In the 2006 Guns/Ammo annual magazine, their is an article on "Bolt or Double?"

I have not read the article yet, however in photo with comment it states that he botched his shot on a cape Buff with a scoped 416Rigby, and found himself having to reach for a.500Ne double to finish the job.
Now ,I have not hunted such beasts,so could the experienced tell me:

If he had the choice of a scoped416R-Bolt and a .500NeSxS to begin with, and chose the scoped rig, I presume cause of the distance, what was the "urgency" to reach for the .500NESxS? Would not a follow up shot with the 416Rigby have been quicker? Might he be trying to emmulate Mark Sullivan? you know, its always much more of a story when the US cavlary arrives in the last minute.
And if the beast was that near to begin with and the option of the .500ne was so close at hand, why would you not use it,rather than having to fiddle with the exchange of another gun? Also, Selby found no problem using his .416R for backing up clients and did so for around 30yrs.

Switching from girl to girl in a cocktail bar I would do,especially when I find one with a bigboreSxS set. I can handle the lashing from that kind of beast, but with cape Buff, I am not so sure!

Comments please.

quote:

Originally posted by Woodjack:
... however in photo with comment it states that he botched his shot on a cape Buff with a scoped 416Rigby,

For some reason guys tend to botch some pretty easy shots in Africa. Perhaps it is because they are hot and tired, or because they are taking Larium, or because they are feeling the pressure of $20K riding on one shot.

quote:

If he had the choice of a scoped416R-Bolt and a .500NeSxS to begin with, and chose the scoped rig, I presume cause of the distance, what was the "urgency" to reach for the .500NESxS?

Undoubtedly there is some gunwriter hyperbole going on here. Personally if I cannot take a cape buff with an iron sighted double, I will not be shooting a cape buff because for me the way the stalk is conducted (i.e., getting reasonably close) is what this game is all about.

Switching rifles between shots on a buff, unless there is a rifle failure, is something only done by writers or fools. In real life, the PH would have dropped the animal. Funny though, I was just reading a story where the General botched a shot on a leopard!

When you get done reading the article could you tell us what happened?

I have not read the article - and with personal opinion aside...

it makes sense to have found one's self in a position where taking an initial shot at a buff with a scoped 416 could make sense...

that shot was a little too far back or up or low or...

the buff heads for thicker stuff...

gotta follow him up, and then yes, I too would put the scoped 416 away and reach for the double.

I suspect the missing variables in the story thus far have to do with terrain conditions and the distance from the buff both before and after "reaching for the double."

But I'm just speculating.

Poetic license?

Dave

I'm with 500 Grains here. If the buff is far enough away you need the scoped 416 then get closer. If you fail then try again or find another buff. I've blown a shot on a buff after a jog to catch him. Glad to have my double on the follow up. My PH never backs up on a buff BTW.

JPK

If for some reason he wounded the buff with the scoped 416, and had to follow it up I can see switching to a big double. If it made him more confident of stopping a charge.

And if he needed to make a longer shot or a precision shot, he could always switch back.

JMHO

Now back to your regularly scheduled Boddington Bashing...

I'm with 500 grains too. On the advice of my hunting partner and booking agent (Surestrike) I didn't scope my .458 Lott. Now that I’ve done it, I couldn’t imagine buffalo hunting without the thrill of getting RIGHT IN AMONGST THEM!

I’d rather have a 36 incher taken at 20 yards than a 41 incher taken at 150. If I had Saeed’s budget, I’d keep a scoped heavy for filling out a large number of tags, but given my more modest means, I’ll be hunting buffalo at the one-to-two per safari rate, and I don’t want to miss out on getting close. No scoped buffalo rifle for me, thanks.

Ha!

There are a lot of buffalo that can't be approached close enough for me to shoot without a scope.

Before this topic wanders off into "I never shoot buff with a scope," a low power scope is a good idea and in many cases a necessity for good shot placement, which normally negates any necessity of looking for "the double."

If you haven't wounded a buff you haven't hunted many buff, and men (and women) get hammered sometimes when they screw around and wound buffalo. Or this is where the PH is supposed to start earning his money?

I think it is bad advice to be suggesting that one is not a real man if they use a scope for buffalo hunting, whether Boddington can shoot or not.

Well, personally I didn't say anything about not being a real man if you hunt with a scope, just that I don't wish to use one at this stage of my hunting career.

Will, I suspect that you and I would probably agree that buffalo should not be shot unless you're certian of shot placement, and that mediocre shots should not be chanced. I'm just saying I'll take the chance of a sub-par trophy or being skunked against the excitement of trying to get in close.

Your Mileage May Vary.

Shoot, real men don't use a rifle at all! We use a bow. Only sissies use a gun. Seriously though, what on earth does using a scope have to do with getting close? These are two completely different things. Last buff I shot was at 15 yds, through a 1.1X set Kahles scope. BTW, IMHO, any PH who does not back up his client on buff and would let them wound an animal without at least attempting to put down the animal, is a dangerous PH.

Whom cares what Boddington or 500 gr uses to hunt with? It is your hunt do what you wish.

Sounds like the article is similar to this older article.

Guns & Ammo

Regards,

Terry

Boddington has repeated many times his preference for using a double rifle. I assumed that the reason he used a scoped 416 when a 500 double was available was the distance, perhaps I read more into it than was there.

Still, for me, if I can't get close I don't want to shoot. Its not the dead buff that I am looking for but the great hunt, including being close.

I prefer to shoot a double double. If you prefer a scoped bolt, great, unscoped bolt, likewise. But getting close is, for me, what a buff hunt is all about.

Unfortunately we don't have catch and release hunting. When a fish is in your hand or the net, boat...You have succeeded and can let it go knowing that. In hunting you can't be sure until the animal is dead.

On the issue of a PH who does not back up a client's original shot on a buff being a dangerous PH, I just gotta laugh. Unless the buff goes down to a CNS hit, he is going to be moving after the first shot the great majority of times, no matter what rifle the client uses. This being the case, the PH who backs up after the client's first shot will be shooting almost all of his clients' buff even if the clients' shots are perfect!

Hell, I didn't know I'd blown the shot till the blood trail fizzled. And it wasn't til we were standing over the dead buff that I knew for sure how far off my first shot was.

JPK

Petersen's annuals are comprised of reprints from the prior year, together with ballistics tables, etc. I think Terry got the right one.

Boddington doesn't say he switched in the middle of a hunt; he says his scope was knocked off earlier in the hunt and he didn't know it. He points out a double, where both barrels share the same sights, would have suffered from the same problem, but felt that the 2nd shot might have helped. That was his 2nd screw up on that hunt -- the previous animal was an elephant he tried to brain and missed because he was shooting down and misjudged the point of aim to hit the brain.

Dan

BTW, just to put my perspective in it, I think close changes under the circumstances of the hunt. 50yds might be close in one set of circumstances, and 25 yds is always close, 100yds is never close.

If 50 yrds can be close, then 100 yards is close to close... if not close.



Dan

quote:

Originally posted by JPK:
I'm with 500 Grains here. If the buff is far enough away you need the scoped 416 then get closer. If you fail then try again or find another buff. I've blown a shot on a buff after a jog to catch him. Glad to have my double on the follow up. My PH never backs up on a buff BTW.JPK

The Buff doesn't have to be far away to be in a possition to require a scoped rifle shot, for the initial shot! I've shot buff from 15 yds with a scoped rifle while hunting with my double. It this case there was a tiny little hole in the bush where the bullet had to thread through to get to the buff's vitals. If this shot is just a little off, the next thing one needs is an iron sighted double, and quickly sometimes.

Like NEW_GUY, I think this had more to do with bush conditions than the SO-CALLED gun writer's poetic license! Gun writers are not all as stupid as some seem to think! All this rhetoric, when it is evident nobody here has actually read the article! My opinion is simply a guess as to what the reason is for this rifle switch, at best, also, but I will read the article and then make my up my mind afterwards!

Dan,

I have to disagree. The closer you are to close the more you realize that your getting really close to being really close and really close is really close to ideal.

Does this help you get close to my take on close and really close? Or do I have to get closer to English for you to get really close my take on close?

MC,

JPK

MacD37,

I find it easier to see through brush near the rifle without a scope. The close brush seems to disapear through a scope. Also seems that if the hole is so small the extra one inch or so higher, over the barrel(s) the line of sight is with a scope may be trouble. If the brush is near the target I haven't worried about it. This with regard to any game animal except elephant.

Gentlemen,

Let me start off by saying that I am NOT a double rifle man. So I would not even considre hunting with one unless tyhere is absolutely no choice for it.

I have killed a few buffalo, all with scoped rifles. Distances were probably as close as 12 yards and all the way to over 300 yards. All with scopes.

I used to hunt with low power scopes 1.5-5, then switched to 2.5-8x. The latter is installed on all my buffalo hunting rifles.

And despite the fact that I have screwed up on a few shots, luckily we have never gotten into any dangerous situations.

quote:

Originally posted by JPK:
Dan,

I have to disagree. The closer you are to close the more you realize that your getting really close to being really close and really close is really close to ideal.

Does this help you get close to my take on close and really close? Or do I have to get closer to English for you to get really close my take on close?

MC,

JPK

Close enough!

Dan

Woodjack,

Since you haven't read the article, and you haven't hunted buffalo, and you feel more comfortable in a pick-up bar, what was your question again?

quote:

Originally posted by interboat:
Woodjack,

Since you haven't read the article, and you haven't hunted buffalo, and you feel more comfortable in a pick-up bar, what was your question again?

Geez, Don, lighten up!

All questions wil be answered to those who read the article.
As far as a miss on a brain shot goes: I witnessed a friend put 3 shots into an elephants head with a 416 at about 30 yds and miss the brain. All 3 shots were in an area the size of my hand and after the animal had winded the hunters and started to move. They were all in the right place and should have done the trick but the angle was over or under the brain due the the motion of the head. I timed this from the video I was making and all of it was over in less than 5 seconds. The PH put him down before he reached the heavy brush with a shot that intersected the 3 previous shots. The first shot put him down and he was back up in a flash. It was a real educational experience on elephant hunting.
On that hunt the only time the hair raised up on my neck was on the previous day when an old buff was drinking at the end of the day and we came upon him at a water hole. He was 50 or 60 yds off and as he turned and looked I understood what Robert Ruark meant with his classic line. I think this old boy was just too thirsty and too disdainful to mess with us.

My 416 is scoped with a steel tube 2X Weaver with a post reticle. I can't see with irons anymore.

Wow! I'm in awe being in such esteemed company. Men who've not only never missed a shot, but men who feel competent to judge not only Boddington's ability to shoot, but his writing as well.
At least the General is man enough to admit he's not perfect.

"For every artist, there are a thousand critics."

Dave

I don't know about being perfect.. but it is a tough hunt when lots of things go awry... very discouraging... but that's hunting. I think Boddington does a great job of expressing ALL of it -- the very discouraging events as well as the increadibly glorious.

The recent Sports Afield contains a Boddington article describing cat hunting, wherein he describes in detail one of the "failures" he refers to without expansion in the article this thread addressed. Earlier this year, I read a Boddington article about "running with the buffalo" where he describes running in the middle of a group of buff. Sounded like a truly exultant event!

The article addressed in this thread was about bolts vs. doubles -- which leads to virtues and failings -- which leads to specific failures -- which is how Boddington got onto his story about that very rough hunt. It starts with a brain shot that didn't connect -- MAYBE because the angle was strange (MAYBE NOT! just luck). Then the rifle gets banged around while loading meat from that loxodontus africanus, which shows up when the scope doesn't point where the bullets print the next time he needed it (or it might have already been off when he took the brain shot...? cannot really tell -- just that things didn't work well on that trip). Piling one problem on another. But he did point out that not all failings are saved by the separate actions and barrels of a double. Oh well -- that's hunting.

Dan

quote:

Originally posted by Will:
Ha!

There are a lot of buffalo that can't be approached close enough for me to shoot without a scope.

Before this topic wanders off into "I never shoot buff with a scope," a low power scope is a good idea and in many cases a necessity for good shot placement, which normally negates any necessity of looking for "the double."

If you haven't wounded a buff you haven't hunted many buff, and men (and women) get hammered sometimes when they screw around and wound buffalo. Or this is where the PH is supposed to start earning his money?

I think it is bad advice to be suggesting that one is not a real man if they use a scope for buffalo hunting, whether Boddington can shoot or not.

So Will, let me get this straight? What you are saying is that no matter what you use sooner or later you are going to wound a buffalo?

I agree and have been there and done that.

What you are also saying is that even though buff get wounded no matter what set up you use that we should use Will's set up primarily just because you say so?

Have I missed something here or am I on track?

Will right, rest of world wrong ,once again!

If you want to use a scope, USE ONE nobody has questioned your manhood for using one, once again it's a preference thing! Get over it! And yes there are times when they come in damn handy. There are also times when they are hindrance.

I always bring two rifles one is a heavy usually a double the other is a scoped .375H&H both get used. I guess that makes me a cross dresser but hey I'm secure in who I am. And Will I embrace your diversity as well.
XOXOXO

quote:

Originally posted by interboat:
Woodjack,

Since you haven't read the article, and you haven't hunted buffalo, and you feel more comfortable in a pick-up bar, what was your question again?

Interboat,

no I have not read the article or hunted buff, that is why I have posted so those who have hunted buff and those who have or will read the article, can enlighten me and others, who may like to learn a little.
Your not one of those folk who has shot one buff and knows everything now! are you?,or one of those folk who believes that one must have hunted buff to qualify to post on the ABGH ?

You dont find your retreat in hunting buff cause your scared of Women, do you?..... If that is the case then you can teach me some about buff(as long as you have sufficient experience) and I will do the same for you in regard to the opposite sex.

To the rest of you lads, thanks for your input.

If you shoot the same particular animal with two or three different kinds of rifle and two or three different calibers you can write a whole bunch of things and actually get a lot of people to read about it. In a sport where we argue about 200 fps difference from the same bullet in the same caliber in the same rifle, the possibilities are endless when you add some variables with exponential potential.

Surestrike,

I'm not saying anyone has to use a scope. Anything legal, or almost, is okay by me.

The point I was making is that there just might be a bunch of guys looking for guidance, especially first-timers, and the topic replies were heading in the direction of "I never use a scope," impling that is the only real way to hunt buffalo.

In my experience when I was buffalo hunting there were few buffalo, worth shooting, that were within 25 yards, my open-sight limit. If the "close" criteria is applied to buff hunting to be able to use open sights there are going to be darn few big buff killed on a 7-day buff hunt.

I have seen the effect that some of these topics have on neophytes. All the talk about bullet placement being different for African game (the exception are buffalo & elephant brain shots) than whitetails results in guys cramming for the shot with their copy of Doctari's shot placement guide in their hands on the airplane as it crosses the pond.

Just making the point that all-in-all one will probably get more and bigger buff with a scope and is probably the best bet for the inexperienced hunter. You can do whatever you want to, obviously.

In my opinion, the only need for a double, other than fulfilling a romantic fantasy, is following up wounded dangerous game. In Boddington's elephant hunting video, he is using "the big 500 double" and blows the shot, as one can hear all the rest of the crew blazing away at the escaping elephant. Go figure!

JPK:

You said your PH never backs you up on a buff. Good luck on future hunts! There is an old expression that goes back to the Middle Ages. "He was the old warrior who went to the wars -once too often". Don't let it happen to you.

quote:

Originally posted by Will:
Surestrike,

I'm not saying anyone has to use a scope. Anything legal, or almost, is okay by me.

The point I was making is that there just might be a bunch of guys looking for guidance, especially first-timers, and the topic replies were heading in the direction of "I never use a scope," impling that is the only real way to hunt buffalo.

In my experience when I was buffalo hunting there were few buffalo, worth shooting, that were within 25 yards, my open-sight limit. If the "close" criteria is applied to buff hunting to be able to use open sights there are going to be darn few big buff killed on a 7-day buff hunt.

I have seen the effect that some of these topics have on neophytes. All the talk about bullet placement being different for African game (the exception are buffalo & elephant brain shots) than whitetails results in guys cramming for the shot with their copy of Doctari's shot placement guide in their hands on the airplane as it crosses the pond.

Just making the point that all-in-all one will probably get more and bigger buff with a scope and is probably the best bet for the inexperienced hunter. You can do whatever you want to, obviously.

In my opinion, the only need for a double, other than fulfilling a romantic fantasy, is following up wounded dangerous game. In Boddington's elephant hunting video, he is using "the big 500 double" and blows the shot, as one can hear all the rest of the crew blazing away at the escaping elephant. Go figure!

Will,

I am not implying that one should never use a scope on buff. The client who above mentioned me recommending his use of ghost rings on his Lott is a personal friend and I have personal knowledge of his shooting ability. For the average Joe I do not recommend learning iron sights just for his or her African hunt. I recommend a scoped .375 or .416. for the first timers DG hunt.

If your open sight limit is 25 yards that speaks to either very poor marksmanship or an eyesight problem. In either case it sounds as though a scope is a not an option for you rather a necessity.

I grew up shooting iron sighted rifles. I find a scope to be cumbersome at times. Mostly at the worst and most critical times.

As far as doubles there are doubles then there are doubles. Some shoot well some don't. I happen to own one that does shoot very well. Same goes for bolt guns. Good ones and bad ones and such.

As far as Craig muffing the shot on his elephant. There are plenty of guys who do that with scoped bolt rifles every year in fact more as there are more of them out there. Go figure.

Once again this all boils down to the operator not the equipment for the most part. There are a few of you on this sight who've come out and played with me and my double. I can assure you we've found no problems with accuracy speed or ability. Learn your rifle shoot the hell out of it in real life conditions on game (Feral hogs are a great way to keep tuned up). Once you get really good with it go hunting DG. Pretty simple formula really.

I just don't adhere to these blanket statements about this type of rifle or that. As far as romantic notions that's your opinion and you are free to express it.

If a guy gets good with his double there is no difference in ability or accuracy between the two weapon types the major difference is the double is a much smother faster handling piece on fast breaking fast moving animals.

Greg Allyn

Woodjack,

How did you know I wrote you a message? Did someone here call you up and read it to you over the phone and explain to you what all the big words meant?

You seem to think it’s normal for a guy to have a magazine spread out before him, spot a picture on a subject he knows nothing about and immediately dial up an Internet forum and somehow manage to type in something like ... I’m not going to take the time and trouble (or don’t know how) to read this article, so I want everybody out there to tell me what the article says and what it means. And, oh, by the way, I know a tit when I see one and you should see me operate at the local meat market.

What kind of helpless illiterate moron are you? Retarded? Suffer from attention deficit disorder? Congenital halfwit? Garden-variety stupid fuck?

Is this one of those how-many-Woodjacks-does-it-take-to-read-a-magazine-article jokes?

Personally I feel completely at ease with a double or a scoped bolt gun on buffalo and on elephant for that matter. I have killed buff out to 125 yds. with a double and 50 yds on elephant. Where I see the advantage of a scoped bolt on buff is when your main emphasis is on a trophy bull and your working large herds. Your shot may be across the herd and between other members of the herd not to mention intervening bush. You may have to thread your bullet theough a small hole to get your trophy and I am more comfortable with a scope under thosse conditions. Actually you can hunt safely and with great pleasure with either.


465H&H

First let me start by saying I have double rifles and love them. That should keep the double rifle fans off my case. Every time I have been in contact with PHs I have asked their opinion of clients using doubles. The answers have ranged from "I don't care" (very infrequent) to a roll of the eyes and a strong opposition to the practice. I would love to see honestly a poll of PHs on the subject. I think the nays would far outweigh the yays.

LJS:

If the PHs rolled their eyes at a client using a double - might it be because the clients couldn't handle the big bores - and doesn't the double have limited accuracy beyond,say,75 yards? - (rather close to an elephant or buff who might take strong resentment to a bad hit) and isn't it an open secret that PHs put clients within the distance of DG that the PHs think they can handle any lousy shooting? -so they stretch the distance? I don't know. I'm asking. The one situation I don't see responded to in this thread is what I consider to be an enormous advantage of the double - the quick one -two shots. Even a double in 375 H&H would be nice, wouldn't it in brush? As I said, I don't know - but there has to be some reason why the old timers carried doubles for DG even where bolt actions were available. Just my thoughts.

Gerry375
I think the preference by the oldtimers for the double was the absence of the quality scopes we now enjoy. Also, they would be in the bush for months at a time without a PH backing them up and a malfunction did not put you totally out of commission with a double. Two guns in one was one of a doubles attractions. Several of the PHs said under stress people not totally used to iron sights tend to not not pull the sights down and shoot high. I think if we were talking a scoped double the reaction would be different. In reality most of us shoot far more with a scope than iron sights. One of my doubles is a 500/416 scoped and I am much more accurate with the first shot with that gun.