Grizzly Rifle

medvedqc said:
what i do not like about those bullets is that for grizzly they will maybe destroy the skin ... multiple parts going that fast are really destroying stuff ...
Click to expand...

Literally none of them exit, I advocate clients shoot until the Grizzly drops, I might see an exit every few years at this rate even up to 300gr .375 Ruger. They're built like barrels and bullets are almost always under the far skin, with a big bloodshot stretch circle where the skin pulled out and shot back like an elastic.
 
Slamfire said:
Rifle?

On horseback, after it had mauled a child picking berries he rode up to it and severed its spinal chord, killing it instantly..."His greatest feat of bravery occurred in 1866 when, in full view of his camp, he killed a grizzly bear with a spear..."

http://plainshumanities.unl.edu/encyclopedia/doc/egp.na.023

Brass cojones for sure.
Click to expand...

Jim Corbett finished an Asian Brown bear with a hatchet once, they drew straws to see who was walking into the thicket with the hatchet as they were out of ammunition. Doesn't make the .45-70 a .375 H&H either though I'm afraid. :d
 
MiG25 said:
NDP says they're ending the Grizzly hunt.
Click to expand...


NDP and the green will split the vote and Crusty Clark will get in by default
If I have to I would just get my stepbrother who family has traditional hunting Territory up by Sewart and go with them but it would be fun to hunt and fish spatsizi as I have worked up in the General area but never bin in spatsizi
Put in LEH for caribou and moose combo and goat in Spatsizi as well hopefully I get one of them lol
 
Last edited:
Ardent said:
Taylor thought so but I have struggled to find evidence of it right up to .505. Modern terminal ballistics are wholly dependent on expanding bullets and speed, we moved past frontal area being an important factor an awful long time ago. If we were talking 2" vs 1/4" holes I may concede a point, but we're talking a tenth of an inch.
Click to expand...

Not so much larger diameter but rather cross-sectional area. The 45 has 50% more than the 375. Some sources have indicated the importance of cross-sectional area for delivering incapacitating shock such as A-Square's Lt. Col. Alphin, and Ray Ordorica/Andy Runyan wrote about it in the 416 RM article.

What is the reasoning behind minimum legal bore sizes for hunting in some African nations? Why not have a .300 instead of a .375?
 
Ardent said:
Taylor thought so but I have struggled to find evidence of it right up to .505. Modern terminal ballistics are wholly dependent on expanding bullets and speed, we moved past frontal area being an important factor an awful long time ago. If we were talking 2" vs 1/4" holes I may concede a point, but we're talking a tenth of an inch.
Click to expand...


Taylor always gets trotted out by big bore advocates who carefully or carelessly skip
the rest of book.

I like this quote about the 300 H&H:

"Firing its 150 grain slug the .300 Magnum is unbelievably deadly. I can't remember ever having to give a beast a second of them--- they're sure dynamite."

Although it sounds like something Roy Weatherby would say, it was John Taylor. :)
 
Dogleg said:
Taylor always gets trotted out by big bore advocates who carefully or carelessly skip
the rest of book.

I like this quote about the 300 H&H:

"Firing its 150 grain slug the .300 Magnum is unbelievably deadly. I can't remember ever having to give a beast a second of them--- they're sure dynamite."

Although it sounds like something Roy Weatherby would say, it was John Taylor. :)
Click to expand...

I remember you raising this point around the place a fire should have been while hunting Grizzly. That Taylor seemed impressed by how a few cartridges hit above their weight- what they had in common you pointed out, was they were fast. Suppose it didn't jive with Taylor's KO theorem perfectly and velocity wasn't made a greater factor in his curious calculations. Have to love any calculation with a constant explained as, and I paraphrase, "Don't ask where this number comes from, it seems to work."

For the thread's benefit Dogleg's hunted a couple and brought a .300 RUM and a .375 H&H, the .300 got the knod due seasonable weather as it was stainless. His 180gr Accubond anchored the Grizz.

Slamfire said:
What is the reasoning behind minimum legal bore sizes for hunting in some African nations? Why not have a .300 instead of a .375?
Click to expand...

Tradition mostly. In my eyes it has nothing to do with frontal area and everything to do with the .375 H&H being Africa's .30-06, and having held a preeminent role for over a century. It's also a tidy ballistic middle ground with a .30-06's trajectory and about the most recoil the average hunter can tolerate.

Spend enough time in Africa and you'll see what I mean, new ideas aren't exactly embraced by the administrative arms and the rules were written a long time ago. Even the most stalwart .375 H&H fan (guilty) will never try to tell you it's going to accomplish things a good .300 or .338 won't. Actually, some probably will.. and I was probably one, I've received somewhat of a ballistic education that refuted a lot of principles I held dear.
 
not easy to mention in the same token John Taylor and new ideas for the rules ... always love to read what he said about the 9.3x62 ....

sometimes small and fast is the way to do to it sometimes not ....

i do not have the huge experience that some have here but we always need to remember that shot placement is everything ...

we had a good conversation this week end on how a 350 remington magnum, a 300 win magnum and another caliber (someone may chime in for the total number shots ...) that kind where needed with a huge amount of lead to kill a bison while a lady close to those three hunters killed her bison with two shots of 30-06 ....

my record: a hunter that i guided needed 13 shots for a barren ground caribou and it stopped only because he was short on ammo my 300 savage ended the suffering of that poor animal.
 
I have to admit I'm tempted to use my kimber adirondack 308 but on the fence I have better rifles and calbers but for packing it is sweet
 
Ardent said:
I remember you raising this point around the place a fire should have been while hunting Grizzly. That Taylor seemed impressed by how a few cartridges hit above their weight- what they had in common you pointed out, was they were fast. Suppose it didn't jive with Taylor's KO theorem perfectly and velocity wasn't made a greater factor in his curious calculations. Have to love any calculation with a constant explained as, and I paraphrase, "Don't ask where this number comes from, it seems to work."

For the thread's benefit Dogleg's hunted a couple and brought a .300 RUM and a .375 H&H, the .300 got the knod due seasonable weather as it was stainless. His 180gr Accubond anchored the Grizz.



Tradition mostly. In my eyes it has nothing to do with frontal area and everything to do with the .375 H&H being Africa's .30-06, and having held a preeminent role for over a century. It's also a tidy ballistic middle ground with a .30-06's trajectory and about the most recoil the average hunter can tolerate.

Spend enough time in Africa and you'll see what I mean, new ideas aren't exactly embraced by the administrative arms and the rules were written a long time ago. Even the most stalwart .375 H&H fan (guilty) will never try to tell you it's going to accomplish things a good .300 or .338 won't. Actually, some probably will.. and I was probably one, I've received somewhat of a ballistic education that refuted a lot of principles I held dear.
Click to expand...

Taylor's KO theory was based on head shots on elephant using solid bullets. He openly admits that energy is likely a better indicator of effectiveness on thin-skinned game. He was also of the opinion that the lighter, faster, .416 Rigby & .425 WR were better lion stoppers than the .450/.465/.470.

The first minimum calibre law came out in Kenya in 1957, on the recommendation of the East African Professional Hunter's Association ( now defunct ). Prior to that, you could use anything you wanted. Had these laws not come about, the .375 might not be quite as popular as it is today.
 
Last edited:
9.3mauser said:
Taylor's KO theory was based on head shots on elephant using solid bullets. He openly admits that energy is likely a better indicator of effectiveness on thin-skinned game. He was also of the opinion that the lighter, faster, .416 Rigby & .425 WR were better lion stoppers than the .450/.465/.470.

The first minimum calibre law came out in Kenya in 1957, on the recommendation of the East African Professional Hunter's Association ( now defunct ). Prior to that, you could use anything you wanted. Had these laws not come about, the .375 might not be quite as popular as it is today.
Click to expand...

Very good points and info all around there 9.3, important note on the application of his KO hypothesis. It holds about as much water in western thin skinned (bears, ungulates) game circles as a crab trap.
 
Most places I hunted they didn't give a flying f**k what you were shooting as long as you could shoot it well. If you wanted to shoot a buffalo with a 340 that was perfectly OK with the guys I hunted with. I know 3 people who took their buffs with 30 cal rifles, all they want over there is your daily rate and trophy fees, if they can talk you into more animals and pricier animals they will regardless of what rifle and caliber you brought. Minimum caliber laws go out the window as the city fades in the rear view mirror............A cape buff is no harder to kill than a NA bison, you drive a 30 cal 200 gn Part through his shoulder into his heart/lung region and he's going to die the same as any other critter. And if it smashes the opposite shoulder on the way out...even better. You are probably better off with a 30 cal 200 gn bullet on a rib shot than a 416 or 375. More damage from higher velocity..........The only two that really require the min caliber laws are elephant and rhino. The are built like tanks and have exceptionally thick and tough hides. One is most certainly better served with a .470 NE than a 300 WM in these two cases.......Having said this it is still a fact that untold hoards of these two animals have been killed with the 7.62X39 cartridge......but this has nothing to do with sport hunting, nor does Bell's or Taylor's exploits. Taylor at least was a bit of a gunnut and his use and observations of various cartridges on elephants has merit.

Mig, all countries that instituted minimum caliber laws adopted the 40 cal minimum but they all excepted the 375 H&H and some the 9.3.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom