quote:

Originally posted by lavaca:
Well, I'm committed to a 7mm. Weatherby. Smallest caliber I've ever taken to Africa and smallest caliber I've ever hunted with since I was ten years old. Help me convince myself I'm not making a huge mistake.

For Plains game that is an excellent choice. I for one would not cripple it with heavy bullets. With todays bullets you can drop down several weights from traditional offerings flatten your trajectory and still get deep penetration. If I were shooting a 7mm I would pick a tough 150 grain aerodynamic bullet like a Barnes TTSX or an Accubond or a multitude of others and practice practice practice at the longest range you intend to shoot any game at and then go kill stuff.
One thing that amazes me is people will pick a "flat shooting" cartridge then cripple it by using the heaviest possible bullet.
Yes I understand for long range target shooting or sniper style long range hunting that everyone uses heavy for caliber aerodynamic bullets but I don't think that is the goal here.
Just my thoughts.

A matching pair of rifles in 416 Rem and 7mm STW?

.

Just saw this thread today .... My immediate thought was 7 MM or 270.

7 MM is a great choice. Enjoy it and do post pics !

.

quote:

Originally posted by lavaca:
Well, I'm committed to a 7mm. Weatherby. Smallest caliber I've ever taken to Africa and smallest caliber I've ever hunted with since I was ten years old. Help me convince myself I'm not making a huge mistake.

There are two reasons not to. They are a 300WM and a Wiseman 300WSM. You have them, they will work fine and the time and money for a new set up can be saved by practising more with what you have.

Imho you don't need a lighter projectile you need a softer one at 180 grains for smaller plains game. There is nothing wrong with a good accurate Sierra, Nosler BT or similar.

Then again, when was logic an excuse not to buy a new rifle ......

quote:

Originally posted by Snellstrom:

quote:

Originally posted by lavaca:
Well, I'm committed to a 7mm. Weatherby. Smallest caliber I've ever taken to Africa and smallest caliber I've ever hunted with since I was ten years old. Help me convince myself I'm not making a huge mistake.

For Plains game that is an excellent choice. I for one would not cripple it with heavy bullets. With todays bullets you can drop down several weights from traditional offerings flatten your trajectory and still get deep penetration. If I were shooting a 7mm I would pick a tough 150 grain aerodynamic bullet like a Barnes TTSX or an Accubond or a multitude of others and practice practice practice at the longest range you intend to shoot any game at and then go kill stuff.
One thing that amazes me is people will pick a "flat shooting" cartridge then cripple it by using the heaviest possible bullet.
Yes I understand for long range target shooting or sniper style long range hunting that everyone uses heavy for caliber aerodynamic bullets but I don't think that is the goal here.
Just my thoughts.

Wind deflection is almost always less with heavy for caliber bullets. Once you have to click up for range, flat shooting no longer matters. If the animal is past 200 yards, especially in the area he is going to hunt, it pays to take a quick range check. Less than 200? Even a .416 works well.

I shoot 150 gr bullets in my STW only because I can't seem to get it to shoot heavier bullets accurately.

quote:

Originally posted by lavaca:
Frank,

You are perfectly correct in your conclusion that any rifle will do 300 yards --that is if the loose nut behind the trigger can do his job.

I generally sight my .416 Rem. Mag. dead on at 100 because at least half the shots (on buffalo primarily) are going to be shorter than that. Those shots are critical and some, I might not have a lot of time to think about.

I usually put a sticker on the cheek piece of my rifles to remind me of my drop at various ranges. I don't need to do that with my .416; it's 6 inches low at 200 and 21 inches low at 300 -- etched in my mind.

The problem is not at 200 yards, but at 300 yards and beyond, when holding in space, what does 21 inches look like?

I'll take something flatter shooting beyond 300 yards.

I use a Kenton Ballistic turret on my 338RUM for long range PG shooting in Namibia. The dial is cut for the altitude and temps in Namibia. The rifle has a Nightforce scope on it. Range and dial, it's that simple.

I shoot the 210gr Scirocco at 3250fps which really thumps the target, which is a necessity with LR shooting.

I myself would not use a 7mm Wby as it doesn't have the frontal area for real squat down power

The limit is how steady you are, I normally sit and spread the sticks

It would even work on your 416....with say a 350gr bullet..........

The heavier bullets that can still be propelled quickly get the best from the cartridges with larger case capacity. In my opinion you cripple a good cartridge with a short and stubby low BC bullet which maintains little energy at range and has poor penetration.

I have hunted extensively with a 300 Win Mag and I have never used a bullet lighter than 178gr and primarily used bullets in the 200gr class. It is important to match the bullet construction to the size of the animal you intend to hunt. I never felt limited. On long shots use a rangefinder and adjust your aim, or dial your scope.

Thanks again for all the thoughtful comments. The 7mm Weatherby has been purchased, so I've made my choice. It's done. But, I thank everyone for their thoughts.

Code4: Yours was the rational, perfectly logical comment about using existing assets that have proven themselves in the past. I don't come to AR to hear what I could from my wife. I hope you know I'm joking and just giving you a hard time.

Blair: I seriously considered a .338. My father is a .338 fanatic and notwithstanding the legality, a .338 is more than enough medicine for a buffalo with a properly placed bullet.

Leadwood: I hear what you are saying about bullet weight and I'm a culprit. I generally shoot the heaviest bullets available, but this rifle is different. I'm thinking nothing over 160 and maybe even 140's. With the 140's, if sighted in 1.5" high at 100, they would be 3.5" low at 300. Need to see where they would be at 400.

Someone suggested a 350 grain bullet for the .416. I usually use 400 grains and I don't like mixing bullet weights for a single caliber on a single hunt -- I'm too simple minded for that. However, this is the hunt that a 350 grain .416 might be appropriate, with only one buffalo being available.

Thanks again guys.

You are welcome mate.

Have a GREAT hunt

Enjoy the hunt. We want a report ... of course.

lavaca, what rifle platform did you go with? Planned optics?

Brandon,

The rifle was built by McWhorter on a Model 70 action. It's got Talley bases. I'm torn on scopes. That could be the next discussion.

I'm partial to Swarovski. I've got 1-6 Z6's on my favorite light rifle (a .30-06) and my go-to .416. I like a 30mm tube, but most of the higher magnification Z6's have objectives of 50mm or more, which places the scope too high in my opinion.

Thinking about dropping down to a 1" tube and a Z5 or maybe a Zeis. I welcome thoughts, but I'd like the max power to be 12 to 18. The objective to be under 50. German optics preferable.

Get a Remington 700P in 300 Win Mag.

With the right loads it will print 3 shots into 1/2 inch at 100 yards and your good with the right scope to 1000 yards.

quote:

Originally posted by lavaca:
Brandon,

The rifle was built by McWhorter on a Model 70 action. It's got Talley bases. I'm torn on scopes. That could be the next discussion.

I'm partial to Swarovski. I've got 1-6 Z6's on my favorite light rifle (a .30-06) and my go-to .416. I like a 30mm tube, but most of the higher magnification Z6's have objectives of 50mm or more, which places the scope too high in my opinion.

Thinking about dropping down to a 1" tube and a Z5 or maybe a Zeis. I welcome thoughts, but I'd like the max power to be 12 to 18. The objective to be under 50. German optics preferable.

Sounds like a great rifle. Looking forward to seeing pics. As to the scope, I can feel your dilemma with the 50mm objective, thought I needed them when I first started buying rifles, and then found them to sit too high on the guns. Are you looking at much low light shooting to make the 30mm really shine? I can't offer much help Z5 vs Z6 as all my scopes are (budget limited) to Leupolds.

I can't offer much help because I rely on the proven ruggedness of the Nikon lines.

Some of you shooters just have not been around long enough, when the 300 H&H first came out, its wasn't much of a success, but then it set every 1000 yard match record, and became the darling of that clan of shooters, thus it became quite popular with the masses..Just before your day..check the records.

Brandon:

Like you, I tried the 50mm objective scopes thinking they would be a great advantage in low light situations. The problem is they are so high that without a ridiculously high comb on the stock, you can't get a good cheek-weld and groups suffer.

The only 50mm I ever liked was the Leupold that had the cut-out on the bottom that allowed you to mount it lower (was it the VX-L?). I still have one of those in 2.5 or 3.5 to 10, I just don't remember. That's a possibility as well, but I'd like a little higher magnification on this rifle.

Ray,

Totally agree about the .300 H&H. I've always wanted one.

I put a Z5 on my .30-06, as I thought the old 2-7 leupold was the problem... Turns out, the bidding was shot, Jim Kobe fixed that and it shoots, but the Z5 stayed on.

It's pretty light, and has more magnification than I need. The only down side was I brought it before they had the illuminated reticles, so it has a duplex crosshairs that I am not really wild about. If I remember right it's a 4-20x model, but can't say without unlocking stuff for sure.

Look at one at a store and see if you like it...you probably will.

I hear you about the change in cheek weld, but adding a bubba buddy or something similar can make a big difference as well.

The 2.5-18X44 Z6 with a Ballistic Turret might be a very viable choice, lavaca.

Or if that objective is still too large for you, drop down to a Z5.

HUge bulky scopes on hunting rifles turn me off..My favorite variable is the older 2x7x28 and I like the 3X and 4X fixed power scopes as well..

I have never been in a situation wherein these scopes have let me down..I don't shoot in the dark and I don't shoot beyond 400 yards except on a few rare exceptions, but when I did the scopes worked fine.. The longest shot I ever made was on a Mule deer with a .308 Savage 99 and a 3X scope and it was long and won me a 100 dollar bill..

When I hunted Masailand I used 200gr Nosler Partitions from a 300 Mag. My longest shot was an Oryx at 350 yards. The 7mag will work just fine. I would also recommend practicing shooting longer distance off the sticks. I would also recommend heavy for caliber bullets - had to finish a North bound Eland from the South side.....the 200gr Nosler Partition exited under it's chin......in the real world all your shots won't be broadside. Good luck!

Blair,

That's perfect. Exactly what I had in mind.

quote:

Originally posted by lavaca:

Totally agree about the .300 H&H. I've always wanted one.

You realize, of course, that you have mentioned that caliber more than once in this thread. Maybe this is the time to scratch that itch.

I have Z6 2.5-15 x 44 BRH on my 300 Win and 270 (if you don't care for the turret). Perfect scopes for those ballistics.

Grenadier,

You sir, are correct. A .300 H&H is probably inevitable. But I'd want it to be pretty, not like my usual tools. It's like never having slept with a gorgeous redhead, but always wanting to.

Blair, your scope idea sounded great but FMC pointed out that a Z6 would necessarily be a 2.5 to 15, not to 18. (he didn't call you on it or anything. He just described the same scope and obviously is correct, not that there is much difference between a 15 and 18 power).

Still seems perfect for this rifle. I like the 44mm objective.

lavava,

FMC is correct, 2.5-15x44.

I had the next model up confused with it, the 3-18X50

Been researching this. Blair, you can get that with a 1 inch tube in a Z5.

In all cases, most rifles, well 99% will outshoot the capabilities of the shooter. Also the determining factor for the kill is bullet placement. Until you can call the shot, stay on the range.

3-18x44 Z5 is a 1" tube. I have one. It is a really nice scope but it's loooong.

The Swaro and Leupold are favourites due to the smaller occular (eye-piece). Many Scopes are so large in the occular bell that this is interfering with the bolt handle when the scope is mounted far above the barrel. Of course this is a non-issue with the 54 degree bolt lift MkV Weatherby. Gotta love a Weatherby sometimes....

Z

Thousands of rounds downrange in practice and in competition, I think I can call the shot.

As a child shooting offhand, my father, a former master sergeant in the AMU, required me to call my shots. Not just left, right, high, low, but value. A 9 at 3 0'clock. Oh crap, an 8 at 10:30.

I think I can call my shots.

quote:

Originally posted by lavaca:
Been researching this. Blair, you can get that with a 1 inch tube in a Z5.

Will save you money too. All good.

Finally dug the '06 out and looked at it.

Its a 3.5-18x44 with the pre set turret adjustment gizmo.

Not too heavy, but it is a bit long.

I may move it to a different rifle, as I think its too much scope for an '06, but dang it makes hitting 400 yard gongs with my 180 grain hunting loads easy...

Ill bet dollars to donuts when you get home the 7 mag will be your favorite caliber, well at least until boredom steps in!! that's usually the way it works with me...I know my old 30-06 will do and has done all the larger calibers can do and it has, but its so boringly consistant and its successs leaves nothing for me to post on!! dammit!

quote:

Originally posted by lavaca:
Brandon:
Like you, I tried the 50mm objective scopes thinking they would be a great advantage in low light situations. The problem is they are so high that without a ridiculously high comb on the stock, you can't get a good cheek-weld and groups suffer. .

On my Weatherby MK V in 30-06 Sprg I have this Swaro Z4i, 3-12x50 set in Warne rings.

I do not find it high in any sense, in fact this is a very comfortable and above all, a very flexible combo.

Don`t rule out such Scopes as they are extremely flexible for a lot of hunting.

Ray,

I suspect you are completely correct for all the small stuff. Ele, Buff, maybe eland, might be different. My .416 still does wonders.

I started this mess and I'm glad folks think a 7mm works.

Lavaca,

I'm glad that you started the mess. People need to know what a 416 can do. The 416 Rigby can be loaded to 2800-2850fps, a 350gn bullet, .444BC. That is good for African long range, which basically means 200-400 yards, more commonly 250.

Here is a 200-yard oribi:


And below is a 50-yard guinea fowl with a 416:

OK, not so long range.

And a 416 works great on larger game like impala:



Yes, the 416s, the 416Rigby (loaded like a 416Weatherby), 416 Remington, and 416Ruger, are enough gun for impala, though only the impala pictured above are specifically from Masai land.

Tanzan:

I agree. If I could only have one rifle, heaven forbid ...

My .416 of choice is a Bill Wiseman in .416 Rem. It's great on buffalo so long as I do my job. I've only shot one elephant with it, so not enough to comment, although it did fine.

As to the small stuff, it's taken two leopard cleanly and quite a bit of plains game from duiker to eland. As to "long range" I agree that's a relative thing, but a Grant's and a couple of zebra at 200 and a Coke's hartebeest at about 280 are the longest shots I've taken with it.

The nice thing about it is out to 300 yards, everything is simple. With a 400 grain bullet, dead on at 100, I'm 6" low at 200 and 21" low at 300, which is not a problem on sizeable game. That said, I don't want to shoot it beyond that, or even beyond 200 yards on smaller game, which is what prompted the 7mm.

Arild,

That is a fine-looking rifle.