Hopefully Ganyana will drop in here and tell us why ZNP went to FN-FALs.

Any one who would chose of a 308 rifle over a 470 double rifle to follow a wounded elephant into the jess please raise your hand!



465H&H

quote:

Originally posted by truvelloshooter:
In my books most novice elephant hunters are better off with a .375 H&H, with a specialized bullet designed for the very purpose of elephant hunting, such as a FN Solid.

Yes, of course, but that does not mean it is the minimum safe caliber.

In Ron Thomson's book he talks of only using the 7.62 for the milling left over youngsters, not the original shooting of bulls with the herds or the big cows. Richard Harland is silent on the 7.62. Ron Thomson went from the fifties or sixties til he was kicked out because he was white. Both favored the 458wm and neither cite failures. Both cite examples where knocking an elephant out or off its feet saved their bacon. This is not possible with a 308, less likely with a 375H&H than a 458 which is less likely than a 500.

JPK

JPK,

You mentioned in your post that both Richard Harland and Ron Thomson favored the 458 WIn Mag. and neither cite failures.

We also know that a .375 H&H will out-penetrate a .458 Win Mag any day. When extreme penetration is the objective, then the 375 H&H is the better option, unless you wanna hang your hat on a slightly higher energy level. Harry Manners never felt the need to do so. After Jack Lott was flug into the air by a buffalo, he was not too impressed with a .458 Min Mag. Perhaps ol' Jack had it wrong too and he was a 'crappy' shot too.

Chris

Dan,

.... "To me, safe means that I have more than a 50-50 chance of turning a charging elephant at 4 yards with a shot to the face even though I miss the brain (which is highly likely in such a situation)."

Dan I said before that your definition of an adequate caliber is certainly a stringent one (over-kill), but a good one nevertheless - no argument, chom.

BUT, BUT, BUT ... turning an elephant at 4 paces. I was just thinking if you could turn him at 4 paces you have a good chance to stop him with your body at ZERO paces.

Dan I know you are a serious oak, no pun, I am just having a bit of fun.

Take care
Chris

The biggest bore have the least controversy

The smaller the caliber is....the more controversy

quote:

Originally posted by 465H&H:
Hopefully Ganyana will drop in here and tell us why ZNP went to FN-FALs.

Any one who would chose of a 308 rifle over a 470 double rifle to follow a wounded elephant into the jess please raise your hand!
465H&H

465H&H

I've never hunted ele nor have I shot a 470 double to any degree, but I have used an FN-FAL, or more exactly the British SLR.

I have no idea what type of ammo the croppers prefer in their FALS, but given something sensible, I would prefer using one for the simple sake of familiarity...

When the rifle and the mags were well maintained, they were very reliable and were of course cabable of very fast follow up shots...And for me, the SLR handles and points better than any sporting rifle I have handled since...

I would guess that many of these guys from Southern Africa probably spent a minimum of two years in the Army during the bush war years and their FALS would be like an extension of their body's...

Regards,

Pete

husky

I personally would welcome heavier expanding bullets in all calibers used for DG, and even for other medium to short range purposes. I load my 9.3x64 with 300gr Rhino's, but when they run out, I would love to try heavier. In my .450 Rigby, I use 550gr Rhino's, as the only 600gr bullets I could find, was unreliable.

Truvelloshooter,

Jack Lott was tossed after he gut shot a buff. Yes, it was the crappy shot that got him tossed, but then surely you know this.

Interestingly, after being tossed, Jack Lott didn't turn in his 458wm for a 375H&H but rather improved velocity and energy, penetration of the 500 grain .458" bullets.

On penetration vs bullet weight, frontal area, etc, those things that lead to knocked out or down elephants, turned elephants....The end goal is to find the right compromise in a rifle that can be carried all day and shot effectively at the end of the day.

You need enough penetration to reach the brain, but you need enough bullet to knock the elephant down or out or to turn a charge. 500 Grains has his compromise in the .510" 570 grain solid at 2150fps from his 500NE. Mine would be a .458" 500 grain solid at 2150 from a 450NE.

More penteration than "enough" amounts to wasted energy that should be used to push a bigger bullet. For a clear example, you are better off using a 500 of any description than a 460WM. Closer call, a 450/400 NE or a 404 J at the original loading than a 375H&H.

Harry Manners preffered the 375H&H, but most of the fellows who shot many elephant preffered a whole lot more bullet. Like I said in an earlier post, for every small or medium bore fan there were at least two or three big or biggest bore fans.

JPK

EDIT: FWIW, my understanding is that in Zim, the 7.62 was used when the culling was by teams of three shooters. It was used to kill the smaller elephants to preserve supplies of sporting style FMJ ammo in the larger calibres.

Quote from 465H&H

"I have some real problems with the observations listed above or rather I should say in the interpretation of what they mean. First of all the sample sizes are extremely small to make any definative conclusions. For instatce based on the laws probability the odds of the first three charges where a 450 caliber rifle was used say that there is approxamately a 20% chance that a stop would have occured in all of the first three charges simply based on random chance."


Hi 465,

It is interesting that when I wrote the first posting I thought that eventually a question would arise as to the validity of the statistics. First, as I acknowledged in the posting, this is a small sample population and I agree that it is possible to misconstrue whatever, if anything, these data are trying to tell us.

To expand upon your point, let us for the sake of argument assume that all of the rifles in question have the "same" stopping effectiveness and that degree of effectiveness is about 50% as reflected in the results of the 470-class calibers. In other words half the time the charge will be stopped and the hunter can walk away and half the time he/she will be squished. So it is analogous to flipping heads and tails with a coin.

Therefore, there is one chance in 8,192 for the 375, be based on this 50% probability (0.5 to the 13th power), to achieve thirteen straight successes. There is also only a 12.5% chance of three out of three "successes" for the 500-class calibers, if the 50% probability assumption is correct. I would like to emphasize, which I neither say with pride nor shame, that these are not "my" numbers, only what I read in the magazines. I believe that based on this albeit small population the data seem to support the conclusion that there is an important difference between the stopping effectiveness of a 375 and a 500 Nitro Express at close range (less than 30 meters, which was the basis for the report).

Frankly, I do not find this such an extreme conclusion. John Taylor loved the 375 but also talked at length about the value of a 577 or 600 for "tight work". He though also cautioned that one could not simply get a 577 and "shoot into the grey..." and be effective.

There was a member who, as I recall, had a signature line (or was at least fond of saying) that "no one enters into the jesse wishing that they had a smaller rifle". I recall that another said something to the same effect about carrying a double rifle but wishing for a bolt action.

I would like to note that Art Alphin, who got tossed by a Cape Buffalo when hunting with a 458 Winchester, did not then start using a 375, but rather developed the 500 A-Square. It seems when hunters have a caliber that for any reason (and some that are not related to the caliber, i.e. Lott) fails, they tend to go bigger, not smaller.

Hope you are having a great day in Nampa. (Boise was home for 11 years...)

Best,

Don

Don!

I don't argue with any thing you said in your last post. my point was that we have very limited numbers of observations to look at and since I haven't read the article I don't know all of the details of the encounters. I just don't want people taking these numbers as facts, they are only a set of observations. As an example I have seen two elephant charges stopped, one with a 375 H&H and another with a 450/400. Another charge was stopped while I was in camp by PH Billy Leamon with 460 Weatherby. Can I say that based on this sample of of three charges that if you use rifles in 375 to 458 caliber you have a 100% chance of stopping a charge? I think not. The same applys to the the three 500 caliber charges you cited. If the 450 class cartridges were only capable of stopping a charge 50% of the time and in the other 50% of the time the hunter was killed or injured do you think that they would still be used and recommended? I also think not on this one.


If you get back to Boise give me a call and wewill meet and tell some tall tales.


465H&H

465H&H

PeteE!

Being familiar with your rifle is extremely important no matter if it's humans or animals that you are hunting. I too dearly love the FN-FAL and used one for a couple of years in practical rifle competition. My problem is with the 308 caliber not having suffecient stopping power or penetration, especially with the commonly used military ammunition used in culling. Read Ron Thompson's boob "Mahohbo" for his experience using the 308 on elephant charges and culling.

465H&H

465H&H,

I have Thompson's book but its a while since I've read it...sounds like a good excuse to dig it out and have browse through it again...

With regards the penetration potential of .308 calibre bullets, in the .308Win, I don't think they are lacking if chosen wisely..

Looking at a couple of different reloading manuals, they list a 200 grn with an SD of .301 with an achievable velocity of 2400fps...

If we compare that data to three other small bores that that have been used to head shoot ele in the past, you'll notice the similarities:

A 175grn out of a 7x57mm with an SD of .310 and a similar achievable velocity...

A 160grn 6.5x54 MS has an SD of .328 and a velocity about 2300 FPS

A 250 grn bullet from a .318 WR has an SD of .364 and again a velocity of around 2400fps..

To my thinking, with decent bullets, that puts the .308win right in the same ball park.

I realise that the cullers using FN-FALS were probably using military ammo, but even so, a lot of animals were culled using that combination so theory aside, obviously it does work…

Regards,

Pete

Pete E!

Your correct in that the 308 fits right in with the rest of the cartridges you listed as far as penetration goes and also as far as stunning power/shock/thump/stopping power goes. All of those calibers were used by some of the early elephant hunters with mixed success. On side brain shots all have suffecient penetration to reach the brain. The reults were less successful on full frontal brain shots. They all sometimes failed to penetrate sufficiently or in a straight line so quickly fell out of favor as general elephant hunting calibers. None of them have suffecient energy/bullet weight to reliably stop or turn a charging elephant on a shot that missed the brain.

One of my PHs in Zim has a huge amount of elephant culling and PAC experience as well as having used the FN-FAL as a Rhodesian Light Infantry member during their little skirmish a few years back. He carried it and a 450/400 double in his cruiser. When we followed elephants into the jess he never even considered taking the FN.

465H&H

quote:

If you get back to Boise give me a call and wewill meet and tell some tall tales.

Hi 465,

Thanks for the kind offer and I will take you up on that. Maybe meet at the old "Buster's" for the Holloween party. (An inside joke for all old Boise area residents).

I must admit that I was amazed when I read this report regarding the lack of success of the 375 as I love this caliber. I would have figured that some of the charges might have failed to be stopped at very close range when one tried to shoot up through the truck and bottom of the head, but ZERO!

Hey, look at it this way, at least this thread is generating less heat than your posting regarding elephant penetration.....

Cheers

Don!

Anytime anyone says this always happens or that never happens, the red flag goes up for me. There are very few absolutes in this world. But hey it is all fun to hear every ones opinion. That's the way we learn.

465H&H

.

We had A square make us up a bunch of monolithic .308 bullets. Seem to rememeber they were 180grn but may have been 200.

Prefered choice was actually the soviet armor piercing 7.62x54R of which we had lots of ammo, and plenty of draganov rifles to shoot it out of (sans scope and with stock re-done). The main reason for choosing an F.N.- FAL or Draganov was number of rounds, speed of fire and economy of ammo! When you are culling amo costs become important!

Also, Everybody started the cull with a heavy where possible. Each team leaders idea of a heavy varied but was generally a .404 or bigger ( Clem used a .465, Ken Worsley a .458, Mike la Grange a .460 A square short, etc). to knock down the3 biggest cows and make sure that the maitriach was down. The you switched to something smaller and faster firing to finish things off quickly.

I don't believe that 7.62 nato has enough reliable penetration (without special bullets) for frontal shots on big cows or bulls. Sometimes it worked, sometimes the bullets distorted and went astray or failed to penetrate. I have shot one elephant with 173grn Kynock 7x57. It worked. It was a big bull and it was a frontal shot. Would I choose to keep trying? No.

Knocking off young bulls/cows and calves - 7.62 is all you need.

For hunting, I agree with the legal minimum. By trial and error, over 50 years the colonial governments of Africa determined what was a safe minimum in the hands of less than brilliant shots.

Bear in mind- Bell was well known for wing shooting ducks using his 7x57 and .318. I watched ken Worsley break 97 out of 100 half bricks thrown into the air betwen 30 and 50 paces ahead of him (warming up for a cull). When you take your .22lr goose or pheasant hunting instead of a shotgun, you are good enough to consider a small bore on ele.

Ganyana!

I would expect more acuuracy from some one with your reputation. Bell was shooting cormorants not ducks!



465H&H

465- Looking at the photo's ( I have quite a few from his last trip) they are all Egyptian Geese! Unfortunately, his last book "Bell of Africa" was ghost written from his notes and diaries after his death so there are some inaccuracies- and many of the pictures they needed for the book were in obscure parts of the world - like Bulawayo!

I remember Bell talking about shooting flying cormorants below Murchison Falls with his 3i8 Westley Richards and the locals wondering what kind of shotgun he was using to hit the birds 100 yds up. Seems to me I remember him claiming to hit 3 out of 4 on a good day. Also he did say they shot quite a few ducks and geese when going up the Bar Aouck river. I believe he shot most with a shotgun on that trip.

CHEERS!

455H&H

quote:

If we compare that data to three other small bores that that have been used to head shoot ele in the past, you'll notice the similarities:

A 175grn out of a 7x57mm with an SD of .310 and a similar achievable velocity...

A 160grn 6.5x54 MS has an SD of .328 and a velocity about 2300 FPS

A 250 grn bullet from a .318 WR has an SD of .364 and again a velocity of around 2400fps..

Old man Bell regarded the .318 WR as ideal as one could hope for, if my memory serves me correctly. Surely not to turn charges at close range or in the jesse, but when one uses it wisely at safe distances. Now all of a sudden the bigger and more powerfull .375 H&H is not "safe" ... Huh? Not even with modern FN solids? Or could we argue that Mr Bell did not really know the meaning of "adequate" or "safe"?

When we quote from the source about not a single .375 H&H being able to stop a charge, we should know the following to be able of any meaning or substance:

a) Were the shots all with with lead-core solids or monolithic solids? (or even soft nosed bullets)

b) Were the bullets brain shots or all missed brain shots?

c) Were the misses so far from the brain that they were not near misses - say within the previously stated 2 inches? (or far away)

Once the above is answered, we will be in a better position to interpret the validity or otherwise.

Chris

Chris, the minimum required caliber has grown exponentially ever since the founding of the Accurate Reloading forums. I have estimated the function for the instantaneous rate of change in minium calibers to be something like.

dX/dt= rX(t), where X(t) is the minimum diameter at time t in calibers and r=1.1.

As you should know by now, the .375 H&H is just barely adequate for whitetails at this time but will be relegated to bunny hunting by the year 2013. In the year 2043, the 16" guns off the Iowa class destroyers will be the minimum safe caliber for smaller cape buffalo and culling elephant calves.


Brent

Truvelloshooter,

Bell was an exception and apparently most of his elephants were shot in the open or in light cover.

Here is some help from John Taylor, who you seem to favor based on your earlier citation of his books.

"Any modern rifle, large or small, firing bluff nosed,solid,metal-covered bullets is capable killing the largest elephant in Africa; but--the mere capacity to kill, ALONE, is insufficient. A .256 will kill an elephant, provided that that elephant is sufficiently accomodating to expose a vital spot. And that is just the point...."

He then describes many circumstance when a whole lot more rifle is needed. Some no longer apply in sport hunting, but many still do.

Describing very close confrontations when shooting up is required, he writes, "...;and I can definitely and most emphatically state that no light bullet will have the slightest effect whatsoever. I have had this most conclusively proved--at least, to my own satisfaction."

He then goes on to describe some situations that worked out poorly for fellows using "light" weapons.

Most importantly he continues, "To which can be added the additional fact that practically all the most successful and most experienced elephant hunters, both of the past and of the present day, used and use rifles throwing bullets of not less than 400 grains for use in thick cover."

Then a list of hunters and their weapons. I'll list names and rifles and leave out descriptions for brevity:

Sutherland: a pair of 577NE's
Pearson: first 577NE's then magazine rifles throwing 400 grains or more.
Banks: double throwing 480 or more grains in cover, a medium bore magazine rifle in the open.
Pitman: 450NE
Percival: 450NE
Ritchie: 470 NE
Anderson: 577NE
Hunter: 577NE
Teare: 404
Game Rangers of Tanganyika: 470NE, 465NE, 450/400NE, 404, 404.
Fairweather: 450NE No2
Blunt: 416

On the 375H&H, "In other words, it can be definitely stated that is no less powerful rifle on the market at the present time than Holland's .375 magnum, which ought ever to be taken against elephant in thick cover. And even there you are running pretty close to the margin of safety--to close, in my opinion, for any but an experienced man."

Hunters using more than minimal rifles for elephants isn't something new. In fact, its very possible that the average rifle used today is a whole lot less than the average used sixty or so years ago in similar circumstance, that being hunting in the thick stuff.

JPK

from some tales posted here it seems an accurate model 52 winchester and a clip each of stingers and std velocity lead is all anyone needs to hunt the African Big Five successfully. I still am curious why the governments there are not on to this phenomenon and have not dropped the minimum calibre to 22rf...any thoughts on this failure to bow to technology? PH's get to spend most of the year guiding and shooting big game. They rattle on about using these small calibre rifles for DG, but I have not heard of one carrying an FN-FAL, etc to work yet. No game is dangerous if you get close enough and the animal is unaware of your presence and intent before taking your shot. As a kid, growing up on a farm, we butchered all of our own beef and hogs. My dad shot them in the forehead at 5-8 feet with a Colt Woodsman and solids. That 22 had over a hundred 1200-1600lb steers to its' credit and that many 300-500lb hogs. 100% one-shot kills. We have a couple posters here that hunt hogs, I doubt they use a 22rf handgun. The little guns can kill very well with proper bullet design and placement. They wouldn't stop anything major under stressful conditions. Make the shot, you seldom have any problems. The graveyards though, are full of people who used "not enough gun" for the job in Africa. I would love to see one of the smallbore gurus go into the brush after a wounded buffalo with an FN-FAL. The big bore rifles are like Dial deodorant soap, "...takes the worry out of being close...".

JMHO, I've not yet killed anything bigger than a 2100lb American Bison or two and a couple black bear.

regards,

Rich

465 (and others) You may remember Clive Conolly's party trick whenever he took visiting IPSC shooters hunting on one of hos (now occupied) ranches.

Clive almost always carried a .375 H&H flanged double - even if only hunting kudu because of the elephant on the farms. If the party flushed a flock of guinea fowel Clive would shoulder his rifle and quickly drop a pair with a "left and a right"

Of course- Clive was a world class trap shooter and guinea's rising in straight lines ahead of you are much easier targets than francolin but it was still impressive!

As to taylors writings in African Rifles and Cartridges- go back to what he wrote in African Big game rifles a decade earlier. He recomended a .450/400 for all but the closest cover. This was not what the publisher wanted and much of his more famous book has been "expanded" along the publishers wishes.

In the thick ataxacantha and jess where Taylor poached (after WWII it was almost all poaching.) a heavy rifle is a good idea - especially when hunting alone

Pre WWII when he actually held a license he hunted in more open country and didn't go into places where even Angles tred lightly. When you are poaching however- you want to be places no police patrol is ever going to venture - not even to confirm that the incident took place!

I haven't read all the posts in this thread but just from personal experience, when you enter the thick stuff and the range shrinks to a few yards, whatever you are carrying rapidly shrinks in size. And I am talking about the rifle you are carrying too.