JohnS

I do not consider shooting elephants at a distance off of a ladder "hunting".

While Taylor was also an "Ivory Businessman" at least he "Hunted" them.

quote:

Originally posted by JPK:

quote:

Originally posted by pichon1:

quote:

Originally posted by JPK:

quote:

Originally posted by Saeed:

quote:

I don't think anyone here argues that a perfect brain shot with a 570gr 500 isn't as effective as the same perfect shot with a 900gr 600 or even a 375.

I would certainly argue that a perfectly brain shot elephant with a 375 would dropped dead as if pole axed just as if he is hit with any caliber.

If you believe otherwise, that is, of course your choice.

"knockdown" effect has absolutely no meaning in hunting in the real world.

Hit an animal in the brain, and he will drop dead, regardelss of caliber.

Break his spine, and he will dropd in his tracks, regardless of caliber.

I think some of you here have seen far too many Hollywood movies.

No one is arguing this point regarding the effects of one cartridge vs another when your brain shot (or spine shot) is perfect (and the cartridge and bullet selection adequate to reach the brain - like a 220gr solids from a 30-06...as opposed to a 165gr soft from the same rifle), and it isn't even a part of the original question.

You continue to try to refocus the thread away from the original question, which is which of the 500, 577 or 600 has more knock down effect or penetration.

Personally, I have knocked down or down and out out more than a half dozen elephants with less than perfect brain shots, it is a relatively common occurance and has been something that professional ivory hunters relied on so your contention that it has no meaning in the hunting world is utterly without merit.

JPK

Hey JPK,
I like to see that word "personally" in your post. You have clearly seen knock down/out effect in the field and therefore your attesting to it's validity is good enough for me and a myriad of others. Also, as you said it's something that has been relied upon by ivory hunters for decades and written about extensively.

However there will always be those who like to dispute the "bleeding obvious", good luck to them. They are probably members of the Flat Earth Society as well.

Hey, its a double edge sword. For each elephant that I have admitted to knocking down or knocking out I've admitted to missing the brain shot!

Saeed's next post will be all about how if you make the shot perfectly then you don't need it and how he never misses. Not unlike the first several on this thread, but nastier and aimed at yours truly, I think! But I doubt that Saeed hunts elephants like I do. I know that he doesn't hunt buff like I do and I would take very few of the shots he does. I've never felt the desire to shoot dangerous game like targets, from afar.

No problem with being the butt of irrelevant comments, or a fellow hunting how he wants, but when things get close and tight, and your even looking for that, you ought to have the right rifle. If you want to shoot from a greater distance, a heck of a lot less rifle is required. If you read the posts by those with experience, and ignore those with none, I think their preferences for close or far stands out and is reflected in their choice of rifle cartridge.

My 2 cents,

JPK

JPK,many people have experience in doing something the wrong way.

quote:

Originally posted by N E 450 No2:
Lets remember Bell was not a "Hunter".

He killed elephants for the Ivory, as a BUSINESS. Not for Sport

He shot many off a "ladder" where anything bigger than a 7x57 might have kicked him over.

When ever HUNTING elephants is discussed Bells name should never be mentioned.

He did not kill his elephants in a SPORTING WAY.

He was a BUSINESSMAN.

Bell was not a HUNTER. Not a SPORTSMAN.

Not sure I would say Bell didn't hunt in a sporting way. Wandering tens of thousands of miles in turn of the century primitive Africa with absolutely no comforts, risking disease, attack from the indigenous population, (who had never seen a white man) not to mention the myriad of other thing that bite and sting one to death in what was then a very Dark Continent, could not have been exactly champagne hunting.

I would suggest he was about as sporting as one could get.

I believe the most important step in doing the job correct is to use a rifle with a well maintained bore.If you don't,then disaster is waiting to happen.Also,the minimum caliber for ele should be the 458 Lott.

Good Lord, this topic is still dragging on?

Better to let it go before everyone say things they'll later regret.

Oh yeah, if Taylor wasn't a hunter supreme I don't know anyone that was or is.

Sorry, couldn't help myself.

quote:

Originally posted by Will:
Good Lord, this topic is still dragging on?

Better to let it go before everyone say things they'll later regret.

Oh yeah, if Taylor wasn't a hunter supreme I don't know anyone that was or is.

Sorry, couldn't help myself.

AMEN. PONDORO RULES!!

quote:

Originally posted by John S:

quote:

Originally posted by 500grains:

quote:

Originally posted by JPK:

Saeed's next post will be all about how if you make the shot perfectly then you don't need it and how he never misses. Not unlike the first several on this thread, but nastier and aimed at yours truly, I think!

Some guys hunt elephant on their hind legs like a man, get close and get a charge. Other guys like to use a 3-9x scope and shoot from shooting sticks. The guy paying the tab decides his style of hunting I suppose.

That's a bit condescending, don't you think? What kind of charge are you talking about here? Being charged by the animal or just getting your thrill for the day? I gather you believe anyone who doesn't care to chase cow elephants in ultra thick cover with a double rifle is somehow not deserving to be called a "real" man or is just a second class hunter?

Only taking issue with that post? Did you fail to read the host's posts?

pichon1

Never said Bells exploits were not hazardous, or not an adventure, just that he was not a "Hunter".

His method of killing elephants has no bearing in any discussion today about "hunting" elephants.

If Bell was alive today and killing elephants he would be using a helicopter.

500-
I believe that anyone hunting elephant, regardless of where and what type cover is involved, hunts them on their hind legs like a man. We can disagree on what rifle is best suited and what bullets may be the best, but we're all hunting and walking a fair amount of miles to get the shot we end up taking. Why would the range of that shot make one any more of a hunter than the other?

450-
Taylor was an ivory hunter, or more properly, an ivory poacher. Still a market hunter, regardless of terminology.

quote:

Originally posted by N E 450 No2:
pichon1

Never said Bells exploits were not hazardous, or not an adventure, just that he was not a "Hunter".

His method of killing elephants has no bearing in any discussion today about "hunting" elephants.

If Bell was alive today and killing elephants he would be using a helicopter.

Not sure I get your drift. He used whatever methods that were available to him to kill his quarry as quickly and efficiently as possible (as most hunters do) and those means were far more primitive than what is available today. Any ele hunt today involves 4x4 vehicles, GPS's, two ways, backup PH's, luxury camps etc. How many modern day ele hunters would be prepared to do it Bell's non sporting way? Not many could or would be prepared to walk from "arsehole to breakfast" and back again across much of Africa on 12 month plus safaris. No bush landing strips (or aircraft for that matter) to make the journey quicker.

In his book "African Rifles & Cartridges" Pondoro says that he rates Bell as the greatest elephant HUNTER of them all. A pretty good endorsement I think, well good enough for me anyway.

Just my opinion, but I see Bell as a killer of elephants, not a hunter, just as I see the American Bison Businessmen killers not hunters.

Maybe we are just not agreeing on what to call something.

I consider Bell a killer of elephants, myself a hunter.

A more PC name for the difference might be market hunter and sport hunter.

Would you consider someone, who today, shot his elephant out of the back of the tuck, at a distance, with a smallbore scoped rifle an "Elephant Hunter" or a fella that killed and elephant?

quote:

Originally posted by N E 450 No2:
Just my opinion, but I see Bell as a killer of elephants, not a hunter, just as I see the American Bison Businessmen killers not hunters.

Maybe we are just not agreeing on what to call something.

I consider Bell a killer of elephants, myself a hunter.

A more PC name for the difference might be market hunter and sport hunter.

Would you consider someone, who today, shot his elephant out of the back of the tuck, at a distance, with a smallbore scoped rifle an "Elephant Hunter" or a fella that killed and elephant?

I suppose we are argueing semmantics here. What I am saying is that in order for Bell to have killed his bag of ele, he had to first "hunt" them, which he did under the most arduous conditions (compared to today). I am not sure where the truck comes into the equation. There certainly weren't any around in Bell's day. However in answer to your question, no, I wouldn't condone shooting an ele from any vehicle. Although today vehicles are used in the process of hunting ele, if only to cut down on the ammount of walking that is sometimes required.

A hunter under your definition also kills elephants, so is it a numbers game? ie. Once you get past a certain number you cease to become a "hunter" and just turn into a killer? Where does one draw the line in the sand?

I think I need to ask Dan (500 grains) about this quandry.

No it is not a matter of numbers, if I had the money I would be over there now.

I have heard from various sources that Zim and Bots have @ 60 thousand or so to many elephants
EACH.

If I could afford it I would buy the whole quota for both countries.

However, I would shoot them up close with a double rifle, not off a ladder with a small bore.

I just do not think shooting them off a ladder is Sporting.

But then Bell was not trying to be a sportsman, he was a Businessman.

i think, in time, it's gonna be proven when enough anecdotal evidence comes in that the bullet and bullet design matters more than caliber or ME ever did. the barnes and flat point monometal solids/punch bullets have completely changed the game and what was once marginal is now absolutely acceptable and dependable. these guys kept going bigger b/c their bullets pretty much sucked compared to what we have now. there's 600 nitro rounds that have been shown to not penetrate the skull frontally on elephants and then there's some damn pistol rounds that'll exit the back of the head or be found 4 feet into the elephant on a frontal brain shot, let alone a 375 H/H with the same style bullet.

Hey guys this isn't such a difficult concept. Comparing knock down between calibers that all have the ability to stimulate and shock the central nervous system ie the brain or spinal cord and cause the knock down effect is irrelevant. The nervous system has an all or none firing mechanism and when enough shock is dealt whether it's physical damage to the brain or severe close impact, knock down occurs. Think of it as a light switch. You flip the switch the light goes out. You can hit the switch hard with a 600 NE, or you can flip it with average 375HH force, the end result is the same. If you don,t apply enough pressure the switch doesn't move hense no knock down. Which is what occurs when on occasional person or animal is shot with a light caliber slower moving projectile in the brain and doesn't go down and lives another day. Therefore, of the capable calibers, shot placement becomes the primary determinant in knock down.

Penetration is a much easier repeatable analysis which hopefully someone has some data on.
Here's one for the chest thumpers. Hitting something the size of an elephants head at 5 or so yards isn't exactly a difficult feat or there would be a hell of alot more stompings taking place. So you shouldn't worry if someone wants to use sticks or a scope.

quote:

Originally posted by John S:
500-
I believe that anyone hunting elephant, regardless of where and what type cover is involved, hunts them on their hind legs like a man. We can disagree on what rifle is best suited and what bullets may be the best, but we're all hunting and walking a fair amount of miles to get the shot we end up taking. Why would the range of that shot make one any more of a hunter than the other?

]

Before we get to such a question, I am interested in your decision to ignore rude and condescending posts from one person posting on this thread in order to focus on my post. Seems a bit odd, unless you are just trying to score points with the host....

quote:

Originally posted by N E 450 No2:
No it is not a matter of numbers, if I had the money I would be over there now.

I have heard from various sources that Zim and Bots have @ 60 thousand or so to many elephants
EACH.

If I could afford it I would buy the whole quota for both countries.

However, I would shoot them up close with a double rifle, not off a ladder with a small bore.

I just do not think shooting them off a ladder is Sporting.

But then Bell was not trying to be a sportsman, he was a Businessman.

The reason Bell sometimes shot from a ladder was so that he could SEE the friggin elephant in the 8-10 ft grass that he was surrounded by. He also shot while perched on his gunbearers shoulders for the same reason. Being surrounded by ele under those conditions ( they were often only metres away) sounds pretty bloody sporting to me.

By the way who says every ele has to be shot with a double, so close that you can "smell the peanuts in it's breath"? (Capstick's line)

Just curious, in a perfect world, how many elephants would you like to shoot/kill//hunt/eradicate, in a sporting way of course?

quote:

If I could afford it I would buy the whole quota for both countries. Big Grin

Not if I beat you to it!!

quote:

Originally posted by HAY-MAN:
Hey guys this isn't such a difficult concept. Comparing knock down between calibers that all have the ability to stimulate and shock the central nervous system ie the brain or spinal cord and cause the knock down effect is irrelevant. The nervous system has an all or none firing mechanism and when enough shock is dealt whether it's physical damage to the brain or severe close impact, knock down occurs. Think of it as a light switch. You flip the switch the light goes out. You can hit the switch hard with a 600 NE, or you can flip it with average 375HH force, the end result is the same. If you don,t apply enough pressure the switch doesn't move hense no knock down. Which is what occurs when on occasional person or animal is shot with a light caliber slower moving projectile in the brain and doesn't go down and lives another day. Therefore, of the capable calibers, shot placement becomes the primary determinant in knock down.

Penetration is a much easier repeatable analysis which hopefully someone has some data on.
Here's one for the chest thumpers. Hitting something the size of an elephants head at 5 or so yards isn't exactly a difficult feat or there would be a hell of alot more stompings taking place. So you shouldn't worry if someone wants to use sticks or a scope.

You are wrong on all counts.

First, an 7x57 or 577 or whatever that drives a bullet to the brain is going to kill the elephant.

But to knock down an elephant with a missed brain shot takes more than a small bore. While it shouldn't be relied on it becomes progressivly more likely with grater bore size and bullet weight, given enough velocity to get a solid bullet to the brain to begin with according to more than one hunderd years of cumulative experience of thousands of ivory, sport and proffessional hunters. Turning an elephant from a charge isn't much different, bigger bore and more bullet weight equals more likely hood of turning a charge. Same experience for over a century.

The target for a frontal brain shot on an elephant ranges from roughly a 5" oblong "circle" to maybe 6" worth. Hitting a circle of that size at ten or twenty or fifty yards isn't much of a challenge, but hitting that circle when you can't see it and it is from 1' to more than 3' behind the point of impact starts to become a challenge. Throw in great relative motion, which is greater the closer you get, of the brain when the elephant turns to you or raises or lowers its head and there is more of a challenge. There is even greater relative motion of the poi required to reach that relatively moving brain, again all the greater when you have closed to close range. When your approach is to within 10yds or so, you are well inside the range where many elephants will come rather than go when they sense you, so add in a bit of tension too. Becomes a challenge, eh?

Keep in mind that there are no fixed reference points to make the frontal shot on an elephant. Each reference point moves in relation to the brain as the elephant raises or lowers its head or turns. There are relatively fixed reference points on side brain shots, but not from the front.

When you stand off at 50, 30, and for some elephants 20yds, you have all of the time in the world to evaluate the reference pints, the spacial relationships, etc to make that shot. Its blown more than half the time anyway. When you approach until the lephant turns to you, you have only a moment to mount your rifle, gaude your shot and make it, or not.

Why in the world would a sane man do this without a rifle that has a track record of at least turning elephants, let alone dropping them?

My answer is that the medium bore fan either doesn't hunt elephants close and in the thick stuff and so doesn't do it or is dumb enough to believe his PH is infallible. Possibly, in some cases, doesn't have enough experience to know better.

Penetration is a good thing when talking elephants, and there is no such thing as too much. But there is such a thing as enough. All of the medium bores from the 9.3x62 and the large bores from 450NE up have enough, given a solid bullet stout enough.

And the reasons that there aren't more stompings is manifold. First, most won't hunt close, and that applies to PH's as well as clients. Second those who do, and do it more than a few times ussually end up with a big bore stopping rifle, at least so far as I can tell from my inquiries and observations. Third, Ph's might not be infallible, but many are damned good.

JPK

quote:

Originally posted by tradmark:
i think, in time, it's gonna be proven when enough anecdotal evidence comes in that the bullet and bullet design matters more than caliber or ME ever did. the barnes and flat point monometal solids/punch bullets have completely changed the game and what was once marginal is now absolutely acceptable and dependable. these guys kept going bigger b/c their bullets pretty much sucked compared to what we have now. there's 600 nitro rounds that have been shown to not penetrate the skull frontally on elephants and then there's some damn pistol rounds that'll exit the back of the head or be found 4 feet into the elephant on a frontal brain shot, let alone a 375 H/H with the same style bullet.

Given a legal rifle, any good bullet will do it, penetration wise from steel jacketed solids to truncated cone flat nose monos. Thats why they're legal cartridges. I prefer North Fork flat noses, but I hunt with Woodleighs too.

But penetration does not equal stopping or knocking down or out. That has proven to take diameter and weight, plus of course sufficient velocity.

JPK

quote:

Originally posted by pichon1:
Just curious, in a perfect world, how many elephants would you like to shoot/kill//hunt/eradicate, in a sporting way of course?

I can't speak for 450NE No2, but my first goal is twenty five to be finished within the next two to three years. My second is fifty, within the next ten. My third is one hundred before I die. But I hunt for the experience and the thrill and the sheer fun, not just for the numbers. The numbers are more a result of setting a pace and a budget of sorts. But I enjoy elephant hunting and so accelerating the pace and breaking the budget.

BTW, making brain shots is not like riding a bicycle, you go stale without doing the real thing and that huge elephant head under your foresight doesn't look as familiar as it once did. Eighteen months off because of business obligations was a setback.

I suspect that if I ever achieve "seeing the brain suspended within the elephant", as Richard Harland descibes it in his book "Ndlovu", I will have achieved my goal, no matter how many elephants I have hunted.

JPK

quote:

Originally posted by John S:
Why would the range of that shot make one any more of a hunter than the other?

It does on any game. The approach on any game is what makes the hunter. The more so for elephants because the tension grows increasingly exponentially with each step inside of fifteen yards or so. Even more when you become the target and the defender. That doesn't happen from afar, at least with any regularity.

JPK

quote:

Originally posted by Saeed:
We sit in camp and laugh at all the stories written how a 416 kills so much better than 375! And a 458 kills so much better than a 404!

They do, of course, in the dreams of the writers.

That about says it all!

Yes, says it all: irrlevant and non-responsive t the topic of this thread, which is, "Penetration of the 577NE vs 500NE vs 600NE".

Doesn't even mention one of the cartridges.

JPK

quote:

Originally posted by JPK:
Yes, says it all: irrlevant and non-responsive t the topic of this thread, which is, "Penetration of the 577NE vs 500NE vs 600NE".

Doesn't even mention one of the cartridges.

JPK

,

JPK I'll not be drawn into this little stinck fest! You know nobody ever wins these things! Opinions are something everybody has whether they know what they are talking about or not. This string is no different!

My post above was an answer to the only post I've read in this extensive pissing contest, and it applies to 90% of the "THIS IS BETTER THAN THAT" so-called debates on the internet! It just happened to be the first thing I saw after being off the forum for a week or so, and I have no idea what the concinsus is,if there is one which I doubt, nor do I care
PUT IT WHERE IT GOES, and you've got a dead animal. END OF STORY!

..................

Very, very seldom do I ever disagree with 450 No 2. In this case though I disagree with his determination that Bell wasn't a hunter. I submit that he had to be much more of a hunter than any modern sport hunter. He had to do all the work except for tracking himself. He made the decisions that counted most such as, is the track fresh enough to follow?, how do I approach the elephants to afford the maximum number being shot?, etc., etc. Modern clients after elephant do little if any actual hunting. On my first elephant hunt my PH Gomez Adams told me that less than 5% of the hunters he guided had any interest at all in the technicalities of elephant hunting. They are content to follow along and do what the PH tells them to do. They very seldom even ask any questions as to what is going on. And of those that do show some interest in hunting techniques very, very, very few ever get to the point that the PH thinks he could go out with a tracker and safely hunt a single bull elephant with out a PH let alone take on cow herds.

I do agree that Bell had a lot to admire but he was completely lacking in sportsmanship. Any one that admits to leaving 100 or more wounded elephants in the bush does not deserve my respect and shouldn't deserve yours. Many here admire him for hunting elephants with a 7X57 or 303, totally inadequate calibers for elephant hunting. Had he used a 450 or above he would in all likely hood not left so many wounded elephants. Yes, he was a commercial ivory hunter that hunted for a living. To say that he wasn't a hunter would be the same as saying that your elephant hunting PH is not a hunter because he is only doing it for the daily rate he is being paid. Both are commercial hunters.

465H&H

I agree with .465H&H across the board.

It is absurd even to suggest that Bell was not a hunter.

As for his choice of weaponry, well that is another can of meat.

Well I must say I agree with 465H&H even though he says he disagrees with me.

Actually Pinchon 1, 465H&H and I feel the same about Bell, we have just expressed our feelings in a different way with different definations applied to the words we used.

I am the root of all this disagreement, when I said bell was not a hunter. My mistake, I shouldhave said that:

Bell was not a SPORT HUNTER and his shooting exploits have no place in a discussion about what rifles should be used by the modern SPORT HUNTER.

Bell was a MARKET HUNTER, and much like a culling operation the conditions are different from a sport hunt.

I am not trying to take anything away from his skill or the JOB he was doing. I am not badmouthing Bell, he was an Adventurer of the highest order.

Simply,what he did with his small bores and what cullering officers do with an FN in 308, have no application to the Sport Hunter.

quote:

Originally posted by 465H&H:
Very, very seldom do I ever disagree with 450 No 2. In this case though I disagree with his determination that Bell wasn't a hunter. I submit that he had to be much more of a hunter than any modern sport hunter. He had to do all the work except for tracking himself. He made the decisions that counted most such as, is the track fresh enough to follow?, how do I approach the elephants to afford the maximum number being shot?, etc., etc. Modern clients after elephant do little if any actual hunting. On my first elephant hunt my PH Gomez Adams told me that less than 5% of the hunters he guided had any interest at all in the technicalities of elephant hunting. They are content to follow along and do what the PH tells them to do. They very seldom even ask any questions as to what is going on. And of those that do show some interest in hunting techniques very, very, very few ever get to the point that the PH thinks he could go out with a tracker and safely hunt a single bull elephant with out a PH let alone take on cow herds.

I do agree that Bell had a lot to admire but he was completely lacking in sportsmanship. Any one that admits to leaving 100 or more wounded elephants in the bush does not deserve my respect and shouldn't deserve yours. Many here admire him for hunting elephants with a 7X57 or 303, totally inadequate calibers for elephant hunting. Had he used a 450 or above he would in all likely hood not left so many wounded elephants. Yes, he was a commercial ivory hunter that hunted for a living. To say that he wasn't a hunter would be the same as saying that your elephant hunting PH is not a hunter because he is only doing it for the daily rate he is being paid. Both are commercial hunters.

465H&H

Don't get me wrong here, I'm not doubting the veracity of the statement that Bell lost 100 plus ele. (using a 7x57 most of the time would virtually ensure that ele would be lost, no matter how good one is) I, like most who have posted on this thread, am of the opinion that "size does matter" when it comes to choice of calibre for hunting pachy's. I am just curious to know in what book or article he made that admission.

quote:

Originally posted by pichon1:

quote:

Originally posted by 465H&H:
Very, very seldom do I ever disagree with 450 No 2. In this case though I disagree with his determination that Bell wasn't a hunter. I submit that he had to be much more of a hunter than any modern sport hunter. He had to do all the work except for tracking himself. He made the decisions that counted most such as, is the track fresh enough to follow?, how do I approach the elephants to afford the maximum number being shot?, etc., etc. Modern clients after elephant do little if any actual hunting. On my first elephant hunt my PH Gomez Adams told me that less than 5% of the hunters he guided had any interest at all in the technicalities of elephant hunting. They are content to follow along and do what the PH tells them to do. They very seldom even ask any questions as to what is going on. And of those that do show some interest in hunting techniques very, very, very few ever get to the point that the PH thinks he could go out with a tracker and safely hunt a single bull elephant with out a PH let alone take on cow herds.

I do agree that Bell had a lot to admire but he was completely lacking in sportsmanship. Any one that admits to leaving 100 or more wounded elephants in the bush does not deserve my respect and shouldn't deserve yours. Many here admire him for hunting elephants with a 7X57 or 303, totally inadequate calibers for elephant hunting. Had he used a 450 or above he would in all likely hood not left so many wounded elephants. Yes, he was a commercial ivory hunter that hunted for a living. To say that he wasn't a hunter would be the same as saying that your elephant hunting PH is not a hunter because he is only doing it for the daily rate he is being paid. Both are commercial hunters.

465H&H

Don't get me wrong here, I'm not doubting the veracity of the statement that Bell lost 100 plus ele. (using a 7x57 most of the time would virtually ensure that ele would be lost, no matter how good one is) I, like most who have posted on this thread, am of the opinion that "size does matter" when it comes to choice of calibre for hunting pachy's. I am just curious to know in what book or article he made that admission.

I don't remember but have tried to relocate the statement. It was in another book or article nd it quoted him and referenced back to one of Bell's books. Based on the reference I assume it was correct.

465H&H

quote:

Originally posted by N E 450 No2:
Well I must say I agree with 465H&H even though he says he disagrees with me.

Actually Pinchon 1, 465H&H and I feel the same about Bell, we have just expressed our feelings in a different way with different definations applied to the words we used.

I am the root of all this disagreement, when I said bell was not a hunter. My mistake, I shouldhave said that:

Bell was not a SPORT HUNTER and his shooting exploits have no place in a discussion about what rifles should be used by the modern SPORT HUNTER.

Bell was a MARKET HUNTER, and much like a culling operation the conditions are different from a sport hunt.

I am not trying to take anything away from his skill or the JOB he was doing. I am not badmouthing Bell, he was an Adventurer of the highest order.

Simply,what he did with his small bores and what cullering officers do with an FN in 308, have no application to the Sport Hunter.

Now I agree with N E 450 No2 across the board.

Should I be confused?

This is a classic AR which is better thread.

This started out as which big dog hits hardest. It then tranmugrefied into; my dog is bigger than your dog, my dog is smaller but it has more fight in it than your big dog, I think your dog is so stupid it's funny, Then you get away from big dogs altogether and we see the which African hunting super hero is better the silver surfer, or spiderman. Which then transforms into my super hero can beat up your super hero, when all of that fails as it always does on this site it digresses into personal insults and mockery. Then people feel bad about what they've said so they start making lofty posts about the merits of other posts. The end.

All of this very much reminds me of a bunch of small boys being put into the same room with no adult supervision and too much time on their hands. It is truly unbelievable that a bunch of "grown" men will continue to engage in this unending BS.

Cheap thrills I guess...

surestrike

I did not see any serious personal attacks.

In fact I think this thread remained a lot more civilized than many on AR where people have strong feelings about a passionate subject.

"The difference between men and boys is the cost of their toys."

I don't subscibe to this 100%, but there is a little truth to it I think.

That and the lack of face to face. How many times at a cocktail party or whatever have you demurred objection to a theory or alleged fact that you just know is wrong, or not taken the fellow with two left feet to task for claiming to have run a 4.7 second 40 or a 10 second 100...just to avoid a confrontation or socially uncomfortable situation? And is demurring any better?

I don't think stripping away some of the social grease for these mine is better harangues is all bad. And I'm hopeful that even while posting in (vehement) opposition to the other s' pet theories that all of us at least have half an eye out for something to learn.

For instance I've learned that if I want a low stress, low intensity elephant hunt that doesn't give me ten or twenty yards worth of dry mouth or the possiblilty of taking years off my life and leaving me with post traumatic stress syndrome I ought to use my 375 with a scope and keep the distance good and cushy.

See?

JPK

quote:

Originally posted by surestrike:
This is a classic AR which is better thread.

This started out as which big dog hits hardest. It then tranmugrefied into; my dog is bigger than your dog, my dog is smaller but it has more fight in it than your big dog, I think your dog is so stupid it's funny, Then you get away from big dogs altogether and we see the which African hunting super hero is better the silver surfer, or spiderman. Which then transforms into my super hero can beat up your super hero, when all of that fails as it always does on this site it digresses into personal insults and mockery. Then people feel bad about what they've said so they start making lofty posts about the merits of other posts. The end.

All of this very much reminds me of a bunch of small boys being put into the same room with no adult supervision and too much time on their hands. It is truly unbelievable that a bunch of "grown" men will continue to engage in this unending BS.

Cheap thrills I guess...

Hey, I've got a good idea. If you don't like what you read, stop reading it! Surely you have too much time on your hands if you are forraging through "boring" threads.

God forbid that we should all agree on something.

Let's change the subject to religion and politics, that should be fun.

quote:

Originally posted by N E 450 No2:
surestrike

I did not see any serious personal attacks.

In fact I think this thread remained a lot more civilized than many on AR where people have strong feelings about a passionate subject.

SPOT ON COMMENT!!

quote:

Originally posted by pichon1:

Hey, I've got a good idea. If you don't like what you read, stop reading it! Surely you have too much time on your hands if you are forraging through "boring" threads.

God forbid that we should all agree on something.

Let's change the subject to religion and politics, that should be fun.

pichon1,

You should try decaffeinated.

I never said it was boring. In fact it quite amusing in juvenile kind of a way.

quote:

Originally posted by surestrike:

quote:

Originally posted by pichon1:

Hey, I've got a good idea. If you don't like what you read, stop reading it! Surely you have too much time on your hands if you are forraging through "boring" threads.

God forbid that we should all agree on something.

Let's change the subject to religion and politics, that should be fun.

pichon1,

You should try decaffeinated.

I never said it was boring. In fact it quite amusing in juvenile kind of a way.

I'm glad this post's "juvenile" ramblings are "amusing" to you. When they cease to amuse you and if it is possible to get your hand off your cock long enough, may I suggest you do us all a favour click on the little red cross in the top right hand corner of your screen.

Surestrike,

With all do respect, the only one I see resorting to personal attcks here such as calling others "juvenile",is yours. I also believe this has been an interesting, entertaining,friendly and respectful discussion between friends.

465H&H

quote:

Originally posted by pichon1:
I'm glad this post's "juvenile" ramblings are "amusing" to you. When they cease to amuse you and if it is possible to get your hand off your cock long enough, may I suggest you do us all a favour click on the little red cross in the top right hand corner of your screen.

"Surestrike,

With all do respect, the only one I see resorting to personal attcks here such as calling others "juvenile",is yours. I also believe this has been an interesting, entertaining,friendly and respectful discussion between friends."

Interesting take on that 465.....