264,

thanks for the shot details.


BTW:
Selby tells the story that a .318 250gn solid penetrated deeper than any other bullet he ever witnessed.
An inbound rhino took one in the snout and the pill was found just under the hide of its right rear hip.

Trax, I heard that story from Harry as well. I'd buy it!

Penetration, good shot placement (and of course CooL nerve ) is what got many of the greats through their extensive careers.
Mr.Bell popped 1100 ele with his 6.5mm and 7mm....Mr.Manners popped 1000 ele in his ivory days using the .375H&H,
.....and young 14yo Gail Selby dropped her bull ele with Bells 7x57
...and when inept .470NE SxS carrying clients totally screwed-up -- Harry Selby solved any further client embarrassment with his trusty .416 bolt trash.

But people these days obsessed with super magnum muzzle energy-bore Size and rifle type [yet comparatively limited experience]
would have people think they know so much better what the recipe to success is,..even foolishly suggesting that those greats were 'undergunned'
...

The likes of Manners and Bell, extensively proved that increased calibre size really is no grand substitute
for actually knowing what your doing and doing it properly with seemingly more humble tools.

quote:

trusty .416 bolt trash.

Which he of course worked from the wrong side!

Heres a young bull taken a couple of weeks ago. With a Win 70 338, 185TTSX and a 225 hydro. Hydro wasnt needed. 40m shot.
General load for buff is a 250 woodleigh protected point.They work well.
Cheers Mick

You know Selby hunted Kenya as a boy with his first rifle a Browning .22rimfire,
and he's on record for stating that he killed a whole range of plains game with it, up to the size of WaterBuck.
and,,,
Selby liked the .33 bore so much, that after talking with Ken Stuart and the technical adviser for Norma ammunition,
the .318 Selby Magnum was created.....it being the 300H*H case necked-up.

It was even casehead stamped ".318 Selby MAG"

Well, my very modest experiences have led me to appreciate bore, bullet composition, and energy/momentum. I've shot duiker, oribi, and spurwing geese with a 22 rimfire. But I've also wateched spurwing geese fly away after being hit with a 22. Yes, it is easy to blame me, the hunter, with a poor shot. But I was trying my best with the little open-sight 22. It didn't group very well, though I don't remember how bad things were.

What I do remember is that results with a 222 were remarkably different. We shot alot of spurwing geese and some guinea fowl and other birds with a 222 and 270. I don't remember one getting away. Most were bang/flog, though an occasional bird would run a few steps or even go airborne before crashing. Distances were typically 75-100 yards, some closer of course, though I remember one shot at about 200 yards with a 270 that was patiently timed to take two big geese.

In addition, I've seen an oribi run away and escape after being shot by a 338 near sundown. But there is no question that on average, a 338 or 375 put down an animal with more authority than a 270 or 30-06. Animals had more of a tendency to drop, or to take fewer steps. On average. There are always exceptions. These days I tend to hunt about one animal a year, so I don't have a broad statistical base to say that 416's and greater are empiracally better. They plain work.

But it is important to recognise any rifle as a tool and never to rely on it for taking a bad shot (high risk of wounding only) or making a bad shot. In today's world of fewer opportunities and more pressure to take a marginal shot, a larger, more powerful cartridge is a prudent choice. Angled shots and shots where an animal steps or turns at the break of the trigger are more successful with more powerful cartridges.

This is all on a cline, of course. The larger caliber produces better results, unless the gun starts to weigh down a hunter or intimidate a hunter. The intersection of that downward cline of "too big/heavy/powerful" with the upward cline of "better results, less follow-up" is the rifle and cartridge that a hunter wants to find.

The law occasionally intrudes on such an academic search, though, stipulating a minimum boundary for some animals. While I would probably have set the bar at the 338WinMag level for buffalo, game departments in Africa have sometimes chosen .366 (9.3mm), 3900 ftpounds, .375", and .40" as the minimum bar for buffalo and other dangerous game. In my "maturity," I now tend to think that the minimum is probably not the best intersection of clines for most people. Oh, I know that the 7mm's, 300's, 338's, 9.3's, and 375's with premium bullets are all buffalo killers in capable hands, Selby's 416 Rigby (equivalent to a 416 Remington or 416 Ruger these days), or 458 Win, is probably a better choice for most people after appropriate training and practice.

So back to the thread. Yes, the 338 Win Mag with a 225gn TTSX bullet is a load that could hunt the world. And the 185 TTSX would give a little more flatness and speed out to 500 yards, with very little loss of BC for resisting winddrift. I could recommend it for deer-sized game. For a hunt including larger animals the 225gnTTSX sets a rather excellent bar. The GSCustom and CEB-Raptors, or some premium lead core bullets, could be tested for possible better accuracy in a particular rifle. Accuracy among the suitable bullets might be the decisive factor, if one can gain a 1/2-MOA on the others.

I,ve shot Mule deer in Mexico with a 22 L.R. with good results but you must modify your hunting method greatly to be successful..

Ive shot one or two buffalo with the .338, 7x57 and 30-06, but you must modify your hunting method greatly to be successful..

My point being you can kill any animal with about any reasonable caliber, if you get close and place your bullet properly and use the right bullet to get the job done. Inuit kill polor bears with .223, Mexican vaqueros kill deer with 22s, Alaskans kill about anything with 30-30s..Did you know that some folks kill all those same animals with a bow and arrow!

quote:

Originally posted by 416Tanzan:
.. Selby's 416 Rigby (equivalent to a 416 Remington or 416 Ruger these days), or 458 Win,
is probably a better choice for most people after appropriate training and practice...

Selby carried his .416 for the imperative 'solve all problems' professional duties of a PH,
which at times is far more demanding that a clients limited respnsibilty/limited ability with a rifle,
regardless of its calibre.

Selby felt 7x57 was sufficient for his 14 yr old daughters use in her elephant hunt,...and so it was.
[pretty much the bull ran the typical distance bulls would run when Bell drilled them in the heart with 7x57]
HE could have trained her up on his larger .318WR if he thought it was going to offer some distinct advantage to both him & her.
...and really,
if a 14 yr old screws-up with 7x57, or adult client screws up with .470NE, Selbys jOb/Task with his .416 was all the same.

SElby has attested to the fact He and other PHs in his time, discovered that clients were more consistently making cleaner quicker kills
with the .375H&H (vs) the bigBores.
and thats what really made SELby and his like appreciate the .375H&H so much,
cause it meant far less screw-ups by regular common average skill clients
--and importantly they noted >> it resulted in far less dangerous follow-up jobs for themselves as PHs...

quote:

Originally posted by 416Tanzan:
In today's world of fewer opportunities and more pressure to take a marginal shot, a larger, more powerful cartridge is a prudent choice.

Yet we still have those today who are passionately dedicated to their bow hunting and who don't feel the need to seek:
- thousands FPS more velocity,
- or thousands more in ft/lb energy,
- or greater range
- or flatter trajectory
- or more shot angle options

as OFFERED by a thumping centrefire.

Instead they discipline themselves to work within the range & capability of the equipment they prefer using,
I did same when I put 300WBY & 270WBY down and began using a humble .22/250 for a change ......I had a great time!!!,
but then I got lazy/wanted things to be easier again.

Some people can be at ease with hunting Africa or Nrth American Elk with a bow,
then some people will feel more 'pressure' than the bow hunter, despite carrying a 308win, .300win. .375 or even a .416
That tells me its mostly all about personal state of mind -- A person is only under as much pressure as they put themselves under.

Apart from Bells 300 ele kills with his 6.5x54, we also have these seasoned hunter testimonies using the same:


"With the .256, I have killed many lions as well as pachyderms, it is no weight to carry on foot or on horseback,
and the mechanism is of the simplest and strongest kind."

- Sir Alfred Pease, "Book of The Lion"


"I shot most of my lions, say forty, with the .256. I do not remember exactly,
but feel sure that two-thirds of the lions did not need a second bullet."

- Blayney Percival


and lets not forget the Sikh military officer father and son combo [that Bell mentions] that took up the British rail offer
of a bounty on lions...they purchased a Rigby .275 mauser and set out to work to then claim bounty on some 90 lions
in a period of around 9 months.
Bell himself early on as a 16 yr old, got a job killing lions for Uganda Rail, using a .303

Yet people today with uber magnums, life protecting safety net PHs backing them, Sat. phones and modern medivac services on hand
like to talk up the pressure/risk/danger to life they are under on their once in a lifetime or occasional recreational hunt?
....

One marked difference here is that these people from the past who achieved so much with small bores,
were often people who had been to war hunting people who were also just as capable of killing them with the same modern convenience!
So their understanding & perspective on personal risk and danger while hunting wild animals was much more sober and realistic.
Their interpretation was no where near as inflated as the ordinary recreational hunter likes to imagine things to be.

Since no large organised number of lion,elephant or buffalo could fire modern weapons at them from a distance,
it certainly made beast hunting a lot easier and less life threatening than the carnage these people were exposed to in the
time of late 19th century/early 20 century WARS.

For people who witnessed or were hands on involved in mass destruction of humans on regular basis in times of war,
why would they even flinch at occasional news they received in Africa of a hunter that was killed while out collecting cats or ivory?
...further to the point, would they have really then bothered with trivial things like the bolt (vs) Double and calibre debate nonsense
like goes on in places like AR?...you think they at the time put such deaths down to the person using a .275 or .350 bolt rifle instead
of a sidelock .450cal?

Surely if some people can kill 40 lions or 300 ele with .256 bore...and some people 90 lions or 800 ele with .275 bore,
then how could one then rightfully blame those calibres for the deaths of other less fortunate hunters?

More than anything, it usually came down to basic lousy shooting that got people killed,
rather than choice of calibre or action type.

I agree with all the above in that good shooting is the key to success, but I do believe one should use as much gun as he can handle on dangerous game, and its not a bad idea to use enough gun on whatever you hunt..As many deer as I have killed with a 22 L.R. and a 222, I know that a 30-06 is the better choice.
I hunt hunt deer these days with my 25-35 out of nostalgia mostly. I have had to pass on shots at some really big bucks because they were say 300 yards out, and my stalk just didn't work..Bothers me not at all, as I have shot my share of the big bucks, but its a fact of hunting with lesser calibers, and your ability to accept being unsuccessful and not take foolish shots. I know folks that do not have that kind of control under the excitement of a hunt. I suppose it takes a few two day tracking jobs and an extra 5 or more miles of walking to teach us these lessons.

I suspect that most of the lions and elephants shot in times past with small bores were caught out in the open. Very different situation than going into the bush after them IMHO.

quote:

Originally posted by Mikelravy:
I suspect that most of the lions and elephants shot in times past with small bores were caught out in the open...

I am just wondering what sources you used to come to such a conclusion.

I know Bell wrote to say he had natives drive elephants into a small hand cut clearings they made
and He would then drill them in that small man made open area as they emerged from the tall stuff.
He had two 10 shot .303 Metfords ready, a gun bearer would hand him the second after the first was emptied on the herd.

- He also gave other accounts of being right on the tail of bulls in the thick stuff armed with his 7x57.

- He even found himself climbing his dead bulls to get clearer shots on the rest of them, which may well indicate
the country was not so open and easy.

- He also used a stand so he could shoot over the rather tall 14ft grass, to execute his trademark head shots.

- Bell would find himself in areas where he needed to push through foliage where the leaves were covered in mud
that had been deposited by passing elephants.... as he pushed through, the dry mud would flake off
and drop into his rifle gritting it up,....now that hunting in thick country wouldn't you say ????????



In the early 20 century many of the easy access open areas had been severely depleted/shot out of elephant,
requiring ivory hunters to trek to more remote/more heavily folaged country to get their valuable ivory hauls.
Bell went to great lengths to find virgin country away from the open areas where elephant once used it be so
commonly shot by every tom dick & harry.

Bell, Taylor, Boddington, Sutherland, some others I can't recall now.

It's pretty hard to pick where your animals will be in Africa or anywhere else..I have read that quote over and over thru the years but it simply does not hold water IMO..Its used mostly to dispel Bells use of the 7x57, but in fact he hunted the open areas and thick stuff just like any other hunter..

Where I hunt elk its thick and swampy but you do on occasion get a shot across a canyon that can be 400 or more yards, so I don't hunt the thick stuff with a 45-70 or 358. I have had the same experience in Africa, sometimes in the thick vugas parting grass with my rifle barrel and then look up on the bordering side hill and theres a buffalo 100 or so yards away..

I'm sure the old PHs had the same experience. As to hunting the thick stuff for DG as opposed to open country with a a 6.5x54 or whatever, I would opt for the thick stuff, There I can place my shot with persision to the brain or spine, in the open country I might not be so lucky and it doesn't take a lion or whatever to cover a hundred or more yards. In the bush you can climb a tree if all else fails, in the open you much outrun a lion..

Its all the same, open or thick, its just hunting and all about making the right decision on where your hunting, or for that matter, about the Condors. The whole worlds just a fairly tale!

quote:

Originally posted by Atkinson:
... Bells use of the 7x57, in in fact he hunted the open areas and thick stuff just like any other hunter..

Ray, people should note that:

PH Harry Selby had the good fortune to meet and discuss things with a number of seasoned PHs that knew Bell,
and they had nothing bad to say about Bell, nor did they dispel his abilities or achievements.

but these days we have cashed up recreational hunters who have gone to Africa for their holidays
with bodyguard PH in tow,...who on return from their holiday stints in Africa have since become Xperts
that like to doubt or dispel Mr.Bell based on poor loosely drawn conclusions and then present them via the internet.

ITs no wonder Harry Selby didn't bother to post on AR anymore, cause the current foreign vistor holiday hunters to Africa

just seem to fckn know it all about Bell and just about everything else...

Hey, 270's kill buffalo just fine. I love the 270.

So why did my 270-shooting wife buy a 375R for Tanzania, and why do I prefer carrying the 416? My son and I think the world of the 338WM and yes we would gladly shoot a buffalo with it, much more so than with a 270. But for some reason we always grab the 416 when given the choice between 338 and 416. We're just getting soft.

270,30,338,375,416 whatever,... a person should use what they are most competent & capable with....within the bounds of the law.

Its plain proven stated fact from seasoned PHs with multiple decades of exposure and experience
that many clients [in Africa in the last say 60+ yrs of modern safaris]are more competent effective
hunters/killers with the likes of smaller rounds that they have more confidence/competence in shooting,
rather than suffering the larger-bore boomers.

However, If any recreational hunter on AR who disputes that, and, has spent anywhere near the time hunting
[and witnessing many others hunting] in Africa, than those seasoned pros who spend their lives & careers doing in Africa,
id like to hear your large sample base findings.

quote:

Originally posted by 416Tanzan:
So why did my 270-shooting wife buy a 375R for Tanzania, and why do I prefer carrying the 416?

IIRC,

- you approve of your wife using .270win for elk, but you feel you need a .338 or .375

- your wife shoots a down-loaded 375 Ruger for buffalo, but you feel you need a supercharged .416


Q./ What makes .270win and downloaded .375 good enough for a woman to use,
but not equally good enough for you to use?

I gather you don't consider your wife undergunned, and logic would tell any sensible mind
that you would not be undergunned if you used the same as your wife.

That must be why all of the phs carry 243s. Bullshit

There are some matters that need to be emphasised again in this discussion (if they have not already been).

1) Shot placement. Bell brained eles and anything else big and nasty. Not every one is a "Bell".
2) Today's hunters who pay to hunt have PH's and/or guides. There's a good enough reason for that I think.
3) It has been implied that if one can afford a paid hunt for African DG, or DG in any other country, they can afford an appropriate rifle/caliber plus the requisite ammo.
4) Prudent bow hunters have a back up rifle or handgun, if alone, or a guide with an appropriate rifle if DG is the prize, and it's not a .22LR!

Yes, there's no doubt that a .22LR will kill a lot of game when the SOLID is placed just right into the brain! My oldest son did it scores of times in Africa in killing warthog for protein for self and family, or villagers who needed it. But these were all carefully placed shots into the brain of warthogs which came to a water hole. He was in a tree, waited until he could shoot them in the ear hole, into the brain. If the animal moved or he happened to "muff the shot" he had a merry chase for several hours before he bagged the warthog! He showed me the skull of one pock marked with about 10 .22 cal. holes in the skull. He NEVER took a body shot on a warthog with his single-shot .22LR. And, he only used the .22 if he was out of 12ga Brenneke slugs!

He spent two decades there and became a licensed big game hunter, and he would NEVER recommend using a .22LR for a visitor. When I hunted with him, he handed me his 12ga pump with a pocket full of Brenneke slugs! They were VERY expensive (when available) and NEVER fired for fun and games!

Bell used SOLIDS of excellent construction and sectional density for brain shots.

60 years of hunting a variety of game from groundhogs to moose, has taught me that I can learn to shoot a .458 Win Mag as well as I can shoot a .223 Rem. And I have shot both extensively, and killed game with them. But NOBODY will convince me that a .223 can have the same effect on big game as one in .458-cal. with equal shot placement.

My current load for bear, coming up in a few days, is a 9.3 X 62 shooting a 250 AB at 2700+ fps (4000+ ft-lbs) from a very light T3 Tikka "Lite" producing 42 ft-lbs of recoil. It shoots consistently at sub 1/2 MOA. In a few weeks I'll be hitting the 80 mark. So, as far as I can see, it's a myth (that needs to be buried - and the sooner the funeral the better) - that one can ALWAYS shoot a mild recoiling rifle better than a hard-recoiling one. That rifle will shoot 3 in a ragged hole at 100. So did my first .458 Win Mag firing 500-grainers. And so did my last .350 Rem Mag shooting 250s at 2700 fps. Yes, they were all chronographed with no blown primers or stuck cases (or 26" barrels).

Bob

www.bigbores.ca

If I were a long range shooter and based on some backyard tests I've performed, I would load the 300 gr. Sierra BTSP to max, it will hold its velocity better and be less likely to be moved much by wind under normal circumstances and would have a good Punch when it got there...It would be pretty hard to beat this combe in a std. .338 Win when comparing it to other bullets. I suspect the difference would be subtle in some cases, dunno?

Sometimes much is made out of guess and by gosh backed up with somewhat suspicious facts by some trying to make a point..Happens all the time in the gun mags when one compares his old darling blaster to other calibers etc, etc.

quote:

Originally posted by DLS:
I'm thinking about trying some new bullets in my 338 and would appreciate hearing from other experienced 338 shooters about the 200 grain Nosler Accubond. I've always shot 225s in my 338 but I'm wanting to do a bit of experimenting with bullets and loads this summer for an Arizona Strip deer hunt I got drawn for this coming November.

I'm now using accubonds in almost all my rifles.

For deer almost any bullet in a .338 Mag is more than enough.....a 200 grain accubond will surely do the job and with some left over.