458 Win Mag-458 Lott?

_____________________________________________________

A 9mm may expand to a larger diameter, but a 45 ain't going to shrink

Men occasionally stumble over the truth, but most of them pick themselves up and hurry off as if nothing had happened.
- Winston Churchill

Posts: 5077 | Location: USA | Registered: 11 March 2005

Ignored post by jwp475 posted

Show Post

JPK

one of us

posted

Hide Post

quote:
Originally posted by Atkinson:
JPK,
Your boring me to death with your rant, and I am tryin to be civil with you, not so on your part in several threads..

I agree that with "monolithics" and/or a good "handload" with regular bullets the .458 is a good cartridge, I have said that all along but you passed on that everytime..Any 500 gr. bullet at 2000 FPS is a big game round IMO, the .458 can squeeze that out safely, but beyond that its questionable unless one shoots a 26" barrel and perhaps has a longer throat and magazine, then 2100 may be doable IMO...I base this on my chronograph, not assumption or guess and by gosh.

I also know it was and is a poorly designed case from the get go. It should have been a 2.80, 2.85 or 3" round, no earthly reason why it wasn't other than Winchester was in to short magnums at the time as they were popular..

If you were right then all this "well, use 450 gr. bullets or use 400 gr. bullets and this powder only etc. ya ya...That in itself tells me the round is short on powder capacity..Also the claims of velocity with safe pressures by you is a croc and that can be varified by simply looking at a Swift reloading manual for one and observing the powder density for your so called wonder powders. Now if you don't have a problem with compaction then that is fine, I do have a problem with compaction and clumping of powder.

IMO, converting a .458 Win. to a Lott is so simple that its ridiculas not to do so..I have yet to hear a reason why you refuse to even consider this approach.

Bottom line is we disagree, its bothering you a lot more than it bothers me..and as far as your "experience" goes that you quoted me in another thread, can it, I'm not impressed, I have been there also...

Your comparison to me shooting a 370 gr. GS Custom or North Fork in my 416 makes little since to me, I shoot it because neither one of them make a 400 gr. because a 400 gr. is too long..Like I said monolithics change the whole picture.

I am not going to change my opinnion and neither or you, so let it go at that, I am trying my best to be congeniel and keep this subject to intelligent conversation. If that is unsuitable to you then I see no point in continueing it...

Ray,

You are off, again, your "facts" just don't add up, again.

The velocities you cite, especially 2000fps, are woeful and NOT REPRESENTATIVE of the performance of even factory loads.

As I said, your experience with the 458wm, loading, shooting, chronographing, is either one of: A.) Nonexistent, or B.) Far enough in the past that it is irrelevant. You continue to prove this.

My current load, and a factory load for comparison, were pressure tested for me. Guess what? My load is well, well below max and so was the factory load. Mt load produces 2145fps with the 500's and it isn't much beyond the STARTING load for the Hornaday manual, calling it a midlin' load would be more than fair.

Hornaday isn't going to publish over pressure loads, you know that. Go do your homework and read the manual.

Your cannard about the 450's is a joke. To you and your reasoning that the 458wm performs best with a flat nose mono solid 30grs less than the round nose solid calibre norm and 50grs less than the round nose solid cartridge norm, somehow leads you to the conclussion that the problem is with the cartridge. But now you come and tell us that NF doesn't make 400's for the 416 and that the full weight monos are too long for the 416 anyway. Whats the difference? NF didn't make .458" 500's either! The mono does indeed change the whole picture and its not with just the 458wm it is with your favorites too.

Ray, you can't even keep your stories straight. If you want an intelligent conversation, go do your homework, if you find an fact based refutation of your bull less than congenial, stop pedling the bull.

JPK

BTW, a 500 grain .458" solid at 2000fps is not something I ever want to hunt elephants with. IMO, it is marginal in the extreme.

Free 500grains

Posts: 4900 | Location: Chevy Chase, Md. | Registered: 16 November 2004

JAL

one of us

posted

Hide Post

quote:
Originally posted by maddenwh:

Here's what you said JAL... "And so maddenwh draws the line. No one should buy ANY big bore under the Lott. Presumably you can load the Lott down to .375 H&H ?".

Um, yes. what I mean here is that if one should always take the Lott over the WM, any DG cal UNDER the WM must be even worse. Just a form of logic. One could also say as there are more powerful cals. than the Lott,one should choose THEM.

The facts are they are two different cals. and one is not necessarily better than the other in all circumstances.

I'll have another go at summing up my thoughts.
So, the Lott is bigger, and? better.

Those that keep saying the .458 is marginal may be right, BUT, many on AR have proven different.
And if a Lott is so much better because of more power, who's to say a bigger cal. shouldn't obsolete the Lott. (I mean, is it the all time perfect cal.?? )

By all means buy a Lott if you want. Drill out a .458 if you want, but the fact is a good shot done with a .458 will beat a Lott flinched off the vitals. If you can handle the recoil, go for it. If you load it down to 2150/500, well, it's not really a Lott anymore is it.

This drilling out is a bad habit. Starting with a Hornet to K hornet, all the "improved" rnds. are a pain, and bigger is not always better. Hell, we have Jockers here use 505 Jeffery's on deer, presumably incase any trees get in the way.

Posts: 2355 | Location: Australia | Registered: 14 November 2004

Ignored post by JAL posted

Show Post

Page 1 2

Please Wait. Your request is being processed...

Accuratereloading.com