After toying for awhile with the notion of getting a bigger bore rifle, I had more or less settled on the .458Lott as the most practical for my purposes. I have a couple of .375's, and once owned a .416Rigby but sold it. If I return to Africa it would likely be for an elephant, or at least another buffalo, so I'm using that as my excuse/rationalization for another gun, despite the fact that for the vast majority of its life the gun would be a plinker/deer rifle/varminter.

Now I have come across a new Winchester Safari in .458WinMag. Is there any practical reason not to ream this gun out to the Lott chamber? For that matter, is there any practical reason to do so? The action appears long enough to contain the Lott, so I have to wonder why Winchester is apparently not offering it in that chambering. What am I missing?

John

Pride?

Might be seen by some as an admission of the 458WM's perceived shortcomings compared to the Lott.

I, personally, think they are two different animals and the WM's past problems are . . . just that, a thing of the past.

As for the project, the long action will work for the Lott conversion. The mag box may require some lengthening, etc. etc. etc.

Most of the reasons for wanting a Lott have been resolved with the newer 458 WM loads being offered now. I'd keep it as it is...just my 2 cents.

I wont comment on changing the gun as I have no idea what is involved. But, Winchester not offering the Lott is just plain stupid- IMHO. The Lott can fire the WinMag, the Lott is a little more power and easier to reload. The Lott has become the new standard.

Why is it stupid? They lost my sale. I would buy one. I know others would too. No you did not miss anything. Stupid thats all. I'd consider trading my CZ for an M70. But, apparently they dont need my business. No problem here.

No more Ruger RSM, no Winchester M70 thats a lot of sales for CZ to Americans who want a basic safari grade Lott.

All M-70's are built on the same length action. So if you really want a Lott, buy a 458 Win, get a new follower and mag box from Winchester, and possibly a new bolt stop, and have the gun rechambered. There probably won't be a lot of feed work needed.

It certainly a good option in my opinion.

In the past, the Winchester Custom Shop did build rifles in 458Lott and I always found their work to be very, very good. I have no idea if there any longer is a Custom Shop since the move, but it would certainly be worth a phone call.

I think that with the modern ammunition there is no need to transform your rifle of 458 Winchester Magnum to the cartridge 458 Lott. The ammunition of nowadays has services very superior to the ancient one.


---------------------------
Traducción por PROMT™
http://www.promt.es

quote:

In the past, the Winchester Custom Shop did build rifles in 458Lott and I always found their work to be very, very good. I have no idea if there any longer is a Custom Shop since the move, but it would certainly be worth a phone call.

Good advise I am sure, but it should not be necessary to get reamed up the kazoo for the cost of a custom shop build to get the industry standard Lott chambering. I sure wont, both on principle and as a waste of money. Screw Winchester, not other way around.

The 458WM should be limited to the custom shop for that minority customer with some kind of nostaglia / sadist thing going.

quote:

I think that with the modern ammunition there is no need to transform your rifle of 458 Winchester Magnum to the cartridge 458 Lott. The ammunition of nowadays has services very superior to the ancient one.

Hornady superformance maybe making the old rating. The Federal Premium loads are still at 1950fps muzzle velocity! The WM still suffers a handycap, even if it can be made to work. The Lott is so much easier.

http://www.federalpremium.com/...ls/rifle.aspx?id=352

Cut from Federal online catalog (sledgehammer solid, for Africa not a reduced NA load):

Load_____Caliber__________ Muzzle__ 100 Y
P458T3__ 458 Win. Magnum__ 1950___ 1729

I just found another Federal load that is rated 2050fps at the muzzle.

quote:

Originally posted by Biebs:
Most of the reasons for wanting a Lott have been resolved with the newer 458 WM loads being offered now. I'd keep it as it is...just my 2 cents.

+1
Lott offers no advantage over the 458WM with the new AA powders and 2150 fps velocities you can attain today.

If it was easy, Federal would not be rated 200fps (or even 100) below original 2150 spec. Thats top dollar ammo for a respected supplier. And those are just catalog bragging numbers, not actual measured data.

NO advantage!

Years ago (when I hunted and shot the single barrel style) I had my Model 70 reamed out to .450 Watts (a bit of magazine work, too) and it worked fine. I shot the Watts, Lott and the .458 Win. without problems. The rifle was a 1990s control feed and the seial number ended with 458! I also had Griffin and Howe add one of their pads to bring out the pull a bit.
Good shooting,
Cal

With newer powders and better bullets there should be no problem sticking with a plain jane 458.

I think a good analogy would be offering a 22 short for a squirrel rifle. Yes the 22 short can kill squirrels all day, but why not chamber the 22LR if it fits the gun and then have the added versatility?

The Lott chamber give you the versatility of more powder and bullet choices and either short or long case. Winchester is just being down right ignorant on this one.

I dont blame jwm for asking if there is some technical reason Winchester does not offer the Lott. It is so unbelievable stupid, that they would act this way.

I think that the .22short/.22lr analogy is a good one as far as it goes. No question, if the m70 came in the Lott that would be my preference. However, since it doesn't I think I will go with the .458Win and shoot it that way for awhile. As many of you have noted, the conversion seems to be doable at a later time if desired, or I may simply be happy with the gun as is.

Safari-lawyer, I think you probably nailed it with the comment about "pride". That must have been Ruger's justification for chambering their #1 in .416Ruger and dropping the .416Rigby, since no other reason seems applicable to drop the long cartridge in favour of the shorter one in a single shot rifle. Maybe Winchester simply didn't like the optics...their flagship bolt gun chambered in someone else's "better" version of their cartridge. Certainly if they chambered the gun in both, then the shorter-chambered guns would languish on the shelves, and that wouldn't look good either.

Thanks to all for your opinions and help.

John

I think JWM hit the nail on the head. WHY!!! would winchester put Jack Lott's name on a cartridge named a 458 WINCHESTER MAGNUM. Get real real they are just as narcissistic as any big company. Just like Ruger why chamber a rifle in a 100 year old round that has been doing just fine since WWI when you can replace it with a HIGH pressure round with your name on it that is an off shoot of the 416 remington concept. Jack did us all a favor when he fixed the 458 with an excellent replacement. How many people actually shoot elephants with their 458's versus take them out to the range and break rocks? I hunt with all my big bores and get plenty of looks when I'm out in the woods looking for deer and elk. Its silly to ask why they don't do the Lott. Just look at Kimber they chamber the lott. What about Dakota and their rounds great idea but again who wants someone elses name on their guns.

Brad

Winchester had the option of the "lott" when Winchester planed the safari rifle except it went by its orginal name the 450 Watts long they opt'd for the 450 Watts short..Jack got all the credit for the lott almost 30 years after the Watts was made so why does jack get all the glory and credit...

quote:

Originally posted by Express_Rifles:
Winchester had the option of the "lott" when Winchester planed the safari rifle except it went by its orginal name the 450 Watts long they opt'd for the 450 Watts short..Jack got all the credit for the lott almost 30 years after the Watts was made so why does jack get all the glory and credit...

Amen to that, sir!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Hey...if any of you are contemplating the change to 458 Lott...I'd sure like to send you our XRM magazine conversion to see if it works with the lott. It was designed for the 375, but 458 Lott's fit.

There would be no obligation other then to let us know if you can now have a four round magazine with our replacement box.

quote:

Originally posted by Duane Wiebe:
Hey...if any of you are contemplating the change to 458 Lott...I'd sure like to send you our XRM magazine conversion to see if it works with the lott. It was designed for the 375, but 458 Lott's fit.

There would be no obligation other then to let us know if you can now have a four round magazine with our replacement box.

Freebies from Duane? Wow! If you don't want to press forward with your Lott rechamber job, I'll buy a Model 70 in 458 and have a go at the project.

Have at it! Please post how it works out.

John

Gentlemen:
What smith would you recommend for the 458 Win to 458 Lott conversion given the need to change magazines, followers, bolt stops and feed issues?

Gentlemen:
What smith would you recommend for the 458 Win to 458 Lott conversion given the need to change magazines, followers, bolt stops and feed issues?



That Fine chap who posted above Mr.Duane Weibe.

Nothing wrong with the newer 458's issues has been resolved.

Nothing wrong with the Winmag..The Lott was reinvented to get 2150 easier then with the Winmag now 2150 can be done with both some want to pay the price of the lott with recoil but to eaches own

"Nothing wrong with the new 458Win". Unless hand loaded I would have to disagree with this statement.

Doesnt have to be handloaded as long at your trucking at 2100 your fine..

The 22lr/22 short comparison was excellent. Another would be why buy a 38 special when you can get a 357 magnum. Before I bought my 458 lott, I agonized over this decision. In the end, the only reason I could find to buy a 458 mag over the lott was because of nostalgia. The lott will do everything the 458 mag will do, only with less pressure. It will also do quite a bit the 458 mag won't do, like drive a 500 gr bullet out at 2300 fps.

And please tell me what does a 458 caliber do running 2300 that a 458 at 2150 real world not on paper not a guess and not what youve read and will try to pass off as first hand knowledge.Let me know

Some guys want 2400fps, I don't know about why. It has to be a lott easier to hand load the lott to 2150fps than the WinMag. It sure seems to be a problem for even the big boys like Federal, who I trust more than AR members to walk the line between safe pressure and max performance.

The real question should not be "do we need 2300 fps?", but "why should we settle for a short marginal case when the M70 safari is setup for the 375 and 416?". Those idiots went out of there way to make a special shortie chambering of the safari rifle, just to accommodate the 458WM. It just annoys me no end.

As for nostalgia. To be a good thing the nostalgia should be a positive reputation not a legacy of complaints more complaints and the occasional near death experiences. The 458WM has one of the most negative reputations of almost any round. Ive read complaints about feeding the 425WR and 500Jeff but the shear numbers pale by comparison to the reams of negativity written on the WinMag.

quote:

Originally posted by Express_Rifles:
Doesnt have to be handloaded as long at your trucking at 2100 your fine..

Absolutely.

quote:

Originally posted by fourbore:
Some guys want 2400fps, I don't know about why. It has to be a lott easier to hand load the lott to 2150fps than the WinMag. It sure seems to be a problem for even the big boys like Federal, who I trust more than AR members to walk the line between safe pressure and max performance.

The real question should not be "do we need 2300 fps?", but "why should we settle for a short marginal case when the M70 safari is setup for the 375 and 416?".

Ive read complaints about feeding the 425WR and 500Jeff

Perhaps this is why Kynock load 458Lott with 480grn bullets to 2150?

Oh, and never had a problem with the 425WR, "touch wood"

quote:

Originally posted by fourbore:
Some guys want 2400fps, I don't know about why. It has to be a lott easier to hand load the lott to 2150fps than the WinMag. It sure seems to be a problem for even the big boys like Federal, who I trust more than AR members to walk the line between safe pressure and max performance.

The real question should not be "do we need 2300 fps?", but "why should we settle for a short marginal case when the M70 safari is setup for the 375 and 416?". Those idiots went out of there way to make a special shortie chambering of the safari rifle, just to accommodate the 458WM. It just annoys me no end.

As for nostalgia. To be a good thing the nostalgia should be a positive reputation not a legacy of complaints more complaints and the occasional near death experiences. The 458WM has one of the most negative reputations of almost any round. Ive read complaints about feeding the 425WR and 500Jeff but the shear numbers pale by comparison to the reams of negativity written on the WinMag.

I too would like to see Winchester offer the 458 Lott in the model 70, as it would be a bit lighter and trimmer than a CZ or Ruger.

That said, I have a 458 win. mag. Browning Safari FN made in the early 1960s and at approx. 8lbs, it is a joy to carry. It is easy enough to load this rifle with 500 grain bullets approaching 2200 fps, 2150 a few grains number max. published loads. These are published loads by more than one source and show NO PRESSURE SIGNS.

Forget about what you read in the past, actual experience today suggest otherwise....

The only short comming of the 458 win. mag. today is its ability to handle 500 grain mono-metal bullets. Actually, the Lott does not have what I would call ideal case capacity to load 500 grain mono-metals...it is better but not ideal in my estimation.

At 2400 fps and/or the ability to handle 500 grain mono-metal bullets...you are up to the Rigby/Weatherby sized cases...more weight and more recoil...If only someone would legtimize the 460 G&A that would seem to be the perfect 458 balancing case capacity and rifle weight, at least in my view.

quote:

I think that the .22short/.22lr analogy is a good one as far as it goes.

And, as another said 38/357.

But the big advantage is surely not for the extra power (again modern +P+ 38 is there or thereabouts equal with modern "downloaded" 357) but for the "insurance" that in a tight spot when the shorter cased 38 ammo hasn't arrived you can feed it with longer cased 357 ammo!

So for "belt and braces" I'd understand the wish for the 458 Lott chambering just in case my 458 Winchester ammo was lost in transit and all I could get was Lott length cartridges!

quote:

If only someone would legtimize the 460 G&A that would see to be the perfect 458 balancing case capacity and rifle weight, at least in my view.

Today we have both the 450 Dakota and 450 Rigby. With the Rigby apparently gaining a small following. I think CZ chambered some 450 Rigby, not sure. The Rigby claim to fame is the low pressure loading. Kinda the anti-WinMag. Then there is the Lott, right in the happy middle.

quote:

Perhaps this is why Kynock load 458Lott with 480grn bullets to 2150?

This only goes more to bring in question the suitability of the even smaller WinMag case. What would Kynock do with that POS?

I checked the Kynock website:

458 Win {no data provided, big surprise! }
458 Lott 480 gr bullet at 2300 fps 5200ft-lbs
450 Rigby 480 gr at 2400 fps 6300 ft-lbs

http://www.kynochammunition.co.uk/

2300fps is better than what I thought they had advertised.
With "Hand loading" I can easily achieve 2160fps (with no pressure signs) with these Woodleigh 480grn bullets from my 458Win let-alone the magical 2100fps.

I hope I would never say a bad word or speak out of turn toward anyone owning a 458Win. Heck, if Ruger offered a 458Win in the Hawkeye, I might even be tempted. Probably not, but it would make sense. I could understand that.

My complaint is Winchester has the M70 Safari setup for the magnum length 375H&H and 416Rem - magazine, feeding all setup for sale from new factory. Then goes out of the way to chamber the short 458. Its just so damn stupid, it makes me crazy.

Kynoch never produced ammo for the winchester so whats your point ?

What me? I did not bring up the Kynock loadings.

My point or retort was, if Kynock under loads the 458Lott (ie 5000 ft-lbs as opposed to 6000), imagine what they would do "if" they did load the WinMag. You know, some African hunters and some ammo companies prefer to keep the African ammo loaded to lower pressure. That (hi pressure) was an early complaint against the 416Rem. And the 416Rem is full magnum length big capacity case and only 40 cal. My point: If you, me or Kynock or Federal, decide modest pressure is more important than Superformance the 458WM comes up short or shorter.

So why do you suppose Kynock loads all those other 45's and only sells brass for the Win Mag? I have an idea.

I noticed, Kynock loads the 450Rigby to approx power levels that the Lott is rated to - 6000 ft-lbs. The 450 Rigby seems to be gaining a foot hold in Africa.

Express, I went back and read your posts. Do you like the idea of the new M70 being 458WM only and no Lott? I am not a PIA, just asking for straight talk - your thoughts.

jwm: you have a PM