quote:

Originally posted by Willie:
Taylor's African Rifles and Cartridges should be required reading!!

Agreed. You should do so yourself sometime, as it's obvious you haven't.

For the preponderance of his life, John Taylor lived in the bush year round, making his living hunting ivory. A "rifle guy" and an inveterate experimenter, he tried the majority of cartridges available, from .600 down. He possessed a breadth and depth of experience with cartridges for elephant that is probably unique. He came to trust the .450/.470 group, but a bit later in his career (it seems that he did so in the latter part of it), tried the .450/.400, and used it extensively. He owned four that I know of. His experience with the .400 moved him to write:

quote:

"For some reason I find difficult to explain I derived greater pleasure from using the .400 than any other caliber; and no weapon behaved more successfully in my hands. There is something about the double .400 that just seems to suit me. I would happily finish the remainder of my career with a pair of them and nothing else - unless it was a third, just to give me a set of three!"

In the next paragraph he goes on to warn of the "ignorance and lack of experience" of "experts" that insist on "nothing smaller than .450" even though they've never used a .400.

Then our intrepid novelist posts:

quote:

Originally posted by Willie:
I have never even shot a 450/400 much less used one hunting.

And is then presumptuous enough to follow it up by quoting from his new novel about double rifles:

quote:

Originally posted by Willie:
John Taylor, in his famous book, African Rifles and Cartridges, highly praised the 450/400 cartridge. It is one of the few gospels of Taylor about which I disagree.

Isn't that special? An amateur and beginner elephant hunter opines that, based on his great experience (never even fired a .400), John Taylor is full of beans. Not surprising I suppose, as thats what novelists do - write fiction.

Taylor's opinions have great probative value. In comparison, yours have none whatsoever.

Same with this:

quote:

Ya just can't keep trying to rewrite history. "Professional elephant hunters" just didn't use little peashooters.

Pure fabrication, at least by your definition of "little peashooters". This one is so far from the truth that it isn't even worth responding to. The list is long.
-----------------------------------
"Serious rifles have two barrels, everything else just burns gunpowder."

Since I have just killed my first bull elephant I feel as though I am the newest qualified expert. Oddly enough, the rifle I took to Africa was a Searcy two barrel set. One set in 450-400 and one set in 375 flanged. I killed the elephant with the 375 flanged loaded with Barnes banded solids because it shot slightly more accurately offhand for me.

That's it.

Here is my elephant, Karl Stumpfe was the PH.

josh

Nice bull Josh, congratulations to you & Karl! jorge

Jorge, it was the coolest, most exciting thing I have ever done. We had to track him a little and I ended up running after him, the only thing I could think was to shoot him again and get him on the ground. I am not sure that I wouldn't have grabbed him by the tail and attacked him with my pocket knife. Thankfully he turned on us and I shot him in the neck and killed him. A little messy but I got him.

Go and hunt elephant as soon as you can. There is nothing better.

j

quote:

Agreed. You should do so yourself sometime, as it's obvious you haven't.

Jesus, what is your fucking problem? I try to ignore you but you must be just some kind of fucking jerk.

I ask you to relate all your elephant experience and get no replay. Obviously all your experience is what others have to say.

Just put me on ignore and I'll do the same to you and it will save you all these supposed learned reprimands which you slobber over.

Fuck off.

Yes, Taylor spent a paragraph or two discussing the 450/400, favorably, as an afterthought. But he spent a couple of chapters telling us that the minimum rifle for heavy cover was a 450+.

Nice, but contradictory chater on the 375H&H as well.

Within the chapter on elephant cartridges, in which the 450/400 finds no reference, he tells us that he killed the majority of his elephants with the 450. When added to the 465H&H - which he prefered because H&H built a lighter rifle - he makes it clear that the huge majority of elephants he killed were with these two cartridges.

"Do as I say, and not as I do?"

Mac,

If you have hunted elephants with a 450NE class cartridge and come to know its limitations, and recognize that more bullet and more energy would be better, and why, I venture that you have become more than passingly knowledgable on the adequacy of lesser cartridges, including the 450/400 and its even greater limitations, smaller bullet, reduced energy.

Will,

Some two years ago or so, after reading some particularly vaporous, groundless and erroneous pontification on elephant hunting and cartridge effectiveness authored by 400NitroExpress I asked him how much elephant hunting or buff hunting experience he had. Like now, he never answered and dodged the question mightily.

Nothing like an arm chair expert, eh?

JPK

DDouble,

I would bet that if you were to take your list of proffesional elephant hunters who used medium bore rifles, especially those from the later years, and compare it with a list I would compile, there would be three to one or greater for the large bore rifles.

Moreover, for those who were pros as you define it, killing for ivory for money, the medium bore fans probably also used large bore or bigger rifles in the thick stuff, just as Taylor did.

JPK

JPK,
Agree 100%, actually it may be even more than 3 to 1 in my literature references. My argument was of a different nature: the .375 shot heaps and heaps of eles while the .400 double is a far better gun/caliber.

Looking back on my several buff hunts with a recurve bow in heavy amazon cover (worst than anything I have seen in the thick jesse of the zambeze), considering it is bigger and stronger than the cape buff, and after climbing many trees (once up in a branch somhere in the bush I glanced a native who came along and he was simply crying seeing the buffalo under our feet), that 90% of the danger is in HOW YOU HUNT.

It is going beyond what your gun allows, or trusting it can take care of anything that may get you hurt or killed. I have hunted very differently with my 9.3 and .470 doubles, with a recuve or with a .38 special (yes I killed a huge buffalo bull with it). The danger was in the way you expose yourself on some hunts and the way you play things in others. I once backed out of a place with my .470 (there was nothying to climb) and other times I charged the herd in the jungle trying to close down and shot a stray animal with my recurve (always with a good size climbable tree withing close reach).

If you hunt with your head you will come to Karamojo Bells conclusion: he sid he shot hundreds of buffalos with light and medium rifles and NEVER, EVER, had one dangerous experience with one! That is no understatement to me!! How did he managed to do that??? He probably left wounded buffalo behind, and he probably forfeited hunting them in very dangerous situations.

Thus if you want to tackle any type of terrain, if you won´t back out (I remember once a PH ordered us to get out while in the middle of an elephant herd with a nice bull, I was young and dumb and complained, but today I see Richard Brebner, the PH then, was so absolutely correct), then you better have a .600 and someone to back you up... And forget the .400s. Use things bigger and rembember that you still will need to be really good or lucky.

quote:

Originally posted by Willie:

Jesus, what is your fucking problem? I try to ignore you but you must be just some kind of fucking jerk.

Like I said, Willie. You get what you give. I've asked you before - Do you ever have a civil conversation with anyone? Having a discussion or expressing an opinion without being confrontational and rude doesn't seem to lie within your gift. How was it that Surestrike bracketed you - "an insecure, prissy little bitch" or something to that effect, wasn't it? I give people the benefit of the doubt on the net as the written word isn't always a reliable read of the person, but we've met. You came by the booth at SCI last year. You've got some serious insecurity issues.

quote:

I ask you to relate all your elephant experience and get no replay.

I made no pretense of any experience, let alone great experience. YOU DID. You pretended to have the this great insight and experience that qualifies you to condemn Taylor's conclusions. Let's look at it again...

quote:

John Taylor, in his famous book, African Rifles and Cartridges, highly praised the 450/400 cartridge. It is one of the few gospels of Taylor about which I disagree.

I simply observed the incontrovertible fact that Taylor had a great deal of experience with the .400 on elephant, while you're a beginner with little experience - and none whatsoever with the caliber that you condemn. You don't even have the information to begin to form an opinion, let alone "disagree" Taylor's.

quote:

Originally posted by JPK:
Yes, Taylor spent a paragraph or two discussing the 450/400, favorably, as an afterthought. But he spent a couple of chapters telling us that the minimum rifle for heavy cover was a 450+.

Pure fabrication.

Taylor was in fact rather unkind in expressing his opinion of those that espoused such views, insisting that such comments reflected "ignorance and a lack of experience":

quote:

from page 116:

"Those men were staunch upholders of nothing smaller than .450. But to speak like that is merely to expose one's ignorance and lack of experience."

Taylor was an ivory hunter, plain and simple, and wrote "African Rifles and Cartridges" quite late in his career, at a time when the breadth and depth of his experience with the use of numerous modern rifles on elephant had become unique, and his conclusions solidified. He wasn't shy about making his views plain. After an in depth discussion of each cartridge, he added a short, one and a half page chapter entitled "A Summing-up", to summarize his conclusions, obviating any argument as to what his final conclusions were.

With respect to heavy rifles and heavy dangerous game he wrote:

quote:

pages 99-100:

"Large bores throwing heavy bullets for heavy and dangerous animals such as are shot at close quarters usually in thick cover", he gave his choice as ".400 and .465" and said: "I should like to emphasize that I would be just as happy with a .400 as with a .465".

Any suggestion that he meant otherwise ignores his words and fails to rise to the level of creative imagination.

Its seems axiomatic that a few that go off to Africa and shoot a few elephant as visiting sportsmen suddenly become "Wee Willie Bimstein, discoverer of Africana Loxodonta and the only white man to ever shoot one. If you want to hunt 'em without gettin killed, HERE, buy my book, or take my adivce on the internet". Everybody that frequents these boards are familiar with the phenomenon of course, and most rightly view it as a joke, but you take the joke to new highs.

It's understandable for anyone to want to write about their experiences, whether here or otherwise. That's a positive thing, and anyone with similar interests can benefit from it. Further, you're entitled to rational conclusions based on the extent of that experience. In this case, why not say "Hey, I've never used a .400 at all, so I have no opinion as to it's suitability for elephant and defer to Taylor, who had a great deal of experience with it"? Or maybe "Gee, I've never even fired a .400, but given my modest experience elephant hunting with other calibers, I don't think I would ever be as comfortable doing so with a .400 as Taylor clearly was.." Either way, there would be nothing for anyone to take exception to, as it would clearly represent your honest experience and conclusions therefrom. Either option would also preserve a level of credibility for your comments on other calibers commensurate with your experience.

On the other hand, when you, as beginners, pretend some lofty "expert" status to refute Taylor's conclusions, going so far as to make statements that are plainly false, and ascribing fabrications to Taylor to support your arguments, you abandon what credibility your small experience would otherwise legitimately provide.
---------------------------------------
"Serious rifles have two barrels, everything else just burns gunpowder."

I have shot most of my elephants with my 450 No2.

Mainly because I really like the rifle.

It is big, 28" bbls, and heavy. But I can shoot it like a 22LR.

My 450/400 is a very fine shooter as well.
I have shot a lot of game with it in the lower 48 and in Alaska.

On my last Safari I shot some plains game with it as well as a cape buff lion and bull elephant.

I was in and out of a few elephants herds with it before I shot the bull I did.

At no time did I feel under gunned.

My Personal feelings are that the 450/400 is the BEST choice for a Double Rifle for most of the Modern Sport hunters.

IF ytou are going to specialize in elephants, AND CAN handle the recoil of a bigger gun, then go for it.

However be advised that at 6 YARDS or LESS a 450/400 in the right place, is way more better than a 700 Nitro "in the head".

And let me add, that we are all lucky that 400 Nitro Express does not take his 450/400 to Africa and become a Poacher, or win the Power Ball lottery, and buy up ALL the elephant quota on the Continent of Africa, because in about 6 Months the elephants would all be dead, I have seen him shoot.

I have never read in ANY of the old African elehant hunters books where ANYBODY ever said ANYTHING bad about the 450/400.

Most all that used it praised it highly.

Ane their bullets were not near as good as todays bullets.

400 Nitro, I don't understand. Have you killed an elephant? Have you killed a lot of elephants?

If you have killed lots of elephants would you give us a tally of what you shot them with and the circumstances?

I am a rank rooky with a single kill with a 375 flanged Searcy double rifle.

Please let us know your personal experience.

Thanks,
josh

I have owned 3 different 450/400s. A Jeffery, a Watson Bros and a Boswell. I have also shot a Westley Richards and a Wm. Evans. I have only used the Jeffery in the US to take a couple of bull elk. I haven't shot any elephant or buff with one but have seen two killed with a 450/400, one of which stopped a charge at 6 paces. Taylor said you could count on stopping an elephant by slamming a bullet into it's head. That the 450/400 had enough power to knock an elephant down with a head shot that missed the brain but that it would get up quicker than when shot with a bigger caliber. That is exactly what happened with the cow stop. It was knocked down by the shot but slowly got to it's feet obviously dazed. A second shot brained it.

As Taylor said: If someone were to give me a best grade 450/400 double I would use it the rest of my life and feel perfectly and adequately armed. (or something to that affect!)

465H&H

I don't have any experience hunting elephants and probably never will. While I am sitting here at my computer, a 450/400 double sounds like a perfectly reasonable alternative for that purpose. It is a wonderful caliber for a double and if that is your choice, I surely would not disagree. Countless elephants have been taken with a 450/400 or its' bolt rifle counterpart, the .404 so it is simlpy absurd to argue that it is unsuitable for that purpose. However, John Taylor repeatedly says in his books that "if a man is not to sure of himself or lacks experience" it is understandable that he may wish to select a larger caliber. Put me in that category because something tells me that if a really big enraged bull elephant was bearing down on me trumpheting to holy hell, I would want something with a little more "punch".

quote:

Originally posted by Dave Bush:
I don't have any experience hunting elephants and probably never will. While I am sitting here at my computer, a 450/400 double sounds like a perfectly reasonable alternative for that purpose. It is indeed a wonderful caliber for a double and if that is your choice, I surely would not disagree. However, no matter what John Taylor says, something tells me that if a really big enraged bull elephant was bearing down on me trumpheting to holy hell, I would want something with a little more "punch".

Dave has really boiled the issue down to the basics. There is a power level that is needed and then there is a power level that makes the hunter feel more comfortable. Sometimes we tend to confuse the two. All you may need is a 450/400 but a 450+ or 500 may make you more comfortable. In my case I would be comfortable with a 450/400 in the bush veldt but would be more comfortable with my 465 or 470 double in the thickest Jesse in the Valley. Ian Nyschens felt the same way and preferred his 450 No 2 over his 404 J under those conditions. Others may feel more comfortable with a 500 double under these conditions but for me the weight issue creeps in and I prefer a lighter rifle. In fact, I actually prefer to carry my 465 over my Searcy 470 in the thick stuff because it is 1/2 lb lighter and is easier to carry due to it's more slim receiver and the fact that it has slightly better balance. Let's try not to confuse what makes you more comfortable with what you need, that will cut down on some of the controversy here.

465H&H

465H&H:

Now I am going to tackle some really hard issues like health care, getting Will and 400 Nitro Express to make peace, or getting Mac to buy an S2

Maybe we can get Obama to host Will and 400 Nitro in the White House lawn for a beer. If we're real lucky Biden will join them.

quote:

Originally posted by Dave Bush:
465H&H:

Now I am going to tackle some really hard issues like health care, getting Will and 400 Nitro Express to make peace, or getting Mac to buy an S2

..................

I think you may have a shot at getting Will, and 400 Nitro to at least sign a treaty, but it will be a VERRRRRRRRY long time before you will get me to buy a Blaser!
I'm makeing room for the Blaser S2 right now...........

quote:

Originally posted by Dave Bush:
465H&H:

Now I am going to tackle some really hard issues like health care, getting Will and 400 Nitro Express to make peace, or getting Mac to buy an S2

You like challenges, don't you Dave.

I think most of us come here for enjoyable and informative conversation about a similar interest, and do so because it's fun. Unfortunately, a few bring very different agendas. This kind of thing isn't my idea of fun.
--------------------------------------
"Serious rifles have two barrels, everything else just burns gunpowder."

Mac...

Making room for a Blaser

Now that was a good one.

quote:

Originally posted by N E 450 No2:
Mac...

Making room for a Blaser

Now that was a good one.

Et tu, Brute?

Dave

You know I like Blasers. I shoot their D99's and BBF97's.

I would not hesitate to hunt with a Blaser S 2...

But Mac's post was funny.

I know Mac real well, he is a good guy.
He just don't like Blasers.

Nobody's perfect

quote:

Originally posted by N E 450 No2:
Nobody's perfect

Tony you are absolutely correct! Even I was wrong about something once ......UUUUUUUH back in, I think it was 1947 or so!

Dave we are real particular down here in Texas, Tony was a top cop, and we put his Blasers in quarantine for three months so they didn't expose our double rifles to their lethal deficienecies!

I still have a bunch of bison in my freezer but when it's about gone, I think we need to put together a bison hunt. I'll even let Mac shoot my S2!