[IDShooter]

Hi there,
    Theodore Roosevelt killed rhino with then-new full metal jacket 30-06 loads! I think I would opt for a .375 H & H with X-bullets. Maybe some solids too just in case the situation seemed right for them.
     But I think you are right, your 45-70 should work fine! It's pretty darn close to some of the old English rounds.                   IDShooter

 

[IDShooter]

About a flat-nose in .458; Speer has their tungsten core African Grand Slam which has a flat nose (although not a WIDE flat nose) because, as Speer states, it promotes straight in-line penetration. I can't find my Barnes catalog right now but I think they or another company make a homogonous solid with a flat nose also. It would sure be interesting to see penetration/wound channel tests comparing these to cast bullets. Be sure to throw in some bones!
         It seems too that this thread has leaned toward guiding for dangerous game rather than hunting dangerous game. I stick with my first response - a good .375 H&H. Why? A highly un-analytical reason... That's what Finn Aagard liked and that's what Bwana Robert Ruark used! After all, hunting IS a tradition.
      As for the Mauser extractor, I think MikeG is correct that the claw needs to be supported by the action to work most reliably and I really think that the controlled feed and stop-ejection is a benefit that the Remington does not have. I've had feeding-extraction difficulties with 3 different Remington 700's in hunting situations. Fortunately neither the deer nor the groundhog were particularly dangerous, although the groundhog DID charge! <!--emo&--><img src="http://beartoothbullets.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/smile.gif" border="0" valign="absmiddle" alt=''><!--endemo--> (I had just shot his companion and I was between him and the den)
          Perhaps the main reason the double is so popular is that you just pull the trigger - there is no action to cycle at all thus no thinking or opportunity for human error to screw things up. At least for the first two shots!        IDShooter

 

[IDShooter]

MikeG,
      Yeah, those rascals can be vicious!  <!--emo&--><img src="http://beartoothbullets.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/tounge.gif" border="0" valign="absmiddle" alt=''><!--endemo--> I once shot one with 3" tusks! No kidding, his teeth didn't meet properly so they didn't wear against each other. The lower teeth curled right up and back over his nose. I would have thought it would be hard to eat but he had a mouthful of clover when I shot him!                      IDShooter

 

[IDShooter]

Hello all,
       DOK, the larger diameter slugs surely make a greater impression on a critter, but I don't really think it has much to do with energy (within reason). Let me relate experiences that back my opinion...
    I have shot mule deer with a 7 mag from about 40 yds, behind the left shoulder and exiting the right shoulder, jellying everything in between. With no lungs to speak of and a broken shoulder that deer ran almost 100yds. My wife was beside me and a split second after I shot, she shot the 1st deer's companion with her .243. It dropped right there at the lung shot! And you would think it would have been adrenalized, or at least alarmed, by my shot and the other deer's flight. Who knows?
      Also, my formative years were spent hunting deer with a shotgun. A 12 ga. Brenneke slug doesn't have more energy than most high powered rifles, yet EVERY deer I shot with that slug dropped at the shot. The only deer I've seen run after being hit with a Brenneke was hit poorly (my hunting partner was not the best marksman bless his heart). These slugs don't expand and they all went completely through.
      I know that's not a conclusive study, but it's enough to convince me that energy can't be counted on. Big bullets seem to work pretty well though!               IDShooter



<!--EDIT|IDShooter|May 18 2002,19:19-->