Have you ever tried much lighter bullets on Buff in Africa?

I'm curious because I ONLY shoot white tails and have used then in many calibers and my experience with them is that with copper bullets it doesn't really seem to make much difference at all. I can kill deer with a 53 grain bullet every bit as well as I can with a 250 grainer. The main difference I see is that light bullets just seem to shed velocity fast enough to rob some distance off the max that they are effective at. Deer do present much problem for penetration to monos, but getting a mono to expand at lower velocity. I've never recovered one from a deer yet and I have seen some damned impressive penetration at full expansion through a lot of bone. I have seen about four feet of penetration without hitting a lot of bone.


Not that I am in any way contemplating shooting a Cape Buffalo with a .223, but I would have to believe that much lighter smaller rounds with monos should work well. A 130 grain mono out of a 300 WM is pretty hard on whatever it hits

No I have not.

I tend to stick to the original weight of the bullet intended for that caliber.

Buffalo I have only shot with 300 grain 375 caliber, and 400 grain 416 caliber.

Nothing else.

And I agree with you that different bullets make no difference in killing an animal.

I have shot 130, 140 and 150 grain bullets in 270 caliber out of various wildcats.

No difference at all in the killing effects with any of them.

I have also used 7mm, 338, 375 and 416 on all sorts of game animals.

Sadly, never noticed any difference either.

I would be very happy using my 30/404 on everything in Africa.

But it is not legal.

Years ago I used to take two rifles on safari.

One for buffalo and elephants, and the other for everything else.

Then I stopped doing that, and just use my 375/404 for everything, and never looked back.

I have shot buffalo with it at over 300 yards, and other animals at over 500 yards.

Makes life so much easier, using one rifle, and one bullet.

I am probably one of the few hunters who has a professional hunter who puts up the shooting sticks miles away from our animals and says "he is a bit far. You have to aim high!"

Or "you see the bull there? A bit far though. Make sure your bullet does not drop into that cow just below him"

I fire a shot, and the bull drops.

He says "That is ridiculous!"

Asked later why he put the stick up so far away, he says "Open area so we cannot get any closer. Anyway, you told me if you can see it, you can hit it"

That sounds more like Roy than Alan...

quote:

Originally posted by crbutler:
That sounds more like Roy than Alan...

It was Alan.

But, as the old saying goes, the fruit does not fall far from the tree.

I remember Roy bringing us to a couple of bulls lying under a tree just of the top of a sandy hill.

A big tree at the top.

He says, walk up to the tree and shoot one.

He did not bother to mention the bulls were under that tree!

The muzzle of my 416 Weatherby was almost toughing it when I fired!

On another occasion we were following a herd of buffalo as they fed.

When we caught up with them, they were about 300 yards away about to disappear into thick bush.

He puts the shooting stick up, and says "a bit far for buffalo"

I shot one anyway, and they all ran off.

We went over and found our bull dead within 40 yards from where he ran.

He used to say "wait for him to give you a good angle"

After a few years he would say "shoot him up the arse!"

It is very hard to keep up with these African professional hunters

I have always thought the 338 Win Mag is the ideal all round caliber. At one time they made a 300gr bullet for it. Not sure if that's still the case, I have not loaded this caliber for years. I did shoot a Moose up the rear end (literally, there was no entry wound) with a 250gr soft and we found the bullet in the brisket. At the other end of the spectrum, shot a springbok and it pretty much took both front legs off at the shoulder.

Saeed what is your point of impact at 100 yards when using your 375/404 + 1" + 2" ?

quote:

Originally posted by DArcy_Echols_Co:
Saeed what is your point of impact at 100 yards when using your 375/404 + 1" + 2" ?

I am not really too fussy about it.

Anywhere between 1-2 is fine.

For all hunting, except leopard, lion and croc, one does not really need to be that precise.

I load my ammo for the safari, and fire 3 shots.

If they are one inch high, one and half, I just leave them as they are.

The question comes from wondering what a light for caliber 375 bullet would accomplish in transiting a Buffalo. The deer with four feet+ of penetration was shot with a puny 85 grain TSX at 3200 FPS. It turned the lungs into red soup and when it passed just over the heart it ruptured the heart such that it remained connected at the tip of the left ventricle and exposed all four chambers and valves better than I could have done with a scalpel.

Lungs are lungs and a Buff's lungs are about as fragile as a deer's. I am pretty sure I do not want to be Just shooting lungs on something like a Buff though. But... 200 grains of bullet going through a chest at 3200 FPS has just got to be pretty hard on them.

I have no use for heavy-for-caliber bullets, but for all others, I do a dance based on caliber.

Not sure why. Don't look for pure logic. Just whatever logic comes from my experience.

Anything in .458 needs a 500 grain bullet, IMHO. Just seems right, and works, with proper velocity, like instant poison.

In .416, I am indifferent to a point. Anything from 350, to 370, to 400, to 410 seems fine.

In .338, I like 225.

In .375, I like 270, but my favorite is the no longer made but super deadly 272 grain Hirtenberger ABC bullet. I have my stash, and my stash will last me all of my days. But if anyone has any, please contact me. I am a ready, willing and able buyer! These ABC bullets cut and slice like a chainsaw blade cutting through pine.

In .500, I like the 600 grain Woodleighs (may they come back strong), or even better, the 570 grain Barnes.

Monolithic, or almost monolithic, copper or brass bullets are my first choice, every time.

quote:

Originally posted by miles58:
The question comes from wondering what a light for caliber 375 bullet would accomplish in transiting a Buffalo. The deer with four feet+ of penetration was shot with a puny 85 grain TSX at 3200 FPS. It turned the lungs into red soup and when it passed just over the heart it ruptured the heart such that it remained connected at the tip of the left ventricle and exposed all four chambers and valves better than I could have done with a scalpel.

Lungs are lungs and a Buff's lungs are about as fragile as a deer's. I am pretty sure I do not want to be Just shooting lungs on something like a Buff though. But... 200 grains of bullet going through a chest at 3200 FPS has just got to be pretty hard on them.

Frankly, we see things in the field which make no sense at all.

The same bullet and load that would penetrate a bull buffalo from tail to neck, would get stuck in an impala shot in the neck, lengthsways, and the bullet is found by his tail.

A bullet with over 5,000 pounds of energy, hits an impala at 30 yards.

All he does is flinch as if he has been bitten by a tse tse fly, and walks as if nothing has happened to him.

After a few yards, he sits down and dies slowly.

This is the same impala shot legthways.

quote:

Saeed, I believe in the notion that one must match the caliber and bullet and its velocity and power to the quarry.

A full penetration 5,000 ft.-lbs. bullet that passes through a game animal in a millisecond is no more effective than a full penetration 2,000 ft.-lbs. bullet that does the same thing!

Mike

I have shot hundreds of gallon water jugs with mainly copper monos. I don't know about effective for killing water jugs, but I do know this:

If I duplicate the range of the shot and the rifle I CAN tell in maybe most cases with surprising accuracy what size mono by repeating the test and looking at the result and size of water droplets from the exploded jug.

That has to be from the amount of energy and the speed of release of the energy. With a very fast bullet that carries sufficient energy the droplets tend to be much smaller and much more uniform at distance and a heavier bullet that is much slower and penetrates much further tends to be noticeably larger. I first noticed this comparing 85 grain and 100 grain 25-06 bullets and 80 grain with 130 grain bullets. I found it pretty startling that it was so repeatable.

Very high velocity releases sp much energy into the water so quickly that the water disperses in easily noticeable quite uniform droplets.

That can only come from the rapidity of the energy dump. It might be much more difficult to see in an animal, but it has to work pretty much the same.

Saeed has a whole lot more experience with buffalo than I will ever have, but I don't know why anyone would want to shoot them with a light bullet. I'm sure I could kill a buffalo with my .30-06 light rifle and 180 grain softs if everything was just right, but I'd rather have a proper 400 grain bullet out of a .416. Just my two cents. Take it or leave it.

Also, not a fan of mono bullets. I know a lot are. Maybe I'm just old, but I'll use a bonded bullet with a lead core. Always worked for me.

quote:

Originally posted by miles58:

quote:

Saeed, I believe in the notion that one must match the caliber and bullet and its velocity and power to the quarry.

A full penetration 5,000 ft.-lbs. bullet that passes through a game animal in a millisecond is no more effective than a full penetration 2,000 ft.-lbs. bullet that does the same thing!

Mike

I have shot hundreds of gallon water jugs with mainly copper monos. I don't know about effective for killing water jugs, but I do know this:

If I duplicate the range of the shot and the rifle I CAN tell in maybe most cases with surprising accuracy what size mono by repeating the test and looking at the result and size of water droplets from the exploded jug.

That has to be from the amount of energy and the speed of release of the energy. With a very fast bullet that carries sufficient energy the droplets tend to be much smaller and much more uniform at distance and a heavier bullet that is much slower and penetrates much further tends to be noticeably larger. I first noticed this comparing 85 grain and 100 grain 25-06 bullets and 80 grain with 130 grain bullets. I found it pretty startling that it was so repeatable.

Very high velocity releases sp much energy into the water so quickly that the water disperses in easily noticeable quite uniform droplets.

That can only come from the rapidity of the energy dump. It might be much more difficult to see in an animal, but it has to work pretty much the same.

Which is precisely why I deleted my post that you quoted!

After some reflection, I realized that I had overgeneralized, which is a logical fallacy.

But what I said is true to some extent, which stops at elephant.

An elephant does not care about velocity.

Only penetration matters on elephant.

quote:

Originally posted by Saeed:

Frankly, we see things in the field which make no sense at all.

The same bullet and load that would penetrate a bull buffalo from tail to neck, would get stuck in an impala shot in the neck, lengthsways, and the bullet is found by his tail.

A bullet with over 5,000 pounds of energy, hits an impala at 30 yards.

All he does is flinch as if he has been bitten by a tse tse fly, and walks as if nothing has happened to him.

After a few yards, he sits down and dies slowly.

This is the same impala shot legthways.

Yeah, I hear you. How much blood they put on the ground is a good example. I have found no key to explain why there isn't correlation between wounds and the blood that hits the ground, nor relative severity of the wound and how much blood hits the ground.

For example: I regularly shoot deer facing me dead on at short range with a crossbow. That very uniformly puts the arrow through the atria, down through the heart and out the left ventricle, then exiting Bambi near the umbilicus. I have killed a few dozen with that placement. Shortest run was almost 100 feet. Longest run was ~200 yards. Blood trails ranged from sparse and hard to follow to a 4 foot red swath.

I have given up trying to understand it. If I cannot make sense of the same shot with the same broadhead and arrow, I sure as hell will never do so with a rifle.

quote:

Originally posted by Russ Gould:
I have always thought the 338 Win Mag is the ideal all round caliber. At one time they made a 300gr bullet for it. Not sure if that's still the case, I have not loaded this caliber for years. I did shoot a Moose up the rear end (literally, there was no entry wound) with a 250gr soft and we found the bullet in the brisket. At the other end of the spectrum, shot a springbok and it pretty much took both front legs off at the shoulder.

i have shot a 338 for many years. I use a 250 gr. nosler partition and I have never recovered a bullet on anything I have taken with that load. It just works.

Of the bullets available today my choice is:

Mono copper
Solid shank like the Bear Claws
Partition
Bonded
Normal lead core

quote:

Originally posted by Saeed:
Of the bullets available today my choice is:

Mono copper
Solid shank like the Bear Claws
Partition
Bonded
Normal lead core

Here, I am either shooting something that will make it to my plate or a varmint, usually a small varmint. Red squirrels and chipmunks. For the varmints I tend to use a smaller rifle and very fragile bullets. Everything I intend to
be eaten by me or anyone else, I shoot with copper monos.

I like Swift A Frames for buffalo and they've worked well on all the larger antelope I've shot with them. And a couple of leopards. Suspect they'll work well on lion as well.

The biggest bullshit written about bullets was by Art Alpin of A-Square.

He invented the so called LION LOAD.

A most useless bullet ever invented.

Far too soft, breaks up too fast.

Same thing he wrote about inventing the 577 T.Rex.

That some Zimbabwe professional hunter had problems killing elephants because of lack of power and penetration.

I have been told from first hand experience the 577 T.Rex failed to penetrate an elephant's head from the front.

Which is not unusual, and can happen with any caliber.

Got a question asking about me using Sierra Match King bullet on one of my previous hunts.

It about 20 years ago in South Africa.

I built a new wildcat, a 30/404.

The rifles was built on a Sako action, and I installed a Dan Lilja barrel just shy of 27 inches.

My intentions was to try and see how different bullets performed on game animals at very high speed.

I tried several makes of bullets, all in 180 grains.

Velocities varied between 3440-3480 fps, depending on the bullet make.

Frankly, that was quite an eye opener of an experiment.

I start off by using the Sierra Match King bullets.

Every single animal I shot with them died with one shot.

They ranged from nyala, reedbuck and zebra.

The bullets all broke up on the surface, never penetrating deep at all.

But, all animals dropped dead??!!

Bullet fragments did not even exist.

An example was a zebra.

Standing broadside.

Bullet hit him on the shoulder, never penetrated into the chest cavity.

Creating an enormous crater.

The zebra dropped stone dead.

I think this was what Roy Weatherby used for his hunts, with the 300 and 257 Weatherby Magnums.

I read some about Roy Weatherby's field testing of those calibers. He seemed to have more variable results than you did. I have often thought that had he been able to use something like the Barnes bullets post XLCs he might have had much more satisfactory results. I started using Barnes bullets with the Xs and as soon as the XLCs were available I used them and quit with the uncoated Xs. I never had the least problem with any of them, but the uncoated Xs id put a lot of copper in the barrel. I have only had a couple of rifles copper foul bad enough that it affected accuracy enough I had to fix it, but when the XLCs came out there was no point in using the uncoated Xs made no sense.

Did you ever do much experimentation with your Walterhogs up in the 3500 FPS range? I would think they would be superb at those velocities for bigger animals.

I have a 375/416 Rigby, and have used it once in Africa.

Sadly, penetration at 3140 fps was not very good.

It seems I get best penetration at around 2800 fps, and that is what I load my current ammo for hunting.

Back when I shot high power competition, I shot a whitetail with a Sierra 168 gr. boat tail match. Shot for the lungs and it was quite effective.

In some rather aimless and pointless wandering on the internet I fell down a rabbit hole of videos of people shooting Cape Buffalo with arrows. Most all were shooting regular vertical compound bows. I do not know, but would assume that at the least they were shooting pretty heavy draw weight bows. I saw no arrows penetrate all the way through. All the shots but one were intended as double lung and a couple maybe the heart as well. Almost all the arrows were still sticking out of the Buff, some did not look to have penetrated well enough to make it to the off side lung. A backup with a rifle was usually present and sometimes obvious. It struck me as interesting that mostly it seemed that those arrow shot Buff died pretty much like any comparably shot whitetail. Even to the extent that the distance run after the shot was comparable.

Part of that I would attribute to the arrows failure to penetrate. With a broadhead somewhere central inside the chest when an animal runs it scrambles the lungs pretty impressively. Mostly though, it has to be that while a Buff is a huge and pretty rugged critter, the lungs are simply just a larger version of a deer's lungs. Lungs have to exchange air molecules and have to b very similarly constructed to do it.

All that being true, then a .223 shooting a 53 grain TSX through the lungs would in all probability penetrate much better than the arrows and kill better. You wouldn't catch me trying a stunt like that, I don't care who was my backup nor how big his rifle. Sticking one with an arrow sounds like it'd just shorten ones life expectancy even more. But... even though they did not show and of the "didn't work as planned" shots, they did kill a bunch of Buffs and what they showed was very like my deer hunting.

I used to bow hunt and was prepared to take it to so called DG. But you do make it DG with a bow that can't stop an animal. My much wiser wife looked at me and said that would be just fine once I'd put our children through college. Made sense. I've hunted with a rifle ever since.

Last year we had a hunter who wanted to shoot a buffalo with a bow.

Never managed it.

People do shoot them, and succeed.

But most do it on a specific area where blinds are set for the purpose.

Nothing wrong with that.

But hunting one in the wild is an exercise in futility.

We did find, and shoot several bulls at close range, but non of them would have been easy with a bow.

With a rifle I can basically shoot them at any angle.

Not so with a bow.

I think, well at least all I remember, was the videos I saw were all taken of people on the ground and looked to be way closer than I'd want to be on the ground afoot from alive and healthy Cape Buffalo. Some I'd have guessed them at not more than 20 yards. Do they maybe have Cape Buffalo in some kind of fenced hunting operation in place there?

I wouldn't think that a captive Cape Buffalo, even from stock that had been kept, fed and around people for many generations would be something a person could ever trust. I've been around more than enough Holstein bulls that I would never under any circumstances trust one. I have never heard of successful domestication of Cape Buffalo. Going inside a fenced operation containing Cape Buffalo would have to give enlightened meaning to the phrase too stupid to live.