Ross does original research on odd subjects that interest him, and he writes about it. I am not always interested in his subject, but I find his process and passion for his subject captivating.

I first became aware of Ross as writer in his pistol shooting days. Then, as now, he was an expert in his chosen field, and he wrote well about it.

i like what he write, and since he started for write for the great swedish journal Vapentidningen (the weapons news paper) i have read about buffalo hunt in Botswana with a Selous Farquarson , coues deer hunt with a 300 wby, his thoughst about a custom rifles and so on.

JVRP 475.

The 308 ball ammo was not used on elephants because of "precision" as Ross Seyfried says.

It was used because of magazine capacity and the fact it would work on herds of small skulled elephants such as cows and calves that consitute most of the targets in culling.

Its not reliable on bulls.

The information is dead wrong.

Ted,

The problem is that none of the Ross Seyfried quotes you cite are inaccurate.

quote:

Originally posted by Ted Gorsline:
JVRP 475.

The 308 ball ammo was not used on elephants because of "precision" as Ross Seyfried says.

It was used because of magazine capacity and the fact it would work on herds of small skulled elephants such as cows and calves that consitute most of the targets in culling.

Its not reliable on bulls.

The information is dead wrong.

Well, first off, the quote you used doesn't say the 7.62 NATO round is adequate for bulls.

quote:

......You might be interested to know that again "polls" aside (here is he is bashing Craig Boddington's poll of rifles used by PHs most of whom used 458s) most elephants killed on control, in Africa are not killed with .458s or 416s or even 375s. They are shot with 7.62 NATO ball. It is ladies and gentleman, a question of precision."

Ross simply states, as do you, that it is used for most elephants killed during culls. If Ross recommends the a 30 caliber rifle for bulls elsewhere in the article then please cite it. That recommendation isn't hinted at in your example.

Regarding the use of the word precision, I think you're reading something into it as I just don't see a problem with precision shooting. It seems pretty much common sense that the NATO round would only be adequate for elephant of any size if the shots are placed precisely. Magazine size only comes into play because you are shooting groups of elephant. Certainly you're not suggesting that you spray all 20 rounds imprecisely in the general direction of elephant.

He also isn't alone in his .458 bashing. Many hunters dislike it for the same failing you note about the NATO round on bull elephant; it has proven in the past to be unreliable. It gained this reputation early on due to ammo problems and the stink lingered.

From the African Hunter site archives we find "What is wrong with .458?" by Charlie Haley with this quote:

quote:

. . . These tales, all true, serve to indicate that all is not well with the .458. Is it to be trusted at all, or is it a troublesome and generally worthless cartridge? Why does it perform well most of the time, but occasionally fail dismally? In short, just what is wrong with the .458?

The complete article can be read at:
http://www.african-hunter.com/WhatsWrong.htm

Ganyana notes in "The .458 . . . A Cartridge I love to Hate!" (African Hunter, Volume 3 of 2006) a .458 Win Mag failed him on his very first elephant. He eventually got it before it got him because he had a 7x57 with 175 grain solids to fall back on. He chronographed his ammo and found velocities ranging from 2130 to 600fps. After that discovery

quote:

I have never shot another animal with a .458.

If Ross was concerned about these failures, that would have been valid depending on when the article was written. These issues have been largely resolved, but Ross Seyfried wouldn't be the only hunter to still mistrust it. As Ganyana puts it

quote:

... For me the first impression was a lasting one, and I have found several cartridges that deliver the performance I want without having to go back to it.

Actually, from your earlier post it's impossible to tell why Ross recommends against the .458. It could simply be that, for most safari clients who don't shoot a heavy rifle often, there really are better choices such as a .375H&H.

The article you cite may indeed be dead wrong in its conclusions, but the examples you use don't support that claim.

Dear Ted, I could not find a 180 switch either. I too find a couple of things that Ross is wrong about in my opinion. You mention one, the 458. It is just personal bias on his part and he has been on that side of the street forever to my knowledge. It is just something that he believes and can make a good case for. I think the preponderence of evidence on the other side is good enough for me. I think Phil Shoemaker the AK guide rebutted him nicely a couple of months later in the same mag. The other is just as bad; he hates the 30-06! For shame I say. But again, he makes no bones about it; it is just personal bias. He loves the 270 and the 280's. I would chalk the 7.62 thing up to not being wrong but incomplete. Ross knew full well that cows and calves are the ones being culled and mag capacity had a lot to do with it along with precision but time and editors and "writing for the masses" is indeed a weighty task. Thanks for the reply. I enjoyed and appreciated it.

Dear China fleet sailor,

I was not commenting on the 458. I was commenting on Ross's stated reason for using the 7.62 Nato ball ammo on elephant culls.

Actually I usually find Ross's articles interesting because he talks about new ideas wheras most other gun articles show a few groups, the picture a dead animal, a few reloads and that's it.