In the current American Rifleman, March '09, in the article Middleweight Champ, The Kimber Talkeetna 375 H&H Magnum, Keefe is hunting in Africa and says,
"...but under the blistering Namibian sun, I was grateful to be carrying the lightest weight stopping rifle present." The other rifle present was a Kimber Caprivi in 458 Lott.

Since when does this 8 pound 13 ounce turnbolt rifle qualify as a stopper? Did Keefe IV misspeak or is he an idiot?

well, the famous ivory hunter wally johnson thought it was according to Gregor Woods in his book, Rifles for Africa

As much as I like the way Keefe has reshaped the content of the "American Rifleman," I'm inclined to be less generous about his firearm evaluations.

quote:

Originally posted by onefunzr2:
In the current American Rifleman, March '09, in the article Middleweight Champ, The Kimber Talkeetna 375 H&H Magnum, Keefe is hunting in Africa and says,
"...but under the blistering Namibian sun, I was grateful to be carrying the lightest weight stopping rifle present." The other rifle present was a Kimber Caprivi in 458 Lott.

Since when does this 8 pound 13 ounce turnbolt rifle qualify as a stopper? Did Keefe IV misspeak or is he an idiot?

He's just another gun rag writer, nothing more!
The fact that a "8 pound 13 ounce turn bolt rifle" CAN be a stopper seems lost on you, onefunzr2. That depends on what the chambering is.

That sentence from his article seems to mean the stopper was the 458 LOTT, and he was glad that they had the 375 H&H rifle as well, for the long shots, as the light stopper for things like Zebra, or Gemsbok. However the 375 H&H can bea stopper, depending on where and what you are hunting. In Alaska the 375 H&H is a fine stopper for the large bears, and In Africa can on some animals be a better stoper for things like Leopard, or Lion than some of the larger slow traveling treditional "STOPPERS". Cats need stopping at times as well, but are far more effected by the shock, offered by faster velocity, and a fast opening, controled expansion bullet, than the big animals like Cape Buffalo, Rhino, Hippo, and Elephant, which require a big foot print, and deep penetration.

All that is a guess, however, because I haven't read the article, and am not familiar with Mr. Keefe's writing. I don't take the American Rifleman, only the American Hunter, and that article is not in there! He certainly could have meant exactly what you read into his words! If so, then you are absolutely correct about the caliber, but not about the "8 pound 13 ounce turbolt rifle" not being a stopper!

I'd vote for idiot.

I am lost here, what the hell does the weight of the rifle have to do with its ability to stop something??????????

Your shooting at whatever it is with the cartridge the gun is chambered for.

Unless your down to the point of having to throw the rifle at something, then yes I would agree that an 8 pound 13 ounce turn bolt rifle would not have the stopping power of say a 12 pound 6 ounce turn bolt rifle.

Secondly what difference does it really make as to the type action that the rifle is in, falling block, turn bolt, sxs double, as long as when the time comes and the trigger is pulled, the gun goes bang, and the PH who is standing there with his carcass in the way trying to stop whatever it was that the sport only managed to irritate with his shot???????

Markie is the biggest gun whore I have ever read. If you note, waaaaaay down, in the fine print, you can see that he got invited to go to Africa to test and write about the Kimber.
The manner in which he glosses over the problems with it are hard to digest. You cannot fit a 375 round in one without pushing it down and back in the magazine because the loading port is 3.5" long and a 375 round is 3.6. You have to load by pushing the back of the case down and backwards into the magazine. Very slow to load/reload. If you can follow the article thru he dances all the way around saying it K-I-C-K-S like a mule. You can pretty much tell he was struggling to find a way to compliment the rifle in any way. Of course, if he doesn't, there go all of those free trips to Africa, etc. Lame piece of writing, by someone whose forte should be writing ads and laying out copy for the magazine.

Rich
Buff Killer

I have a 7 lb 13 oz 458 Winchester Magnum. Since it is so light I guess it isn't a stopper. It sure stops me when I fire it!!

465H&H

Can't we all just get along?

Or at least be a little less harsh in our judgments?

This is not the first bit of hyperbole on the subject of firearms that any of us has ever read, nor do I expect that it will be the last.

I included the rifle's weight as this is the basis for the article. I wasn't insinuating that any rifle's weight had anything to do with it being, or not being, considered a 'stopper.'

Just for you, MacD37:

quote:

The problem (ele) bull was taken by Kimber's Dwight Van Brunt with a Caprivi chambered in .458 Lott, and I followed with a camera and the slung Talkeetna for most of the stalk. The Caprivi is a light rifle for a .458 Lott, weighing about a pound and a half more than the Talkeetna, but under the blistering Namibian sun, I was grateful to be carrying the lightest weight stopping rifle present. Van Brunt and PH Jamy Traut dispatched the problem creature without the need for my help, so that day anyway, the Talkeetna was carried a lot and shot not at all.

The hunt occurred in Namibia not Alaska. Since the 375 H&H is the bare minimum for hunting DG in most parts of Africa, I found Keefe's equating it in the 'stopper' category laughable.

I just wondered if I or Keefe was wrong headed.

I actually know Mark and he's a nice guy (and smart) so no need to call him an "idiot" because you don't agree with his word usage.

That being said, his African hunting experience is somewhat limited.

I wouldn't call a .375 a "stopping rifle" but it's a subjective term. Cut the guy some slack.

I guess you have to be the judge of that one. Craig Boddington, in his Safari Rifles II talks about the .375 and in part says: "Ivory hunter Pete Pearson started his career as a staunch .577 fan but eventually switched to the .375 and never went back. Harry Manners, another of the all time great elephant hunters, swore by his over-the-counter Winchester Model 70 .375. And, of course, the number of professional hunters who to this day rely on the .375 as their backup is overwhelming." Page 79.

Do not tell JPK.

A 7mm through the brain will stop anything with bad intentions. A .700 through a flapping ear won't stop a mangy coyote.

If you know your tools, and know how to use them, and can put the lead where it's supposed to be, you can call a lot of things "stoppers".

If you're spending awful lots of time computing energy figures, drooling over catalogs, dissecting what others have been doing while you were busy dreaming about doing it, then a 1.200 Mega Cojones Maximum would probably be borderline adequate for possum stopping.

quote:

Originally posted by mrlexma:
Can't we all just get along?

Or at least be a little less harsh in our judgments?

This is not the first bit of hyperbole on the subject of firearms that any of us has ever read, nor do I expect that it will be the last.

Mrlexma and I agree. Everyone knows that articles in gun magazines about a particular brand are usually bias due to a business relationship. Anytime I read - "and I took it to Africa to test it", you know and I know who paid for the trip. It is like WWF wrestling or whatever you call it. It is part of the "game" to get you and I to buy whatever is being sold.

The good news is that this forum has people who use the various guns and bullets, then report back on their experience. I trust the reviews on AR more than in American Rifleman or Gun Digest.

Let us all get along as we know that is "no Santa Claus".


PS - As to a stopper gun. I think any gun that puts the bullet in the brain is a stopper. Bigger is usually better, but accuracy trumps "bigger" everytime.

Guys
Much like beauty being in the eye of the beholder, stopping ability is often in the hands of the shooter. Without a doubt, there are better pure stoppers than the .375 , but equally true there have been countless charges stopped with it on all the big stuff Africa can throw at you. I know Mark, have great respect for his gun knowledge, shooting ability, and his personal character. I HAVE spent time with Mark on safari,seen him preform flawlessly on buffalo, and enjoyed his enthusiasm greatly. I have never heard Mark claim to be a safari expert, so to paint him with that brush seems unfair at best. With over 20 years in Africa both hunting and filming, mostly dangerous game, I have seen plenty of stuff ,and several real deal charges, handled by the .375. Ultimate stopper-NO WAY- but Mark never made that claim. Lets lay off the "idiot nonsense"
Cheers
Dave

quote:

I trust the reviews on AR more than in American Rifleman or Gun Digest.

+1

quote:

Originally posted by N E 450 No2:
Do not tell JPK.

I'm on it!

No the 375H&H is no stopper, as defined in African history and literature.

Boddington's quote is off, his own book reveals a three to one count of PH's in favor of .458" and larger rifles over .425" and smaller rifles When the PH's were asked to respond to "suitable for any situation..." or similar. Take the .425" through .408" rifles to the other side of the equation and it was more like seven or eight to one.

As for the "If you don't miss, they're all stoppers" bull, I'll repeat that first, the PH's don't see it that way, just check Boddington's new book and the recent threads here on what real live Ph's use and second I'll repeat the following.

No one is perfect, even the very best shots and the most experienced hunters and PH's miss.

Think about this, the world champion shooters are determined in competions in which the best shot in the world misses one less target than the second best shooter in the world misses.

And no ten tons of pissed off elephant is coming full bore at them from single digits worth of yards!

Throw in that you, or the Ph, are never gauranteed a reasonable opportunity to take a brain shot. Maybe time, distance, maybe brush, maybe angle, who knows?

JPK

He also says at the beginning of the article that many "authorities" say a .375 should weigh 10 lbs or more. That's too heavy for me, the .375 just doesn't kick all that much.

There was an article in I believe "SCI magazine" about a RSA ph Gordan Mace hit by a buf shot with a 375H&H and he stated the 375 is to light for buf....
I think I was reading that flying to Reno or Dallas last year...

Mike

You guys with "keyboard courage" really make me sick. Jumping in the middle of somebody's stuff with all of your superior knowledge. I see nowhere that Mark O'keefe said what he is stopping. If he is stopping rabid impala or wounded charging steenbok, then the 375 is certainly a stopper.

I vote for (1) paid endorsement, and (2) "idiot".

quote:

Originally posted by Idaho Sharpshooter:
You cannot fit a 375 round in one without pushing it down and back in the magazine because the loading port is 3.5" long and a 375 round is 3.6. You have to load by pushing the back of the case down and backwards into the magazine. Very slow to load/reload. If you can follow the article thru he dances all the way around saying it K-I-C-K-S like a mule.

Funny. I have one. I've practiced loading from a belt carrier w/o looking. And there's no "down and back" movement. I do grab the cartridge between thumb and forefinger near the rim, as that's the part of the cartridge facing up in the loop. But I just press it down into the magazine with my thumb. Not down and back. I don't do anything any differently than I do with any other rifle.

I haven't bothered to measure the loading port, but cartridges load and eject just fine.

And I'd say kick is a pretty subjective assessment. I've let people shoot it who've never shot anything larger than a .30-06, and to a man they say it kicks far less than they thought it would. They were actually surprised at how comfortable it was to shoot.

So was I, considering how light it is. But, then, I also shoot a 9lb .416 Rigby, which according to the author is too light for even a .375, so . . .

Good gracious! It's just advertising.

And when did a nearly nine pound 375 become a "lightweight" rifle? 7 lbs., maybe.

I go away for a few days, come back and see so many of my friends here getting upset of someone stating facts!

Can someone please explain to me what a "stopping" caliber is?

The ONLY sure way of stopping a charging animal is to hit him in the brain. Anywhere else and it is anyone guess - regardless of caliber.

The only requirement is that bullet must penetrate deep enough to reach the brain - regardless of caliber.

Missing the brain while using a larger caliber is not guaranteed to help any at all.

I have heard far too many first hand stories of calibers as large as the 577 T.Rex not stopping a charge because the brain was not hit.

Taylors Knockout is rearing its ugly head again.

+1 Saaed

cfs,

not real big on actually R-E-A-D-I-N-G are you? And a bit deficient on the measuring thing as well...?

If a magazine loading/ejection port is 3.5" long and a loaded round of 375H&H is 3.6X" long it will absolutely NOT! push straight down a magazine box from the top or side without some finagling. As an example, the loading port on my CZ550 in 375 is 3.668" long. I can just drop a loaded round in and push straight down to load the magazine. I had Dwight VanBrunt show me a Kimber .375H&H and demonstrate how easy it was to load a round in the manner I described at the 2008 SHOT Show. I had one here for a magazine article I wrote. What you describe is physically impossible unless the loading/ejecting port is longer than the cartridge.
If you had read any of the subjective articles written a year ago about the H&H round being an odd fit in a standard length action you would have figured that out. I did NOT say you couldn't get rounds in, but the 2008 AR article said it was awkward to load like a 721 Remington in 375. I guess markie-mark wrote that one before the free $20,000+ trip to Africa Kimber paid for.

regards,

Rich
Buff Killer

quote:

Originally posted by Saeed:
I go away for a few days, come back and see so many of my friends here getting upset of someone stating facts!

Can someone please explain to me what a "stopping" caliber is?

The ONLY sure way of stopping a charging animal is to hit him in the brain. Anywhere else and it is anyone guess - regardless of caliber.

The only requirement is that bullet must penetrate deep enough to reach the brain - regardless of caliber.

Missing the brain while using a larger caliber is not guaranteed to help any at all.

I have heard far too many first hand stories of calibers as large as the 577 T.Rex not stopping a charge because the brain was not hit.

Taylors Knockout is rearing its ugly head again.

Saeed,

Nothing you have said is untrue but there are a lot of opinions on what is defined as "stopping."

If the caliber is big enough to probably turn or knockout an elephant in a real charge than it is a stopping cartridge, which is the 5000 ft-lb and 400 grs. criterion.

One will have a smaller and smaller chance of doing such as the cartridge caliber and energy decreases. It is just a fact of life that some refuse to recognize.

Though we will always have different opinions on this point, I'm always right.

"The Vintagers championships quantifies the category this way: The Stopping Rifle will be 40-caliber or larger,
shooting a bullet of 400 grains or more at 2000 fps or greater."

quote:

Originally posted by Idaho Sharpshooter:
cfs,

not real big on actually R-E-A-D-I-N-G are you? And a bit deficient on the measuring thing as well...?

If a magazine loading/ejection port is 3.5" long and a loaded round of 375H&H is 3.6X" long it will absolutely NOT! push straight down a magazine box from the top or side without some finagling. As an example, the loading port on my CZ550 in 375 is 3.668" long. I can just drop a loaded round in and push straight down to load the magazine. I had Dwight VanBrunt show me a Kimber .375H&H and demonstrate how easy it was to load a round in the manner I described at the 2008 SHOT Show. I had one here for a magazine article I wrote. What you describe is physically impossible unless the loading/ejecting port is longer than the cartridge.
If you had read any of the subjective articles written a year ago about the H&H round being an odd fit in a standard length action you would have figured that out. I did NOT say you couldn't get rounds in, but the 2008 AR article said it was awkward to load like a 721 Remington in 375. I guess markie-mark wrote that one before the free $20,000+ trip to Africa Kimber paid for.

regards,

Rich
Buff Killer

I'm a huge fan of reading. You apparently failed to notice, but I was responding to a w-r-i-t-t-e-n post. Yours. A keen observer might not have accused me in w-r-i-t-i-n-g of failing to be able to r-e-a-d their very own post that I quoted and responded to. Quite accurately, too, if your level of agitation is anything to go by.

Being a keen observer myself, I've managed to identify your particular difficulty. So, let me help you out with this problem that, I hate to tell you, somebody who claims to be a professional writer ought not to have. The definition of words. There is a huge difference between r-e-a-d-i-n-g and b-e-l-i-e-v-i-n-g.

Since you've raised the issue, in addition to reading, I'm also a huge fan of doing. Maybe if you drop by, I can help you improve your technique.

I don't just drop the cartridge in, let gravity do the work of getting the cartridge through the port, then try to push the loose cartridge into the magazine. I maintain control of the cartridge holding it just forward of the belt between thumb and forefinger as I take it out of the belt loop. Then press the cartridge, again just forward of the belt, as I guide the cartridge through the port into the magazine. Simple downward thumb pressure works just fine. Press down on the case body just forward of the belt and a magical thing happens. The whole cartridge snaps into place into the magazine. There's no "down and back" to it. Just down.

There is no "finagling" and I don't have to look at it. They will go in. If you go back and r-e-a-d my post I never said I was holding the cartridge exactly parallel to the loading port as I push it in. If you read what I w-r-o-t-e I said that the only pressure I put on the cartridge was straight down. I said "there's no 'down and back' movement." Not being much of a fan of measuring things that work all right to see why they're not causing me problems, as you have graciously noted, I'm also not much of a fan of carrying a carpenter's level around to ensure I am making my life more difficult than it needs to be. I am sure the fact I am holding the cartridge at a slight angle has a great deal to do with it, or that if interfered with the cartridge could assume whatever angle it needs to fit into the loading port. But, then, it wouldn't have to be held at much of an angle to overcome such a small mismatch, would it?

Again, I said I don't look at it while loading. I also said I don't do anything differently than I do for any other bolt action rifle I own. I'll let you in on a secret. I'm sure since I'm not looking at any of them, at some point the forward part of the loading port contacts the tip of the bullet, forcing the bullet end to wait until the case head has been lowered into the port before following.

For me, thumbing cartridges into a magazine is a gross motor movement. It isn't a precisely measured evolution, like loading torpedoes into a submarine to replenish her. I don't use a carpenters level and micrometer to make sure everything's precisely level and centered. So that means I'm probably getting the rounds in there with some minor amount of cartridge/port interference with all my rifles, even those having that oh so important .068" extra length that you find so critical. It really doesn't give you much of a margin for error when feeding your rifle while keeping your eyes on something else. It may be there, but you know what; I won't bother to measure those to find out, either.

I really don't care if the cartridge enters back-end first or at a perfectly flat angle.

If you look straight down at your CZ receiver, and compare it to a Kimber, you'll see that the CZ has a flare cut out of the metal on the left side just forward of the reciever bridge. At least, my .416 Rigby does.



I mention that because I will admit the last cartridge into the Kimber magazine is much more difficult to get in than the others.



If I were able to move my thumb over slightly to the left, as the CZ receiver allows but the Kimber does not, then pushing the last round into the magazine against the pressure of the stack and over the magazine lip would be far easier. Both my thumb which is forced more to the center of the well, and the round underneath nestled on the right side of the receiver, pressure the round just enough against the left receiver wall that it makes rolling it over the left magazine lip much more difficult. But again, I've only noticed that because the last cartridge is much more difficult to load than the others, which go in easily. Had the last one gone in as easily as the others, I probably wouldn't have hunted down the reason for the rifle to fail to cause me problems, simpleton that I am. But since it did cause me a problem, which only occurs while loading the last round into a full magazine, I wanted to find out why. And oddly enough, it wasn't the length of the loading port. Which, if I might be so bold as to spell things out for you, would have been a problem with the others as well.

The cartridge will be entirely in the chamber, lying on the stack. But it is only on the last cartridge when the upward pressure of the stack means the lack of leverage caused by the narrowness (not length) of the port creates difficulty fitting it into the staggered magazine.

Being such an illustrious writer, you may want to pass that along to Kimber. I'm not on a name-dropping level of friendship with them, which as you can see has just impressed the hell out of me. Just remove a little bit of metal at the rear of the receiver opposite the ejection port, and the last cartridge would load as easily as the others.

In the meantime, I plan on not developing all sorts of other problems with a rifle which heretofore hasn't been giving me the difficulties you boys keep insisting in print it ought to be.

Thanks for your interest,
Steve
Ship Killer

quote:

If the caliber is big enough to probably turn or knockout an elephant in a real charge than it is a stopping cartridge, which is the 5000 ft-lb and 400 grs. criterion.

Bill,

I highlighted what a lot of people seem to believe. "Probably" is the operative word here, and to be honest, and from what I keep hearing from PHs, a hunter is far more likely to actually make a propper hit, with a smaller rifle he can actually shoot well, than hunter who uses a larger caliber and cannot shoot it it well.

Again, this is probably due to the fact that many of them have read that a larger caliber might make up for their lack of shooting ability, and a marginal hit might kill or turn an animal.

I think this argument will go on for as long as there is hunting.

quote:

Originally posted by Saeed:
Again, this is probably due to the fact that many of them have read that a larger caliber might make up for their lack of shooting ability, and a marginal hit might kill or turn an animal.

Another great line of reasoning from AR's host and premier comedian.

First off, better inform those PH's of this crystal clear reasoning. After all, according to Boddington's book, 80% or so chose rifles larger than 375's, and 75% os larger than the 425! (More if you count recent posts here!) Geez, do they have it backward! Or four out of five think think themselves poor shots!

And then there is the thought that must have escaped: maybe it is possible to shoot a rifle larger than 375 or 425 well, eh?

Never mind, I forgot, we're all supposed to use a medium bore rifle and simply never miss! It's not like anyone ever misses any shots with a 375, right?

Just to think, more than a century since the advent of cordite and all of that time wasted developing all those big bore cartidges, making rifles for them and using them. Tsk, tsk, tsk!

Lets face it, they all became obsolete in 1912! Hmmm, the power of marketing over substance all those nearly nine decades. Think of all all of those hunter from all over the world, every race and creed, who thought themsevles such poor shots! Oh, the humanity...

JPK

Yes. The PH's I know use heavy calibers - 450+. All of them agree that bigger is better (especially for stopping charging elephants), and all of them shoot very, very well! When you are in charge and there is a possibility of someone being squashed, I don't think you want to mess around with peashooters. In certain situations, a .375 just cannot do what a .470 or .500 can - simple, no debate.

Dave

Saeed,

I certainly agree that anyone who can't handle anything bigger should use a .375 when after elephant or buffalo.

A bigger bullet placed poorly is far worse than a smaller one placed well. Marginal hits are to be avoided at all costs.

But we are all human, and bound to err, and that means we will sometimes be stuck with a marginal hit, perhaps at the worst possible moment.

I want my marginal hit, if I am unfortunate enough to deliver one, to be struck by a sledgehammer, and not a fly-swatter!

We seem to be confusing two different recommendations from PHs. One is for a clients rifle and the other is for theirs or another PHs rifle (they will probably also include a client here that can accurately use a big bore stopper). For the general run af the mill client whom they do not know they will recommend a 375 of some variation. Why? Because they don't know him or what he can handle and the 375 is more likely to be shot well by this hunter. Clients hunting DG with rifles of heavy recoil that they can't shoot well are a serious problem to them, causing wounded and lost animals and dangerous follow ups. Like a guiding a bow hunter, muzzle loader or hand gun hunter for DG using a sub-stopper increases the likely hood that they will have to help stop a charge. But inexperienced clients being over gunned is more of a problem than being under gunned. The same PH will recommend a bigger caliber stopper to other PHs and to clients but only if they are experienced and can handle the bigger gun as well as a 375.

Another point is that a 375 such as a light weight 378 Weatherby probably will be more difficult to shoot acurately than a 458 Win out of a 10 1/2 lb rifle. It is recoil that causes the problem more so than caliber or bullet weight.

465H&H

quote:

Originally posted by Woodhits:
I actually know Mark and he's a nice guy (and smart) so no need to call him an "idiot" because you don't agree with his word usage.

That being said, his African hunting experience is somewhat limited.

I wouldn't call a .375 a "stopping rifle" but it's a subjective term. Cut the guy some slack.

Cut him some slack? My dictionary defines that slang term as "to be less demanding; ease off." Why would anyone be inclined to give some slack to the Editor-in-Chief of the American Rifleman, "The World's Oldest and Largest Firearm Authority?" That position goes back 123 years. Shouldn't he be held to the very highest standards? We're not talking about some freelance schmuck, fresh out of college, writing for walking-around-money.

Dave, I read the article in question last night and found it to be a well-written, informative and useful product evaluation of the Kimber Talkeetna .375.

You seem unduly exercised about one line in the entire article, in which a .375 is referred to as a "stopping rifle."

As has been pointed out by some of the posters above, many hunters, including some with a lot of experience hunting dangerous game, would agree with Keefe.

Personally, I don't agree with him on this point. But by the same token, I don't think that he is an idiot for saying what he did, or that he is necessarily ill-informed. Rather, I think that Keefe's point is an arguable one - with which I happen to disagree.

Reasonable people can disagree about such things reasonably.

Maybe, but not about preferring a 10lb 375! or thinking an 8 3/4lb 375 is a light weight!

(Not that that makes him an idiot, hmm, or does it?)

JPK