Craig Boddington was the senior contributing editor of our modern gun and ammunition caliber dictionary. Craig was involved in the development and testing of many of these and writes from first hand experience. This dictionary was written exclusively for Wholesale Hunter with unique information found nowhere else.
For a generation, the default position for a fast, flat-shooting, hard-hitting cartridge has been 7mm, .284-inch. In the 1950s, while Jack O’Connor was touting his beloved .270s, other notables like Les Bowman and Warren Page were pushing the fast 7mm with its traditionally long, heavy-for-caliber bullets. Oddly, Remington’s excellent .280 Remington (1957) on the .30-06 case didn’t take off. Neither did the belted 7×61 Sharpe & Hart. Probably because of availability, it was only factory-chambered by Danish firm of Schultz & Larsen.
By
Craig Boddington
We Americans love our .30-calibers. The .30-06 is still popular and powerful. It’s little brother, the .308 Winchester is, after the .223, America’s most popular centerfire. These days, many folks want to shoot a bit farther, so we want faster cartridges that shoot flatter. Plenty of fast .30s, but with speed comes recoil. For many, a magnum .30-caliber is too much of a good thing. And, unless we do a lot of hunting for game larger than deer, magnum .30 performance isn’t necessary.
Boddington, Charlie Barnes of Flat Creek Precision, and Zack Aultman, on Zack’s range in Georgia…messing with a Flat Creek 7 PRC.Continue reading “WHICH 7MM FOR YOU?”
Magnifying riflescopes aren’t new. Limited use in the American Civil War, and a few bison hunters used scopes in the 1870s. Scopes improved and became more popular in the 20th Century, but only came into widespread use after WWII.
By Craig Boddington
ARE IRON SIGHTS OBSOLETE?
Magnifying riflescopes aren’t new. Limited use in the American Civil War, and a few bison hunters used scopes in the 1870s. Scopes improved and became more popular in the 20th Century, but only came into widespread use after WWII.
As a youngster, I learned to shoot with open-sighted .22s, rifles and handguns, but I did my first hunting in the ‘60s with fixed 4X scopes. I never hunted with iron sights until 1979. By then, I had my first variable, a 3-9X Redfield. Wow, that huge image made shot placement so easy. Today variable magnification runs deep into double digits, along with scopes that incorporate laser rangefinders and yield shooting solutions. Just yesterday I went to the range and zeroed a Pulsar thermal imaging riflescope.
With such advancements, are iron sights still useful? Despite magnifying scopes, lasers, and reflex sights, open sights still dominate in handgunning, because ranges are short, and because a handgun with an optic is more difficult to carry and holster. In the rifle world, generations have grown up shooting and hunting with scopes.
Boddington and Tim Baugh with a fine Kansas whitetail, taken with a classic 6.5×54 Mannlicher with factory open sights. In order to assure a close shot, Baugh used an archery stand in thick woods. As often happens, enough light to see the sights was an issue, but patience paid off.
This is sad. Much to be gained by learning to shoot with iron sights. One quickly learns slight aiming errors cause huge differences. Daughters Brittany and Caroline had no interest in shooting or hunting until they were mid-teenage. Then, as if a switch was turned, both suddenly wanted to go hunting with Dad. I made mistakes with both. We began with scoped .22s, but I skipped starting them with iron sights. They shoot well, but they missed the valuable lessons of carefully aligning front and rear sights.
Boddington is about to drop the hammer on a Texas hog, using a Winchester 94 in .30-30 with factory iron sights. Although adequate light is always an issue, feral hogs are ideal game for iron sights: You can usually get close enough, and often get multiple opportunities.
Eastern deer hunters who started with Grand-dad’s .30-30 received this training. So did all veterans…until adoption of the ACOG riflescope. Today, many younger hunters have little or no experience with iron sights. Regrettable they don’t have that background, no way to appreciate how spoiled we are by magnifying riflescopes, or the fun and frustration of iron sights.
There are two types of iron sights: Open and aperture. The open sight is typically a blade or bead front sight, which must be visually centered in the notch of a rear sight, usually a V or U. The aperture or “peep” sight uses a similar front sight, with an open circle rear sight, in which the front sight must be centered, then superimposed on the target.
On both open and aperture sights the front sight is normally a blade (left), or a bead. Boddington prefers a bold bead of about 3/32-inch diameter. A large bead obscures more of the target but is easier to see and faster to acquire.
Open sights require the eye to focus in three focal planes: Rear sight, front sight, target. The aperture sight reduces this to two: The eye naturally centers the front sight in the circle. The rear sight “fuzzes out,” but the eye must focus on front sight and target. The riflescope reduces this to just one focal plane: All the eye must do is focus on the target and superimpose the reticle. Same with the reflex or “red dot” sight, which has only existed since the Aimpoint came out in 1975.
With good vision and adequate light, peep sights are capable of superb accuracy. Up until a decade ago, Boddington could regularly produce groups like this with apertures. This is a 1930s RF Sedgely Springfield, fitted with receiver-mounted aperture.
Capability with iron sights depends largely on size of target and visual acuity (which tends to diminish with age). When I was young, I could resolve open sights beyond 200 yards. Today, less than half. Before scopes, the aperture sight was the “precision” sight. In the Marines, we qualified annually to 500 yards with peep sights, and much 1000-yard competition is still done with apertures.
Qualification day at Edson Range, Camp Pendleton. Until the recent adoption of Trijicon’s ACOG scope all Marines shot out to 500 yards with aperture sights.
With all open sights, as distance increases, the front sight subtends (obscures) more of the target. Absent magnification, same with red dots. A greater limitation to open sights: They require good light. With age, night vision tends to diminish along with overall acuity.
So, sights with lenses that admit more light are always superior in those critical periods at dawn and dusk, aided further by lighted reticles or the illuminated red dot. The only real disadvantage to both scopes and red dots: They are an additional appendage, adding weight and bulk. We have this idea that iron sights are more rugged and goof-proof than optical sights. This can be true, but usually isn’t. Today, factory-supplied iron sights are often flimsy, seemingly supplied primarily for “looks,” little thought they might actually be used. I’ve seen many more iron sights bend, break, and come out of zero than I’ve had trouble with scopes.
This herd is just over 100 yards away, no more cover and no more options. If a bull steps out it’s a simple shot with a magnifying scope, do-able with a red dot…but much too far for a safe shot with iron sights.
Still, scopes and red dot sights remain non-traditional with various types of hunting rifles. To the point that we, including me, stubbornly insist on using iron sights. Good examples are double rifles and traditional lever-actions. I like both types so, in recent years, I’ve been doing more hunting with iron sights than I did when I was young.
This sporterized 1903 Springfield .30-06 was Boddington’s first centerfire rifle, mounted with a Williams aperture on the rear receiver ring. As a youngster, he never hunted with this rifle; he was nearly 40 when he used it for this California feral hog.
There’s a caution here: Iron sights are difficult. At middle-age, kids gone, mortgage paid, we may wake up one morning with the means to acquire a classic double or fine old Winchester. The expertise to effectively use iron sights doesn’t come with the purchase. Steep learning curve, especially if you didn’t grow up shooting irons.
Boddington on the range with his Heym .450/.400-3” double, mounted with an Aimpoint red dot sight. Boddington agrees that optics look terrible on classic doubles. However, as his vision restricts iron sight use, optics enhance accuracy, range, and versatility.
We have this romantic idea that big-bore double rifles should wear “express” open sights. And older top-eject lever-actions defy conventional scope mounting. Fine. Make a commitment to lots of practice, understand you must keep your ranges short, and accept that you’re going to give up potential shots. Especially at dawn and dusk.
To some extent, it depends on what’s more important to you: The hunt or the game. Or, if you’re a “gun guy,” the opportunity to use a certain rifle. Couple seasons back, at our Kansas farm, Tim Baugh wanted to use his late father’s open-sighted 6.5×54 Mannlicher,. Light comes late in our thick woods and leaves early. I put him in a stand set up for archery. He saw deer early and late, couldn’t see his sights, stayed patient, shot a fine buck on his fourth morning.
Although open express sights are most common on double rifles there are other options. This .303 double has a flip-up aperture on the tang, greatly increasing accuracy and versatility. These are descending pairs from both barrels after sight adjustments.
Unless very close, I much prefer apertures to open sights. I’ve used receiver-mounted peep sights on lever-actions for decades, and I have a double rifle in .303 British with flip-up peep on the tang. With adequate light, I’m still good to beyond 100 yards.
Until the 1940s the aperture was the precision hunting sight. Boddington used a 1930s .30-06 Springfield by RF Sedgely to take this Colorado bull, one shot at about 125 yards.
The good news: If you have 100 yards of effective range, you’re in good shape for much hunting. Just understand you can’t always get that close. I’m not going sheep hunting with iron sights. Although, before 1940, everyone did. I’m reluctant to use iron sights for whitetails. Not a matter of distance, but light.
This Alberta black bear was taken with a Big Horn Armory M89 in .500 S&W. The “guide gun” is popular today, often mounted with a “ghost ring” aperture like the Skinner sight on this rifle. Getting close enough to take black bears with iron sights is often possible, but light can be an issue.
I often use iron sights for feral hogs and black bears. With hogs, I can usually get close enough. If I can’t, another opportunity is likely. On black bears, light is the issue. Couple years ago, I took a peep-sighted .348 Winchester into an Idaho bear blind. Also, a scoped rifle. Had a bear on the bait, too dark to see the front sight. I switched rifles and shot the bear. If you’re really a gun guy, that was serious cheating.
Big-bores doubles traditionally wear fixed open sights. Strong and sturdy, short in range. Perfect for PHs, who only fire in emergencies. For you and me, questionable for buffalo because, with herd animals, tough to get close enough. Can be done, and I have…always with the understanding that I must pass on many potential shots. Optical sights look awful on a classic double, but they are practical. In recent years, as iron sights grew harder to resolve, I’ve choked it up and put red dots and scopes doubles.
Recently, we’ve seen a resurgence in aperture sights. Thanks somewhat to the popularity of the big-bore lever-action “guide gun,” commonly mounted with a large-opening rear aperture that we call a “ghost ring.” Not as precise as a target aperture with tiny opening, but faster, adequate for shooting game to at least 100 yards. This type of lever-action is popular with wilderness wanderers in bear country, also carried by some Alaskan guides. Good choice for both.
This is the kind of encounter buffalo hunters hope for. If you can get this close, iron sights are wonderful. Problem is, with herd animals like buffalo, getting within sure iron sight range isn’t always possible.
As with Cape buffalo, not ideal for you and me to carry on a hunt for grizzly or Alaskan brown bear. Such hunts often come down to just one chance. This past year I considered taking a big lever-action on an Alaskan hunt, talked myself out of it and went with a scoped .338. My chance came at 225 yards, foolish shot with any iron sight, regardless of expertise.
Although scopes and red dots are commonly used, iron sights still dominate in handgunning to keep the profile trimmer. This is a favorite hunting handgun, a SIW M29, always used with iron sights. Just need to keep shots close.
There are many close-range hunting situations where iron sights remain suitable. If you can get close enough and have enough light. In the entire spectrum of world-wide big-game hunting, I can only come up with three situations where iron sights are superior. First is during wind-driven precipitation, too hard and fast to keep a lens clear.
Boddington and Idaho houndsman Bruce Duncan with a good mountain lion. Duncan’s M94 .30-30 is a classic houndsman’s rifle: Short, light, easy to scramble with in tough country…and no scope.
Another is hunting with hounds. Houndsmen are justifiably concerned for their dogs’ safety. They worry about the “tunnel vision” effect of magnifying scopes; some houndsmen do not allow use of scopes. The range is short enough, and a sleek, un-scoped rifle (or handgun) is a blessing in the mad scramble to get to the hounds.
Elephants are almost always encountered—and taken—at extremely close range. Magnifying scopes aren’t needed, and Boddington believes they are dangerous in this application because of the potential “tunnel vision” effect.
A third is hunting elephant. 25 yards is a long shot. Magnification isn’t needed, and the tunnel vision effect is dangerous. Not just the risk of seeing a wall of gray hide. The greater is other, unseen elephants. You need peripheral vision. With hounds and hunting elephant, a red dot sight is a sound alternative, but in these specialized situations, iron sights are superior.
these days, long-range shooting is “in,” with many shooters working hard to expand their range envelopes. There’s a lot to this. Knowledge of trajectory, art of reading wind. Cheek weld, breathing, consistent trigger press.
By
Craig Boddington
These days, long-range shooting is “in,” with many shooters working hard to expand their range envelopes. There’s a lot to this. Knowledge of trajectory, art of reading wind. Cheek weld, breathing, consistent trigger press. At distance, all the little things matter. However, in all field shooting, getting steady enough to take the shot is critical. Just how steady one needs to be is a relative thing; depends on distance and size of target. Successful field shooters learn how to get steady—enough—from a wide variety of field positions.
Sticks tripod P-Dog: Prairie dog “practice,” using three-legged African shooting sticks, broken down for a sitting position. If you can hit prairie dogs consistently, no big game shooting is daunting.
In a few days, I’m headed to a near-annual prairie dog shoot in eastern Wyoming with friend Gordon Marsh, proprietor of this site. We’ll start shooting from portable benches, not as steady as a concrete bench, but better than any field position. A prairie dog offers a target about two inches by six. At 300 or 400 yards, not much to shoot at.
For field shooting, the prairie dog is the best teacher I know, not just because the mark is small, but because of windy prairie. Doesn’t take much breeze to blow a light varmint bullet clear off the mound. I was fortunate to do a lot of prairie dog shooting when I was young, great training. I still look forward to every refresher course. Typically, I’ll shoot for a while off the bench. Great for precision, but limited learning from the great teacher. After a while, I’ll rove the edges of a colony, shooting from field positions. Hit ratio goes down, but this is the best training of all.
The Javelin bipod/tripod system from Spartan can be variously configured, including as a dead-steady fore-and-aft system
For most long-range shooters, a bipod is a primary stability tool. With practice, prone off a bipod is almost as steady as the bench. Tricks include loading the bipod with forward pressure, using a light sandbag under the butt to get the height perfect, then using a daypack under your supporting elbow. Many long-range shooting instructors stress use of a bipod. To a fault, because no single solution works under all conditions.
Sticks fore-and-aft P-Dog: Boddington “working out” with fore-and-aft sticks in a prairie dog town. This was the first time he used this type of sticks. Steep learning curve but, once you get the hang of them, the stability is marvelous.
Late spring is also the start of peak safari season in Southern Africa. Not uncommon for me to train on prairie dogs, then get serious on plains game. This year I’m going straight from Wyoming to Mozambique. Here’s something prairie dogs and plains game have in common: Prone-off-bipod isn’t a good solution for either. Where we shoot prairie dogs, sagebrush gets in the way, precluding prone. Sometimes you can lay on top of an old mound and gain a bit of elevation. Just be careful of flopping down on the prickly little prairie cacti. And be mindful of prairie rattlers. In Africa, all plants have nasty thorns and low vegetation often precludes a prone position. Never mind the creepy-crawlies that might be on the ground.
Sticks fore-and-aft: In South Africa’s Eastern Cape, these hunters are set up to take a long shot off of fore-and-aft sticks. Look at the typical vegetation; this is why African hunters use elevated shooting sticks…to get above that stuff.
I’ve carried bipods in open country since I was young. The Harris bipod was the original and still excellent, attaching to the fore-end via the front sling swivel stud. For pronghorns, I like models with extending legs long enough for a sitting position, getting you over low vegetations. With the popularity of long-range shooting, there are now many options from several makers. These days I usually carry a light carbon fiber Javelin bipod, either on my belt or accessible on my daypack. The Javelin attaches via a strong magnet that replaces the front swivel stud, quickly available when needed, not on the rifle when not.
I’m not an extreme-range shooter on game, very much a “get as close as I can guy.” For sure, I won’t back up to take a shot! However, I’d rather have a deliberate steady shot at distance, rather than risk bumping an animal.
Sticks fore-and-aft practice: On the range in Mozambique, PH Ben Rautenbach demonstrates how to set the rifle on fore-and-aft sticks. With practice, this new breed of shooting sticks can essentially double one’s effective range off of stick.
While I take few animals from a classic prone-with-bipod setup, I still find the bipod a useful tool. Often, I’ll put the legs on a rock or log, or on top of a pack to, to get the height right, or to get over low vegetation. Any potential field shooting positions, no matter how weird, can be practiced on the range…or in a prairie dog town.
The problem with bipods or any other favorite shooting position: Too easy to get complacent, married to one shooting solution. I’ll have a bipod in Wyoming, keep it handy in Africa, doubt I’ll use it over there.
Using two sets of sticks on a wide-open Mozambique floodplain, Boddington took this hartebeest at 425 yards. With one set under fore-end, the other under buttstock, near-benchrest stability is achieved.
Last few years, in larger safari camps. I’ve been surprised at how many Americans bring long-range rigs to Africa, suggesting to me that I haven’t appreciated the breadth and popularity of the extreme-range movement. Mostly good. Fast 7mms and .300s with heavy bullets are perfect for African plains game,. Good scopes help everywhere, and there are places over there where you can reach out: Hills, mountains, deserts, floodplains. However, I’m disturbed by the number of hunters I see who struggle because they expect to lie prone with bipod, like their instructors taught them. For this I blame American shooting instructors, awesome technical marksmen, but lacking in either field experience or imagination.
Sticks-chicken wing: The “chicken wing”: Using a second set of sticks under the shooting-side armpit. Amazing how much extra stability this offers
Set-piece prone with bipod rarely works in Africa. There are good reasons why African hunters have long relied on three-legged shooting sticks. Fast to set up, fast to get into position. Standing on sticks, you are above the thorns, and can take shots impossible from lower positions.
The problem with traditional three-legged sticks: They are never perfectly stable, a short-range solution. How far depends on one’s ability, and amount of practice. Most people can quickly become deadly to at least 150 yards, somewhat farther with practice. Wife Donna is awesome off sticks; despite my 40 years of practice to her 20, she’s steadier than me. Even so, 200 yards is a long poke off sticks.
Sticks-buddy: Stability off sticks can be enhanced by having a buddy grasp the sticks and offer a shoulder for the shooting elbow. Good trick to practice on the range.
With today’s equipment, many people want to shoot farther and can. There are tricks that help. A second set of sticks under the rifle butt can create a near-benchrest situation. Or, under the shooting-side armpit, what the instructors at the SAAM shooting school call “the chicken wing.” Or stabilizing the shooting side elbow. Can’t do much to change Africa’s terrain and vegetation, but this stuff, too, can be practiced at home. Never forget, all position practice can be done with a .22, reducing cost, blast, and recoil.
Last few years, many African PHs have abandoned traditional three-legged shooting sticks in favor of newer designs with additional struts that support both butt and fore-end, what I call “fore-and-aft” sticks. Sounds awkward, but they work. Like everything else, they require practice, but dual butt and fore-end support greatly enhances stability and extends range. Just how much depends on the person (and, always, how much practice), but I’m convinced they essentially double effective range off sticks. Not as steady as prone-with-bipod, but in the African context, they work.
Donna Boddington practices off traditional three-legged shooting sticks with a .22. Donna is unusually steady off sticks, but three-legged sticks alone offer a short to very-medium-range solution.
With enough practice, I’m not sure there’s a limit. There are now several varieties of these fore-and-aft sticks. The first ones I saw was “4 Stable Sticks” out of France. At first I thought they were the work of Satan, but after I got the hang of them, I saw the value. Since I use prairie dog shooting as training for big game, I took a set to Wyoming a couple years ago and used them for my “roving” prairie dog shooting. A few weeks later, I used them in Africa. With a bit of practice, amazing stability.
Done right, prone with bipod is almost as steady as a bench. Useful position to master, but not practical in many field situations
I figure: If I can consistently hit prairie dogs with confidence at a couple hundred yards, then no shot at a big game animal should be daunting. I’m surprised at how frequently I’m now seeing these “fore-and-aft” sticks in Africa: I’ve encountered them recently with Zambeze Delta Safaris in Mozambique (awesome on the floodplains); and at both Frontier Safaris and John X Safaris in the Eastern Cape. Longer shots are likely there because of terrain relief, but low, prickly vegetation makes shooting prone problematic.
2023 kudu off sticks 500 yards: NOTE: LAST REFERENCE IN TEXT. Boddington and PH Fred Burchell with a good East Cape kudu taken using fore-and-aft sticks at 500 yards, a near-impossible shot off traditional three-legged shooting sticks
Last year, at Frontier, PH Fred Burchell was using fore-and-aft sticks. Last evening, near sunset, several kudu cows boiled up out of a canyon, followed by an excellent bull. Old friends, Fred and I are a good team. Sticks up, rifle steady, Fred ranging. I got on them quickly, but they were all mixed up in fading light, no chance for a shot, distance increasing. Finally, on top of the far crest, they separated. The bull lagged, 500 yards, quartering away. Take it or leave it. Common sense said to leave it, but I was steady, and both I and the rifle had been shooting well. The shot felt good, looked good, but of course they trooped over the skyline.
Gordon Marsh uses an old prairie dog mound to get a bit of elevation. Watch out for cacti and rattlesnakes.
The bull was stone dead just over the ridge. For me, that would have been an impossible shot off traditional three-legged sticks, and no way anyone could have shot from prone. Doubt I could have done it without practicing on prairie dogs. Which I’ll be doing in a few days, then moving onward to plains game.
I often claim that I’m the world’s worst turkey hunter. Possibly not true, but when I tell you what I did last week, you’ll believe me.
Turkey guns and loads have come a long way.
By
Craig Boddington
I often claim that I’m the world’s worst turkey hunter. Possibly not true, but when I tell you what I did last week, you’ll believe me. I was trying to get a Rio Grande gobbler on my kids’ place in Texas. Running out of time, I took a final cruise down the power line road, stopped foe one more call. Good grief, a gobbler cut loose. Not far away. Grabbed the shotgun, pumped the action, ducked into the woods.
: Boddington’s first gobbler taken with TSS was taken in Georgia in 2023, using a Mossberg semiauto 12-gauge with Apex No. 8 shot. The shot was past 40 yards; the bird went straight down.
I found a perfect tree to sit against, got the gun across my knees, went to work on the slate. Double gobble, closer. Couple minutes later I saw the red head. Then another. Two nice gobblers, coming straight in. Both were good birds. When they were about 30 yards away I held the bead low on the neck of the larger tom…and heard the loudest CLICK ever. Plenty loud for the turkeys, too. They were gone. My fault or the gun? I know I pumped the action, but the bolt didn’t pick up a shell. And so ended my 2024 Texas turkey hunt.
The shell that I didn’t fire was a Hornady 12-gauge three-inch, nickel-plated No. 5 shot. Those were good shells, shot several gobblers with them. Still have a few, so I may shoot another turkey before they’re gone. Provided I can remember to load my darned gun. I was sad when Hornady got out of the turkey load business. I asked why and was surprised at the answer: “Turkey loads are getting ever more specialized.”
Donna Boddington and Zack Aultman with a nice Eastern gobbler, taken with Apex No. 9 TSS in a 20-gauge Benelli.
Man, are they. Not being a truly avid (or expert) turkey hunter, I missed much of this. Those Hornady turkey loads were good shells, though not much different from good shells I’ve used most of my life: Heavy payload of high-quality nickel-plated lead shot. Today, there are at least a dozen types of shot on the market. I don’t claim to have experience with all. I’ve shot couple of turkeys with bismuth shot, pretty good stuff. One, years ago, with steel shot duck loads. It worked, but I don’t recommend that. HD and Hevi Shot, both tungsten alloys, are excellent.
I was introduced to HD on a writer’s hunt in Mississippi several years ago, with experimental HD shells from Kent. Incredibly impressive on the pattern board, used them for a couple of gobblers, equally impressive. HD and Hevi Shot are excellent, and the shells are reasonably affordable. However, they aren’t TSS. Tungsten Super Shot (TSS) is easily the deadliest shot to date. Just two years ago my Georgia friend and Eastern gobbler mentor Zack Aultman introduced me to TSS.
Based in Mississippi, heart of turkey country, Apex is just one of several smaller firms offering today’s increasingly specialized turkey loads. This is the load Boddington used in 2023, a full two ounces of No. 8 TSS in 12-gauge three-inch.
As a metal, tungsten is denser than lead. Water has density of 1 g/cc (gram to cubic centimeter). The old standby lead is 11.3 g/cc, while tungsten is a whopping 18.1 g/cc. Tungsten is both heavier and harder than lead. In effect, you can drop down three or four shot sizes, still get more penetration per pellet, and a lot more pellets in your pattern. Because it’s harder and heavier, patterns hold together better. With lead, I’ve always been a No. 5 shot guy on turkeys, although I’ve often used No. 6. Often, I hedge my bet with No. 4 as the second shell in the magazine or in the second barrel. Smaller shot for head shots, larger shot for backup body shots if needed.
Two beautiful gobblers, plenty close. The bird on the left is offering a perfect shot.
With TSS, you can drop down to 8s or 9s, no real need for larger shot for backup. It’s that effective. You can also back off a gauge or two. Less recoil in a lighter gun. With TSS, serious hunters are confidently taking turkeys with .410s. Me, I’m neither that serious, nor that confident. For years, believing bigger was surely better, I used a 10 gauge. More of a fashion statement than a necessity. I went to a 12-gauge long ago, and today I’m perfectly happy with a 20-gauge…with good shells and a tight choke.
Of these five 20-gauge turkey loads, all are TSS except the top center Magnum Blend load, which is Hevi Shot. Only the Federal Premium TSS load is from a major manufacturer.
Last year and this, I took Eastern gobblers at Zack’s place, using Apex shells, loaded in Mississippi. Last year I used a Mossberg 12 gauge with two ounces of No. 8 TSS. One shot at the pattern board to verify. No turkey was going to walk through that pattern. The gobbler I shot was farther than I like, past 40 yards. Didn’t matter.
This year, a week before my comeuppance in Texas, Zack loaned me a 20-gauge Benelli, this time with 1 5/8 ounces of Apex 8 ½ TSS. Again, one shell to verify the pattern. With young Ben Pickren on the call—13 years old and so good I stayed quiet—we had a nice tom come to about 25 yards. Straight down without a wiggle.
That’s good, but this struck me more: I held low on the neck and was concerned the pattern might have messed up the breast. Not a single pellet the breast meat, only couple pellets in the head. The pattern centered exactly where I was aiming, low on the neck. That’s tight.
These patterns were shot at 25 yards with four different 20-gauge TSS loads, using a Rob Roberts choke in a Benelli semiauto. No turkey could walk through any, but the second from left Boss Tom, 1 5/8 ounces No. 9, is clearly the most impressive
With the turkey business done, we had some time to play. Zack dug around camp, found odds and ends of five different flavors of 20-gauge TSS shells. A Federal Premium load was the only one from a major manufacturer. He also found a hatful of 20-gauge turkey chokes.
Bigger isn’t necessarily better. As I wrote in this column a year ago, I lost a turkey pasted center-chest with a 10-gauge. That was poor shot placement: the head was tucked in, bad decision. In truth, my plain-Jane 10 gauge double that I loved threw terrible patterns. Not much development in 10-gauge chokes (or shells) because it’s uncommon and not essential.
Today there are numerous options in shotshells and shot. This Kansas gobbler was taken with Kent No. 7 HD load. HD is a milder tungsten alloy, heavier than traditional lead shot, but not as costly as TSS.
Although the science is hardly new, chokes have developed along with shot and shells. Unfortunately, at the cost of TSS shells, nobody spends a lot of time on the pattern board. Too bad because there is much to learn.
Using a Primos Jellyhead choke, this pattern was fired at 25 yards with Boss Tom’s 20-gauge load, 1 5/8 ounces No. 9 TSS, an amazing pattern.
No way I was going to run through six chokes, and we didn’t have enough shells anyway. I shot my turkey with a Rob Roberts choke, so we patterned it at 25 yards with four loads. No turkey could walk through any of those patterns, but a Boss Tom No. 9 TSS load clearly patterned better than the rest, including the Apex Ninja No. 8 ½ load I’d taken my turkey with.
Sort of randomly, next we tried Primos’ Jellyhead choke tube. Again, in this choke, in this gun, on this day, the Boss Tom load won. Big time. I’m not sure I’ve ever seen a pattern like that before. About 70/30 above/below point of aim, density scary just above point of aim. I prefer high-shooting shotguns and always aim below point of impact. It is said that 60/40 (60 percent above aim, 40 percent below) is ideal, but I’m okay with 70/30. As an old trapshooter, I don’t want a flat-shooting shotgun where I must cover the head. My preferred hold is low neck, so I want a high-shooting shotgun.
Dad and I hunted turkeys in Missouri in the mid-Sixties, when the Ozarks first opened. I maintain my position that I’m not a serious turkey hunter. However, with nearly 60 years of experience, my long-set habits and opinions don’t change easily. Obviously, with better, deeper-penetrating shot and denser patterns, sensible ranges are increased. I know how far some folks are shooting turkeys, but I’m not going there. At 71, it’s like open sights on a rifle. My window has shrunk. I’m a 40-yard guy, do-able with older shells as well as new. Closer is better, but not too close. I’d rather have a pattern to play with, rather than a tight ball of shot.
: Patterning a shotgun off the bench is hard work. With heavy loads, even a 20-gauge has plenty of recoil. It’s not necessary to waste expensive shells, but it’s essential to verify both point of impact and pattern with whatever load you choose.
The most important thing: Essential to pattern your shotgun. We can still kill turkeys with old-fashioned shells. We must be able to because, awesome as it is, TSS has drawbacks. Since it’s harder than lead, it cannot be used in many older shotguns. If okay with steel, it’s probably okay with TSS. I have guns than can’t use either.
Boddington and Ben Pickren with a fine Georgia gobbler, called in by Pickren and taken by Boddington at 25 yards, using a 20-gauge Benelli with Apex TSS No. 9 load.
Then, there’s cost. Frightful. Tungsten is a scarce metal, few mines in the world. Some of the shells we were gleefully flinging at paper targets were ten-dollar shells. Ouch. Although tungsten based, HD and Hevi Shot are alloys that use less tungsten, less expensive. Not as good as TSS, but better than good old lead shot…which is not damning with faint praise. Despite efficacy, I wouldn’t hunt waterfowl with TSS. A turkey, well, kind of a big-game bird. Tasty, but more a trophy hunt than a meat hunt. I baulk hard at a $10 shotgun shell. Much the same cost as .470 Nitro Express. But we only need a few: One to verify pattern and point of aim. One to kill the bird, maybe a spare just in case. With the results I’m seeing, pricey but acceptable.
The .45-70 Government was adopted by the US military in 1873. Amazing that it’s still with us today, more amazing that it’s still popular. Truth is, it almost died away. The .45-70 saw us through the plains campaigns and the last years of bison eradication, but it was our standard-issue military cartridge for just 19 years, replaced by the .30-40 Krag in 1892.
By
Craig Boddington
The .45-70 Government was adopted by the US military in 1873. Amazing that it’s still with us today, more amazing that it’s still popular. Truth is, it almost died away. The .45-70 saw us through the plains campaigns and the last years of bison eradication, but it was our standard-issue military cartridge for just 19 years, replaced by the .30-40 Krag in 1892.
In the 1870s, no repeating actions could handle the .45-70. The 1881 Marlin lever-action came first, followed by Winchester’s answer, the Model 1886. The .45-70 was the most popular of the 1886’s 19 chamberings, but it was long gone before production ceased in 1935. Longer gone were the 1881 Marlin and the original 1895 Marlin.
Because repeaters were costly, through the 19th Century single-shots were more popular. The .45-70 was a common chambering in most big single-shots. However, after the bison were gone and the Great Plains were pacified there was limited need large cartridges. Winchester 1885 High Wall was probably the last classic American single-shot, .45-70 just one of its many chamberings.
This custom .45-70 was built by Idaho riflemaker Jim Brockman 30 yeara ago, before Cerakote or rail mounts existed, and when the “guide gun” concept was brand new. Brockman’s rifle offered three sight options: Conventional scope, LER scope, and aperture on the rear scope base.
The original .45-70 load used a 405-grain lead bullet in front of 70 grains of blackpowder, producing 1330 fps for 1590 foot-pounds of energy. Factory loads were converted to smokeless powder, but because the trapdoor Springfield action is not strong, pressures were kept mild and original ballistics maintained.
Factory ammunition remained available, but from about 1930 no new .45-70 rifles were made. Bill Ruger gets credit for starting the comeback. People thought he was crazy when he brought out his Ruger No. 1 in 1966, the first modern centerfire single-shot. Some folks thought he was even crazier when, early on, he chambered his No. 1 to .45-70, an almost-forgotten relic.
Handloaders already knew what the .45-70 could do in strong actions. Also, thanks to the early success of the .458 Win Mag, introduced in 1956, the .45-70’s .458-inch bullets were common. Gunwriter John Wootters was among the early purchasers of a Ruger No. 1 in .45-70. He took it to Mozambique where, among other animals, it accounted for a huge leopard.
The time of reintroductions and reproductions wasn’t yet, but the .45-70 was back. Its return was secured in 1972 when Marlin introduced their 1895 lever-action in .45-70. Marlin took the name from their original 1895, but the “new” 1895 is based entirely on the 336 action. The process started in 1964 with the Model 444, an internally enlarged 336 adapted to the powerful .444 Marlin. Eight years later, Marlin went a step farther, hogging out the strong 336 action to house the big .45-70.
: This Texas hog was the first animal taken with a Ruger/Marlin 1895 in .45-70. Although the .45-70 has many uses, Boddington loves it for hog hunting: Ranges are usually close, and the .45-70 speaks with authority.
The new Marlin 1895 opened the floodgates, introducing a new generation to the .45-70’s hard-hitting short-range power. Standard factory .45-70 loads are still loaded to mild pressures, ensuring safe use in trapdoor Springfields. Marlin’s 1895 spurred ammunition manufacturers to create a new generation of .45-70 loads, pressures still mild, but with lighter bullets loaded faster, increasing energy and flattening trajectory. Long standard, loaded by multiple firms, is a 300-grain bullet at 1880 fps, yielding 2355 ft-lbs.
Since lever-action 45-70s have tubular magazines, downrange performance was hampered by the necessity to use blunt-nosed bullets. Hornady changed this in 2006 with their Flex-Tip-eXpanding (FTX) bullet with compressible polymer tip, the first sharp-pointed bullet safe for use in tubular magazines. In their LEVERevolution line, these were mated with new propellants that increased velocity without excessive pressure. Their 325-grain FTX is loaded to 2000 fps, yielding 2886 ft-lbs.
Today, the 1895 Marlin has been joined by newly manufactured Winchester 1886s, and Henry’s .45-70. Also, numerous big single-shots on old and new actions. Standard .45-70 loads continue with mild pressures, but there are ascending grades of .45-70, always available to handloaders. Hornady’s loading manual lists three sets of data for the .45-70: Trap Door, 1895 Marlin, and Ruger #1. Similarly, specialty ammo makers like Cor-Bon and Garrett offer .45-70 loads tailored to various action strengths.
: Boddington’s friend Bobby Dierks used his Henry .45-70 with Hornady FTX bullet and Leupold red-dot sight to take this awesome Kansas buck…at 200 yards. Tough shot with a .45-70 and/or a red dot, but obviously possible.
With heavy loads in strong actions, the .45-70 transcends the big woods cartridge it was long considered, to a serious thumper adequate for the biggest bears and baddest Cape buffaloes.
Part of this ammo revolution, and the .45-70’s resurgence, is based on the popularity of the “guide gun.” Whether Henry, Marlin, or Winchester ’86, the guide gun is simply a big lever-action somewhat updated. Usually with shorter barrel, perhaps a rail mount with ghost-ring aperture, rust-proof finish, laminate or synthetic stock.
The first “guide gun” I ever saw (before I heard the term) was a lovely Marlin .45-70 by Idaho custom maker Jim Brockman. Neither rail mounts nor Cerakote existed, but this rifle had it all: Matte metal, flat black stock. Three sight options: Detachable forward-mounted Long Eye Relief scope on the barrel and detachable 1.75-5x20mm scope on the receiver, rear receiver base also housing an aperture. Deadly accurate, this rifle was far ahead of its time. Wish I’d bought it.
: A fine Texas whitetail, taken with the Ruger/Marlin 1895 .45-70 using 325-grain Hornady FTX. We could agree that the .45-70 is more powerful than needed, but it drops deer with authority, little tracking required.
I didn’t, but I have a long history with the .45-70. The first animal I took with it was a big Arizona mountain lion in 1979. Not with a rifle, but with a JD Jones .45-70 barrel on a T/C Contender. In a handgun, the .45-70 is all the fun anyone needs!
Years later, I took a massive bison bull with a Wesson & Harrington break-open single-shot. I used .45-70 cases loaded to .45-90 specs, using 415-grain hard-case bullets. They exited the far side. A big bison is 25 percent larger than a Cape buffalo, so I know, unequivocally, that a .45-70 with good loads is adequate for African buffalo. In between, and still, a lot of pig hunting and close-range deer hunting with .45-70s, much of it preceding the “guide gun” phenomenon.
The lever-action is uniquely American, so “guide gun” is generally interpreted in Noth American context: A rifle a guide carries for in extremis use when hunting big bears. The concept is seductive, and big lever-actions became popular. Toward the tail end, Marlin was offering the 1895 .45-70 in many configurations. Despite parent company Remington’s impending doom, they were selling all they could make.
On the bench with one of the first Ruger/Marlin 1895s in .45-70. In stainless steel with laminate stock, this rifle had a wonderfully smooth action and produced near-MOA groups at 100 yards.
Ruger acquired Marlin from the ashes and tooled up to make lever-actions. I assumed they would start with a .30-30, but the first Ruger Marlin was a short-barreled 1895 .45-70 in stainless and synthetic. “Why” is simple: In latter Remington/Marlin production, .45-70s outsold .30-30s two to one. Good on the old warhorse .45-70!
The problem with the guide gun concept: Few of us hunt big bears or guide in big bear country, and the purposes aren’t the same. A bear guide should carry a fast-handling, powerful repeater. A bear hunter must carry a rifle that will stop a bear, also has adequate range. With proper loads, the .45-70 is powerful enough. On the latter count, I’m not convinced.
45-70 Group: Although at its best for short-range use, the .45-70 is often exceptionally accurate. This is a latter-production Remington/Marlin in “guide gun” configuration, fitted with an Aimpoint red-dot sight.
A young friend had a chance to go on an Alaskan brown bear hunt. He considered a lever-action .45-70. I talked him out of it. A 200-yard shot would be possible, but difficult. He chose a scoped bolt-action, got a nice bear. I hunted brown bear in Alaska last fall, never got a shot. Going again this spring. I have a Ruger/Marlin 1895 .45-70. Wonderfully accurate, wears a good scope. Love to take a big bear with that rifle, but I’m not taking it. Too costly a hunt to take chances! Last fall, I carried an accurate, well-scoped .338, same gun this spring. If my one chance is past 200 yards I can take it with confidence. Possible with a .45-70, but risky.
Co bison 45-70: This huge bison bull was taken with a Wesson & Harrington break-open single-shot .45-70. Hard cast bullets loaded to .45-90 specs gave through-and-through penetration, convincing Boddington the .45-70 is fully adequate for large bovines…with the right loads.
It’s not that the .45-70 isn’t capable of extreme accuracy or long-range shooting. Rather, its arcing trajectory makes longer shots difficult. And although big bullets always hit hard, they lose energy fast. I’d hunt Cape buffalo with a .45-70 before I’d take it for a big bear. I know I’m not going to shoot a buffalo past 100 yards. On a bear hunt, likely just one chance. I want to be certain I can take that shot with confidence.
So, whether you call it a guide gun or just a big lever-action, I see the grand old .45-70 as ideal for situations where you know the shot will be close. Perfect for pigs, awesome for black bear over bait or with hounds. Ideal for thick cover whitetail hunting. Overgunned, maybe, but not much tracking!
45-70 recoil: This Remington-production Marlin .45-70 “guide gun” is caught in peak recoil. Although more of a hard push than a sharp blow, the .45-70 is a powerful cartridge generating significant recoil, especially off the bench.
Let’s be fair: With modern loads and optical sights, the .45-70 is not a bayonet-range rifle. Couple seasons back my friend Bobby Dierks had a big Kansas buck up on an opposite ridge. He had his Henry .45-70 with Leupold red-dot sight, figured about 200 yards. He held the dot on the backline and dropped the buck. Fine shot with a .45-70…and with a red dot. Also, a great buck, entered into Boone and Crockett’s records at 173 typical. Regardless of game, circumstance, or load, the .45-70 is slow and its bullets drop quickly…but hit hard when they get there.
A cartridge “belt” is a narrow ridge of case material around the cartridge base, quickly stepping down to the actual case diameter. Throughout the 20th Century most cartridge dubbed “magnum” wore belts, so we came to accept that a belted cartridge was bigger, faster, more powerful.
New cartridges versus belted magnums.
By
Craig Boddington
A cartridge “belt” is a narrow ridge of case material around the cartridge base, quickly stepping down to the actual case diameter. Throughout the 20th Century most cartridge dubbed “magnum” wore belts, so we came to accept that a belted cartridge was bigger, faster, more powerful.
338 brown bear: Donna Boddington used a Proof Research in.338 Win Mag to take this big brown bear on Admiratly Island. There are faster and perhaps more accurate .338-caliber cartridges, but the belted .338 Win mag is the most popular, most available, and offers great performance with moderate recoil.
Around the turn of the millennium, with the introduction of fast, fat-cased unbelted RUMs,, WSMs, and more, cartridge design—and our perceptions—shifted away from belted cases. This has continued, witness the Nosler cartridges, Hornady’s PRCs, and Winchester’s 6.8 Western.
The world’s last belted magnum appears to be the 6.5-.300 Weatherby Magnum, introduced in 2016. Since then, even Weatherby has shifted away from the belt, introducing their 6.5 RPM (Rebated Precision Magnum) in 2019, following up with their .338 RPM in 2022. A rebated rim means that the rim is of smaller diameter than the base, allowing a rifle to house a fatter cartridge. Not a new concept. The first rebated rim cartridge was the .425 Westley Richards, introduced in 1908. Best-known is probably 1963’s .284 Winchester, parent case for the 6.5-.284 Norma, and the Weatherby’s RPMs.
264 mule deer: A fine Wyoming mule deer, taken at sunset with a 140-grain bullet from a .264 Win Mag. Though no longer popular, the .264 is still an effective hunting cartridge…and Boddington’s .264 shoots extremely well.
As with bottleneck cartridges with full-diameter rims, most rebated rim cartridges headspace on the shoulder. A headspace index is a critical feature to all cartridge design. Headspace, defined, “is the distance measured from a closed chamber’s breech face to the chamber feature that limits the insertion depth of a cartridge placed in it.” There are multiple ways to skin this cat, but all metallic cartridges have a headspace index mated to chamber dimensions.
6.5 lineup: Left to right: .274 Win Mag, 6.5-284 Norma, 6.5 PRC, 6.5 RPM, These four 6.5mm cartridges are identical in velocity and performance on game. Boddington would have one of them, but he has an accurate .264 he’s unwilling to abandon
Simplest is an exposed rim, mated to a recess at the beginning of the chamber. In the blackpowder era, almost all cartridges were rimmed, perfect for single-shots, fine for tubular magazines. Problematic for box magazines because the rims must be stacked to preclude jamming. There were effective box-magazine rifles for rimmed cartridges, but Peter Paul Mauser’s rimless cartridge proved a better mousetrap, headspacing on the cartridge shoulder. Obviously, the chamber must be cut right to match the case, and the cartridge must be manufactured to proper dimensions. Both were possible in the latter 19th Century, so shoulder headspacing became common and is considered more precise.
Let’s return to the belt. The first belted cartridge was Holland & Holland’s .400/.375 Belted Nitro Express, introduced in 1905, headspacing on the belt, with matching chamber recess The mild.400/.375 didn’t succeed. H&H tried again in 1912 with their .375 H&H Magnum. Its gentle shoulder was inadequate as a headspace index, so the belt was retained. Versatile as well as powerful the .375 H&H became a world standard. In 1925 H&H necked the case down to create the cartridge we know as the .300 H&H Magnum, headspacing on the belt because of its tapered shoulder.
: On the bench with an early 7mm PRC. Intrigued by its performance with heavy bullets, Boddington bought this Mossberg Patriot in 7 PRC
Since then, most belted magnums have used the .375 or .300 H&H case. The primary exceptions are Weatherby’s family of big cartridges based on the .378 case; and Weatherby’s two smallest magnums, the .224 and .240.
“Magnum” comes from a French word for an extra-large bottle of champagne. The British started using it in the blackpowder era for extra-large cases. Over time, “magnum” became synonymous with “faster and more powerful.” And, until the RUMs and WSMs, “magnum” was inextricably linked to a belted case.
Belted cartridges with defined shoulders don’t need the belt for headspacing, as long proven by our too-many unbelted “magnums.” Over time, the “magnum” suffix was clearly over-used. Enough turn-of-millennium unbelted magnums failed that today, manufacturers seem reluctant to use the word. Make no mistake: The Nosler cartridges and the PRCs are “magnums” in every sense we know, with or without belt or suffix.
375 Ruger LDE: Boddington’s favorite African animal is this excellent Lord Derby’s giant eland, taken in northern Cameroon with a .375 Ruger. An excellent cartridge in all ways, it’s unlikely to ever be as available or popular as the .375 H&H.
Not all belted magnums have succeeded. H&H’s .240, .244, and .275 belted magnums are nearly unknown. Neither the .308 nor .358 Norma Magnums ever caught on. Some of Weatherby’s belted magnums have achieve widespread popularity; others have remained primarily proprietary to Weatherby. Remington’s 6.5, 8mm and .350 Rem Mags languish.
Winchester’s 1958 .264 Win Mag was briefly popular, then nearly killed by the more versatile 7mm Rem Mag, introduced in 1962. I still have a .264. Velocity is identical to the 6.5 PRC. Because my .264 has an exceptional barrel, I’ll pit it against any 6.5 PRC for groups.If I wanted a fast 6.5mm with more versatility than the 6.5 Creedmoor, I’d get a PRC, maybe a 6.5-.284, maybe a 6.5 RPM. With almost no new platforms and limited ammo, I can’t recommend a .264 today…unless it was a great deal. For me, I have oceans of .264 brass and good handload recipes. Can’t see duplicating its performance and creating a whole new supply chain issue.
300 Win Mag groups: Boddington’s Jarrett .300 Win Mag groups well with a variety of both factory and handloads. He likes the new unbelted fast .30s just fine, but is satisfied with the performance he already has
Okay, my beloved .264 is history. However, several tried-and-true belted magnums remain worldwide standards: 7mm Rem Mag; .300 Win and .300 Wby Mag; .338 Win Mag; .375 H&H. All are widely loaded and chambered by most manufacturers. The 7mm Rem Mag was the world’s most popular magnum. The .300 Win Mag now occupies that spot, with the7mm Rem Mag still in second place.
In each bullet diameter, there are newer cartridges with modern (unbelted) cases that are at least as fast or faster. In 7mm: 7mm PRC, 28 Nosler, 7mm RUM. In .30: .300 PRC, .30 Nosler, .300 RUM, plus the belted .30-378 Wby. In .338, .338 RPM, .33 Nosler, .338 RUM, and .338 Lapua, plus belted .340 and .338-.378 Wby Mags. In .375, .375 Ruger and .375 RUM, plus belted .375 and .378 Wby Mags.
300 Wby Mag: Boddington has done most of his mountain hunting, especially in Asia’s big mountains, with various .300 Wby Mag rifles. This big Altai argali was taken in Mongolia with a .300 Wby Mag barrel on a Blaser R8
Newer cartridges with fatter, more efficient unbelted cases, are touted as being more accurate. Maybe, but in my experience quality of barrel, sound bedding and assembly, and quality of ammunition are more important to accuracy than case design.
Whether chambered to old belted or new unbelted cartridges, a good rifle should shoot well. The newest cartridges have an advantage in that they are, at least initially, offered in the best loads featuring the most accurate modern bullets. Hornady’s Precision Hunter line (PRCs) is awesome stuff and there are no flies on Nosler or Weatherby-branded ammo.
Boddington is not anti-magnification. Without question, high magnification makes
shooting tight groups easier. These were shot with a Sabatti Saphire .300 Win Mag, topped with
a Vector Optics Continental 3-18x50mm scope.
Regardless how good the ammo, a factory load is just one assemblage of components. No predicting what load a given rifle might shoot best. The more loads available to try, the better the odds of finding extra-good results. So, cartridge popularity is a virtue, not a sin. Handloaders can experiment endlessly. Factory load shooters should think about cartridges with limited choices.
New cartridges aren’t all about accuracy. A lot of our new cartridges are designed to be mated with faster-twist barrels intended to stabilize the longer, heavier, super-aerodynamic new bullets. Depends on what you intend to do, just don’t forget that heavier bullets and faster cartridges produce more recoil.
Me, I haven’t jumped heavily into the new cartridges. I concede they are “better,” but I’m neither a competitive nor extreme range shooter. How much better do I need? M trusty .264 is the primary reason I don’t have a 6.5 PRC.
7mm is a different story. I used to hunt extensively with the 7mm Rem Mag. Haven’t had one for years. The 7 Rem Mag’s traditional rifling twist was 1:925. Maxes out at about 175 grains, but when I was using that cartridge, I never shot bullets that heavy. I’m fascinated by the heavier 7mm bullets, so I bought a 7 PRC. So far, accuracy is adequate, not impressive; hope the loading bench makes it better.
I’m more of a .30-caliber guy. Most of my mountain hunting is behind me, much of it done with .300 Wby Mag and, more recently, .300 Win Mag. If I were to start over, I’d get one of the modern cartridges in a fast-twist barrel that would stabilize aerodynamic 220 and 225-grain bullets. Since it’s too late to start over, I’m good with my fast .30s in old, belted magnums…with lots of loads to play with.
In .33, I tried both the .340 Wby Mag and .338 RUM. Awesome performance, too much recoil. I retreated to the old standby .338 Win Mag, fast enough, plenty of power, acceptable recoil.
: Donna and Craig Boddington took these Mozambique Cape buffalo bulls from the same herd within a few seconds. Donna used a Blaser R8, Craig a CZ 550, both in .375 H&H. Total three shots fired. Since 1912, the .375 H&H has been plenty of gun for buffalo.
Similar story in .375. I used both the .375 Wby Mag and .375 RUM. Effective, but recoil too unpleasant. I have also used the .375 Ruger extensively, have both .375 Ruger and .375 H&H rifles. I’ll argue all day long that the .375 Ruger is a “better” cartridge than the .375 H&H: More efficient, fits into a lighter, more compact action. It is also faster and delivers more energy, but not by such a margin that recoil goes off the page. As large-caliber cartridges go, the .375 Ruger is popular, but it will never encroach on the .375 H&H’s worldwide availability.
New cartridges are always fun, may give a bit extra, but long-trusted cartridges still get the job done. Just think about it before you get rid of a traditional belted cartridge in favor of something new. Especially, consider what you intend to do, and how much popularity and resultant availability mean to you.
When I was young, the fixed 4X scope was the standard riflescope for hunting big game. Fixed-power scopes of higher magnification existed, but they were primarily used for varmints and target shooting. Most of us figured a fixed 4X would handle just about any hunting chores. Variable-power scopes existed back then but were widely distrusted because zero shifts were common as magnification changed. The variable-power scope wasn’t completely perfected until the 1970s, so I did my early hunting with fixed 4X. My first variables were 3-9X. Older shooters grumbled that “a fixed 4X was all the scope any hunter needed.” I did not agree. Wow, the image size at 9X was wonderful.
Boddington is not anti-magnification. Without question, high magnification makes shooting tight groups easier. These were shot with a Sabatti Saphire .300 Win Mag, topped with a Vector Optics Continental 3-18x50mm scope.
For years, about three-times-zoom (as in 3-9X) was the technological limit. The thing is, no matter what you’re hunting, not all shots are far. So, with any variable scope, it’s important to have a low-end magnification setting low enough to keep you out of trouble for close shots. Up close, too much magnification, and all you’re likely to see is a wall of hair. Today we have four, five, six, and even eight times zoom capability. This changes the game. A 1-8X scope would seem the ideal setup for a versatile big-bore like a .375. Variables of 2.5-20X or 4-32X would seem to satisfy just about any shooting situation: Extreme magnification for distance; a low-end that’s low enough to allow following up a wounded animal.
Boddington’s Winchester M88 lever-action wears a Leupold 2.5-8X scope. Trim, enabling low scope mounting, yet powerful enough to enable shooting as tight groups as the rifle is capable of.
Maybe, but there are other practical considerations. You will always pay more for higher magnification and for scopes with the highest zoom ratio. And the scopes will be larger, bulkier, and heavier. The style today is toward bigger scopes. Fine if you need the capability, but I don’t like to add unnecessary weight. Also, bigger scopes must be mounted higher. Adjustable combs and strap-on cheekpieces fix this problem. However, some (most) of my hunting rifles handle just fine with a smaller scope mounted low. So, instead of charging into the big-scope culture, how about evaluating how much magnification you really need?
If you’re part of the growing long-range group, you need high magnification. Doesn’t matter if you’re ringing steel, shooting prairie dogs, or reaching out on big game. My varmint rifles wear big glass. Love to ring steel, too. On game, I’m not an extreme-range shooter. However, with the equipment we have today I’m comfortable shooting farther than when I was young.
This Alberta black bear was taken with a Mossberg Patriot .350 Legend, topped with a Swarovski Z8i 1-8x24mm scope. Reasonably compact, the eight times zoom gives this scope tremendous capability for short to medium-range hunting.
Trust me, I embrace magnification. Over the years, I’ve stepped up…but only to a point. When Leupold came out with a 4.5-14X, I got one immediately, used it for a lot of open-country hunting. Today I’ve stepped up a bit farther. On my current open-country rifles, I’ve used several 4-16X and 3-18X scopes. I’ve tried more powerful scopes, but for my hunting, I just don’t need more magnification. Rarely use all that I have, because with high magnification at my fingertips,it’s important to keep the scope turned down. The higher the magnification, the smaller the field of view, thus the slower and more difficult to acquire a distant target.
Now 15 years old, Donna’s light MGA .270 Winchester has work a Leupold VX3 3.5-10x40mm scope since new, a light, trim scope with plenty of capability. This is her favorite rifle and scope, including for mountain hunting.
QUALITY VERSUS QUANTITY
When deciding on a scope for a certain rifle, I like to consider the capability of that rifle…and what I’m likely to use it for. A prairie dog rifle needs a lot of scope. So do the rifles I might take sheep hunting. A rifle for mule deer needs a bigger scope than a rifle for hunting my Kansas whitetails, where few shots exceed 150 yards. My lever-action .308 wears a trim 2.5-8X scope. My .375s usually wear a 2-7X or 3-9X, this is because the cartridge is more versatile than the low- range variables (such as 1.75-5X) we typically put on a .375. Great for bears and buffaloes, not enough scope for plains game. And, yes, I have a good 1-8X that I’ve moved back and forth to several rifles. Awesome capability, love it…but it’s larger and heavier than ideal for the short- range rifles I’ve been using it on.
: A dial-up turret on a hunting rifle simply must have a goof-proof zero stop.
Leupold’s zero stop on their Custom Dial System (CDS) is rock-solid and highly visible.
With optics, quality counts most. You want a scope that’s edge-to-edge clear, and you also want a scope that gathers enough light to enable the dawn and dusk shots critical in so much hunting. You’ll pay for scopes with higher magnification, and you’ll also pay for scopes with high-quality glass and the best coatings. The best scopes are expensive. Boddington’s First Law of Optics: Generally, you get what you pay for. Now, with the best, premium glass, it may be difficult to easily see the upgrade you’re paying for; you may not realize the advantage until a last-light opportunity comes along.
4
Fortunately, there’s a lot of excellent medium-priced glass. Larger companies often offer different “grades” of optics at ascending price points. I’m nervous about the lowest-price optics,but the middle lines are usually pretty good. Hunting buddy Gordon Marsh, who happens to be the proprietor of the LG Outdoors and Wholesale Hunter sites turned me on to the Vector scopes that he carries, just one example of excellent medium-priced glass. We all know that most rifles shoot better than their owners. I’m constantly amazed at how well today’s basic bolt-actions shoot. If on a budget, scrimp on the rifle and invest more in the scope.
With six times zoom and 30mm tube, Vector Optics’ Continental line is a good example of excellent medium-priced glass. From top: 3-18x50mm, 2-12x50mm, 1-6x24mm.
I still do a lot of my hunting with medium-range variables in the good old 3-9X class. Still a wonderfully versatile power range, very adequate for longer—if not extreme—shots. Maybe you need more than that, maybe you don’t. Give it some thought. Rather than springing for high magnification, maybe you’d be better served by a higher-quality scope with less magnification or a lower zoom range.
TUBES, OBJECTIVES, TURRETS
I also use a lot of scopes with good old one-inch tubes. They are lighter and more compact, and size of the tube does not speak to the quality of the glass. However, Americans are increasingly going to the larger 30mm tubes, long the European standard. We are also seeing more 36mm tubes. Again, bigger and heavier. There are two advantages to larger tubes. First, they admit more light. If quality is equal, a 30mm scope will be brighter than a one-inch scope. Second, they offer a greater range of adjustment, important for shooting at a distance.
Boddington’s 2034 Kansas buck was taken with a Ruger-Marlin .30-30 topped with a Leupold Rifleman 3-9x40mm. 3-9X remains an extremely useful power range. The Rifleman is Leupold’s least costly scope line, a good basic hunting scope.
Larger objective lenses also admit more light. The drawback is scopes with big objectives must be mounted higher to clear the barrel. We got big objectives from the Europeans, who generally don’t have “legal shooting hours” like we do. Over here, predator and hog hunters also often don’t have shooting hours, so you may need a 30mm scope with a big 56mm objective. I generally don’t. Most of my one-inch-tube scopes have objectives of 42mm or less, while my 30mm scopes usually have 44mm or 50mm objectives. Low rings, never, but sometimes I can get away with medium rings.
The popularity of long-range shooting has changed the game with scope turrets. Tall turrets for dialing the adjustments add bulk to the rifle but are essential for long-range work. On rifles I use for close to medium-range shooting, I don’t need dial-up turrets. Again, depends on what you’re doing. With dial-up turrets on any rifle you might hunt with, one cardinal rule: Make certain your scope has a solid, goof-proof zero stop!
Boddington on the bench with his Jarrett .300 Win Mag. Today this is his go-to mountain rifle, here topped with a Leupold VX6 3-18x44mm scope. Boddington figures this is about all the magnification he needs and has rarely zoomed it all the way up.
Scopes above about 10X in magnification need parallax adjustment, most commonly a third turret, again adding weight and bulk to scope and thus rifle. That’s another nice thing about the good old 3-9X scope: External parallax adjustment is not necessary, keeping the scope slimmer and trimmer.
RETICLES AND FOCAL PLANES
Reticles have changed a lot, with most companies offering various options. For open-country use, I like a reticle with multiple aiming points or stadia lines. At medium distances, I’m more likely to use the reticle and hold for elevation, only dialing at longer ranges. Since I’m neither an extreme-range shooter nor a competitive shooter, I prefer simpler reticles, rather than Christmas tree reticles, some of which now have all manner of ornaments on the tree. Depends on your purposes, and how you train.
his is the Nightforce 2.5-20x50mmF1, a top-quality modern “big scope” with eight-times-zoom and tremendous versatility, from close to as far as anyone needs to shoot.
Above all, I want a highly visible crosshair intersection that draws my eye. Recently, I’ve messed with a couple of test scopes that had reticles with just a tiny cross in the center. So small that, when shooting groups, I struggled to see it. An illuminated reticle generally solves this problem. I love illuminated reticles, especially valuable for low-light shots.
In June ’23 Boddington took this fine Eastern Cape kudu with a long shot in failing light, using a Nightforce 2.5-30x50mmF1 scope on a Remington 7mm Rem Mag. The scope was fantastic, but Boddington didn’t like the first focal plane reticle on this particular scope.
Some companies offer reticles in choice of first or second focal plane (FFP or SFP). In FFP, the reticle shrinks as magnification is reduced, and enlarges as magnification is increased. With SFP, the reticle stays the same size. Long-range shooters insist FFP is best because windage and elevation hash marks or stadia lines are valid at all magnification settings. In SFP, in-scope markings are only valid at one magnification usually the highest.
This is problematic if you like to use your reticle for elevation and windage, rather than dialing. Even so, for hunting, I much prefer SFP. At lower settings, for close shots, where you want a bold reticle, the reticle may be so small that it’s hard to see. Last year, In Africa, I used a night force 2.5-20x50mmF1, wonderful glass. Nightforce offers a choice of focal plane; F1 indicates FFP. I fought the reticle constantly, especially on fast, close shots.
Yes, that title will upset some folks. Funny thing about the .25-caliber cartridges, bullet diameter .257-inch: Those who love ‘em tend to be passionate about their “quarter-bores.”. Those who don’t love .25s probably don’t hate them, just ignore them.
This big feral hog dropped in its tracks to a single 100-grain Interlock from a Savage 1899 in .250 Savage. The old .250 Savage isn’t fast, but it’s as effective on deer-sized game today as it was a century ago.
The .25-caliber is a uniquely American bullet diameter, rarely seen in Europe, equally uncommon in Africa. I’m told the .25-06 has some following in South Africa, but I’ve rarely seen a .25 in use on safari.
Over here, the quarter-bores have a rich history, going back to the dawn of smokeless powder. The .25-20 was created by necking down the .32-20 case to .25-caliber, first by Marlin, then by Winchester, and chambered in their popular 1892 lever-action. Initially loaded with blackpowder, the .25-20 quickly transitioned to smokeless. Although occasionally used for deer, the little .25-20 was a common small game and varmint cartridge, popular among trappers.
On a Kansas deer stand with a Winchester M94 .25-35, made in 1906. Because of iron sights, Boddington is careful which stands he chooses, but he does a “sit” or two with this rifle most deer seasons.
Winchester’s .25-35 was the first .25 designed for smokeless powder. The .25-35 and .30-30 use the parent same case, and were introduced together in 1895, so were the first sporting cartridges designed for smokeless propellent. Although hampered by round-nose bullets in tubular magazines, the .25-35 shoots flatter than the .30-30 with a less recoil. The .25-35 was a common alternative to .30-30, plenty of gun for deer-sized game. Jack O’Connor’s outfitter in Sonora in the 1930s, Charlie Ren, used nothing but a Savage 1899 in .25-35. O’Connor famously quoted Ren as saying it was “all he needed.” Lord knows how much game that rifle accounted for.
In 1915, Arthur Savage engaged early cartridge genius Charles Newton to develop a high-velocity cartridge for his lever-action. Newton’s project for Savage resulted in the .250-3000 (.250 Savage), the first commercial cartridge to break 3000 feet per second. The Savage lever-action was stronger than the Winchester, and its box magazine could use sharp-pointed bullets. The .250 Savage was popular for decades…and a real thorn in Winchester’s side.
Gunwriter Gary Sitton was another huge .25-06 fan. He used his Dakota M10 .25-06 to take this fine buck on John Wootters’ South Texas ranch, “Los Cuernos.”
In 1920, Savage introduced the M20. Essentially a scaled-down Springfield action, it was not only America’s first commercial bolt-action; it was the world’s first short bolt-action, sized specifically to the .250 Savage case. In our Kansas deer season just past, Ryan Paul brought a cherry M20 and shot does with it, first M20 I’ve ever seen in the field.
The only way the .250 Savage could reach 3000 fps was with its original light-for-caliber 87-grain bullet. 1915 expanding bullets worked when they worked, but most hunters learned that the .250 Savage performed better with 100-grain bullets at about 2800 fps.
Wyoming gunwriter Bob Milek in the field with one of his beloved .25s. Milek used both the .257 Roberts and .25-06 for game up to elk. Boddington doesn’t believe the .25’s have enough bullet weight or frontal area for larger game, but with proper shot placement, they surely work.
Gunwriter Ned Roberts necked the 7×57 case down to .25-caliber, creating the .257 Roberts, adopted by Remington in 1934. Its longer case enabled heavier bullets at higher velocity than possible with the .250 Savage. Until the .243 came along, the .257 Roberts was the standard “crossover” varmint/big game cartridge. Although rarely chambered in new rifles today, it was extremely popular, and remains an important cartridge.
The .25-06 was developed at Frankford Arsenal during WWI as a military experiment. After the war, it remained a common and popular non-standard wildcat. Amazing to me none of the majors picked it up sooner, but it wasn’t adopted as a commercial cartridge until 1969, as the .25-06 Remington. To this day, the .25-06 is the most popular .25-caliber. With heavier bullets, it is fast, flat-shooting, powerful, and awesome on deer-sized game. With lighter bullets, the .25-06 is probably the largest and most powerful cartridge that could sensibly be used for varminting.
Boddington used his Dakota .257 Roberts with 117-grain SST to take this weird Kansas “management” buck. The buck went down so fast and hard it seemed to bounce.
The .257 Weatherby Magnum was one of Roy Weatherby’s original cartridges, introduced in 1944, based on a necked down and shortened .300 H&H case. It is one of the fastest and flattest-shooting of all commercial cartridges and was Roy’s personal favorite. It’s not especially popular; a limitation is that it has remained a Weatherby proprietary, thus limited sources.
In recent years there have been few new .25-caliber cartridges. An exception was the short-lived .25 WSSM. Great little fireplug of a cartridge, about the same performance as the .25-06, yet from a much shorter case, fitting into short actions. Several of the short, fat magnums introduced at the turn of the millennium have fallen by the wayside. Mostly, I put this down to “too many, too fast.” Too many new cartridges for the market (us) to accept. The “super short” magnums were so short that feeding problems occurred in some platforms.
For the record, I’m not a huge .25-caliber fan but I neither hate them nor ignore them. I have a long history with .25s. In the early ‘70s, on a cougar hunt, the houndsman handed me a Colt Lightning slide-action .25-20. Since then, I’ve hunted with all of them, even tried the .25 WSSM when it was new. I had a super-accurate .25-06, used it a lot, have had a couple of .257 Weatherby Magnums. As a lever-action buff, I’ve had a succession of .250 Savage rifles, have a good one now, made in 1920. Also have a 1906 M94 in .25-35. My current favorite .25, however, is a Dakota M76 in .257 Roberts, accurate and sweet-shooting.
This blacktail was taken with a .257 Weatherby Magnum. By far the fastest commercial .25-caliber, the .257 Wby shoots flat and hits hard.
I admit that I’m not passionate about .25s, but friends that I’ve respected have been. Great gunwriter, friend, and mentor Bob Milek was a quarter-bore guy. He loved the .257 Roberts and .25-06 equally. Gary Sitton, one of our greatest gunwriting talents, was also a .25-06 guy. My longtime boss at Petersen’s HUNTING, Ken Elliott, was a .257 Weatherby Magnum guy, thought it was the cat’s pajamas. So did Robert E. “Pete” Petersen, founder of Petersen Publishing. Sadly, all these guys are gone. Scott Rupp, one of the best Editors I currently work for, is still with us. He’s a quarter-bore guy.
Tastes in cartridges are often somewhat reginal. Usually, this is driven by game hunted, and by local hunting conditions. Texas is the great stronghold of the .25-06. Hard to find a Texas deer camp where somebody isn’t toting a .25-06. Medium-sized deer, shots often on the longer side. More than that: A common landform there is long, open cuts between brushlines, the famous Texas senderos. Here’s the thing about hunting a sendero: They’re narrow with few reference points. When a buck steps out he may not stop for long. No time to mess with a rangefinder, quick look at antlers and shoot. A flat-shooting .25 is a near-perfect choice.
In 2023, Ryan Paul brought a Savage M20 to Kansas, first time Boddington has seen an M20 in the field. An aperture-sight rifle, Paul used it to take does, using a scoped rifle for his buck.
In Central California, we hunt small-bodied blacktail deer. The .25-06 is popular here today, but, historically, I think the .250 Savage was a top gun. I say this because, for years, it was easy to find Savage 99s in .250 on almost any used-gun rack. In the .250 Savage’s heyday, we didn’t yet have feral hogs, and in our tight canyons, shots on our blacktails are rarely long. The .250 Savage was an ideal choice.
For me, the .25s are excellent for pronghorns and deer-sized game, questionable for larger game. Others disagree. Bob Milek used his .257 Roberts or .25-06 for elk almost every year. Milek was a Wyoming resident, usually looking for a fat cow or young bull for the freezer, rarely seeking (or taking) mature bulls. In that context, fine. For all-around elk hunting, I draw the line. Can work just fine, with caution, but I don’t think the .25s offer either the bullet weight or frontal area for general use on game larger than deer.
A nice Central Coast blacktail, taken with a .25-06 on a Ruger M77 action. Accurate and flat-shooting, the .25-06 is the most popular .25-caliber cartridge, a great choice for deer-sized game.
If there’s a fly in the .25-caliber ointment, it’s a bullet problem. Like our traditional .270 cartridges, the .25s have always been considered hunting cartridges. Historically, there have been almost no match-grade bullets or loads in .25-caliber. Today, with the rage for range, little development of modern, low-drag .257 projectiles. As with older .270s, part of this is a rifling twist issue. Since the 1920s, standard rifling twist for .25-caliber cartridges has been 1:10, stabilizing bullets from about 70 to 120 grains. Maximum G1 Ballistic Coefficient (BC) for the most aerodynamic 120-grain .257 bullets is about .400. Not bad, but not in the same league as the modern low-drag bullets with BCs well over .600.
We need longer, heavier .257 bullets to get there, but our 1:10 barrels won’t stabilize them, and many of the actions on our .25-caliber rifles won’t house them. There are some options out there. Berger makes a 133-grain .257 bullet, and Hornady has a new 134-grain .257 ELD-Match with G1 BC of .645. Undoubtedly, these choices will grow. However, none of my .25s will stabilize these bullets. I’m not interested in rebarreling. Same story as my pet .270 Winchesters regarding the new, heavier .277 bullets.
Two different approaches to varmint rifles. Left, a Savage .22-250. Right, a .25-06 on a Ruger M77 action, both with adequate accuracy for any varminting. Boddington believes the .25-06 is the most powerful cartridge that makes sense for varminting.
Doesn’t matter to me. I’m not an extreme-range guy. My .25s shoot well enough and flat enough for my purposes. Happy to keep them in their box as awesome, light-recoiling choices for deer-sized game, at shooting distances I’m comfortable with.
In America, above .30-caliber, cartridge popularity drops like a thrown rock. This is as it should be. Little on this continent that can’t be done with a .30-caliber and good bullets. Millions of American deer hunters don’t even need a .30, filling their freezers and trophy walls just fine with lighter calibers.
Boddington and Jack Atcheson Jr. with a Montana mule deer taken with a .338 Win Mag. Atcheson is a huge .338 fan, rarely using any other cartridge…anywhere. For deer-sized game, Boddington usually uses lighter cartridges. But, as Atcheson says, the .338 “numbs them.”
Still, we do have larger game: Elk, moose, the big bears. Hunters who pursue them—and those who dream of such hunts—love to argue around the campfire about the best and most perfect cartridges. Calibers and cartridge choices are legion. I’ve had long affairs with 8mms, diameter .323. Few cartridges and, ultimately, not enough bullets. Friend and mentor Colonel Charles Askins was the ultimate 8mm guru. Askins begged for a 250-grain 8mm bullet, but 220 grains has been the limit. Whether .325 WSM, 8mm Remington Magnum (or one of Askins’ myriad 8mm wildcats), a fast 8mm with 220-grain bullet is a wonderful thumper on elk. However, in my opinion, available bullets aren’t heavy enough for the largest bears.
Pound for pound, Boddington doesn’t believe moose are as tough as elk, but moose are much bigger. This bullet was taken at about 300 yards with a .338 RUM, firing 250-grain Swift A-Frame.
I also love the .35s. There are bunches of older .35s: .35 Remington; .348, .358, .356 Winchester. Also new: .350 Legend and .360 Buckhammer. Great for black bears and feral hogs, but either marginal in power for larger game, or not enough velocity for versatility in open country. The .35 Whelen and .350 Rem Mag are almost there in both power and velocity. Wonderful for elk and moose, just a bit on the mild side for anything bigger. Oddly, there have been almost no fast .35s. The .358 Norma Magnum is rare; the .358 Alaskan (7mm STW necked up) never made it into factory form.
In October ’23 Boddington used a .338 Win Mag barrel on his Blaser R8 on a brown bear hunt on the Alaska Peninsula. Didn’t get a bear, but he was ready.
Tough to make a case for bigger. The 9.3mms (.366-inch) are popular in Europe, used for driven boar, also by Africa-bound Europeans as alternative to .375. The two most popular—the rimless 9.3×62 in bolt-actions and rimmed 9.3x74R in single-shots and doubles—are just slightly less powerful than the .375 H&H, so plenty for North America’s largest game…but maybe don’t shoot as flat as optimum for our conditions. The faster .370 Sako and 9.3×64 Brenneke are similar to the .375 H&H in bullet weight, velocity, energy, and trajectory. Like the .375s themselves, this means they are overpowered for almost everything in North America except our biggest bears.
I’ve used various 9.3s on African buffalo, and in North America for hogs and black bear. Over here, I’ve used .375s for elk and moose, and for big bears. Awesomely effective…but more powerful than absolutely necessary. Truth is, for North American hunters on home turf, there’s little justification for a 9.3mm, .375, or larger. Fun to own, limited utility.
Left to right .325 WSM, .8mm Rem Mag, .338 Win Mag, .338 RUM, .340 Wby Mag. As a group, the “medium magnums” are extremely effective on game larger than deer. Boddington has hunted with all these and more but believes the .338 Win Mag is the most useful: Fast enough, without excessive recoil, and available in the greatest variety of loads.
If you’re looking for a cartridge with more knockdown power for North America’s large—and largest—game, it seems to me the caliber to pick is .338. Bullet selection is rich, standard at about 180 to 250 grains. There are numerous good cartridges using this bullet diameter at various velocity levels, including: .338 Federal, .338 Marlin Express, .338-06, .338 Ruger Compact Magnum (RCM), .338 Weatherby Rebated Precision Magnum (RPM) .338 Winchester Magnum, .340 Weatherby Magnum, .338 Remington Ultra Magnum (RUM), .338 Lapua Magnum, and .338-378 Weatherby.
All are adequate for elk and moose, and all are fast enough for at least medium ranges. However, if we include the biggest bears—and want the utmost in versatility—then we probably want a cartridge with enough case capacity to propel heavy bullets at meaningful velocity. I think the place to start is in the middle of that cartridge list, with the .338 Winchester Magnum.
Boddington has found most .338s to be accurate and non-finicky. His .338 Win Mag barrel for the Blaser R8 is simply amazing, producing sub-MOA groups with 250-grain bullets
Winchester started their line of .30-06-length belted magnums in 1956 with the .458. In 1958 the family grew with two new cartridges in versions of their beloved Model 70 bolt-action: The .264 Win Mag in the “Westerner;” the .338 Win Mag in the “Alaskan.” The .338 Win Mag was intended for the largest Alaskan game, which includes elk, moose, and our biggest bears. Most common factory loads are 200, 225, and 250-grain bullets. Respectively, velocities are around 2950, 2800, and 2650 fps, all producing about 3900 ft-lbs of energy.
.33-caliber has deeper roots among British cartridges. The .333 Jeffery, available in both rimless and rimmed (.333 Flanged) versions, was loaded with 250 and 300-grain bullets. The .318 Westley Richards was more popular. Its designation comes from the inconsistent British convention of naming cartridges by the smaller land vice groove diameter: The .318 uses a .330-inch bullet, so also a .33. In the days before caliber minimums were instituted, both the .333 Jeffery and the .318 WR were used to take game up to elephant (with non-expanding solids). WDM “Karamoja” Bell, best known for preferring the .275 Rigby (7×57), wrote that his largest one-day bag of elephants was taken with a .318, using 250-grain solids.
PH Cliff Walker and Boddington with a Lichtenstein’s hartebeest, taken with a .338 RUM. Although not especially common in Africa, all the faster .338 cartridges are adequate for the full run of large African antelopes.
Gunwriter Elmer Keith (1899-1984) hailed from Idaho and hunted elk in black timber. He became a lifelong believer in larger calibers with long, heavy bullets. Working with Charles O’Neil and Don Hopkins, he used the .30-06 case and .333 Jeffery bullets to create the wildcat .333 OKH.
Winchester’s .338 used a literal .338-inch bullet. In 1902 Winchester introduced the .33 Winchester in their M1886 lever-action, using a 200-grain .338-inch bullet at 2200 fps. The .33 predated the British cartridges, but why Winchester chose the .338-inch diameter isn’t known. Although Winchester quit loading .33 Win in 1940, it’s natural that Winchester used the same diameter for their .338 Win Mag. All “.33s” that have followed, including Elmer Keith’s later wildcats, use .338-inch bullets.
The .264 and .338 Winchester Magnums were introduced together in 1958. The .264 debuted in a version of the Winchester Model 70 called “Westerner;” the .338 was brought out in an M70 dubbed “Alaskan.”
Like most new cartridges, the .338 got a lot of buzz, but initial sales were slow. Probably because the word spread about sharp recoil. Duh! Although the lighter bullets kick less, you cannot produce nearly 4000 ft-lbs of energy without recoil, and not everyone needs this level of power. Over time, those who do discovered the .338 is wonderfully effective on large game. Lighter cartridges work fine on elk, but elk are tough, and many hunters want more. The .338 has become a standard “big gun” for elk, excellent for moose, and a sensible, fully adequate minimum for our largest bears.
Although lighter cartridges certainly work, Boddington believes the several .33-caliber cartridges are ideal for elk. This Roosevelt elk was taken with a .338 Win Mag using a 210-grain Nosler Partition.
Let’s go back to that list of current .33-caliber cartridges. The .338 RCM and Weatherby’s new .338 RPM are ballistically about the same as the .338 Win Mag, with more modern case design: The short, fat, unbelted RCM is a short-action cartridge; the RPM is unbelted. Despite its out-of-fashion belted case, the primary advantage of the .338 Win Mag is its greater popularity, offering a wider selection of loads from more manufacturers.
The last four cartridges on that list–.340 Wby Mag, .338 RUM, .338 Lapua, and .338-.378 Wby Mag—all have greater case capacity and are considerably faster than the .338 Win Mag. Energy yields approach or exceed 5000 ft-lbs. Trajectories are flatter, thus extending effective range. These are valuable attributes, but it depends on what you need, and how much recoil you’re comfortable with. I haven’t spent much time with either the .338 Lapua or .338-.378 Wby Mag…and probably won’t. I used the .338 RUM when it was new, also did a lot of hunting with the .340 Wby Mag. Both were wonderfully effective, hard-hitting and flat shooting.
Donna Boddington used a Proof Research .338 Win Mag and a single 225-grain InterBond to take this big Alaskan brown bear on Admiralty Island.
I took the .340 to Africa a couple of times. I’m not especially sensitive to recoil, but that’s where I learned my limit. In the context of shooting plains game almost daily, I decided the .340 was more fun than needed. I circled back to the .338 Win Mag. It kicks, but I’m comfortable with that level of recoil. The faster .33s come back a bit too hard and too fast for my taste, especially on a sustained basis. Like everything else, they can be tamed with muzzle brakes. I prefer not to use brakes because of the blast and, anyway, I’m not an extreme-range shooter on game. The .338 Win Mag shoots flat enough for my purposes, with acceptable recoil.
A good black bear from southeast Alaska, taken with a Proof Research .338 Win Mag. There are many great cartridges for black bear, but the .338 is adequate for the largest bears that walk.
My old friend Jack Atcheson Jr. is a major .338 fan. Great sheep hunter and Montana elk hunter, he uses almost nothing else…all over the world. On deer-sized game the fast .33s speak with authority, but they are needlessly powerful. Trajectories are flat enough for great versatility, but I prefer lighter, faster cartridges for mountain game. For me, the .33s are fantastic for elk and moose, devastatingly effective on our largest black bears, and fully adequate for the largest bears. Perhaps oddly, I’ve used the .338 relatively little in Africa. Not sure why. It is unquestionably fully adequate for the full run of large plains game. I’ve often stated that a .338 matched up with a .416 makes the most perfect African battery.
For big bears, moose, and in Africa, I’ve usually loaded up with 250-grain bullets. It’s important to understand that the 250-grain .338 bullet has slightly higher Sectional Density (SD) than 300-grain .375 or 400-grain .416 bullets. So, if construction and velocity are similar, it will penetrate at least as well as these famous bullets. For elk and smaller game, I usually use lighter bullets from 200 to 225 grains, increasing velocity, flattening trajectory, and reducing recoil. Not everyone needs a .338, but if you want more power for larger game, I’m convinced a fast .33 is the way to go.
Like most kids, my first shooting was with a single-shot .22, but, absent a modern Kansas deer season, we were shotgunners, no need for centerfire rifles. Couple hundred miles southeast, Warsaw, Missouri, had a sign proclaiming it “Gunstock Capitol of the World,” home to both the E.C. Bishop and Reinhart Fajen gunstock companies. There, my Dad’s friend Jack Pohl, owner of Bishop’s, was an avid benchrest shooter, big-game hunter, and handloader.
As a youngster, Boddington did almost all of his hunting with handloads, secure in the belief he could build a better cartridge than he could buy. His first “good” mule deer was taken in 1978 with a Ruger .30-06 using 180-grain Nosler Partition and a near-max charge of IMR 4350. The shot was about 450 yards, a very long poke back then.
Mr. Pohl was enlisted to introduce us to the centerfire rifle world. I was probably 12. The deal: He’d take us to the range, and woodchuck shooting. As a graduation exercise, we’d join him on a pronghorn and deer hunt in Wyoming. Big stuff! First, I had to learn how to handload. We started on his bench, then got a basic setup in our basement. Dad knew how to supervise his young son, but I did all the loading. I loved it, spent countless hours with that green RCBS press. Sixty years later, it’s not my only press, but I still use it.
Back then, there were two primary rationales for handloading. First, save money. Second, more important: It was an article of faith that you could load better ammo than you could buy.
Going back 60 years, Boddington has spent countless enjoyable hours at the loading bench. This is his new bench with new Hornady tools, but he still has—and uses—a lot of the reloading equipment he’s had since he was a teenager.
Today, both arguments hold less water. Ammo was cheaper back then, so were the basic tools and components. Even then, you had to do a lot of shooting to amortize the equipment. Of course, handloading drives you to shoot more, not a bad thing. You must try this load and that and keep searching for a better combination.
Today, I’m shocked at the cost of factory ammo. However, reloading components and equipment have also gone up (like everything else). Buying in bulk, especially powder and primers, reduces the per-cartridge cost. Still, it takes a lot more shooting to break even.
This is Boddington’s lifetime-best group, .052-inch with an 8mm Remington Magnum and a carefully-worked up handload. Groups like this are uncommon with anything, but most attainable through careful, precise handloading.
I started handloading in the Sixties. By the Nineties, factory ammo was so good, and so varied, that it was no longer a given it could be beat…depending on your purpose, and how serious you are. For ultimate accuracy, such as benchrest, long-range, and precision shooting, carefully concocted handloads usually win.
No matter how good, any factory load is just one assemblage of the four components: Case, primer, propellent, projectile. Changing any of them can make a difference in any rifle. In handloading, you can vary all of them, almost endlessly. Different brands and strengths of primers. Even cases vary among the brands. When I was young, our primary choices in bullets were Hornady, Nosler, Sierra, and Speer. More brands today, more weights and shapes. Back then, we might have had two dozen propellants to choose from, including pistol, rifle, and shotgun powders. Today, into the hundreds, new ones all the time.
The .348 Winchester is one of Boddington’s favorites. Into the 1980s, components were relatively available with multiple choices. Today both ammo and .348-inch bullets are scarce; handloading is the only sensible option for uncommon cartridges.
I’ve always been a lazy handloader. My searches for perfect loads have rarely been exhaustive. I tend to use the cases I have (and, today, the primers I can get), and there are plenty of bullets and powders I’ve never tried. Still, I work up loads for my rifles. I experiment with different powders and bullets, varying charge weight and seating depth. As good as factory ammo is today, I can usually build a more accurate load than I can buy…if I care to try.
I don’t always try. Maximum accuracy isn’t always essential. I’m not a competitor, mostly a hunter, and some of my rifles, older lever-actions and double rifles, are specialized in purpose and limited in range. I can beat factory loads, but not by enough to increase performance.
This Uganda buffalo was taken with a .470 made in 1906, firing a handloaded 500-grain Hornady DGX-Bonded. Since volume is low, factory ammo is currently scarce for most big-bore cartridges.
By the Nineties, factory ammo had gotten so good, and the choices so varied, that I wasn’t loading much anymore. A few years later, not at all. For some years my loading gear was boxed up. Thank God, I kept it!
I restarted mostly because I missed my time at the bench. Cost and performance aside, my single greatest reason for handloading: It’s fun! It is a mindless exercise, except you must stay focused. Do that, inspect constantly, use common sense (and loading manuals), and you can’t get into too much trouble. The results are wonderfully satisfying. I get a huge kick out of shooting a nice, tight group. Even better when it’s a load I cooked up. As a hunter, I still get the same old thrill from taking an animal. Rifles matter to me, so it’s better with a special rifle. Better still with a load I’ve worked up for that rifle and hunt.
Son-in-law Brad Jannenga used Boddington’s Savage 99 in .300 Savage with handloaded Swift Scirocco to take this big Axis buck. Tens of thousands of .300 Savage rifles are still in use…but the majors haven’t done runs of ammo in several years. Handloading is the best answer for many older cartridges.
As we know, things have changed. I didn’t foresee the late-teens ammo shortages, and for sure I didn’t anticipate that nasty little virus. My loading bench kept me sane through the pandemic…and still keeps me in business. Supplies are getting better, but still aren’t right. I’ve been out of standard large rifle primers for months, using magnum primers and dropping the load a wee bit. For sure I can’t always find the exact bullet or propellent I want.
Fortunately, there are lots of choices, usually something out there will work. Just the other day, I shopped this site, found two of three propellant I needed (not bad), and bullets I’d been looking for. Things are getting better…depending on what you shoot. On the shortages: I am not a conspiracy theorist. I put it down to increased demand. Millions of new shooters buying ammo, and that’s a good thing. Also, panic buying and hoarding. I believe the ammo makers are doing their best to catch up. However, it costs gazillions and takes time to gear up for unprecedented demand. This must be done with caution…because peak demand has already subsided.
Boddington isn’t a blackpowder guy but needed to work up loads for his son-in-law’s .500 Black Powder Express, made in 1885. This hog was taken with a 440-grain Hawk bullet with smokeless equivalent load…and lots of Dacron pillow stuffing to keep the powder down on the primer.
The biggest problem for many of us: The catchup process has focused on cartridges with the highest demand and deepest backorders. Outlets are awash in .223, 6.5 Creedmoor, and .308 ammo. I shoot them, but I also shoot older cartridges. Plenty rifles still out there, but factory ammo is scarce because the majors haven’t done runs in years: .250 and .300 Savage, .257 Roberts, .303 British, .348 Winchester.
Handloading has been my salvation. I also use several large-caliber cartridges: .405 Winchester, .450/.400-3”, .450 and .470 Nitro Express. Now we’re down to limited suppliers…and few or no recent runs. PHs all over Africa are dying for ammo (almost literally). So am I. I have great faith in my handloads, no qualms about hunting with them. Except, on dangerous game I prefer to use fresh factory ammo. If something bad happens, just as soon the post-mortem does not suggest it was my handload’s fault. In ’21 I wanted to use a new-to-me but very old .470 on a buffalo hunt in Uganda. Couldn’t find any fresh .470 factory ammo to save my soul. No problem, I’ve had dies since 1980. Getting a double rifle’s barrels to shoot together can be tricky. Got lucky, this rifle responded to a standard recipe. Took two nice bulls with my handloads, great performance and extra fun.
With double rifles, the challenge is getting the barrels to group together. This 1895 double in .303 British has been a treat. Regulated with 215-grain bullets, it also prints well with lighter bullets at the same velocity. These pairs represent changes in sight elevation.
As a lazy handloader, I’ve generally resisted complex projects. This is my primary reason for avoiding wildcat or non-standard cartridges. Slothfulness aside, I think we have enough standard factory cartridges to choose from. However, with shortages and interrupted supplies, sometimes handloading is the only solution. Gotta have dies, but even with non-standard cartridges, custom dies can be made (extra-simple if you have fired cases from the chamber)
Again, I try to stay out of this game, but recently I’ve had some unusual handloading projects. I bought a .50-115 Sharps from a dying friend. No factory ammo for that one, but the rifle came with cases, dies, and a bullet mold. That one has been fun. I’m not a blackpowder guy, nor a cast bullet guy, but it shoots well with a 515-grain cast bullet and Tin Star, a blackpowder-equivalent propellent that I’d never even heard of before.
The .348 Winchester is one of Boddington’s favorites. Into the 1980s, components were relatively available with multiple choices. Today both ammo and .348-inch bullets are scarce; handloading is the only sensible option for uncommon cartridges.
Although scarce today, the .303 British isn’t rare. My rifle is a very old double, regulated for the old 215-grain bullets. Woodleigh in Australia still made them, but their factory had a major fire. I found a supply, am hoarding them. Took some work, but I have loads that regulate well with 150 and 174-grain Hornady as well as the 215-grain Woodleigh. In May, I shot a nice Alberta black bear with the old double and 215-grain handloads. Awesome penetration, sort of double the fun!
A nice Alberta bear, taken with double in .303 British, firing a handloaded 215-grain Woodleigh. This was the original .303 bullet weight, so this hundred-year-old rifle was regulated with that bullet weight.
The biggest recent project: My son-in-law bought an 1885 exposed hammer double in .500 Black Powder Express (BPE). Of course, no ammo, but there are bullets, and case dimensions are the same as for .500 Nitro Express. This one has been a nightmare, but we’ve got both barrels shooting together with a mild charge of smokeless IMR 4198 and about 15 grains of Dacron pillow stuffing on top of the powder. Between poor light and my fading eyes, it took several outings, but I finally pounded a wild hog with it. If there’s an ammo problem, handloading can almost always solve it…and it’s fun!
