http://huntforever.wordpress.c...un-is-really-enough/ ..

[quote]
HOW MUCH GUN IS REALLY ENOUGH?

The bull stood clear for just a second, about 80 yards away, quartering strongly to us. The correct shot was right on the point of the on-shoulder, or maybe a couple inches inside the shoulder, into the neck. Donna was on the sticks; PH Mark Haldane and I both had our binoculars on that bull when the rifle went off. The placement looked perfect, and so did the reaction: The bull bucked like a rodeo horse, then turned into the herd, that shoulder apparently wrecked. Of course, the mass of buffalo was instantly in motion.


No second shot was possible, but the stricken bull was losing ground quickly, and as they vanished into the tall saw-grass he was almost at the end of the herd. We brought the trackers up and waited a little while before we dived in, but that was pure caution. Everything in our combined experience told us that bull was dead, and not very far away. Caution is good, and only the last part was true: He wasn’t very far away. He was also very much on his feet, and why he didn’t charge in that nasty stuff is another mystery!

A couple of days later, altogether by chance, I had exactly the same shot on a buffalo, and at about the same distance. I was shooting iron sights, so I had to really concentrate to keep the front bead on the point of the shoulder and not let it stray right or left. The squeeze felt good, and when I came down out of recoil the herd was already in motion…except for one buffalo, collapsed in a heap.

I was hunting with Craig Hamman that day. He’s an extremely experienced PH, and he knew as well as I did that it isn’t usual for a buffalo to drop to the shot. He also knows well the limitations of middle-aged hunters with iron sights. “You might have slipped it into his head or neck. Better shoot him again before he decides to get up.”

So I did, but there was little reaction. The buffalo was down to the first shot and he wasn’t getting up. My first shot was placed exactly the same as Donna’s shot two days earlier, the bullet entering at a seemingly identical angle. The results, obviously, were quite different. Donna took her buffalo with a .375 H&H and a good 300-grain softpoint; I took mine with a .500 Jeffery firing a 570-grain softpoint. At the distance, Donna’s bullet had a bit less than 4,000 foot-pounds of energy; mine was still carrying 6,000.

On the strength of these two incidents it would be easy to conclude that the .375 just isn’t enough gun for buffalo, and that the .500 Jeffery is a much better choice! The fallacy in such thinking is that two buffalo don’t offer quite enough of a sampling to reach any conclusions. Somewhere along the way I lost count of the buffalo I’ve taken—let’s call it several dozen—but I respectfully submit that this is also not enough to reach anything beyond an educated opinion. For conclusions I think it’s better to reach back over the past century of African hunting, during which combined wisdom has concluded that the .375 H&H is plenty of gun for buffalo.

My own admittedly limited experience has borne that out. As a young hunter I had a failure on buffalo with a .375 H&H. Of course I was unwilling to admit that it might have been poor shot placement, so I used bigger guns for a lot of years. They worked, but in time I circled back. I keep circling, up and down the scale, but I’ve probably taken more buffalo with a .375 H&H than anything else. Of course it works just fine, and I have long considered it to be the sensible minimum caliber for the largest game.

BELL AND STIGAND

The .375 is not actually the legal minimum in all jurisdictions; the actual minimum is often the 9.3mm (caliber .366). I’ve taken a few buffalo with 9.3mms and seen quite a few others taken, and it works just fine. So does the .338 with a good 250-grain bullet. But we’ve had “minimum calibers” pounded into our heads for so long that it’s easy to forget where the argument came from.

In the 1890s, the parallel developments of smokeless powder and jacketed bullets made possible both velocity and penetration unimaginable in the blackpowder era. The early smokeless cartridges were military ones between 6.5mm (.264-inch) and 8mm (.323-inch), and the military bullets initially in vogue were heavy-for-caliber, round-nosed, full-metal-jacketed slugs. According to early proponents of these “small bores”—hunters such as C.H. Stigand and Karamoja Bell—they worked amazingly well.

One of the first was the 6.5x53R, a little rimmed cartridge firing a 156-grain bullet. Initially adopted by the Romanian military in 1893 and later the Dutch, it became very popular in Africa. On that same Mozambique buffalo hunt just described, my friend Bill Jones had with him a really nice Holland & Holland single shot, chambered to 6.5x53R and delivered in 1898 to none other than Frederick Courteney Selous. It turns out that Mozambique is one of relatively few African jurisdictions that does not have minimum calibers in her game laws. This has made it a popular destination for handgunners and bowhunters…and it meant that Bill could try his Selous rifle on a buffalo.

We all thought this was a bit crazy, but we agreed to give it a go…hoping for an ideal presentation and plenty of open ground! A buddy of Bill’s, Corbin Shell, necked down .303 British for brass and loaded up some CEB 155-grain flat-point homogenous alloy solids at a modest velocity of 2,325 fps.

It took quite a bit of crawling, but Craig Hamman got Bill a clean broadside shot at about 70 yards. The report of that little rifle is as mild as the recoil, and the bullet hit with an odd slapping sound. He turned immediately into the herd, so no backup shot was possible. The herd moved maybe 100 yards in open ground, then turned. We could quickly pick out Bill’s bull from blood on his nose, but before a second shot opened up he lay down…and the herd moved off and left him there. Bill shot him again, a sensible precaution, but he was truly not going anywhere. That little bullet entered centrally right behind the shoulder…and exited the same place on the opposite side!

This was the penetration that early hunters like Stigand, Bell and Selous raved about. It was the first time I’ve seen it demonstrated on an animal as big as a buffalo, and it was an eye-opening experience. So should we forget the minimums and go back to Selous’ 6.5mm or Bell’s 7×57? Uh, no, let’s not get crazy. Bill had open ground, a good presentation, and he placed his shot perfectly. There was initially no blood at all, and the bull stayed with the herd until he went down. In thick cover, that could have caused problems. The old East African Professional Hunters Association was not being arbitrary when, in the 1950s, they instituted Africa’s first “minimum caliber” law. (In Kenya and Tanganyika, minimum of .40 caliber for thick-skinned game.)

TAYLOR

Let’s not get crazy about that, either. The .500 Jeffery I shot my buffalo with was extremely impressive. Also from Bill Jones’ collection, it’s one of just over a score of .500 Jeffery rifles made by Jeffery, and the only one that was made to order. Built in 1936 for C. Fletcher Jamieson, it is referred to several times in John Taylor’s African Rifles and Cartridges. The rifle shoots straight and handles wonderfully.

Again, one cannot read much into just one buffalo, but for many years the .500 Jeffery was the most powerful bolt-action cartridge. It is among a very small handful of cartridges (.460 Weatherby, .505 Gibbs, .577, .600 and .700 NE) that, with ideal shot placement and bullet performance, can overwhelm a buffalo.

On the other hand, it isn’t just the buffalo that can be overwhelmed. When I fired the second shot at my buffalo, my shooting arm went numb from shoulder to wrist. That shot, though totally unnecessary, also went where I wanted it—but several seconds passed before I could shake off the paralysis and prepare to fire again if needed. I should probably admit that my left shoulder hasn’t been exactly the same since a .600 doubled a while back, and a recent fall on a horse didn’t help. But with or without infirmities the recoil of the really big cartridges is at an altogether different level. My conclusion: The .500 Jeffery is too much of a good thing, at least for me!

SPLIT THE DIFFERENCE

Most of us need to start somewhere in the neighborhood of the .375 H&H, and many of us need to stop there. With adequate gun weight and proper stock fit, most people—Donna being a good example—can learn to shoot a .375 H&H. But if that’s a problem, you can step down slightly to the 9.3×62, .370 Sako Magnum (also a 9.3mm), or a .376 Steyr. All are adequate for any buffalo that walks provided you place the bullet where it needs to be. Don’t kid yourself; it’s all about shot placement. Buffalo hit poorly with the really big guns can be lost, and can turn the tables.

On the other hand, if recoil and maximum versatility aren’t issues, there may be a compromise more perfect than even a .375. I was trying to take a buffalo with the Jamieson .500 Jeffery, and we were on a big herd. There was a gorgeous bull in the group, but he was beyond 100 yards and I wasn’t confident with the iron sights. Craig Hamman wisely called Bill Jones forward, and he stood to the sticks with his scoped .404 Jeffery. He quickly took a facing shot, and the bull swapped ends and ran with the herd. The herd kept running, but this bull was down and out in 40 yards, as clean a one-shot kill as you could ever hope for with a body shot.

A .375 might have done that, but I have come to believe that the .40-calibers—the several .416s, the .404 Jeffery, the .450/.400—offer the perfect compromise for buffalo, not quite as shootable or as versatile as the .375, but taking a noticeable step up in power without the bone-jarring and flinch-inducing recoil of the heavier cartridges. But since we’re talking about buffalo, whatever cartridge you choose, put a low-powered scope on the rifle, preferably with a lighted reticle. This may not be as traditional as the good old express sight, but you’ll be able to take more shots a whole lot quicker. You’ll probably place them better, and chances are you’ll wind up with a bigger buffalo. – Craig Boddington
[endquote]

How much gun is really enough?

The one that kills YOUR game.

Unless one hits the central nervous system, no two animals, hit in exactly the same place, by the same caliber, might react the same to the shot.

Forget buffalo for a minute, and let us take the lowly impala!

I have shot enough with different rifles; 25-06 Remington, several 270 wildcats, 7mm, 338 and 375s.

I have seen them drop stone dead with some calibers, shot in the same place, and run for 100 yards when shot by another caliber.

Here are a few examples.

One was shot with a 270 Ackley, about 100 yards away.

Standing broadside, the bullet broke both his front legs, grazed his chest just cutting the skin, never went into his chest cavity.

He ran a few yards and dropped dead.

Another one was about 150 yards. Using the same rifle.

He was standing at an angle, and the bullet hit him in the neck. Again, just grazing it really and not going into him at all.

He ran a few yards and dropped dead.

Another was feeding towards us less that probably 50 yards.

He had is head down at a slight angle. I was using a 375/404 with a 300 grain Barnes X bullet.

The bullet entered at the neck shoulder junction, going all the way and stopping under the skin next to his tail.

He made a slight flinch, arched his back slightly, continued walking for a few yards, then laid down as if he was resting, then fell on his side and died.

Interesting that there are no other comments on this thread. Probably an indication of the respect we all have of the knowledge of Boddington and Saeed.

My only comment is that I wish I had Bill Jones' gun collection.

quote:

Originally posted by Blacktailer:
Interesting that there are no other comments on this thread. Probably an indication of the respect we all have of the knowledge of Boddington and Saeed.

Seriously, besides the Old-Time Hunters and Game Rangers probably no one killed more Buffalo than Saeed and that would include Boddington.

As usual, Craig comes thru like a pro that he is and so does Saeed.
Funny, I shot plenty of DG with 375 and came to conclusion that 40 caliber might be better, so this past Winter I built 404 Jeffery from old Savage 110/300 RUM. Holds three rounds only, but for less then $ 1,000.00 total including purchasing price and looking rather hillbillish, it will do for next trip with my good old 375 H&H Browning as a back up.
Thanks Craig for being the best writer there is since you started writing.

And I think the obvious conclusion to be drawn is that shot placement trumps ft Lbs any day but there is always the biological variable (the impala thinks he just got bit by a tsetse or the elephant mistook a 7x57 for a 600NE).
So shoot the biggest gun that you can shoot accurately.

Kevin Robertson, Veterinarian and PH: Sectional density, penetration!

No, that will not knock an animal on it's butt, but it will close the deal.

According to some people;

If you are targeting DG with broadheads, and the bigbore armed PH needs to finish the job,
-then you are apparently not hunting, but just stunt shooting.

If you are targeting DG with 6.5mm, and the bigbore armed PH need to finish the job,
-then you are apparently not hunting, but just stunt shooting.


so,

If you are targeting DG with .375cal, .4o4, or .458lott and the biGGerbore[.500cal +] armed PH needs to finish the job,
- then you are...?

a./ not really hunting, but just stunt shooting?
b./ really hunting, but only as a novice/amateur?
c./ A hopeless shot and some PHs favourite kind of client?
d./other?

........

But then look at all those DG hunting videos.
Even PH can hit them right and the game still gets away.
As we all know, ultimately it's hunting and if everything was perfect and no excitement there would be no DG, no happiness, no disappointment, no anything.
It would be like work.
Hunting can be ugly, nasty, dangerous and overall so frustrating and that's why we love it and keep coming back and keep everyone in business.
Without misery, there is no happiness.
No one ever hit and dropped everything on spot for eternity.
including the best professionals.
Everyone is fallible and prone to pressure and excitement and mistakes at any time.

I can understand the 'excitement' when first spotting game and approaching for the shot.

For some people who hunt for recreational pleasure,
they can also consider it an exciting experience, when DG does not quickly die to the first shot,
and things go a little wild and unpredictable trying to find/finish the wounded DG.
Then they come back and describe all that to people, as an exciting hunting experience.

YEt professional hunters[poachers] from yrs ago who hunted DG purely for income,
found it annoying additional work[rather than exciting], that they now had to track & finish an animal.
When time could be better spent finding another one to kill either for its horn,ivory
and/or much needed meat supply for the camp.

People like the writer Ruark, thought it was a hard days hunt when
he rode in a motor vehicle to his hunting area in the morning,hunted,
and then drove back into camp by 1.00pm
and began working on polishing off a whole bottle of gin.

Pros like Bell would venture out early on foot carrying his rifle
and would pursue DG the whole day for many miles and finish the days hunt in the evening,
still on foot & carrying his rifle.

Bell at some point did use a .350 Rigby mauser, but found the larger rifle with long magnum action,
not the best choice , preferring the more handy and nimble 7x57.
I dont doubt the large amount of ground that Bell often covered, influenced him prefering to have a lighter rifle,
BUt he learnt what was required to allow that 7x57 to be a tool that contributed greatly to his success on DG.
He learnt the anatomy of the DG he hunted/knowing where to place the shot for a quick and humane death.
He also learned/developed accurate shooting skills to be able to consistently deliver such shots.

Sure the amount of DG back them was more plentiful and much less expensive to shoot,
but game is no less susceptible today,[to the effects of properly placed 7mm solid], than it was back then.
and with todays modern FN solids you are likely to get even better bullet performance.

Rigby .275 = dead buffalo, but more likely to shit myself.

Merky double .500NE = dead buffalo, but less likely to shit myself.

I think someone here should be a bit less obsessed with Bell, Taylor, and Ruark; put down the books on Africana and actually take to the field a few times in order to gain some actual experience, both Here & There-!!

That would be my $0.02 on this entire thread!!

quote:

Originally posted by Trax:
Bell at some point did use a .350 Rigby mauser, but found the larger rifle with long magnum action,
not the best choice , preferring the more handy and nimble 7x57.
I dont doubt the large amount of ground that Bell often covered, influenced him prefering to have a lighter rifle,
BUt he learnt what was required to allow that 7x57 to be a tool that contributed greatly to his success on DG.
He learnt the anatomy of the DG he hunted/knowing where to place the shot for a quick and humane death.
He also learned/developed accurate shooting skills to be able to consistently deliver such shots.

Sure the amount of DG back them was more plentiful and much less expensive to shoot,
but game is no less susceptible today, to the effects of properly placed 7mm solid, than it was back then.

I am one of the few that believe that, in the right hands, the small bore can get the job done.

But I think you need to realize that Bell was not simply a good hunter. His genius with a rifle was on par with the trick shooters who can shoot pennies out of the air or the guys who can throw 8 clay pigeons and hit them all before they hit the ground.

My point is that Bell was a "one in a million" talent. And just like the trick shooting we see on TV, 99.99% of us could never be that good even with unlimited training.

quote:

Originally posted by JBrown:
I am one of the few that believe that, in the right hands, the small bore can get the job done.

And for the mass of hunters who dont have Bells rare level of cool nerve & skill, some need to realize
that just going larger & larger in bore size, does not necessarily
make up for ones human short comings.

Its like when people spruik the superiority of large bore doubles for quick follow-up shots on DG,
then some openly admit that they are more likely to run up a tree than face charging DG
after firing the first two shots.

Phil Shoemaker put it well with words to the effect that:
- a small cal. to the brain will kill, a .50 BMG to the hoof will not.

Well, it all depends to who you are talking to and its experience, my grandfather considered quite unnecessary to use the .30-30 that were available here in Sonora at the time (about 60 years ago) to shoot game when he could take coues deer, mule deer and cougar quite easily with a .22lr, he used to say they both kill when they hit the right spot and told me that if you cant hit the right spot you should not even shoot, i don't use a .22 to hunt deer but i stand by the thinking that if you don't feel like hitting the mark restrain of pulling the trigger.

Todd,

Good point, but I'll do both. If I'm not there, I can at least read about it.

quote:

Originally posted by lavaca:
Todd,

Good point, but I'll do both. If I'm not there, I can at least read about it.

Check your PMs!

quote:

Originally posted by Todd Williams:
I think someone here should be a bit less obsessed with Bell, Taylor, and Ruark; put down the books on Africana and actually take to the field a few times in order to gain some actual experience, both Here & There-!!

That would be my $0.02 on this entire thread!!

Very true Todd.

In addition to the names you have mentioned above, I have read practically all the books I could find on African hunting from as far back as I can find.

I found that so many things written by those authors do not match our own experience in the field at all.

Some statements are so categorically wrong, I am not sure that they were sober when they wrote them.

quote:

Originally posted by Saeed:

quote:

Originally posted by Todd Williams:
I think someone here should be a bit less obsessed with Bell, Taylor, and Ruark; put down the books on Africana and actually take to the field a few times in order to gain some actual experience, both Here & There-!!

That would be my $0.02 on this entire thread!!

Very true Todd.

In addition to the names you have mentioned above, I have read practically all the books I could find on African hunting from as far back as I can find.

I found that so many things written by those authors do not match our own experience in the field at all.

Some statements are so categorically wrong, I am not sure that they were sober when they wrote them.

Especially Capstick...

for example?

I recently went on a non-trophy hunt in Namibia with two friends. They were both shooting the beginner's 4-animal package and we all had an incredible time. One of them used a 7x57 (too much Bell?) and now thinks that it is the end all and be all and that possibly the toughness of African game has been overstated.. His kudu, a magnificent, almost 59"er, and the springbok died in a conventional manner. The two toughies, the Oryx and the Blue Wildebeest had a different fate. the wildebeest went down with a neck shot and the oryx with a broken back. If he had been off an inch or two, we might still be looking for those critters. As it were, with that bullet placement, he could have probably killed either of those with a 30-30 or .223 for that matter. His conclusions were based on anecdotal information, as is mine for that matter, but one swallow does not make a spring. I would have chosen a bit more "gun" just to make sure.

quote:

Originally posted by R. Gunn:
I would have chosen a bit more "gun" just to make sure.

+1

quote:

Originally posted by Saeed:
..I have read practically all the books I could find on African hunting from as far back as I can find.

I found that so many things written by those authors do not match our own experience in the field at all.

Some statements are so categorically wrong, I am not sure that they were sober when they wrote them.

Actually, from my perception, Bells experiences in the field seem to match those of Saeeds in the field.

Bell and Saeed have confidently & very effectively, got the job done many times,
each with their personally prefered calibre[ 7mm & .375 cal respectively.]

YEt we still have people questioning Bells use of 7mm and Saeeds use of .375cal,
some thinking that both these guys have been undergunned[or could have made better choices of calibre] for the hunting they have done.

Bell clearly made the point that novice hunters should not be attempt to hunt DG with a 7mm.
and gives account of numerous novice hunters who hunted lion with 7mm and got themselves mauled or killed in the process.

And maybe its the same with Saeed and his .375/404,
Maybe some people just dont have what it takes to achieve with a.375cal, what Saeed can achieve with a.375cal

Its interesting the decisions of those old well seasoned professional poachers from last century;

Selous: as his hunting career and knowledge/experience progressed, he sold of his doubleRifles and bought a selection of single-shots to hunt Africa with.
Bell: as his hunting career and knowledge/skill progressed, he found he could achieve the same or better, with a much smaller calibre Bolt action.

ITs interesting to note that Boddington says much the same thing Bell stated all those yrs ago;
ie; words to the effect that,.. Shot placement trumps calibre.

quote:

the 9.3×62, .370 Sako Magnum (also a 9.3mm), or a .376 Steyr. All are adequate for any buffalo that walks
provided you place the bullet where it needs to be.
Don’t kid yourself; it’s all about shot placement. Buffalo hit poorly with the really big guns can be lost

I would put those type guys in category well above the alcoholics Hemingway,Ruark and Crapstick.

quote:

Originally posted by Trax:

quote:

Originally posted by Saeed:
..I have read practically all the books I could find on African hunting from as far back as I can find.

I found that so many things written by those authors do not match our own experience in the field at all.

Some statements are so categorically wrong, I am not sure that they were sober when they wrote them.

Actually, from my perception, Bells experiences in the field seem to match those of Saeeds in the field.

Bell and Saeed have confidently & very effectively, got the job done many times,
each with their personally prefered calibre[ 7mm & .375 cal respectively.]

YEt we still have people questioning Bells use of 7mm and Saeeds use of .375cal,
some thinking that both these guys have been undergunned[or could have made better choices of calibre] for the hunting they have done.

Bell clearly made the point that novice hunters should not be attempt to hunt DG with a 7mm.
and gives account of numerous novice hunters who hunted lion with 7mm and got themselves mauled or killed in the process.

And maybe its the same with Saeed and his .375/404,
Maybe some people just dont have what it takes to achieve with a.375cal, what Saeed can achieve with a.375cal

Its interesting the decisions of those old well seasoned professional poachers from last century;

Selous: as his hunting career and knowledge/experience progressed, he sold of his doubleRifles and bought a selection of single-shots to hunt Africa with.
Bell: as his hunting career and knowledge/skill progressed, he found he could achieve the same or better, with a much smaller calibre Bolt action.

I would put those type guys in category well above the alcoholics Hemingway,Ruark and Crapstick.

Actually, I'm thinking this thread would have been more properly named "Bell - Obsess much?"!!

Well, at least the 34 item Signature Line homage, or rather, shrine, to Bell has finally been removed!

quote:

Originally posted by Todd Williams:


Well, at least the 34 item Signature Line homage, or rather, shrine, to Bell has finally been removed!

Shrine is your exaggerated creative term, not mine.
and IIRC, you also take exception to people quoting & listening to what Harry Selby says.
Bell was indeed human and made errors just like other people do, and openly admitted to them.
BUT his level of proficiency was high , compared to more typical capability level of people.
HE also made extensive experience based, observations and discoveries, that are just as applicable today,
and only claimed them to be his own personal observations, based on his own vast experience.
Interestingly enough, Boddington finds himself making the same conculsions as Bell.
Unfortunately some people on this forum have in the past
attempted to discredit Bells findings and quoting him incomplete and/or out of context.

No one these days, is ever likely to gain anywhere near the experience & exposure people like Bell and Selby gained,
and have to share.

If life was just about learning & being guided by ones own experience,
Then people like John Travolta, would have settled for the bare legal minimum rated co- pilot
he legally required to be next to him when flying his own Boeing.
Yet JT ignored such legal minimums and opted for a rather exceptionally experienced Boeing Test Pilot.
I gather because the Boeing test pilot would be able to impart some of his extensive knowledge & experience onto JT.

and I will try ignore and forget experienced old hunter WDM Bell..&..H.Selby...
when Travolta can forget and ignore past pilots H.Hughes and C.Lindbergh.

And if any of us was listening to Elmer Keith, we would be using nothing smaller than .50 caliber for impala!

I loved reading his writing.

Some of which were so funny.

I remember the time he wrote about shooting a deer with a 30-06 Springfield. He said he broke the deer's back. But the deer still ran off!

He reached the conclusion that the 30-06 wasn't good enough for deer.

I can imagine how someone like Elmer would fare in the Internet age!

Saeed, Elmer's reincarnations are alive and well on the AR big bore forum!!!

Theres is clearly a difference between those who primarily hunted for a living,
and those who primarily wrote for a living based on the subject of hunting.

I once read a saying,

' for every account of a lion seen lying in wait, there is a hunting writer waiting to lie.'

I think some opinions are formed because we don't know any better.

My grandfather used to sight his open sighted rifles by shooting them at an empty brass case.

He used to file his front sight and make the bead very small.

He used to file his rear sight into a very shallow V.

I remember him sitting adjusting his rifle by firing at empty brass case which I put on a stick and stuck in the sand.

He would rest his rifle on a blanket lying down, and he would not be satisfied until he drilled a hole cleanly in the middle of the brass case.

My father did exactly the same thing.

He laughed at me when I came home with a scope.

I only managed to convince him of the advantage of using a scope after I had s shooting contest with him.

Him using open sights on an FN SLR and me using a Ruger 77 in 220 Swift, shooting pop cans at long distance.

The first time I hunted in Africa my PH was laughing at me because Ibrought two rifles to hunt with.

A 25-06 Remington for the small stuff, and a 375H&H for buffalo and elephant.

He used to ask "why are you using these minimum calibers?"

Now over 30 years of hunting together with him, he prefers to see his clients using a 375 they can shoot, rather than a bigger caliber they are scared off but had to use because of peer pressure.

Use the rifle and caliber YOU are comfortable with, and can shoot accurately at reasonable distances.

quote:

Originally posted by Saeed:
Now over 30 years of hunting together with him, he prefers to see his clients using a 375 they can shoot, rather than a bigger caliber they are scared off but had to use because of peer pressure.

Well Saeed,
It just so happens that Harry Selby [also over several decades],discovered & recommended much the same thing,
as did other experienced PH during Harrys time.

Those PHs found .375 cal resulted in better & more consistent shot placement, resulting in more clean kills,
compared to often poor shot placement or complete misses by clients intimidated by the large Bores.
PHs were happy with this because it required them to do much less dangerous tracking & retrieval of wounded DG.

Although alcoholic Hemingway presented himself to be a tough manly type Alpha male,
even he chose to lay aside his large-bore SxS in favor of his .3o/o6 Springfield,
to take Leopard,Lion,Buff and Rhino.

quote:

Originally posted by Saeed:
Wrong bullet placement and it makes no difference what caliber or bullet weight you are using.

Many of the things you say line up with the things Bell,Selby and others extensively discovered all those yrs ago,
and that other respected people of today also say.

Giving them all worthy relevance to hunting today, However,
does not at all make me feel that I am building a shrine in honour of Saeed,Bell,Selby,
or any one else for that matter.

Gentlemen there is some credibility to the thought that bullet placement trumps bullet size! However there is no evidence that a large bullet is harder to place well than a smaller bullet. That depends on the nut behind the trigger, or triggers! I personally have taken about everything on the North American continent with a little Mannlicher Shoenauer MCA 61 rile cambered for .243 Win with 100 gr bullets, at 3000 FPS, a full 98% one shot kills DRT! While my hunting partners useing everything from 270 Win to 338 Win Mag were often shooting animals twice or three times. The fact is I shot hundreds of hot hand loads per year with that rifle while my buddies went to the range and shot a couple of rounds to make sure the zero had not moved. Gentlemen it is the shooter to a great extent.

There is an old saying that is very true, and that is, “beware the man who uses only one rifle, for he likely knows how to use it properly!” That statement can be taken to the bank, but it says nothing about one size over the other! A larger chambering placed in the same place as a smaller chambering will usually do more tissue damage than a smaller chambering “TODAY”!

I say TODAY because in Bell’s day the larger bore rifles used mostly large lead bullets that did not penetrate well, or nickel jacketed ROUND NOSE bullets that did penetrate but were prone to veering off course, or if hitting a bone near the surface bending the bullet so it did not penetrate well. Bell used ammo made for war rifles that were spitzer shaped and would penetrate better in a straight line to reach things like the brain of elephant. This made his bullets more effective than most of the larger bore rifles. I believe the guy that shot the large bore rifle all the time knew, as well as Bell, where to place the bullets, and could place them well, but the poor bullets then took over, where Bell’s bullets penetrated better and in a straight line. That is not the case today with modern bullet design.

Today bullet design has much improved in the larger bore rifles so that they penetrate as well as the smaller bore bullets, and if the person shooting these bullets are able to place them where they belong the larger bullet will do more tissue damage than a small bullet in the same place. It boils down to the proficiency of the shooter TODAY.

A very good example is Saeeds proficiency with his 375/404 rifle. His shots are spot on every time, yet people who hunt with Saeed, using the same chambering in a like rifle, tend to wound and need a number of shots to take the same animals Saeed takes with one shot kills. Again it is the shooter! I say if in Bell’s day, the larger bore rifles had had the bullets we have to day, this discussion would never have taken place!

Opinions vary, and the above is mine! Others may choose a different tack, which is their right!

…………………………………………………………................................................. ..

Shot placement first, bullet performance second, caliber last IMHO

is this the official SCI blog? they are using the free wordpress hosting site? yikes

Well said Mac!

quote:

Originally posted by Saeed:
.....

My grandfather used to sight his open sighted rifles by shooting them at an empty brass case.

.....

He would rest his rifle on a blanket lying down, and he would not be satisfied until he drilled a hole cleanly in the middle of the brass case.

My father did exactly the same thing.

.....

Me too: