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.
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
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
When selecting a hunting cartridge, three considerations are most important: Accuracy, shooting ranges, and power, all adequate for the game to be hunted. These apply for hunting any game from prairie dogs to pachyderms.
For varmints, power might seem a silly consideration, so let’s consider that first. The word “varmint” is uniquely American, a corruption from the English “vermin.” The implication is noxious pests, generally removed with minimal restrictions (such as seasons, bag limits, and license requirements). The game Americans generally consider “varmints” range from grass-eating and hole-digging rodents up to coyotes. The distinction can change. In British East Africa (now Kenya and Tanzania), lions were classed as vermin until late in the game. In Europe, the marmot (relative to our woodchuck) is highly prized, often hunted with seasons and limits. In North America, “furbearers” often have separate seasons, sometimes a separate license.
Because of numbers and voracious predation, rules for coyotes are usually liberal. It’s old Wile E. Coyote that calls up the power question on varmint cartridges. From small gophers to the largest woodchuck, any of the rimfires on up are powerful enough, just a matter of how close you must get.
Coyotes are different, pound for pound for pound very tough animals. Power doesn’t matter so much if the encounter is close. However, unless one is calling, coyote encounters aren’t often close. For me, coyote hunting is a centerfire game. Which one depends on required range, and whether pelt damage is a concern. Serious callers (which I am not) often use shotguns with heavy charges of coarse shot. Easier to hit moving coyotes coming to the call, and minimal pelt damage past 25 yards.
The .17 Remington was developed in Australia, no coyotes but problems with non-native foxes. Light, frangible .17-caliber bullets tend to enter and come apart without exiting, so wonderfully effective without ruining the pelt. The popular .17 HMR rimfire is an awesome medium-range varmint cartridge, but marginally powerful for coyotes unless the shot is close. Today we have centerfire .17s from .17 Hornet up through grand-dad .17 Rem. Plus the rimfire .17 Winchester Super Magnum and the .22 WMR. All are adequate for coyotes, effective range depending on velocity. Above that, the .204 Ruger and all the .22 centerfires are fine for coyotes.
I do little specific coyote hunting. The majority I take are targets of opportunity while hunting other game. This means I’m usually carrying a centerfire adequate for deer-sized game. Effective for coyote control, but don’t expect salvageable skins. A partial compromise is to use a milder .22 centerfire like the .223 Rem with non-expanding military or FMJ match bullets. Caliber-size entrance and exit holes are common. Just check your regs; non-expanding bullets aren’t legal for hunting in some jurisdictions. Also, poor choices for other varminting. Frangible “varmint” bullets aren’t quick-expanding just for explosive effect; also, to reduce ricochet.
The varmint hunting I know best is small rodents: Ground squirrels in California, prairie dogs on the Great Plains, both found in colonies. I’ve done some rockchuck shooting in the West, but I can count all the woodchucks I’ve shot without taking my shoes off. Power isn’t an issue. I’ve had great fun shooting prairie dogs with .22 Long Rifle hollowpoints, Some serious Eastern hunters make a game of stalking woodchucks with rimfires.
Wherever, shooting rodents isn’t about raw power, but about accuracy and range, which sort of go together. Prairie dog shooting is perhaps the most demanding of raw accuracy. Small targets open country, usually windy. An adult prairie dog might offer a target as much as twelve inches nose to tail, more like three inches from brisket to backline. Presentation may be anything, but is usually either standing vertically, or horizontal. Either way, there’s a large target in one direction, very small the other.
We typically judge rifle accuracy by average group size. In America, usually at 100 yards. For a hunting rifle, the Holy Grail is generally one Minute of Angle (MOA), even for mountain game. One MOA means one inch at 100 yards, natural dispersion spreading to two inches at 200 yards, three inches at 300 yards, and so forth.
On the windy prairies, and with animals often moving while bullets are in flight, there’s no such thing as hitting prairie dogs with every shot. I prefer hitting to missing. When I inevitably miss, I like to understand why, then correct with the next shot. Doesn’t do me any good to miss because I’m out of accuracy. So, for a general-purpose prairie dog rifle, one MOA accuracy isn’t enough. That means I’m beyond Minute of Prairie Dog at 300 yards. That’s a fair poke on a prairie dog-sized target, nobody hits them all. However, if you start with one-inch groups at 100 yards, naturally expanding groups will cause misses beyond 300 yards. Since I like hits better than misses, I expect a serious prairie dog rifle to do better. No such thing as too much accuracy for small varmints. Also, no limited to how far one can shoot at prairie dogs! Only a few blessed and gifted rifle barrels will deliver one half MOA groups on a consistent basis, but that’s the goal.
It’s not about cartridges. However, my heavy-barreled Ruger No. 1 in .204 Ruger will do that. In May 2024, I was delighted to see that friend and prairie dog shooting partner Gordon Marsh found a No. 1 in .204 that will also do that. I’ve had various other .22 centerfires that grouped as well or better, also 6mms and some larger cartridges.
That level of accuracy is not essential. It’s just that, with less accuracy, effective range is limited. Well, absent wind-bucking and trajectory-flattening velocity, range is limited anyway. On prairie dogs, that’s part of the fun; just depends on how personal you take misses.
The last time I shot prairie dogs with a .22 rimfire was with a Ruger 10/22 target rifle. It averaged .75-inch 50-yard groups across several loads. Theoretically, Minute of Prairie Dog to 400 yards. Between ridiculous holdover, huge wind deflection, and long flight time, you’re not going to hit many prairie dogs at 400 yards with a .22 Long Rifle. Once I figured holdover and wind, it was deadly at 100 yards, and I was surprised at how consistently I could hit at 150 yards. Then, I was done, time to break out a faster cartridge.
In our prairie dog group, Bill Green and Ronnie Whitten love their .17 HMRs. Amazing accuracy, uncanny performance. I’ve seen them hit prairie dogs at 300 yards too often to be flukes. However, the .17-caliber’s light bullets are extremely susceptible to wind, great training to learn to deal with it, but the .17 HMR is pretty much done at 200 yards.
This year, Gordon borrowed another page from my book and also brought a CZ .22 Hornet. Introduced in 1930, the Hornet is America’s first factory varmint cartridge. Despite its archaic rimmed, tapered case, it is shockingly accurate and surprisingly fast; lighter bullets can be loaded to nearly 3000 fps. Fitted with a suppressor, the little Hornet turned out to be Gordon’s primary prairie dog rifle this year. When it was calm, I was impressed to see how consistently he was hitting clear to 300 yards. When the wind came up, he was done, needed something faster.
Since power isn’t an issue, prairie dogs can be shot with anything that’s accurate enough. Kansas friend Vance Cain told me he used to shoot prairie dogs with his .458. When I was a kid, I shot a lot of prairie dogs with my .264, and my “go-to” was a .243. Many folks use various 6mms and .25-calibers with light bullets. The .22-250 reigns as the most popular “fast” varmint cartridge. I used the .22-250 for years, and Gordon always has his heavy-barreled Savage .22-250, his “big gun,” brought out when the wind comes up or only distant ‘dogs are visible.
There are many great varmint cartridges: All the .17s, .20s, .22s, even the 6mms and .25s if one prefers. Some are old, some new. Both the 6mm ARC and brand-new .22 ARC have been wonderfully successful. The .22 ARC has similar velocity to .22-250, but AR-compatible, and barreled with faster twist to use heavier bullets, which buck wind better, but produce more recoil.
Unlike much varmint shooting, prairie dogs tend to offer multiple opportunities. So, for me the ideal prairie dog rifle has lots of reach, but mild enough recoil to allow calling shots through the scope. Call the wind, take the shot, see the strike, reload and adjust. The .223 allows this. Unless very heavy, the .22-250 bounces just a bit too much, as do all larger cartridges. The .204 is faster but, with lighter bullets, has less recoil; it has become my favorite all-around varmint cartridge.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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!
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
I am a firm believer in Murphy’s Law: Whatever can go wrong, will. And its First Corollary: At the worst possible time. Mr. Murphy lies in wait for the unwary and unready. In our worlds of shooting and hunting, there are all kinds of things that go wrong. Much can be prevented by preparation but, even with the most careful planning, stuff can still happen.
Sometimes we do it to ourselves. There’s something to be said for the KISS principle: Keep it simple, stupid. With shooting at longer ranges so popular today, most of us have gone to “dialing holdover” using our elevation turrets. No question, this is the best and most precise way to adjust for distance. With today’s wonderful optics, more consistent than any reticle system.
However, dialing the range is fraught with human error. Can anybody who “dials” a lot honestly say that he/she has never dialed incorrectly? Or, forgotten to return to zero after firing a shot? As common and more dangerous, forgetting to return to zero after not firing a shot?
Not all of today’s great scopes have a solid zero stop. Probably not so critical in competition, but in my view essential on a hunting scope…because stuff happens. In Alaska a couple years ago, young Josh Mayall came into caribou camp with a few days of the season left. He’d be packing during the follow-on brown bear season, but he had a caribou tag. He had the outfitter’s .375, but he’s left-handed like me. I’d just shot a fine caribou, knew my 6.5-.300 Weatherby was zeroed, so I offered it to him, fortunately with plenty of ammo.
Hunting with his father, Pete Mayall, their first afternoon they saw a giant caribou. Josh hit it, then couldn’t hit it again. After the first shot, the caribou and hey needed to cross a thick willow bottom to reposition. All we can figure: Crawling through brush, the elevation turret caught on a branch and spun. Fortunately, the caribou was hit hard; they finally got close enough for a finishing shot. Stuff happens.
Happened to me in the ’21 Kansas whitetail season. Easy shot at close range, clean miss. Checked zero, two feet low at 50 yards. That dial got spun hard. I’d had the rifle in a soft case in the four-wheeler that morning, dial must have spun when I took it out of the case in the dark. Depending on the scope, you can usually figure out how much it spun and bring it back to zero. This one had spun a complete revolution. Unlikely, but stuff happens.
The only real solution is to find a target immediately and make sure. This just happened to me in Africa, good scope with tight turret clicks. Again, spun taking it out of a soft case. Only a few clicks, could have been a full revolution. We went straight to the camp range.
Mr. Murphy lies in wait, but much of the stuff he loves to pounce on is preventable. We can harp on checking screws and straps and such until the cows come home, but we don’t always do it. Ever had a sling break or a sling swivel stud strip out? I’ve had both. Depends on where and when it happens. Can make the rifle a fulcrum, almost certain damage to rifle, scope, or both.
How carefully do you check your ammo? For hunting, it’s downright dumb to not run every cartridge you’re taking in and out of your chamber. I must not have done that at least once. I was far up on a mountain in New Zealand with a .300 H&H, charged with handloads that shot quarter-inch groups. Accuracy didn’t mean much when I chambered a round, didn’t fire, cleared the rifle, and had a bullet stuck in the lands and a magazine full of propellent. The latter was a matter of dumping and swabbing. The former was a real issue, not like we had a cleaning rod on the mountain. After much experimentation and trimming, I finally crafted a long, straight sapling that could be used as a ramrod.
Factory loads are not free of issues, but handloads are more likely to cause ammo problems, for lots of reasons. Just now, I was in South Africa with a gent shooting a .300 WSM. Some of his handloads had been made from full-length-sizing and trimming .325 WSM cases. Sound enough, but he’d held the resizing die a few thousandths loose. Intermittently, some of his cases were refusing to extract. Basically, his rifle became a single-shot…and somebody needed to carry a ramrod on every stalk.
My reloading stuff was packed away for years, back up today with a new reloading shed. I’m loving it, shooting mostly handloads again. I trust my handloads, don’t shoot anyone else’s. However, inspection is constant and continuous. All cases stretch during firing, but cases in rear-locking actions (most lever-actions) are especially notorious. Stretching reduces case life. Properly, we examine fired cases for a “ring” that suggests incipient case head separation. Unfortunately, that ring isn’t always obvious. I was taking my .300 Savage to the range for one more check before a hunt. If there was a tell-tale ring, I didn’t see it. Doesn’t matter, because on firing only the base of case ejected; the rest of the case remained in chamber. No damage but getting the rest of the case out required trip to a gunsmith. That rifle didn’t go on that hunt. In future, I’ll only hunt with that rifle with maximum once-fired brass.
Although the paperwork is draconian, suppressors are wonderful tools. Provided threads are the same, you can switch a suppressor from one gun to another, handy. Except, almost like switching a scope, you must remember to check zero. I was on a whitetail hunt in Nebraska when my hunting partner missed what might have been the buck of the season. He’d switched his suppressor to a lever-action .45-70 and had forgotten to check zero. Murphy loved it!
Hopefully, we all know it’s essential to check a rifle on site or in camp at the start of any hunt. We’ve all failed to do this, but that’s inviting Murphy to join the party. In our Kansas camp, we ask hunters to arrive early afternoon the day before, and I have our range all set up. Last year, just one of my hunters declined to check. Well, you can lead your horse to water, but you can’t make it drink. First morning he missed what he described as “the biggest buck he’d ever seen.”
Too late, we checked his rifle. It was off a couple of inches. Not really enough to cause a miss at the distance he shot, but I like to have things perfect at the start of a hunt.
Hopefully it doesn’t happen often, but once in a while everybody misses. Usually, I know what I did wrong, but if I’m not sure I like to check zero, just to be certain. Last month, in South Africa, I got into camp early enough to check zero that afternoon. Shooting at plates was a mistake. Always better to shoot a proper target but seemed okay. First day I missed an impala, PH Fred Burchell calling the strike to the left. Hmm, longish shot, felt like I could have been high or low, but to the left didn’t make sense. So, we repaired to the range. Sure enough, the rifle was shooting a bit left.
Stuff happens, and you never know when—or why—a scope might shift zero. On longer hunts, and especially on tough hunts, I like to check zero every few days, just so I don’t unwittingly invite Mr. Murphy to join me. Some hunts are tougher than others. I got my Wyoming bighorn on the eleventh day of a ten-day horseback hunt. The previous afternoon outfitter Ron Dube finally glassed up a mature ram. He was far away, no way we could get on him that afternoon. No way I wanted to mess this up after ten days of tough sledding. I insisted we stop and shoot at a rock, just to be sure. The rifle still in zero, we slept on the mountain that night and shot the ram late the next morning.
Other stuff can happen. Twice I’ve opened gun cases to find stocks broken off at the wrist. I’ve seen two other stocks break in vehicles, and one more from recoil. In case you have any question about which is stronger, wood or synthetic, all five were walnut. Laminate is probably the strongest of all, although the heaviest. Years ago, I got into deer camp in Georgia to find the stock snapped off on my then-favorite .30-06. No spare rifles available, just one more use for duct tape. I fitted it together, wrapped it in duct tape, and went out to check zero. Murphy was there, but I got the last laugh. The rifle was still in perfect zero, shot two nice whitetails with it.
Midsummer, hunting season a long way off. That makes it a good time to dust off Old (or New) Betsy and try her out with some different loads.
By
Craig Boddington
Midsummer, hunting season a long way off. That makes it a good time to dust off Old (or New) Betsy and try her out with some different loads. It’s never been a good idea to wait until just before Opening Day before getting in some serious range work, far worse today. Supplies are better today, but there are still shortages and back-orders.
So, maybe you can’t find the brand you’re looking for. Any factory load is just one assemblage of its four components: One bullet, propellant charge, primer, and case. Factory ammunition is wonderful today, but there’s no predicting if any one load will shoot well in your rifle.
So, for accuracy, you try this and that. If you shoot a popular cartridge, something like 6.5 Creedmoor, .308 Winchester, or .30-06, you’ll get old or go broke before you try every load. You’ll quit when you find a load accurate enough for your purposes. I have stacks of partial factory boxes, because, after just one group, I knew my rifle didn’t like that load.
Handloaders have a huge advantage. Oh, we can’t always get the specific bullet, primer, powder, or brand of case we’re used to, but we can surely find components that will work. Then we can put them together…and vary the recipe infinitely.
I’m a lazy handloader. I start with a bullet I like, usually a favorite powder, primers I’m used to…and whatever once-fired cases I have. To save range time (and components), I’ll load just five, then another five with a grain or two more powder, and so forth. If I weren’t so lazy, or if I was in search of utmost accuracy, then I’d weigh cases and bullets for consistency, vary seating depth, and other tricks. Usually, I’m thinking about hunting ammo, so my goal is to find a load that produces the level of accuracy I need to hunt with that rifle…with a bullet that has the performance characteristics I’m looking for.
With factory loads, we can only vary powders, primers, and cases by changing brands. At least with popular cartridges, we can usually vary bullets. Most manufacturers load several different bullets. Again, there’s no telling what bullet or load a given rifle might shoot best. Some rifles are finicky, others or not. I had a Remington M700 Mountain Rifle in .280 Remington, usually an accurate platform…and usually an accurate cartridge. At that time, Remington was the primary source for .280 Rem. One of my better editors once commented, “Remington rifles tend to shoot well with Remington ammo.” Though about it and agreed, but this darn rifle didn’t shoot anything well. With all existing factory loads, it fired shotgun patterns, not groups. By this time, I had dies and plenty of once-fired cases. I looked up a random recipe and loaded up some Nosler AccuTip bullets. Good Lord, instant MOA groups.
That degree of finicky is unusual. Also unusual to get an exponential accuracy increase just by changing loads. Usually, differences between loads and bullets are very incremental. Since it’s impossible to try everything, we usually limit experimentation to bullets that suit our purposes.
Keep in mind that, ultimately, it’s the bullet that does the work. Lots of brands, lots of weights, shapes, and styles, and different types of internal construction. With today’s precise manufacturing, I don’t think there are any bad bullets out there. Modern bullets do what they’re supposed to do, but performance characteristics vary. When choosing bullets, it’s important to know the performance you want. Then, you must cut through the hype and understand what a given bullet was designed to do.
If I wanted maximum accuracy, I’d start with match bullets…understanding that, in some rifles, they may not be as accurate as some hunting bullets. Some match bullets are non-expanding “solids,” thus illegal for hunting in many jurisdictions. Many match bullets are hollowpoints, a design proven for accuracy, and hollowpoints expand, thus always legal for hunting. However, match hollow-points are designed purely for accuracy, not for terminal performance on game. Some hunters swear by them, but I fear them. When they work, they often drop game like lightning, but performance on game can be erratic. Match bullets are simply not designed for consistent penetration and expansion on game animals.
Historically, the most common .30-caliber match bullet was a 168-grain boattail. Today, we have .30-caliber match bullets up to 250 grains. This illustrates a key point in bullet selection: Bullet weight overcomes shortcomings in bullet construction. If your accuracy standards are such that you simply must use match bullets for hunting, then use heavier bullets.
Hunting bullets must be adequately accurate for the game and shooting distances but are designed first and foremost for consistent terminal performance on game. On impact, expanding hunting bullets are supposed to upset or “mushroom,” creating larger wound channels. However, a hunting bullet must penetrate at least to the vitals on the size of game it is intended for.
Here’s where it gets complicated. Expansion is the enemy to penetration: The more a bullet expands, the more resistance it encounters. Thus, the more quickly it slows and must come to rest. Also, velocity is the enemy to bullet performance. Staying with a .30-caliber example, the .30-30 propels a 150-grain bullet at about 2400 fps. The fastest .30-caliber magnums might be 1200 fps faster. No bullet can perform equally across that velocity range. Obviously, bullets slow at greater distances. By about 500 yards, even the fastest .300 magnum has dropped to .30-30 velocity. Out there, you’ll probably get reliable and consistent performance…with less expansion. With fast cartridges, I start with a tough bullet that will hold up at the highest velocity, lest it come unglued if you draw a close shot.
Absent design feature(s) to keep them together, lead-core bullets usually have at least some of the lead wipe away. Not all bullets are intended to hold together and retain weight. Varmint bullets are designed for rapid, explosive expansion, for maximum damage on rodents, and to reduce ricochet. Big game bullets must hold together well enough to penetrate to the vitals.
Provided I have confidence adequate penetration is certain, it doesn’t bother me if a bullet isn’t recovered showing a near-perfect, intact mushroom, or if loses 30 or 40 percent of its weight. Generations of hunters have been happy with the performance of good old lead-core bullets: Core-Lokt, GameKing, Hi-Shok, Interlock, Power Point. They often aren’t pretty, but they work.
More frangible yet are simple lead-core bullets with polymer tips, such as AccuTip and SST. Such bullets tend to be exceptionally accurate, but expansion is rapid. In my experience, these bullets drop deer-sized game like lightning. However, at extreme velocity they can come apart. Again, bullet weight matters, but I avoid such bullets for close shots in fast magnums, and rarely use them on game larger than deer.
Polymer tips increase aerodynamics and prevent battering in the magazine. Upon impact, the polymer tip is driven down into the bullet, initiating expansion. If you like to recover pretty bullets “against the hide on the far side,” then go to bonded-core bullets, which may or may not have polymer tips. The core is chemically bonded to the copper jacket, an additional process that increases cost. Just about everyone has them now: AccuBond, Core-Lokt Bonded, InterBond, Terminal Ascent, Trophy Bonded Tip, Swift A-Frame and Scirocco, more. Bonded-core bullets offer big mushrooms with high weight retention, often above 90 percent.
For hunting bullets, bonded must be the way to go, right? Maybe, but it’s never that simple. Bonded-core bullets are rarely the most accurate, or the most aerodynamic, and upset decreases at lower velocities. So, bonded-core bullets may not be the best choices at longer ranges.
For years, the Barnes X (series) was the lone expanding all-copper (copper alloy) bullet. Today there are many: Copper Impact, CX, GMX, Trophy Copper, more. All copper bullets are hollowpoints, with a skived nose around a frontal cavity, the nose peeling back in petals to the limit of the cavity. Unless a petal breaks off, weight retention approaches 100 percent. Expansion is not as wide as with lead-core bullets, so copper bullets are deep penetrators. If you like through-and-through penetration with exit wounds, you’ll love them…but you won’t recover very many.
Expansion decreases along with velocity. And, since, copper is lighter than lead, aerodynamics cannot quite reach the off-the-charts BCs of today’s low-drag bullets such as Berger and ELD. As with all bullets, some rifles love them, others don’t produce their best groups with all-copper. You never know until you try. I use a wide variety of bullets, depending on my immediate purpose…and what works best in a given rifle. Even with today’s limited availability, there are lots of good options. Even though I’m lazy, I don’t give up experimenting with different loads, a perfect pastime for these long summer days at the range.
Throughout most of the country April is prime time for turkeys. I am not an expert turkey hunter, and a mediocre turkey caller…on my best days.
By
Craig Boddington
Throughout most of the country April is prime time for turkeys. I am not an expert turkey hunter, and a mediocre turkey caller…on my best days. No way I will write the definitive “how to” story on turkey hunting. However, given a chance, I’ve been pretty good at shooting turkeys.
Not perfect. (Talk about that later.) Wife Donna hasn’t taken as many turkeys and, theoretically, isn’t as good with a shotgun. Even so, she is 100 percent on bagging all turkeys she has shot at. She took her first Eastern gobbler in Georgia last Saturday, so her experience now includes three varieties, with some multiples.
On the other hand, my Dad was the best and fastest wingshooter I ever knew on quail and pheasants. Dad had been a successful fighter pilot in WWII and had off-the-charts vision. Despite these advantages, he couldn’t figure out how to hold a shotgun on a stationary bird and center a turkey’s head. His native Kansas had no turkeys for most of his life, so a wild turkey was one of few creatures he really wanted to take. I can’t recall how many turkeys he shot over until he finally took his first with a .22 Hornet (in Texas, where rifles are legal).
AIM A BIT LOW
Most shotguns are stocked to center the pattern a bit high for rising birds, so you can see the clay or the bird above the rib or bead. Some shoot “dead-on,” but few modern shotguns pattern below point-of-aim. Dad’s problem: A fast shooter on rising birds, he liked his shotguns to shoot high and wasn’t used to a stationary target. This exaggerates the effect of a high-shooting gun, and he couldn’t make himself place the bead far enough down on the neck to account for both the stationary target and the rise of the pattern.
You can check this with a pattern board, and you should. Checking “zero” and verifying patterns with a shotgun from a steady rest isn’t pleasant. Heavy turkey loads kick like hell, but it’s essential preparation.
What you want to see on a target: Most of the pattern just above the aiming point. Then, when a bird presents with a more-or-less vertical neck, you can place the bead about where the feathers stop and the naked, red neck starts. Remember, you’re dealing with a pattern, not a single bullet. The majority of the pattern should catch the entire head and neck.
Depending on what a target has revealed, you are probably okay aiming where the neck joins the body (Dad would have been). Height of comb varies; my turkey shotguns don’t shoot as high as my trap guns or quail guns. The main point: Don’t aim precisely at the head. With most shotguns, this is asking to shoot over the top. You must hold a bit low, down on the neck.
On April 1st, opening day in Georgia, we had a disappointing morning. Minimal distant gobbling shut off at dawn, and we never saw a bird. Nearly noon, set up in a different spot, a big gobbler came in completely silent. Just out of range but clearly eyeing our decoys, he started to strut—never gobbled—then advanced cautiously.
I always carry a rangefinder and check distances when I set up, so I’ll have a good idea when a gobbler is close enough. With the shotgun I carried, he’d probably been in range for a while, but he was strutting in weeds that almost covered him. Silent, obviously checking our set, but not comfortable. I was sure he was within 40 yards when he stood erect and stretched his neck.
On a stationary target, a high pattern keeps getting higher as range increases. I rested the Mossberg over my knee, held well down on the long neck, and pressed the trigger. The bird dropped into the weeds, gone, but he was right there, a last few wingbeats as I approached.
HEAD SHOTS ARE BEST
Years ago, I was hunting in Missouri with a borrowed Browning BPS 10-gauge, awesome shotgun. A big bird came straight to us, strutted, and I pasted him head-on at 25 yards with a 3 ½-inch shell, 2.5 ounces of shot. The bird dropped to the shot and flopped behind a big oak. My partner and I ran to it…and the bird was gone. No trace, never seen again.
Doesn’t matter what you’re shooting. Body shots on turkeys with shotguns are unreliable. Tough birds, thick feathers, heavy breast protecting the vitals. When in strut, the head is tucked in, and the temptation is to shoot for that big, black mass. Big mistake that I’ll never make again. Wait until the head extends, and aim for the head and neck
Drives purists insane, but some states still allow rifles. That’s a different deal; the head is too small a target, and often moving. Purists, please ignore this: Where legal, I get a huge kick out of sniping turkeys with a small rifle, .17 or .22 Magnum, .22 Hornet. Wait for the broadside shot and aim where the wing butt joins the body. Doesn’t mess up much meat, and effective. If you have that shot with a rifle, you also have the head shot with a shotgun.
The tricky part: If the head is extended horizontally, while the bird is gobbling, then you have only the head as a very small point target. Better know exactly how high your gun shoots, otherwise there’s increased risk of passing the whole pattern just over the top. I shot a big Gould’s turkey in Sonora with his neck stretched out, remembered to hold a bit low. Killed the bird—doesn’t take all that many pellets in the head—but most of the pattern went high.
The shot I much prefer is to have the neck erect. Still not a big target, but bigger. Ideally, you want pellet strikes in both head and neck. No one can say exactly how many strikes are needed. Where pellets impact is random, but you want multiple strikes—with penetration—in spine and brain. There are “golden pellets”: The one strike that centers the brain, but let’s not count on that.
CHOKES, GAUGES, SHELLS
Depending on range, shells, shot, and pattern, anything can work. I’ve taken turkeys with my Model 12 skeet gun, but it’s not a turkey gun. For years I used a short-barreled Spanish side-by-side 10-gauge with screw-in chokes. Lots of shot, should have been perfect, but tt was rarely as devastating as it should have been. Not much development in 10-gauge shells. The pattern board eventually showed me that, with available ammo, the pattern had holes a turkey could fly through. Cool gun, but I got rid of it. Tight chokes are best, but even patterns more important.
Today, we have better shells, better shot, and better chokes. The great turkey hunter, Dr. Warren Strickland, was the first guy I talked to who was killing his turkeys with a .410. Today, a lot of serious turkey addicts, with great shells and awesome chokes, use small gauges.
Sorry, I don’t. I’m neither a good enough caller, nor a confident enough turkey hunter, to bank on the small gauges. I mostly use a 12-gauge, but both Donna and I have taken numerous turkeys with 20-gauge guns. In 12-gauge, I’m comfortable with 2 ¾ or 3-inch shells; in 20-gauge, we use 3-inch loads.
I have also downsized on shot. Historically, I’ve usually used lead No. 5 or 6 for the first (preferably head) shot, backed up with No. 4 for a follow-up body shot if needed. New shot has changed the game. I was stunned when I heard about experienced hunters—like Dr. Strickland—shooting turkeys with shot as small as No. 9. Depends on the pattern, and the shot. This year, our Georgia gobblers were taken with No. 8 tungsten shot in Mississippi-loaded Apex shells. Tungsten is denser than lead, more small pellets in the pattern, with better penetration per pellet.
Remember, velocity is much the same from gauge to gauge, thus pellet energy the same. Performance is thus largely about choke and payload, which dictate range. With turkeys, the important things are to check point of impact and pattern with your gun and your load.
RANGE AND SIGHTS
Then, focus on that bright red head…and keep your shots within the distance your pattern density guarantees multiple head-neck strikes.
With the shells and chokes we have today, effective ranges have increased. For me, I don’t push the range envelope. Given a choice, I also don’t let birds get too close. Easy to miss when all you have is a ball of shot the diameter of your barrel. My ideal distance is 20 to about 40 yards. In that window, I have a good pattern to work with…and a bit of standoff to bring the gun to bear without spooking the bird.
Unlike most shotgunning, turkeys are usually taken by aiming precisely at a point, stationary target, as in rifle shooting. I prefer a gun with a rib to sight down, and a highly visible front bead. My Mossberg pump has rudimentary rear sight with fiber optic front, awesome.
Just once, I put a low-power magnifying scope on a turkey shotgun. I didn’t like the tunnel-vision effect, and found magnification unnecessary at turkey-shooting distance. I have experimented more with reflex (red-dot) sights. They are extremely effective, especially for older eyes, with increasing trouble resolving the front bead. If your shotgun has sights of any type, then it’s essential to, literally, check zero, adjusting the sight to ensure your pattern is exactly where you want it.
For most of us, a day at the range is just plain fun. Sure, most of us have an agenda: Improve skills, group loads for accuracy, check zero for an upcoming hunt.
By
Craig Boddington
For most of us, a day at the range is just plain fun. Sure, most of us have an agenda: Improve skills, group loads for accuracy, check zero for an upcoming hunt. For some, banging away is pure pleasure, because shooting is fun. It’s fun for me, too; I go to the range for all those reasons.
And more, because range day is also serious work. As a gunwriter, I’m always fighting (and juggling) deadlines. Some articles are hunting stories. Others are gun stories, and many, with hunting guns, are a mix. Whichever, range time is important, and precious.
Reasonable weather is almost essential, a big problem in many parts of the country, sometimes impossible on winter days in Kansas. I’m often asked why we haven’t pulled out of California completely. Grand-kids are good reasons, and I often cite the year-around hog hunting that I love. Range days are more good reasons. The range I use, on a friend’s ranch not far from town, is up a deep canyon, cold in winter and blistering hot in summer, but protected from most winds. Except for infrequent rainy days, I can shoot in at least marginal comfort throughout the year. Honest, the ability to get in a range day almost any time I need to has much to do with how I’ve been as prolific and productive as a gunwriter all these years.
Now, it isn’t like stepping out the back door and shooting, as I can do at the Kansas farm (when weather allows). The range is too far from the house to run back and forth. I have to be organized, and make sure I have everything I need.
Often, I take a half-dozen firearms to the range. A couple I need to run through their paces for articles. Always, a .22 to practice with while barrels are cooling. Maybe a favorite hunting rifle to check zero, or to group a new handload recipe. At least one pistol or revolver, just to keep my hand in. Oh, sure, I’ve gotten to the range and realized I forgot to grab ammo for one or another, or maybe I forgot a spare scope in case I want to make a switch.
If I forget something for a gun I need to write about, that’s an expensive waste of time. So, I try to be organized. I make lists—guns, ammo, gear—and I check them off while I’m loading the truck. As for gear, I don’t need to haul everything. We have a little range house that holds targets, rests for the bench, shooting sticks, staple gun with lots of staples.
Most of what I need to bring stays in my Range Bag. Hunting buddy Gordon Marsh, proprietor of this site, and our mutual friend, Bill Green, spent a lot of time creating the “Boddington Gear” (www.boddingtongear.com) you’ll find on this site: Soft gun cases, range bags, and more. Available in good waxed cotton and excellent buffalo leather, I’m really happy with these products. The real point is: A great deal of thought went into the design.
Good soft cases are essential to protect and safely transport valuable firearms, but my writing business truly depends on the range bag. I designed it large, because I haul a lot of stuff back and forth to the range. Side and end pockets are roomy enough to hold handguns in rugs…and a staple gun. I carry a spare in the range bag, ‘cause I’ve had them quit just when I needed to change targets.
Most of us who care about accuracy save targets, either to compare or brag about. I’m big on this, because when testing firearms, I have protocols to meet, as in “five five-shot groups with multiple loads.” I must save targets, so I can measure groups and photograph them later. I have two options. The range bag has a built-in file folder, not just for targets, but for instructions and other printed info. And, I have my buffalo leather target case, a cylindrical tube that allows me to roll up targets and save them with no damage. (Don’t save targets? It’s also a perfect fit for a straight-ocular-lens spotting scope.)
Now, regardless of what range bag you prefer, here’s the stuff I cram into mine for almost every range day. A small set of gunsmith tools, so I can tighten up screws or switch out an optic on the range as needed. A PAST recoil shield, used religiously for shooting off the bench with almost anything from .30-caliber up. Our Marine Corps mantra was: “Pain is good. Extreme pain is extremely good.” Sorry, but we shoot better when recoil doesn’t hurt, so at the bench I sissy up. Light, beanbag sandbags, so I can get my benchrest support exactly right. Also, a big leather “competition” shooting glove for the supporting hand. In my case, the right hand, because I’m left-handed. I use it on the bench, and in prone, to snuggle the butt against my shoulder, and to make fine elevation adjustments, keeps the rear sling swivel stud from barking my hand.
Naturally, shooting glasses and earmuffs! A spare left-hand strap on cheekpiece so, as needed, I can get the cheek-weld just right, often essential with unfamiliar test rifles, especially with today’s ever-larger scopes that must be mounted higher. And, down deep in one of the pockets, spare batteries—for any device you carry that might need a battery!
Since part of my range days involve “test guns,” I carry a digital trigger pull gauge. Mine is from Lyman, stores multiple tests and yields the average. A chronograph is another essential device, invaluable for handloaders and long-range shooters, and a required work tool for me. The Oehler 35P has long been the gold standard; I’ve had one for 40 years, love it because it yields all needed data on a printout. However, the Oehler is bulky, stores in its own separate hard gun case, and takes time to set up. A few years back, I got a Crony, compact and easy to use, range-bag compatible. My buddy, who owns the ranch and thus the range, also has a Crony, keeps his in the range house, so it’s available on that range. The Oehler and Crony operate off skyscreens, detecting the passage of the bullet. The Oehler is absolutely accurate, but skyscreens are finicky in some light conditions.
Recently, I got a MagnetoSpeed, measuring speed with electromagnetic sensors. The MagnetoSpeed Sporter now lives in my range bag. Inexpensive, weighs little over a pound, and folds up into its 12×3-inch case, about the size of a cigarette carton. It attaches to the barrel in seconds, stores up to 12 shots in a string, and yields High. Low, Average, Extreme Spread (ES), and Standard Deviation (SD). Mostly a rifle guy, MagnetoSpeed does almost everything I need, and can even go on hunts, to verify velocity and thus long-range data as atmospherics change.
EXTRAS
Note that I said “almost.” MagnetoSpeed cannot be used with suppressors. And, since it attaches to the barrel, is not compatible with semiauto pistols with full-length slides. I just ordered a LabRadar, awesome device, measuring speed with Doppler radar. It will work on almost anything…except shotguns (multiple pellets confuse the radar).
Although fairly compact, LabRadar is a bit large for my range bag, so I’ll carry it separately when I need it. That’s not the only thing I carry separately. My camera(s) go in my daypack, along with binocular, or in a camera bag. The range spotting scope has a small tripod that fits handily in the bag, but if I intend to do some “setup” shots, I take a tripod for camera use.
I like to clean at the range, either when finished, or between series of groups. For most of us, the range bag easily holds a jointed rod and everything else, but since I’m usually hauling multiple firearms in various calibers, I usually throw in my big Tipton cleaning set, about the size of a large toolbox. If I have it, I know I have all the right-size brushes and jags.
Most of us have calm, relatively focused range sessions with just a couple of firearms. The range bag probably has adequate room for all the ammunition needed, but my life doesn’t work that way. On my range days, I may have firearms chambered to a half-dozen different cartridges…with multiple loads for each. I put all my ammo in a separate box or bag, so I can keep it sorted, use one at a time…and then put back when I’m finished with that firearm. However you do it, there’s one cardinal rule: Just one caliber/cartridge on the bench at any time!