Barnes O. is 1750 fps as a bear load using 48 grains of A5744, which will reduce recoil down to around 36 ft-lbs.

But the .458 Winchester Magnum isn’t the only Big Bore, it’s just that it’s more versatile than others. Did you know that a .45-70 is capable of great versatility also – not as much as the .458, but they both shoot .457 – .459″ projectiles. And there are myriades of molds for cast bullets in addition to all the manufactures selections. A 400gr flat point from a Marlin is devastation on large game within range if hardness and MV are suited to the game. I’ve owned and handloaded four Marlins in .45-70, and all – including the 18.5″ Guide Gun – would make plus or minus 2000 fps from a good 400gr. A Ruger #1 in .45-70 (unimproved) could make over 2000 fps from the 500gr Hornady! My 2nd No.1 could make 2200 fps from the 500gr Hornady with the throat extended. That’s .458 Win and Lott territory!

<From the Ruger No.1 in 45-70 LT shooting a 500gr Hornady from 5 yards.

Then the .444 Marlin is no slouch, either, when good handloads are applied: a 300gr can make 2200 fps with judicious handloads. And a .44 Rem Mag of mine (Ruger 96/44) with it’s 18.5″ barrel was accustomed to ~ 1700 fps from 300 grainers! Up close and personal, that’s bad news for bears! A 300gr from a .44 mag at 1700 has a TE of 44.6! Just off the muzzle that’s plenty for a 1000 lb animal!!

A .30-06 firing a 180gr at 2700 fps has a TE of 48.3 at the muzzle. But the recoil of the .30-06 will be around 22.5 ft-lbs from an 8 lb rifle whereas the .44 mag load from a 7 lb rifle will be about 15 ft-lbs.

Brian Pearce has commented that a .44 Rem Mag rifle is as effective on elk at 150 yards as a .30-06! He should know as he has them on his ranch, and is an expert in ballistics for both rifles (up to about .375-cal) and handguns.

< Walking a trail scouting for bear sign I was toting my Ruger 96/44 loaded with a 270gr Speer

So a large bore wins again!

The deal is bullet wt. x velocity (at impact) x sectional density (SD) x caliber = TE in a comparative way, whatever value may be ascribed to the TE number. That is somewhat variable depending on bullet type, structure, profile and placement. But when, and if, we know what particular bullets do, or have done, at impact from a particular cartridge, we then have a baseline for making comparisons, or extrapolation for a reasonable result when such comparisons are not “apples with oranges”.

It’s not possible that any relatively small caliber, shooting bullets of (for example) 100 grains to about 250 grains, could begin to favorably compete with any true Big Bore in momentum and “crush” factor when the latter is using optimum weight bullets at optimum velocity. And a “true” Big Bore starts at about .40-caliber making at least 4000 ft-lbs at the muzzle – something like a .450/400 NE or even the .400 Whelen “wildcat”. Both can shoot a 400gr at 2100+ fps.

Yet various .416 calibers are quite popular, and numbers like the .416 Remington and .416 Rigby seem, by far, the most popular.

When I started writing these blogs on BIG BORES in 2008, I made a comparison of nearly all BIG BORES with the .458 Winchester Magnum. The criteria was somewhat different than most, but a fair conclusion resulted in a .458 Win Mag victory. I’ll not repeat all that, but how would the two .416 “R”s mentioned above fare in a fair fight with the .458 Win when momentum, caliber and SD “call the shots” for TE (Terminal Effect)?

We’ll give the “best shot” for each of the three. First up:

The .416 RIGBY

Bullet: Barnes 400gr TSX)

SD = .330

BC = 392

MV = 2462 fps/ 5383 ft-lbs/ TE= 161

100= 2261 fps/ 4540 ft-lbs/ TE= 148

200= 2070 fps/ 3804 ft-lbs/ TE= 135

300= 1888 fps/ 3166 ft-lbs/ TE= 123

400= 1718 fps/ 2620 ft-lbs/ TE= 112

Recoil from 103 grains of RL-22 (best by Barnes) and a 10.5 lb rifle = 61.6 ft-lbs (without a brake)

**Since the .416 Remington will be similar, we’ll not bother with the details (except psi will be greater)

The TE for the .458/ 600gr Barnes load given above is:

MV = 281 TE (5874 ft-lbs)

100= 260 TE (5018 ft-lbs)

200= 240 TE (4268 ft-lbs)

300= 220 TE (3617 ft-lbs)

400= 200 TE (3059 ft-lbs)

Recoil from 65 grains of H4895 and a 10.75 lb rifle (less 15% from muzzle brake) = 56.2 ft-lbs

***Of course, we could compare lighter .458″ projectiles, such as the 550gr Woodleigh or a 500gr from various sources, but that wouldn’t change the fact that the heaviest bullets in BIG BORES produce the BEST effects on large/dangerous game.

But when these bullets are slowed to about 80% (or less) of their potential, recoil drops as well as PSI, while still being very effective on medium to large game. They are the most versatile of all calibers. The reason why .458″ is the MOST versatile of any BIG BORE is due to a near infinite variety of projectiles!

< And, perhaps the best one-bullet-do-it-all in .458″ is the NEW Shock Hammer all copper 404gr BT with a hollow point, various grooves for crimping, creating different COL possibilities, and a BC of .422 and SD of .275.

When started from a .458 Win Mag at 2500 fps it’s TE at 1800 fps impact is 107 (enough for an approximate 2500 lb animal). My ballistic computer program, set to my hunting area for fall moose and elk, gives 1800 fps at 390 yards… that’s a long shot for most moose or elk. But I know (from shooting the 400gr Barnes X-Bullet) that I could push that bullet to at least 2550 fps, making 400 yards doable for bullet expansion purposes. At 2550 fps MV it’s doing ~ 1828 fps at 400 yards, KE is 2997 ft-lbs (for those who are more familiar with that concept than our TE). In any case, whether TE at 110.7, or KE at 2997 ft-lbs, there’s plenty for anything soft-skinned -including Cape buffalo- within range and well hit.

< from the Net

Recoil of my Ruger No.1 – about 48 ft-lbs.

Thanks to Dr Ron Berry (Riflecrank) on 24hr campfire, Big bores and Express rifles, “The Great .458 Winchester Magnum…” for promoting this new bullet and urging Hammer bullets to produce it. It’s now a reality! Thanks Ron…

Til the next…

Shalom

BOB MITCHELL

The LONG-RANGE BULLET melodrama

If we became seduced by long-range bullets for general hunting of big game we could end up like the proverbial dog chasing its tail! There’s no end in sight!

The sporting media, reloading handbooks and Internet chatter are all adopted in the promotion of those extremely alluring pieces of polished copper alloy with the colourful, sharp-pointed tips! It’s intoxicating! Just think… I could reach out and touch something at 1000 yards or more! But, hey, wait a minute… I’d better seriously calculate the probable consequences in pulling the trigger if the scope’s crosshairs is centered on a living, unwounded, game animal !

Nosler alone advertises a series called AccuBond LR (Long-Range) from 6.5 mm to .338-cal. For serious “long range” shooting of big game they say: “…hunters (were) asking for… ultra-high velocity cartridges in order to stretch practical shooting yardages past 1000 yards that would still perform on big game animals”. (Italics mine for emphasis) !!!!!!!!!

I’ll select only some from the magnums – 7mm to .338:

In 7mm: 168gr (.616 BC), 175gr (.648 BC)

In .30-cal: 190gr (.597 BC) – they already have a 200gr AB (.588 BC), and 210gr (.661 BC). The 200gr is one of my favorites for a .300 WM at near 3000 fps. So adding 190 and 210 seems like a bit of “overkill”.

In .338-cal: 265gr (.732 BC), and 300gr (.785 BC). I’d suggest that the 300gr, at least, is meant for the likes of the Lapua and Edge.

First off: Where I’ve hunted for the past 60+ years, no such range has ever presented itself, let alone a big game animal standing in it! The longest potential shot on a mature moose in the north of our province could have been up to about 600 yards (550 metres). Would I have taken such a shot it that’s all I had before the animal disappeared into the bush? That would have depended on the rifle and its load, and if I had a solid rest, the weather and wind, and confidence. That’s a lot of “IFs”! Certainly too many to focus on the extremely rare opportunity of shooting a moose at 600 yards. And the most important “IF” is: What IF that extremely sleek, sharp-pointed bullet misses the point of aim by a foot or more due to matters over which I have little control – or… I fail to control certain important matters? And ” What IF that bullet doesn’t expand well enough?” And what IF….?

The absolute maximum range I’ve set for myself for an animal the size of a mature moose is 500 yards under the following conditions: 1) More than adequate ballistics; 2) The animal standing broadside; 3) A solid rest for the rifle; 4) Little to no wind.

To meet those criteria, I’ve never needed anything more than a standard 250gr Partition (.473 BC) at 3000 fps from my .340 WBY, or a 286gr Partition (.482 BC) from my 9.3 x 62 at 2640 fps to make such a hit possible under the predetermined conditions. In either case, adequate bullet expansion should happen with impact over 1800 fps, and certainly there would be adequate penetration to destroy vitals from either load with a proper hit. Nosler AccuBonds in either caliber have improved BCs over their counterparts in Partitions, except the 9.3 Accubond is a 250gr (.494 BC) while the Partition is a 286gr which I’d prefer for moose or elk, and big bears.

But the ads keep coming with the promise to be effective on game from 500 to 1000 yards or more! But the upshot of that is needing a rifle capable of shooting something like a .340 RUM, .338 EDGE or .338 Lapua, made expressly for these “new” long-range projectiles, if big game like moose, elk or bears are in the super-scope’s reticle! But has the hunter also invested in “new” long-range shooting ability? All of the above three cartridges are capable of pushing the 250gr AccuBond (.575 BC) at around 3050 fps from a 26″ barrel. My .340 Wby was only 50 fps behind that, so it too had the capability of taking moose beyond 600 yards – but would I trust myself for such a shot?

At 750 yards, under what might be considered normal October – November moose hunting conditions, a 250gr Accubond leaving the muzzle at 3050 fps has a drop of about eight feet from point of aim when sighted dead on at 300 yards. Moreover, in a crosswind of 12 mph bullet drift of that 250gr Accubond, with its very high BC rating, will be 40 inches (over three feet). Even with a spotter using a good scope, would it be ethical to take that shot with a mere hope of a lethal hit? What if the moose is walking and hit in a leg? Will it wait around for two or three more shots until one is lethal? 750 yards is a long way from a moose in their typical terrain, and that moose could be long gone into near impossible habitat by the time the hunter even gets to where it was hit. And it might end up days later as moose burgers for wolves!

Did that last thought prompt “hunters to ask for… ultra-high velocity cartridges in order to stretch practical shooting yardages past 1000 yards.”? Lets examine that using the 265gr ABLR at a realistic 2900 fps from a 26″ Edge:

MV = 2900 fps

Zero @ 300 yards/ 12 mph cross wind

600 yards = 2182 fps/ 2800 ft-lbs/ – 47.8″ (4 feet) drop below POA, and 20″ wind drift.

750 yards = 2020 fps/ 2400 ft-lbs/ – 95.3″ (8 feet) drop below POA, and 32.68 wind drift.

1000 yards = 1767 fps/ 1837 ft-lbs/ -216.75″ (18 feet) drop below POA and 62″ wind drift (5 feet)

Impressive! At least to 600 yards… beyond that not more than 1 in 1,000 hunters could pull it off with any consistency in a general big-game hunt, but I think even that’s being somewhat optimistic considering all potential variables of a hunt in a variety of conditions. Sure, it’s one thing only to hunt the same terrain for the same big game, knowing exact ranges with little wind… but add the variables of unknown terrain and weather conditions? That will surely create a new challenge! And of course, such a hunter will be well equipped with the right rifle and load as well as a tricked-out scope, range finder and wind gauge.

But where, it may be asked, in the real world of hunting, would it be permitted by an outfitter/guide to take shots on a “trophy” game animal at 800 to 1000 yards – if any semblance of sanity were to prevail?

So, I not only have serious questions and doubts over the need for such equipment (rifle, cartridge, bullet, scope, etc), but also over the common sense ethics of even contemplating such “stunt” shooting of live game, let alone attempting it!!

<This is a logging road made to bring in heavy trucks and other heavy equipment for a recent logging operation. There’s the main dirt road just beyond my SUV, and forest beyond that. At least a couple of moose came from the timber beyond the dirt road, walked up this logging road and went into the logged-out area behind where I took this photo. It’s about 200 yards to my SUV… can you imagine taking a shot on moose at nearly 4x that distance! That’s a 4-ft high boulder blocking the trail in front of my Ford. Obviously, moose-size animals can get past it as well as hunters on ATVs. This is were I hope to do a bear hunt in May – June, 2022.

Instead of promoting such antics, there should be outright condemnation of such folly! Is anyone keeping score on how many game animals are lost to marginal hits by bows and “long-range” bullets? I personally know a writer for Sports Afield who was an outfitter/guide for moose and bear in Western Canada who told me what “they” used for followup of big black bears that had been wounded by bow hunters! And there were “more than a few”.

I consider it unethical to use marginal tools, including rifle cartridges, for ANY hunt! The rifle and its load should be “more than enough” in case poor angles and longer ranges than anticipated due to wounding happens. But how many hunters have that personal discipline and ability to bring down a wounded big game animal at 600+ yards before it’s lost? And that particularly applies to hunters using .300 to .338 magnums!

The point is not to single out certain types of weapons for hunting, but to emphasise the great importance of FAMILIARITY with them and their LIMITATIONS, as well as PERSONAL LIMITATIONS in their use! And that could include offhand shooting of coyotes using a .243 Winchester! Is wounding a coyote of little consequence if it spends hours or possibly days in terrible suffering before expiring?

A few years ago I was assisting a friend in a bear hunt where he’d be using a ML, which he’d successfully used on whitetails but not yet on black bear. First, we built a stand on a neighbor’s property about forty yards from the bait. I had another stand in another field about 350 yards away, but my intent was to hear his shot before I’d shoot anything. We couldn’t see each other due to a thick bush between us. Around 5 pm I hear “BOOM”, got down from my stand and walked to his location just as he landed on the ground. The search began…. and went on til darkness when he stumbled on the dead bear in a swamp in the opposite direction from what he at first thought the bear had gone. The swamp was almost dry but the swamp grass was very tall obscuring the bear that he literally stumbled over in darkness, even with a flashlight!

< This is the location and one of the bears that showed up for a photo-op early one morning on my trail cam. Was it the one that later got shot? It’s possible! Note the bait barrel has had some activity as it was standing straight up prior to bears getting into it, but it’s attached to those trees with a cable or chain.

What has that to do with long-range bullets? Actually, quite a bit. He was intent on using black powder (modern pellets) that sent up a cloud of smoke that blinded him as to the direction of the bear when it tried to escape! IF the bear had still been living when he stumbled over it… what then? He was obviously UNPREPARED for potential consequences! Then, to top that off, his twenty-something year old son used the same stand and ML for a bear hunt the following week ! That didn’t work out as intended either! Three days were spent, the last with dogs, in tracking a wounded bear that was never found!

All of this is intended to convey that UNPREPAREDNESS and lack of COMPETENCE with any weapon is the main FAULT in wounding game! Does that say anything to would-be hunters of game at 750 to 1000 yards who provoke the production and marketing of “long-range” projectiles?

< Range from the cameraman (me) to the farthest corner of this marsh/bog is just over 400 yards. Moose, deer, wolves and coyote all travel here. Could you imagine taking a shot on any game or predator at 800 yards!?

Of course, I’m not commenting on formal target shooting in this piece as it has little or nothing to do with that sport of which I have zero experience and little interest. But I do have real concerns over trends in the so-called “Free World’s” politics, economics and morality! Yes, and all of that casts its dark shadow over the choices we make to scratch an itch for something as inconsequential as the sleekest projectiles available – OR to prove something about ourselves that nobody cares about except SELF!

Please don’t misread anything I’ve written… I also like to use reliable and appropriate bullets for developing accurate handloads for practice and the game I’ll be hunting in their particular ecosystems. And none of that will likely ever exceed 350 to 400 yards under the most optimistic conditions. I don’t need any big-game bullet with a BC of over .700 to accomplish that! And assuming that one is going to do the essential trials and practice if 750+ yards might be involved, then VERY DEEP pockets is a prerequisite!

Informal or formal shooting of such bullets at 600 to 1000 yards on paper targets is one thing, where rifle, scope and load are harmonised for such shooting using a solid rest or by prone, but a hunt that involves taking the life of any animal, large or small, should be a more serious matter than mere “fun and games”, or to only gratify the ego of the hunter!

The hunter has an obligation to intimately know the ballistics (velocity and trajectory) of his/her rifle from muzzle to impact – knowing it’s LIMITATIONS as well as HIS/HER OWN! He/she also has an obligation to be familiar with the anatomy, structure and weight of the game animal or predator. They also need to have knowledge of their potential tenacity and temperament.

I’ve recently watched several of Billy Molls’ (“Modern Day Mountain Man”) videos. He’s an Alaskan outfitter and guide for moose, caribou, black bear, grizzly, brown bear and wolf, etc. But the one that has been most captivating for me is titled SHADOW of DEATH. It’s 1 hour and 41 minutes long involving a father and daughter as clients for: First – a trophy bull moose, and secondly, a grizzly bear. The seventeen year-old daughter was the main client, and she’d taken several big trophy animals prior to this hunt under the guardianship of her father, who also was an accomplished world-class hunter. With careful management by Billy and his guide, John, a trophy bull moose was harvested after taking four hits from her rifle (that was not identified as to cartridge).

Next came the grizzly hunt, and that didn’t take long to spot a good one moving down the side of a mountain in their direction. They got “Missy” set up near the top of a ridge and waited for the bear to get close enough for a shot. At about 120 yards the shot was taken, and the bear got hit in a front leg near the foot! Then Missy’s bolt-rifle jammed (from short stroking the action), and she never got off another shot. In the meanwhile the father opened fire with two shots at the fast disappearing grizz – with two misses! Then Billy decided he’d better step in with his .375 H&H, and got one shot into the rear of the bear before it disappeared into a thick tangle of bush!

The action that followed was all on camera, and involved Billy, his guide John (a veteran of such adventures) and the father, in that order until John took up the lead with Billy just behind, followed by the father with a video camera. Then the drama begins in sorting out the trail of the bear through nearly impenetrably brush where at times they couldn’t see more than a yard! John was single with no family, and he insisted on taking the lead. Billy had a wife and kids, and his rifle was a .375 H&H. John’s was a .458 Lott. They got close and smelled bear! (I’ve experienced that on several black bear hunts – when you smell ’em you know they’re very close!) Then a roar and John let loose the .458 Lott and Billy the .375 H&H simultaneously! Two good hits and the bear took off away from them. There’s lots of blood to follow – but still, it’s very tight quarters – the last 100 yards took almost an hour! Then another roar and a charge from ten feet! (measured later!) Both rifles go “BOOM” and then two more “BOOMS”. The video only picks up the sound and fury – flames from the barrels as the thick alders burst open in their faces like an explosion! The bear never reached them and lay dead, still out of sight within four or five feet!<This isn’t a grizzly but it’s as large as an average grizzly. It was a regular visitor to my bait site in 2015. He was also mostly nocturnal, but did show up early one morning when I wasn’t there. Range to this site from my tree stand was 85 yards.

Enough gun? Precise shooting at 750 yards? That 7 and 1/2 foot grizzly took a total of 7 shots to kill it, if we count the one from “Missy’s” rifle to the foot, plus one in the backside from Billy’s .375 at just over 100 yards, and three more from the .375, plus two from the .458 Lott at less than ten feet!

The moose was shot at under 200 yards… the grizzly literally at spitting distance!

Now, does anyone need “long-range bullets” for that kind of real-live drama?

Til the next… “Big Bullets for Big Guns – their Advantage”

Shalom

BOB MITCHELL

Planning a BIG GAME Hunt

It’s best to start the process by answering the right questions: What, When, Where and How, and of course, the Who.

The “Who” is the easiest to answer as that would be self with a possible partner. Depending on what is hunted and where, a partner (helper or friend) can provide welcomed companionship and timely assistance. Unless one is a very accomplished outdoorsman, he shouldn’t plan on a remote wilderness or mountain hunt solo. Do I really need to tell of the ever present dangers of a solo hunt under extreme conditions?

< Even skinning a bear of this size is a major chore. I was thankful for my partners who did most of that tedious work. The hide of this bear was auctioned and fetched about $350 for the one doing the cutting. He does his own domestic animals as well as coyotes that frequent his farm. The fellow holding the leg had shot a 400-lb bear and I helped with the skinning. That was a major job in dealing with three inches of fat and saving the hide for a rug. This bear was a fast growing six-footer with little fat.

Potential EXTREME CONDITIONS: remote wilderness; bad weather; steep and slippery rocky climbs, and physical exhaustion. Medications needed to maintain well being; adequate supplies in water, food and first aid equipment; shelter, means for retrieval of dead or downed game; more than “enough ammo” (some may need to be used in an emergency); other necessities for starting a fire to dry clothes and cooking; a cell or SAT phone; a familiar rifle with either iron sights or a spare scope already sighted; a good, dry and warm sleeping bag in a dry tent or warm cabin; a pen/pencil and paper; a compass, GPS, and extra batteries for a waterproof LED flashlite; compact nourishing food that can be put in pockets such as granola bars and nuts; a second pair of dry shoes and/or boots; and the list goes on and on…….. like an axe, tarp, knife and sharpener, camera or cell phone with that capability. And to be fully prepared for a solo hunt (or with a partner) in a remote wilderness, that might present extreme conditions, also demands the means and capability to start a fire and build a shelter from natural products from the forest or bush.

Without these, and more, remote hunting becomes EXTREME!<A 16 hour drive from home to the north of Ontario for moose, bear or deer. We had to be certain that we had enough gas and water along with food and a dry/warm shelter in addition to the necessities for executing the hunt itself.

The WHAT is the game pursued, and that could be a mixed bag of a moose and a wolf as one example. But the game being hunted will have much to say about WHERE and HOW, that will also determine the rifle and load as well as all other essentials.

If the game is antlered and large, that likely implies a remote area. In such a scenario, a capable partner is mandated as well as all equipment essential for retrieval and transport. In fact, most moose hunting today is done by groups of three or even more where responsibilities are shared. That practice could aptly be applied to elk and bear hunts as well. Of course, if an outfitter is hired most of those kinds of activities are his responsibility. That’s a huge burden lifted from the hunter’s shoulders and mind! He (they) can then focus exclusively on the hunt and shooting the game in the right place. But those kinds of hunts are reserved for a minority who can afford the fare that will amount to several thousands of dollars. The hunters that I know from the range, and having met up with some groups in remote places, share in all expenses and supplies.

However, as I’ve made it known, when I started to hunt bear as a particular species, I hired an outfitter in an unfamiliar region of northeast Ontario. He was recommended by an enthusiastic young hunter who gave me the phone number for Norm Easto. Over a period of eight successive seasons, Norm was my outfitter in that remote corner of our province. On a few of those hunts, I brought along a partner but we never hunted together – we each had a personal bait setup, usually separated by several kilometres from one another. But often enough when a bear was reported down, several hunters from the lodge (no matter where they came from) would volunteer to help in its retrieval. Most of the time that wasn’t necessary, but it did create a sense of comradeship at the lodge. Yet, by times a request would come from Norm to assist in various chores, including the finding and transport of a downed bear when he and a couple of assistants were off in another remote area doing the same thing. I well recall the comradery and it was some of the best hunting experiences of my life!

< A retired school principle and friend shared this hunt with me at the same lodge, and took this pic. This bear was shot with my 7mm Wea Mag, and he shot one with his .300 Win Mag.

In sitting alone in a remote corner of “no man’s land”, watching for a bear to show up before it got too dark to see ’em, gave a sense of wilderness challenge that dreams are made of! Can that be captured again? Perhaps… as it’s been a few years since I’ve actually seen a black-as-coal bruin sneaking in to a bait as the dark shadows of night brought a chill to the scene!

May/June are the months for a spring bear hunt in 2022… I hope and plan to be ready. In the plan, several matters have to be cared for prior to the actual hunt, such as where will the hunt take shape? A partner… is one available and/or do I want or need one? Firearm and ammo – sighting-in. Transportation. Retrieval of downed bear. Location of bait and blind since it will be a hunt over bait. A butcher, since I no longer do all that. Etc.

While most of the planning has taken shape in my mind, yet there will still be quite a bit of work involved once the snow and ice have departed, and the roads have thawed and become dry enough to travel on without getting mired in mud. And still: I haven’t yet settled in my mind about a partner. By times they’re essential and at others a burden if they always have to be told what to do and how to do it! But in the retrieval of a downed bear in brush or water (or both), a partner is essential in my experience if it’s at least 200 lbs or more.

However, since my hunt is planned for the newly logged-out area, the bait will be set on the edge of a clearing with a wide, dry, built up road to it. But that is presently blocked by a huge boulder which I can’t get past in my SUV. So if it’s a DIY solo hunt, I’ve yet to figure a way to get a bear from the edge of that clearing to my vehicule about 150 yards away.

My current plan is to use both big-game rifles, alternately: The .458 WinMag and the 9.3 x 62 Mauser.<This is the Tikka T3 Lite in 9.3 x 62 with the new muzzle brake, new 1 lb bipod and new Bushnell Elite in 3 – 9 x 40mm scope. The four cartridges are loaded with 286gr Nosler Partitions that leave the muzzle at 2583 fps/ 4238 ft-lbs. All together (as seen) it weighs 8.8 lbs. With an addition of four more cartridges in the clip magazine and chamber, total weight is 9.1 lbs. With the muzzle brake, bipod, reduced load and eight cartridges total, recoil is reduced from about 48 ft-lbs to 30 ft-lbs, or a reduction of 37.5%! And the rifle balances perfectly when hand held at the magazine clip. That is about 1.5 lbs lighter than the Ruger No.1H in .458 with one in the chamber and four in a buttstock ammo holder, like those on the 9.3 x 62.

This Tikka had previously destroyed two scopes, which have been replaced under warranty. I’m hopeful that a much slower recoil will spare the current one, which is warranted to withstand the recoil of a .375 H&H!

Of course, I’m not personally familiar with every possible contingency from Alaska to Newfoundland, or Labrador to California, but in general terms I realize that a hunt for mule deer on the Prairies requires somewhat different thinking than a hunt for goats in the Rockies! In either case, however, details must be mapped out.

And a major item on that list, if not at the very top, is surely the weapon. Even with a younger generation exploring various options for the hunt, such as bows, muzzle loaders and handguns, rifles are still predominantly first choice. My personal experience is limited to rifles and shotguns, though I’ve considered crossbows. The reason for considering a crossbow over a bow is blindness in my right eye (the reason I’ve only shot rifles from childhood to the present from my left side), and I’m still a right-handed person with most strength in my right arm, but I could shoot a crossbow like a rifle from a left-handed position. Still, this theme is consistent with “Lovin’ the BIG BANG”, a blog about Big Bores- but not strictly!

So assuming a planned rifle hunt, the rifle (s) and their loads must always be near the top of any list in the plan. Assuming a big-game hunt, I’d consider a 7-08 Remington as a starting point. Why? Because in handloads it’s a near twin to the famed 7 x 57 Mauser that needs no apologies for any BG hunt, including African fauna where legal. Yes! Even elephants have been taken with solids in the brain! The key to that being high SD, excellent solid bullets at medium velocity of around 2200 to 2400 fps from relatively close range.

< A remote wilderness that provides habitat for all big game, medium game, small game and predators of our province. And it’s only a little over an hour’s drive from my home. The ranges for shooting game can be from a few yards to over 1/2 kilometre (550 yards+), which outclasses a 7-08 Remington. I’ve hunted solo and with partners in this whole region for deer, bear and moose, using a great variety of rifles and shotguns.

The reason why the 7-08 Rem is downgraded in the thinking of N.A. hunters is due to having become mostly a “deer rifle” using 140gr bullets. When I had my one and only 7×57 Mauser, an unused-in-grease Argentine Mauser, I bought a box of CIL ammo for it. They were round-nose 160gr, and no one told me they wouldn’t work well because they were “too slow” or too heavy! I wasn’t a handloader and didn’t own a chronograph, so was practically ignorant of it’s ballistics, assuming those 160s were making about 2400fps. I didn’t know much except that that was “mucho better” than the new Marlin in .30-30 that had been owned by my oldest brother when I was thirteen and he was nineteen! And a couple of years later, after I’d traded it for a well used M98 in .30-06, a friend and REAL hunter scolded me for having ditched the 7 X 57 for the .30-06! When I say “REAL” hunter, he was a guide/outfitter in central New Brunswick where big bucks would easily go over 300 lbs and often over 400 lbs! He thought the 7 x 57 was superior to the .30-06! But, as explained in previous articles, I needed a scope on my rifles and just couldn’t mutilate that beautiful Argentine Mauser by having the bolt “bent” to accommodate a scope.

The point of all that… What is the point other than to say that the “ancient” 7 x 57 has an enviable reputation for success in game fields of the world… so why couldn’t the 7-08 be used in like manner? There are heavy bullets available to the handloader if not in factory ammo. Personally, if I owned one, I’d load it with the 160gr AccuBond or Partition for everything, and never look back. The one I did own (and should have kept) was a Winchester Featherweight with a 22″ barrel that would shoot the 162gr Hornady BT into 5/8″ at 100 yards at nearly 2800 fps! Right now, at our greatest local emporium, one can be had new at the lowest cost of any of their new BG rifles! If they were 7 x 57s they’d be snatched up in a New York minute… but because of the stigma of being “only” 7mm instead of .308, they are regarded by “The Press” as being “good” but “less than…”.

Any hunter, who knows rifle ballistics and handloading, is well armed with a 7-08 Remington for ANY North American game, including big bears, if he can shoot and gets within range! With a 160gr Partition at 2800 fps its making 2500fps/ 2220 ft-lbs at 150 yards and about 2420 fps/ 2081 ft-lbs at 200 yards. Placed right that should be enough for an approximate 1000 lb animal. And with minimal recoil of about 18 ft-lbs from an 8 lb rifle ready to shoot, a second or third shot should be swift and easy.

That would be my minimum for an “any BG hunt” in North America. It’s as good as a .270 or .308 Win, and better than the 6.5 Creed. But for a potential longer reach, I’d want more for BG, especially for stopping bears or moose at any range. Moose – a bull in rut will take on trains and transport trucks, and cows with calves are one of North America’s most dangerous for those who are unaware. So, personally, I prefer something that makes a bigger hole than 7mm (.284-cal.). And I hunt in bear and moose country.

< Seen last October at my planned for bear hunt this spring of 2022.

So planning at the very least includes facts of the ballistics of the rifle chosen from the muzzle to any range where a shot could be taken, as well as awareness of the region, and knowledge of the game animal whether as trophy, meat or predator. To go unprepared is like hunting while blindfolded.

Til the next…

Shalom

BOB MITCHELL

4 Bears, 4 Loads, 3 Rifles and 2 Cartridges used – A History Lesson

Do we learn anything from history… Personal history? You know the saying: “Those who ignore history are bound to repeat it”!

Applying that dictum to personal hunting experiences, I assume we agree. That is, by now we have enough varied experiences to know what rifles and loads we can always count on for success in particular varmint, medium game and big-game hunts.

This history lesson involves four black bears cleanly harvested with four distinct loads in three different rifles and two rifle cartridges: .45-70 and 9.3 x 62 Mauser. A Tikka T3 Lite in 9.3 x 62 took two of those bears, and two distinctly different .45-70s took the other two.

But there were differences in the four loads, involving not only the end ballistics but the choice of bullets as well. One .45-70 was an 1895 Marlin lever-action repeater firing a 405gr Remington at 2085 fps that stopped a medium bear in its tracks at 100 yards. The other .45-70 was a single-shot New England Firearms firing a 465gr semi-hard cast at 1900 fps that flattened a 6′ black bear at 70 yards.

In 9.3 x 62 I used two distinct loads for two bears over two years on the same private property as the one shot by the NEF .45-70 prior to owning the 9.3 x 62. Actually I’d killed one other bear prior to those two using the 9.3 x 62. It was wounded by a young friend. I chased it down and shot it going away using a 286gr Hornady leaving the muzzle at +2400 fps. It worked. But this is about two other loads and the two bears killed with the same 9.3 x 62.

The two terminated by 45-70s were numbers 1 and 2 on this particular list (several bears had been shot other than those selected for the history lesson): The first by the Marlin on Crown Land and the second by the NEF on the same private property where the two were later killed using my 9.3 x 62. Already I’ve mentioned the ranges for those terminated by the .45-70s: 100 yards and 70. Three of the four (One by the NEF and two by the 9.3 x 62) were all approximately the same size. Those three were all shot over a period of a few years on the same private land, and within 200 yards of each other.

So what did I learn from the rifle and cartridges used in those environments? Those are the lessons in retrospect, hence the history.

Some similarities: Two by each rifle cartridge that was loaded to max safe pressures. Three bears from the same privately owned farm land over a period of five years. (One other was shot using my CZ550 in .458 Win Mag on the Crown Land during that same five-year period – so one bear per year including the one wounded by my friend, that are not included in the four of our history lesson.)

Two bears were flattened where they stood and the other two ran off for 20 to 25 yards. The two dead-on-the-spot were by the two distinct .45-70s and their individual loads, and the two that ran off for 20 – 25 yards were from two distinct loads from the same 9.3 x 62. Ranges for the .45-70s were 100 yards (Marlin) and 70 yards (NEF). Ranges for the 9.3 x 62 loads were 68 yards (286gr Nosler) and 85 yards (250gr AccuBond).

Three of the bears were nearly identical in size, range taken and where hit. One by the NEF .45-70 and the others by the 9.3 x 62. Two were facing me in the uncut grass of the same pasture. One was in 2013 and the other in 2015. The 1st by the NEF in .45-70 was on the north side of a line of trees heading east and west, separating the north pasture from the south, and the other (2nd) was shot on the south side of the same line of trees in which my tree stand was located (in different spots). Range was 70 yards for the NEF and 68 yards for the 9.3 x 62. Both hit frontally in the chest as they faced me, with only head and neck visible above the grass line. In both cases I shot where I thought the heart would be.

The one shot by the 9.3 and 286 Partition went the farthest at around 40 yards down over an escarpment. It was about 20 yards to the escarpment where I think he may have tumbled to the bottom. The 286 Partition was found in the right flank in skinning, barely poking through the hide.

The one shot by the NEF and the 465gr semi-hard cast was also shot frontally while facing me at about 70 yards. In that case as well, all I could see was his head and neck. That bullet went through, coming out below the sternum and was lost. He dropped so fast that I lost temporary sight of him while the light NEF came down from recoil. My first thought: “He’s evaporated”, then I saw faint glimpses of black hidden by the 30″ tall grass.

A 405gr Remington literally flattened a medium bear at 100 yards downhill from my side-hill ground blind on Crown Land. That was a max load from my 1895 Marlin at 2085 fps. Impact velocity would have been just over 1800 fps if Remington’s B.C. number is correct at .281. It’s a duel-diameter bullet. The front half is a bore rider while the remaining half is .458-caliber. That reduces pressure. In effect, it is as though the Marlin has a long throat of about 1/2″. It was one of the best for a .45-70. That hunt was at my traditional Crown Land bait setup.

The last bear I’ve shot was in early October, 2015. The rifle was my 9.3 x 62 shooting a 250gr AccuBond at +2700 fps. Range was 85 yards to the bait barrel from my tree stand on the same private property — north side of the tree line but close to the west side of the property with dense brush and trees. That bear was nearly identical to the two others I’d shot on that same property in 2011 and 2013. A 6-footer that was very smart and cautious. He always knew when I was in my tree stand and where. He only came to the bait barrel (see setup) when he knew I wasn’t in my tree stand. So I fooled him… I left my stand around 6 pm and returned to my van for some warmth and refreshments. I returned approximately 1/2 hour later and caught him on (literally on top of) the bait in the barrel. The shot was angling down through the top of the chest taking out the heart and made exit between left front leg and chest. He went about 20 yards and the loss of blood was like it was poured from a bucket! The 250 AccuBond did its job!

Impact velocity would have been around 2550 fps.< 85 yards to this bait barrel from my tree stand. The large tree to the right held the trail cam that recorded at least eleven distinct bears had been hitting this bait, including three yearlings.

<This fellow isn’t a yearling, but a good 400 pounder.

Let’s review the results and draw some reasoned conclusions:

Bear No.1 – taken with a 405gr Remington at 2085 fps MV from my Classic 1895 Marlin in .45-70, on Crown Land in 1995. Range was 100 yards with an impact of 1845 fps/ 3060 ft-lbs. Bear was DRT.

Bear No.2 – taken with the 465gr semi-hardcast at 1900 fps MV from my single-shot NEF in .45-70, on private land in 2011. Range was 70 yards with an impact of 1735 fps/ 3108 ft-lbs. Bear was DRT.

Bear No.3 – taken with a 286gr NP at 2622 fps MV from my 9.3 x 62 Tikka T3 Lite on private Land in 2013. Range was 68 yards with an impact of 2500 fps/ 3969 ft-lbs. Bear went a total of 40 yards. It may have expired at 20 yards and then tumbled another 20 to the bottom of the escarpment.

Bear No.4 – taken with a 250gr AccuBond at +2700 fps MV from my 9.3 x 62 Tikka T3 Lite on the same private land in 2015. Range was 85 yards with an impact of about 2550 fps/ 3609 ft-lbs. Bear was dead at 20 – 25 yards from bullet impact.

All bears were killed from a single well-placed shot. I had rests for all rifles involved. And all loads had been carefully worked up and tested at the same range for MV and accuracy.

Since bears no’s 2, 3 and 4 were all from the same private property over a period of four years, and within a radius of about 100 yards, and of similar ages and sizes, I’m satisfied that the results convey some significant knowledge. Added to that is the info from the earlier Crown Land incident involving the Marlin load in .45-70. All together, along with other experiences involving both a .45-70 and a .458 Win Mag in bear hunting, as well as another medium-bore rifle, I’m thoroughly convinced that .458-caliber is more effective and efficient on bears (at least) than mediums (as much as I like them over lesser calibers). Yes, of course, there are larger calibers than .458″, but in my experience they will flatten a bear on the spot without a CNS hit! The Mediums will certainly kill, but are not stoppers unless by a CNS hit (Central Nervous System – brain/spine involvement).

That could be important if charged by a bear from 25 yards or less… In such a scenario, time is of the essence and limits shooting to a single shot before being mauled or killed by the bruin! First, there’s the initial shock of being charged at close range by a predator that could outweigh you by 200 lbs or more, with three-inch fangs and razor-sharp claws! If that bear has you in it’s sights at 30 mph, you’ve got LESS than 2 seconds to stop it!

<There was a black bear in the bush to my left – I heard it and had previously seen it there, and the bear bait was just off the pic to the right. The rifle was new to me and is the Tikka T3 Lite in 9.3 x 62 Mauser. The rifle was for protection in late August as the season would begin the first of September, and I was replenishing this bait site. This is the private property where I later shot the three bears with this rifle (in season) – including the one wounded by my young friend – plus the previous one by the NEF in .45-70 at least a year prior to this pic. That bear died at bullet impact at the bait site to the right of this pic. Note the tall grass and weeds. There were bear trails through it, but it was very difficult to find a bear therein at a safe distance, hence the tree stands. But I still needed to bring bait to the chosen site. That was the business of that day.

The owner of the 200 acre property wanted the bears “gone” – all of ’em! Though the farm was no longer in use as such (he was into heavy machinery), there were four horses in residence, plus grandchildren from time to time. About a year later than the above photo, while my partner and I were hunting the dominant bruin of the area, one of the horses got killed by that bear on this property! < One is missing – it was a black stallion.

“Those who ignore history are bound to repeat it”!

Since I’ve become primarily a predator hunter over the past two decades, with energy and time mainly focused on bears, I’ve often wondered what really happened to that trapper from Sudbury whose life was suddenly extinguished by a black bear! He didn’t come home from checking his trap lines… A search and rescue team was sent to find him. They did. But he was unable to fill in any details of that drama since he’d been buried under leaves and other forest debris, after being partially consumed. Drag marks from the still running ATV on the trail told some of the story, leaving some serious questions still unanswered, such as:

1- If he was dragged off a running machine, that was still idling on the trail, how could that happen? and

2- Why? Did he have a heart attack and fall off the machine before that bruin came along and found him?

3- Where was his rifle or shotgun? Did he not have one with him? None were reported…

4- Did he perhaps assume he’d never be attacked by a bear since that had never happened in all his years as a trapper?

5. Since there were drag marks from the ATV into the forest, he must have been killed suddenly. Was he fleeing from the bear, trying to escape on his ATV but got “caught” before getting it into motion?

Idealising bears as “cuddly” shows ignorance and a lack of respect for them! Bears have no more interest in being cuddled by humans than humans have in being cuddled by bears, and perhaps less so!

The main and most efficient predator of moose in Ontario is not the hunter with his .30-06, but the black bear! And that’s not merely hearsay, but fact! Go here for more details: http://www.ontarioblackbears.com

Til the next…

Shalom

BOB MITCHELL