Thanks to RIP for taking up "the cause" for a very good 400gr with a decent BC in .458-cal.

Bob
www.bigbores.ca

So, will lead bullets work better in a 458 Lott chamber or in a 458 Win Mag chamber cut to the Lott 2.8” brass length?

Love the use of “scientific study/survey” to create yet another comforting label for those of free thought.
I know the Earth is going to burn up Sir. I also think that me stopping the use of my 1986 4x4 in order to “prevent” it is simply illogical and unscientific and a we bit of a “god” complex. Yes I sat through class after class in the 1970’s where my science teacher dutifully repeated the great danger of the coming ice age. So I shall live on as best I can to be a good steward of our natural world with my 458wm in hand, trusting in it to help me but trusting only in the Lord God to save me.
Shabbat Shalom,

Anytime I hear the "but 96 or 97% of scientist believe in AGW", I know exactly what I'm dealing with. I'm dealing with one of the easily manipulated who soak up any "trending" topic without subjecting it to critical thought, or more importantly, the hidden agendas behind it. Anyone believing that 97% crap needs to delve into how that number was derived. Trust me, it's an easy search to find how off the mark that declaration is. Here's a hint, when you search for this topic, don't just search for info that confirms your bias. Search BOTH sides of the argument, then see which one holds the most truth.

Which is EXACTLY the reason I brought the entire CC or GW topic into the discussion. While some may think it off the topic of the 458 WM, I firmly disagree. It was simply an analogy. The analogy that the masses are easily duped into "common knowledge" when a little digging into the actual workings of the subject tell a completely different story.

Case in point ... Shootaway. He continues to believe the 458 Lott is a superior choice over the 458 WM. But, RIP has delved into the mechanisms behind the "97% consensus" analogy and shown us that the SAAMI Lott is NOT the same LOTT that Jack built. As such, the current SAAMI offering requires a higher working pressure to obtain roughly 50 fps more velocity. A little digging, which RIP has exposed, shows that there is much more to the discussion than what the "press" has sold us. Magazine length, throat length, max working pressures, updated powder offerings, etc.

Point being, one can choose to believe every thing one is exposed to without question or one can say tell me more. If you say "tell me more" and are met with push back in the form of "well everyone knows this so don't ask probing questions", that should be a red flag. When I see one of those red flags, I say, "Tell me EVEN MORE"!!

So I'll take my own advice and ask "Tell me EVEN more"!! It's very easy for me to digest how the standard WM vs the SAAMI Lott is won by the WM. But what about a "Lott like Jack built", with the ability to take the full length brass and the WM throat? Seems to me, this would be the superior cartridge the Lott devotees wish were the case. But then again, that chambering would now be considered a wildcat, would it not? With a rifle so chambered, and magazine so configured, you are not going to be able to buy SAAMI Lott brass and be good to go 100% with a "Like Jack Built" cartridge. Am I right Dr. RIPster?

Gee, Todd, that is an excellent segway, comparing the mindless Climate Change Crisis Politics Religion to ignorant worship of the SAAMI .458 Lott.
Yep, you get it, unlike poor ol' shootaway, bless his heart.
All that the Lottites have to do, in order to greatly improve their .458 Lott rifle performance,
is to use a SAAMI .458 Winchester Magnum reamer with non-cutting belt.
Jack Lott used his wildcat reamer with non-cutting belt, for 2.8" brass, in .458 Winchester Magnum rifles.
Jack's throat blended into the existing .458 WIN throat.
He liked doing this with BRNO ZKK 602 and Ruger No.1 rifles.
You really gotta have a 3.8" COL-capable magazine or single-shot rifle to take full advantage of the original .458 Lott wildcat.

Funny thing is, sticking 0.3" longer brass in an action that is only 0.2" longer causes problems.
For some bullets perfect for the .458 WIN with 2.5" brass at 3.340" COL in a 3.4" box,
it's a no-go using the .458 Lott with 2.8" brass at 3.600" COL in a 3.6" box.
Lott brass has to be trimmed shorter than minimum spec to fit.
So you use the 0.3" longer brass in a 0.4" longer action and most Lott problems vanish.
Now, duplicate the .458 WIN-V loads at same COL and you can use the same powders that have been perfected for the .458 WIN.
Admittedly, the 2.8" brass might have an advantage with the shorter, lighter bullets,
the ones that cannot be loaded very long with the 2.5" brass.

That reminds me of Work In Progress, converting the too-long-to-be-stable-in-meat 500-gr TSX-FB to shorter bullets to perfectly fill a .458 WIN-V-3.6" ...

Rip ...

Rip ...

quote:

Originally posted by 416Tanzan:

quote:

Another IIRC was of some psychologist investigating why certain people deny the concept despite the general scientific acceptance. As I recall she(?) found the deniers were generally not selfish, callous types who didn't give a damn but sensitive people who could not bring themselves to confront the possible consequences of it being true.

Sambar, one problem on this list is that many of us are old enough to remember the global cooling scare of late 60's (if we remember anything at all ).

The messages have an eerie refrain: "The world might be heading toward an ice age, so give us your money for best treatment." vs "The world is overheating, so give us your money for best treatment."

Many a problem can be fixed by a 505, but the three just listed are outside of its purview.

[Disclaimer: I do not contribute to 'carbon-offset' when travelling to conferences. ]

Yes, Tanzan, I have some recollection of that scientific research and other theories that have not gone anywhere. Sometimes they are faulty, not correctly peer reviewed, and sometimes some other factor comes up that changes the game. Thomas Malthus's theory has not come to fruition so far, either, but with drying climates and rising seas population is going be a problem.

The greenhouse-effect theory is nearly as old, but got a kick along in the 1980s with new discoveries and has been backed up by many more since.

I have heard before your argument that 'global warming' is just some rent-seeking rort - from a friend who had invested half his not-inconsiderable fortune in oil stocks. While that is a possibility, Cicero would probably fall about laughing.

Quo bene? Who benefits? And who has most to lose, monetarily, in this argument? Well, in truth we all do, as we've seen in the Australian fires this summer - but the public's understanding lacks unity and focus.

What group can see with clarity where its interests lie and has the money to move opinions?

The obvious answer is the fossil-fuel companies. They know their businesses will be reduced to plastic manufacture if the world comes to its senses. And so they donate big money to the political parties to go soft on them. They get the ear of media companies to tell their readers the science is not settled, through the sophistry of shock jocks and columnists. They hire spin doctors to influence opinion at every opportunity, like that Colonel Sanders lookalike who'd spent the previous 40 years spruiking for the tobacco industry.

Must admit I haven't contributed to any carbon offsets for a while, either - because until we can get our governments to take these things seriously its just pissing in the wind.

As a contribution that may help this forum at least, I offer the following. It is a small but conscientious effort by some guys I know are American as apple pie (if only for their willingness to test things that involved guns):
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pPRd5GT0v0I

PS: the YouTube that followed that on my 'puter was even better. Not sure if it will show up on yours but the link appears to be the same.

quote:

Originally posted by Todd Williams:
Anytime I hear the "but 96 or 97% of scientist believe in AGW", I know exactly what I'm dealing with. I'm dealing with one of the easily manipulated who soak up any "trending" topic without subjecting it to critical thought, or more importantly, the hidden agendas behind it. Anyone believing that 97% crap needs to delve into how that number was derived. Trust me, it's an easy search to find how off the mark that declaration is. Here's a hint, when you search for this topic, don't just search for info that confirms your bias. Search BOTH sides of the argument, then see which one holds the most truth.

Which is EXACTLY the reason I brought the entire CC or GW topic into the discussion. While some may think it off the topic of the 458 WM, I firmly disagree. It was simply an analogy. The analogy that the masses are easily duped into "common knowledge" when a little digging into the actual workings of the subject tell a completely different story...

Glad to see you back, Todd, and I agree with your thought that this is a fine place to conduct the discussion. (Though I realise the 458WM is God's gift to big-game hunters, it is just possible we may run out of stuff to say about it before getting to Chapter 461, so a little 'light' relief may not go astray.)

Thanks for the compliment suggesting I'm a trendy but I have to admit I first heard about the greenhouse effect in 1985. In those days no one even thought there was a hope of stopping it. My only reaction back then was to make sure my next house was farther up the hill. The scientists' early estimates of how fast the seas would rise were a little overdone but their predictions of worsening storms and droughts have proved spot on - and the sea is rising 3mm a year.

No man is an island, as Donne wrote - we all have some finger in the global-warming pie. I grew up in the beef-cattle industry and still eat steak. I still drive a conventional 4x4 (but make do with the smallest that makes sense) and have taken 11 plane trips in the past 12 months. My son-in-law used to be an engineer at ESSO and I've gathered several hunting buddies through AR who are either farmers or high in the oil industry. I hope you all, and that includes you, Todd, salvage the endgame when and however it comes.

I read recently that even empty emails with nothing but a 'yep' or emoji generate masses of greenhouse gas, so I guess our posts here will create even more hot air

quote:

Originally posted by sambarman338:

Thanks for the compliment suggesting I'm a trendy but I have to admit I first heard about the greenhouse effect in 1985. In those days no one even thought there was a hope of stopping it. My only reaction back then was to make sure my next house was farther up the hill. The scientists' early estimates of how fast the seas would rise were a little overdone but their predictions of worsening storms and droughts have proved spot on - and the sea is rising 3mm a year.

Exactly the type of mass media "common knowledge" I was talking about. See the link below for the real data on the subject.

https://dailycaller.com/2018/0...osts-global-warming/

Exactly like Rip's expose on the "superiority" of the Lott over the WM. Dig a little and is just ain't so.

quote:

Originally posted by sambarman338:
As a contribution that may help this forum at least, I offer the following. It is a small but conscientious effort by some guys I know are American as apple pie (if only for their willingness to test things that involved guns):
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pPRd5GT0v0I
PS: the YouTube that followed that on my 'puter was even better. Not sure if it will show up on yours but the link appears to be the same.

Thanks for the irony !
Some grade school kids "myth-busting" the "myth?" that green house gases do not raise temperatures in a green house exposed to light !
No body is denying that scientific fact.
Do they have to make up a lie to create a myth to bust ?
That is really lame, just like the gun-related myth-busting I have seen there previously, long ago, before I stopped watching that show due to its insipid nature.
The youtube next up right now is about Ronald Reagan's humor.
Some great jokes there too ! Love it !
I think the follow-on youtubes change over time, so just in case anyone misses it here it is:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Pgs-LaWyUJI

Rip ...

quote:

Originally posted by Todd Williams:
Exactly the type of mass media "common knowledge" I was talking about. See the link below for the real data on the subject.

https://dailycaller.com/2018/0...osts-global-warming/

Exactly like Rip's expose on the "superiority" of the Lott over the WM. Dig a little and is just ain't so.

Buy a buy a donkey for those flowers, Todd.

And just to further THE MISSION (all contributions welcome):

If you do not want to mess with the hollow point, just leave them as 402-grainers, 1.400" long.
That is the ticket.
Heck, the Woodleigh .458"/ 480-grain HYDRO weighs about 473 grains without the plastic cap, and about 479 grains with the plastic cap.
Close enough for nominal.

Rip ...

quote:

Originally posted by xausa:
I don't remember anything about global cooling in the 1960's. It was pretty warm where I was:

Definitely no Ice Age going on there.
A couple of O-3's in Vietnam or Okinawa ?
What year?
My Pop was in Vietnam 1966-1967, USAF.
I became a Vietnam Era Veteran at age 17 in 1972 but never had to go there.
The U.S. decided to just quit, so the poop came down in NOV 1972, before I turned 18 y.o.
Took until about APR 1975 to evacuate everybody from the rooftops of Saigon, IIRC.

quote:

Originally posted by Todd Williams:

quote:

Originally posted by sambarman338:

Thanks for the compliment suggesting I'm a trendy but I have to admit I first heard about the greenhouse effect in 1985. In those days no one even thought there was a hope of stopping it. My only reaction back then was to make sure my next house was farther up the hill. The scientists' early estimates of how fast the seas would rise were a little overdone but their predictions of worsening storms and droughts have proved spot on - and the sea is rising 3mm a year.

Exactly the type of mass media "common knowledge" I was talking about. See the link below for the real data on the subject.

https://dailycaller.com/2018/0...osts-global-warming/

Exactly like Rip's expose on the "superiority" of the Lott over the WM. Dig a little and is just ain't so.

Well Todd, increased development will have some effect on property damage but one would assume that if everyone insures their property, all will be well, financially. So, if you think things are that rosy, sell your oil shares and go long on insurance companies

Respected scientists have detected changes in storm intensity and the general consensus among them is that global warming slows down the passing of certain weather systems, bringing prolonged damage in areas they do hit, and that hurricanes may come less often but be much more dangerous when they do.

In case you haven't heard, after being threatened by the worst fires recorded in the area, Sydney, Australia, has just had its heaviest rainfall since 1990 and a lot of flooding. As I understand it, rising temperatures allow the air to hold more water vapor. This will often result in months of drought but, when barometric pressure finally drops far enough, the dump of rain will be much heavier than seen in the long-term averages.

quote:

Originally posted by RIP:

quote:

Originally posted by sambarman338:
As a contribution that may help this forum at least, I offer the following. It is a small but conscientious effort by some guys I know are American as apple pie (if only for their willingness to test things that involved guns):
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pPRd5GT0v0I
PS: the YouTube that followed that on my 'puter was even better. Not sure if it will show up on yours but the link appears to be the same.

Thanks for the irony !
Some grade school kids "myth-busting" the "myth?" that green house gases do not raise temperatures in a green house exposed to light !
No body is denying that scientific fact.
Do they have to make up a lie to create a myth to bust ?
That is really lame, just like the gun-related myth-busting I have seen there previously, long ago, before I stopped watching that show due to its insipid nature.
The youtube next up right now is about Ronald Reagan's humor.
Some great jokes there too ! Love it !
I think the follow-on youtubes change over time, so just in case anyone misses it here it is:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Pgs-LaWyUJI

Rip ...

I'm with you some of the way, Ron. Some of Myth-busters' stuff used to seem a bit twee, but I notice on this occasion they went to great lengths to say how important it was to have everything set up with precision, and I suspect they had that scientist supervising.

A one-degree rise in temperature from 24 degrees doesn't seem much but is more than 4%, and that is of some significance. I have heard that we can actually prove that carbon dioxide and methane will produce a greenhouse effect - within our own kitchens - but haven't tracked that one down yet.

However, I'll bring it along to help The Mission, if I find it.

I have to admit that in his time I was not a great fan of President Reagan, however, seeing your YouTubes I now feel kind of nostalgic

Back again, RIP.

I have spent a little time googling 'home experiment that proves Carbon dioxide can increase temperatures' and came up with this:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kwtt51gvaJQ

I don't know if that's what the scientist I heard on the radio was referring to, but it seems simple enough. If you don't believe his results I know you have the expertise and resources to repeat the experiment.

I also came across this dissertation from NASA explaining why water vapor without persistent greenhouse gases won't maintain the effect on its own.

https://www.nasa.gov/topics/ea...co2-temperature.html

Cheers
- 'Sam'

quote:

Originally posted by sambarman338:
A one-degree rise in temperature from 24 degrees doesn't seem much but is more than 4%, and that is of some significance.

Whoa now. 24 degrees Celcius is 297.15 degrees Kelvin a 1 degree increase of that is less than 0.34 % increase absolute.

I have heard that we can actually prove that carbon dioxide and methane will produce a greenhouse effect - within our own kitchens - but haven't tracked that one down yet.

Yes, "HOME IS WHERE THE FART IS" I always say, and that happens in the kitchen occasionally.

However, I'll bring it along to help The Mission, if I find it.

I have to admit that in his time I was not a great fan of President Reagan, however, seeing your YouTubes I now feel kind of nostalgic

What ! Not a fan of Ronaldus Magnus ?
My mother was a fan of his !
I was named after him !
POTUS #45 might be seen as great as POTUS #40 someday.
Thanks for ringing THE MISSION bell, but do try not to sound like a ding-a-ling next time, please.

Rip ...

quote:

Originally posted by sambarman338:
Back again, RIP.

I have spent a little time googling 'home experiment that proves Carbon dioxide can increase temperatures' and came up with this:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kwtt51gvaJQ

Mr. Science Fair did not mention that the Alkaseltzer knockoff dissolving in water, generating CO2, is an exothermic reaction, generating heat,
and corked up in the bottle it generates more pressure than in the plain water bottle.
PV = nRT, universal gas law, says increase the pressure in a closed system and the temperature goes up.
But who says that the greenhouse effect is not real ? Not me.

I don't know if that's what the scientist I heard on the radio was referring to, but it seems simple enough. If you don't believe his results I know you have the expertise and resources to repeat the experiment.

I also came across this dissertation from NASA explaining why water vapor without persistent greenhouse gases won't maintain the effect on its own.

https://www.nasa.gov/topics/ea...co2-temperature.html

Cheers
- 'Sam'

I have known about the greenhouse effect since grade school.
I just hate to be associated with the sorts of individuals who wear the CLIMATE CHANGE CRISIS POLITICS RELIGION on their sleeves.
It is like Nancy Puh-Loser saying she prays for Donald Trump, and claiming to be a good Catholic abortion proponent,
elected by constituents that poop in grocery store aisles.
Or like Mitt Romney's "faith" as an excuse for for his low-life acts.

Speaking of low-life acts,
Bubba has declared that all possible good uses for Barnes .458"/ 500-gr TSX bullets have been discovered, and then some:

Technology will one day be able to capture CO2 and methane, and etc., for storage here on planet Earth, to be utilized as needed.
Bubba Gaswerkes is in the works.
Home is where the fart is.

Rip ...

Thank you for the intro to bullet metamorphosis technology, a new field for handloading.

quote:

Technology will one day be able to capture CO2

Some specialists have actually argued the opposite: that the earth has relatively/critically little free CO2 and may need to back-boil limestone in order to generate more free CO2 in the future. But I do not claim a background to testify of this on my own.

Just saw the following at Optics Planet on the Nikon shotgun 5"-eyerelief scope:

"Product Discontinued by Manufacturer
Nikon Prostaff P3 Shotgun 3-9X40mm Rifle Scope has been discontinued by Nikon and is no longer available.""

Perhaps they shouldn't have marketed it as 'shotgun-[only]'.

It is the greatest down-to-earth DG scope for rifles with noticeable recoil.

This thread sure does cover some topics. Even bullshit man made climate change

A couple of weeks ago on our main left wing TV channel the climate change people said there would be no rain until April this year and would be insignificant rain and bush fires would rage. In the last week we have had the biggest deluge since 1992 and just about all bush fires were extinguished. Of course older Australians have seen all this before.

The whole thing is about international carbon credits to distribute money from countries like Australia, America etc. to Bangladesh etc. and they will be able to buy Apple phones, Toyota Corollas etc. Will allow them to back off the massive immigration.

If the average temperature increases by 2 degree C that would make a lot of people very happy.

quote:

Originally posted by Mike McGuire:
This thread sure does cover some topics.

Honestly, it should be its own forum.

quote:

Originally posted by RIP:

quote:

Originally posted by sambarman338:
A one-degree rise in temperature from 24 degrees doesn't seem much but is more than 4%, and that is of some significance.

Whoa now. 24 degrees Celcius is 297.15 degrees Kelvin a 1 degree increase of that is less than 0.34 % increase absolute.

I have heard that we can actually prove that carbon dioxide and methane will produce a greenhouse effect - within our own kitchens - but haven't tracked that one down yet.

Yes, "HOME IS WHERE THE FART IS" I always say, and that happens in the kitchen occasionally.

However, I'll bring it along to help The Mission, if I find it.

I have to admit that in his time I was not a great fan of President Reagan, however, seeing your YouTubes I now feel kind of nostalgic

What ! Not a fan of Ronaldus Magnus ?
My mother was a fan of his !
I was named after him !
POTUS #45 might be seen as great as POTUS #40 someday.
Thanks for ringing THE MISSION bell, but do try not to sound like a ding-a-ling next time, please.

Rip ...

I wonder if you can explain to me in this context what degrees Kelvin have to do with? I went back and watched that experiment again but could see or hear no reference to anything but Celsius.

You may have a point in regard to 'Mr Science Fair', though, so I'll keep scanning the Internet for the smoking-gun experiment.

I started an even more humble version of his effort using two Sodastream bottles, one half full of soda, the other water. These have been put out the back in what there is of the sun today, but I haven't noticed any palpable difference in their temperatures, so far.

Well, Ronald Reagan was a true thespian and DJT certainly has an element of that. I have wondered if their showbiz careers may have a lot to do with their election, too. When you've got no idea about the issues, knowing the name and face of some candidate may be half a reason to vote.

Ding-a-ling? You've cut me to the quick, there, Ron. Is that worse than ding-a-ding ding-ding?

quote:

Originally posted by sambarman338:

I wonder if you can explain to me in this context what degrees Kelvin have to do with? I went back and watched that experiment again but could see or hear no reference to anything but Celsius.

Celsius and Kelvin are the same except Kelvin 0 degree is absolute freezing, no molecular activity. The scale however, is the same. 0 degree C would be 273 K. 1 degree C would be 274 K. Absolute zero would be -273 C

Remember also that 2 degree C in world temperature is average across the world. Sort of like measuring the diameter of rock in many places with a micrometer and then get an average diameter. Of course like the rock it will depend where you make the measurements as to the average you get.

quote:

Originally posted by 416Tanzan:
Thank you for the intro to bullet metamorphosis technology, a new field for handloading.

416Tanzan,
Buy a buy a donkey for supporting THE MISSION so faithfully.
Too bad about Nikon discontinuing the P3 Shotgun.
Bubba thanks you for the terminology for what he has been doing.
The bullet-making subsidiary of Bubba Gunwerkes will be called
"Bubba Bullet Metamorphosis" henceforth.
BBM for short.
The TSiX bullets will still go by T6-HP (Hollow Point), T6-BP (Big Meplat Hollow Point) and T6-SS (Semi Solid).

Bubba does ask forgiveness for metamorphosing .458"/ 450-gr TSX bullets.
In the future, only the too-long .458"/ 500-gr TSX will be metamorphosed.
By shortening at both the base and nose of the 500-grainer, both 400-grain and 450-grain T6-BP bullets can be produced,
for single-shot and lever-action use.

Bubba also wants to redesign the .458"/ 400-gr T6-HP for enhanced performance in the .458 WIN-V 3.6" bolt-action repeater.

Stay tuned for these exciting new developments at BBM. Bubba now realizes he quit too soon on the TSiX line, and has a few more tricks up his sleeve.

Rip ...

sambarman338,

No offense meant, just that if you parrot the Climate Change Crisis Politics religious dogma, you are going to be taken for a ding-a-ling.
It is crap !



I have no idea what a ding-a-ding ding ding is.
Will you enlighten me ?

Mike,
Thanks for showing Paul the way.

Rip ...

quote:

Originally posted by RIP:

quote:

Originally posted by xausa:
I don't remember anything about global cooling in the 1960's. It was pretty warm where I was:

Definitely no Ice Age going on there.
A couple of O-3's in Vietnam or Okinawa ?
What year?

Vietnam.

I was there in 1965, just as things were warming up. Behind me in the photo is the airfield at Da Nang, a one runway affair used by civilian airlines, military fixed wing and helicopters. Before this photo was taken, there were civilian "hootches" leaned up against the chain link fence surrounding the base. My job as a member of the III MAF staff, was to remove all civilian structures within 100 yards of the fence and to relocate the civilians living there. To do the job, we were assigned members of the Vietnamese civilian police (as shown here) who handled the civilians, while we provided the trucks and heavy equipment. A 12 hour a day, seven day a week job, but we got it done in time for me to rotate back stateside in November.

The impetus for the job was provided by the VC, who came through the fence the night after I arrived, shot up some Air Force personnel and blew up several planes before being subdued.

Most of the buildings like the one on the right in the background were built of concrete blocks or the Vietnamese equivalent and could be knocked down by gently nudging them with the bumper of a 6X6 truck. Nudging that particular building resulted in a bent bumper and upon investigation in turned out to have been built around a French poured concrete bunker. Since it was right off the end of the runway, we had to stop air traffic when the engineers blew it up.

The green name tag identified me as a member of the MAF (Marine Amphibious Force) staff, as opposed to the red name tags worn by the 3rd Mar Div and the Air Wing staff.

Buried back a few posts is a good question about cast bullets in the 458wm versus the same chamber teamed to 2.8”. Don’t know but Rip has one, or two, of everything 458 so maybe he could comment. I can tell you that it was and likely still is the “common” point of view that the 458wm doesn’t work with cast because of the throat. There are reasons for that as cast rifles were presumed best by a perfect fit of the bullet into the origins of the rifling. Yes that works great but many have proven that other paths get to the same destination.
The point in The Mission is; as is, the 458wm returns all the love you give it, cast, cup and core, mono metal and gives up no ground to any.

xausa,

Thank you for your service.
My Pop may not have survived his year at Da Nang if you had not secured the perimeter.

Rip ...

Ditto Fury01.
My fledgling attempts with cast bullets in the .458 WIN were misguided because I was using cast bullets sized for .457"-grooved .45-70 rifles, they were .459" and so-so accuracy.
Things got really good when I tried .461" in .459"-grooved .458 WIN rifles.
If the rifle is .458"-grooved, use .460" bullets.
If the rifle is .459"-grooved, use .461" bullets.
Or just use .461" in both.
When weather and distractions allow, I will tell what I find with .461" bullets in a .458"-grooved rifle.
Yep, the .458 WIN throat is good with anything, loaded ShortCOL, or loaded LongCOL with monometals, cup&core, or cast.
It even works great with paper-patched and BP, if you care to try that.
I see no advantages for the 2.8"-case for practical use.

Rip ...