In the 1991 Guns & Ammo Annual (and probably in one of the 1990 G&A monthly magazines), Terry Cacek wrote an article “.458 Magnum: Enough Gun?”. In it, he claims that a Bob Woodfill, described as a double rifle enthusiast & gunsmith, had chronographed batches of original Kynoch ammo in a number of the British rimmed calibers from double rifles. Woodfill reported that these all produced about 100 to 150 fps less than the advertised 2150 fps.

Further, Woodfill then reloaded the cartridges using Kynoch components, to the advertised 2150 fps. His double rifles then ‘shot apart’ – left barrel shot left of point of aim, right barrel shot right of POA. He reloaded again as above, except only loaded to 2000-2050 fps and the rifles were regulated – the barrels shot to the same point of impact.

Cacek then goes on to answer the question asked in his article’s title in the affirmative, based on Woodfill’s findings. I am not interested in the .458 WinMag. I am interested in learning if Woodfill’s research is borne out by independent findings. Is the performance of the originals - .450 NE and .470 NE, as loaded by Kynoch back in the day – actually in the range of 2000 – 2050 fps? Do the older rifles, regulated with the original ammo, shoot apart with the modern ammo that actually does reach the magic 2150 fps?

Has anyone here actually chronographed original ammo? I understand that the original stuff is rare and expensive. How about using a rifle from the golden age, say 1900-1939, with the modern ammo – how well is it regulated? If that rifle is used with ammo downloaded to 2000 fps, is the regulation better?

I am not really interested in arguing 5000 ft-lbs vs. 4500 ft-lbs is the ‘right answer’ for African dangerous game. I just want to know what, historically, is correct.

Thanks for your time. I look forward to this discussion.

The following opinions are those of one who has NEVER owned or fired a double rifle.

1. Shooters in the Golden Age weren't as ballistically sophisticated as today's and I doubt that they spent much time worrying about groups on anything smaller than game.

2. Cordite powder deteriorates in time much faster than modern powders so the ballistics tests of vintage ammo aren't terribly reliable where original performance was concerned.

3. Each rifle is an individual and with doubles each barrel is an individual.

4. Getting modern powders to perform in vintage doubles is tricky. Just ask Ray or Mac or any of the other experienced double rifle guys about that one.

5. In the Golden Age, chronographs hadn't been invented yet so the ammunition makers could easily fudge on the posted ballistics and no one would know. As long as the rifle did what it was supposed to, who cared?

I now yield the floor to someone who knows what he's talking about.

I wonder where Mr. Woodfill acquired the cordite to load the cartridges? Some sources I have say it was not produced after the 50s.

jim dodd

I've owned several double rifles, calibers from 465 thru 577. I've chronographed every one of them with original Kynoch ammo and only one, a 500-3", made close to the advertised velocity, and this was in 90*+ temps. In both of my 470s the Kynoch ammo averaged under 2000fps and the guns were "shooting apart" whereas the same guns shot right to the sights with new Federal 470 ammo. BTW, it did chronograph to spec. velocity.
Based upon my own findings and information gathered from several "experts" on cordite, I'd say that if it was shot in extremely hot weather it might make spec. velocities, in cooler weather it likely will not.

Frank, I think you are on the right track! It has always been my opinion, the the methods of accurately measureing speed of a bullet in the last yrs of the 19th century up to the first two decades of the 20th century were a lot of guess work, more than anything else! I have worked with double rifles for many years, and I find that most regulate with less than the advertized speeds the old catalogs advertize. I have shot some old ammo over a crono, but the results was disapointing. I think this would not be a real test, considering the age of the ammo, not to mention the cost of shooting collector's antique ammo. In some case the old rounds are several hundred dollars per round, but even run of the mill things like 450NE 3.25" are $20 per shot, for ammo that is 90 years old!

The tests are not valid in another respect as well, the fact is that the properties of the old balck powder, cordite, and axite powders, are quite different when compaired to modern smokeless powders. The little Buga-Boo of case volume is one thing that throws rocks in the works, hence the use of verious fillers, in the old express cases, when used with modern powder. I think the sharper recoil of the modern powders greatly effects the regulation speed. The old powders had a more pushing type of recoil,or slower rise of the muzzles, and I find the modern powders to be more of a SNAPP! The quicker recoil tents to make the rifle rise quicker, IMO, makeing the speed of the bullet need to be slower, to get the same exit point for the bullet from the muzzle, during recoil. I could, very well, be all wet on this, but that has been what I have observed with my own loading for doubles.

frank sauer
I have seen info from other sources which agree with what you have said. Even in "Shooting the British Double Rifle" by Graeme Wright he states that the rifles he has tested usually regulate below the listed factory velocity.
My 450 No2 is regulated for 75 grains of Cordite [the "normal" load is 80grains.
When I use the normal formulas for cordite conversions to modern powders my rifle shoots spot on. my 3031 loads chrono'ed:
480 Woodleigh softs 81gr.3031 2081fps.
500 Hornady softs 81gr 3031 2053fps
500 Hornady solids 80gr 3031 2065fps

500 Hornady soft 100gr of IMR 4831 2031fps
strangely enough working up to 103 grains did not increase average velocity but the rifle did shoot farther appart.

The only load with RL_15 I have chronoed was 93gr. velocity was 2177fps. This load shot good but pressure was higher than I liked. My best shooting loads at 100 yards with RL-15 are 88 to 89gr. depending on the bullet. I will chrono these loads one day.

As long as my double shoots to point of aim and the bbls shoot close together I do not worry to much about the exact velocity. If I put the right bullet in the right place it will do the job.

I do believe that there was some "blue sky" in the factory velocities from the early days.
There is also a lot of variation in the different chamber dimensions and bore diameters. Usually my left bbl has a little higher velocity than the right....usually.

MacD37
Question for you. When [in the same double rifle] You have developed loads that "regulate" with the rifle with IMR 3031, Rl-15, and IMR 4831 which powder "regulated" with the higher velocity.
Another way of stating this question would be to ask which powder a slower or faster gives the highest velocity once "regulation" has been achieved.

Also have you found that if a load shoots good in a double of a certain calibre will the same load shoot good in other doubles of the same calibre?

Anyone else feel free to reply, the reason I ask Mac this is I know he has experience with several different doubles in several different calibers.

As for the temperature & cordite questions, the article says Mr. Woodfill lived in Denver CO; gets warm there in the summertime, but article did not say when he did the testing. Did not mention where he got cordite or primers.

MacD37, or anyone, is there any information on how cordite would rank with the present day powders, insofar as speed of burning? From your description of push vice SNAP, I might guess that cordite is slower, but I could well be wrong. I wonder if the fact that the cordite was in long strings, as opposed to modern powders being in small grains, might have something to do with the percieved difference in recoil?

NE 450 No 2, just so I'm clear on what you're saying: your rifle, loaded with the 3031 to the 2050-2080fps velocities, is shooting both barrels to POA - is that right? Also, I'm not very familiar with old British double rifles - when you say yours is regulated with a load of 75 gr. cordite, when the usual load was 80 grains, how do you know this?

This is a knowledgable group - thanks, keep the answers, and questions, coming.

Frank:

I never got velocities that far below standard, but there are probably too many variables to a get a sample large enough to be valid at this late date. Age of the ammo, conditions in which it was stored, barrel length, bore wear, and atmospheric conditions when fired will all impact velocity to some degree.

Generally speaking (there were exceptions), the standard external ballistics Kynoch gave for nitro sporting rifle ammunition was for 28" barrels. There are plenty of Brit double rifles around with 28" barrels, but most were 26" or shorter and, yeah, you're gonna lose some with those. John Taylor suggested 25fps per inch for the big nitros. With cordite, I think that sounds about right.

The degree to which age degrades performance is largely dependent on storage conditions which, in most instances, is unknowable today. Much of the original Kynoch currently left in circulation is very likely not quite as old as some folks think it is though. Many writers have suggested that Kynoch stopped production in the late '50s or early '60s. The last batches of the most popular calibers were loaded in 1973. As long as the ammo is still in the original box (red & yellow for nitro), there is no need to guess at the age. The date code - month, day, and year - was stamped on the box from 1926 on.

Here are some of my chronograph results.

.450/.400 3" NE, 400 grain steel jacketed solids, 60 cordite, loaded May, 1967. 26" barrels in mint condition. 2071 fps.
Standard velocity 2125 fps.

.450/.400 3 1/4" NE, 400 grain softs, 60 cordite, loaded June, 1962. 28" barrels, visible cordite burn in the groove. 2140 fps. Standard velocity 2150 fps. Other batches from 1947 and 1956 were very close to 2150 as well.

.470 NE, 500 grain soft, 75 cordite, loaded June, 1972. 26" barrels, worst flame erosion I've ever seen, burned all the to the muzzels, both barrels. 2095 fps. Standard velocity 2125 fps (not 2150).

I didn't see the article but, based on your description, it sounds a little pat to me.
------------------------
"Serious rifles have two barrels, everything else just burns gunpowder."

I have chronographed quit a few 458's early on and depending on barrel length it averaged 2000 FPS.. Some at a little over 1800 and some a little over 2000....thats bordering on enemic.

Handloading can kick this up to a healthy 2100 FPS plus a bit more, but then pressures become apparant and in intence heat may and have reportedly caused problems and powder compaction has also caused problems...

I believe the case was poorly designed in the beginning and should have been a full length but Winchester was on the short magnum kick, example the 7 mm mag, 300 Win Mag, 338 Win were successes so they applied what looked good sales wise, it worked because the 458 was then the only whore in town so to speak..Not so today and there are many better options available...

I am convinced these are all legitamate concerns therefore I don not use the 458 Win. nor do I recommend it to anyone..thats not to say I am correct, just that I'm not taking the chance.

Will it kill buffalo and Elephant, absolutly, I have seen it used successfully many times, but if things go wrong you have been forewarned..

I make no claim to being correct, just my opine on the much questioned 458 Win...Where there is that much smoke, there must be fire IMO.........

/

The most recent Handloader or possibly Rifle Shooter magazine has an article about "old ugly", Phil Shoemaker's Mauser 458 Win Mag (his "go to" gun) - several days ago someone posted asking about Phil's 458, an article from Rifle #100 - this latest article tells the story well - KMule

Ray-
The 458 was the FIRST of Winchester's short magnums. It's success is what paved the road for the others you mentioned!

frank sauer
That is correct, with IMR 3031 my rifle regulates at those velocities.
IMR 3031 [and IMR4831 for that matter] have recieved some criticism, many shooters switching to RL-15. The formula for Cordite to IMR 3031 was to start with the same amount of 3031 in grains as the rifle was regulated with Cordite. Most of the British rifles will say what load they were regulated with. For example on the barrel flats my 450 No2 states "480 bullet max 75Grains Cordite" My 450/400 3 1/4" states "400gr bullet max 60grains Cordite".
Many of the Nitro Express's were loaded with a lighter "Tropical Load" . Usually this load contains @5grains less cordite. This load was designed to not cause high pressures in areas that were very hot.
I still use 81grains of IMR3031 with 350Hornady RN's. This load shoots to the sights [even at 200 yards with the 200 yard leaf up], and "regulates just as good as the 480 and 500 grain bullets.
I have not had any problems finding loads that regulate with 350gr, 480gr., and 500gr bullets with IMR3031, IMR4831, and RL-15.
I have also had terrific results with 300gr bullets in my 450/400 3 1/4. Using the same powder charge that is best for 400gr bullets the 300's hit in the same group, even closer together than the 400's. [I call this the 75% rule]
MacD37 is correct, some times a very small change in the load can make a big defference how good a double rifle shoots.
If you find a double that you like, fits you good but does not regulate properly, as long as the INDIVIDUAL barrel groups are good you can always have it re-regulated.

Folks;

Although it's not a double-rifle cartridge, I did manage to chronograph two different Kynoch .404 loads back in the early '70s when I bought my .404 rifle.

400-grain solids (HEAVY steel jackets!), Berdan-primed and loaded over Cordite chronographed at 2125 fps, with an extremely small spread of only 15 fps or so. This was just about precisely the factory-quoted velocity.

400-grain softpoints, loaded with nitro-cellulose (granular-type) powder and Boxer-primed, ran at 2140 fps average with equally small spreads. These Boxer-primed loads, also in the five-round packets, were described as "Made in England with Some Swedish Components".

Both loads were tested at moderate temperatures(60 degrees, I'd guess at this late date) on an early break-the-two-screens chronograph. Later handloads easily push the 400s to over 2400 fps, which is no bad ballpark to hang around in, although it is brisk on the back end of an eight-pound rifle.

It was generally accepted at that time that IMR 3031 would come close to a weight-for-weight substitution for Cordite, and some of my loads agreed with this belief. The higher-velocity loads were not obtained with 3031, however, and since Norma 204 became unavailable most of my jacketed-bullet loads use IMR 4831. This is also a good cast-bullet round, and makes a fine "plinker" at lower speeds.

My .416 Rigby will drive a 365-grain cast bullet at 2600-plus, if one needs masochistic full-power plinking loads....no leading and decent accuracy, if I do my part. Slower is more fun as I get older, though!

Regards from Bren Mk1

John S,
Your point being? I know that, did I miss something or did we fail to communicate...

I believe 2000 FPS to be a capable load with a 500 gr. bullet...I beleive less is bordering on enemic..1800 I'm sure has worked but I want no part of it, getting to close to a shotgun!!

I believe the 458 Win. capable with a good handload...

I have always loaded all the double I've shot to 2125 to 2150 FPS and none came apart...reckon he was shooting cordite in a black powder gun??

I'm not a real stickler on caliber and feel that a properly place quality premium bullet cures most ailments and does so with the 458 Win...

I do believe the 458 was and is of poor design and should have been a magnum action round with a full length 375 case or such a case as the 458 Lott...I don't think that any knowledgeable Buffalo or Elephant hunter would argue that unless he just invested a sack full of money on a nice 458 Win. I have noticed that always makes a difference in ones judgement with horses, dogs, cars and guns

Anemia ... anemic: the .458 Winchester?

Enema ... enemic: the 404 Jeffery?

Alf

quote:

---

Modern game management practice in controlled areas have shown just how ineffecient hunters really are.

In the RSA statsitics are kept in certain reserves as to the kill ratio of modern hunters using modern equipment. In the "Tessun die riviere" provincial reserve and the "Bloemhof" reserve we look at figures of between 30 and 70 shots fired for each downed animal.

---

So what am I missing here? What type of hunters were in this study? I doubt these were any of us visiting hunters, if this were the case we would be out of ammo after the first or second animal. Does the "30 and 70 shots fired for each downed animal" include shots fired in off season range practice?

Jason

/