Well, another year's proficiency exam has passed for Zimbabwe's Professional Hunters. Don Heath, editor of African Hunter, rates the rifles and problems he saw while administering the test. To say he doesn't like American made rifles is an understatement.

While very opinionated, he does know his stuff.

Rifle Lessons learned from the Zimbabwe Professional Hunter Proficiency Exam
By Don Heath
http://www.african-hunter.com/lessons_learned.htm

:D WOW!! What an excellent, informative read. Although Africa is in every hunters dreams, the reality of such an event will mostly go unfulfilled. I wonder what a PH would think of a vintage Winchester or Marlin invading his turf? Now I'm not feeling so confident of the vaunted 45-70 and 45-90 leverguns. It would be interesting indeed to take the test using an American lever action rifle.Hmmmm...
Mike

A good read, too much tongue in cheek for my tastes. All he had to do was list the problems, not his personal acidic remarks. Almost sounds as if he thinks all American firearms are sub-standard. To each their own. I certainly hope that the results get posted so that year after year, the trainees don't bring the same model rifles.

I noticed the same anti-american rifle attitude. You have to respect his experience but he has an abrasive way with words. He managed to attack all the brands of rifles I own.

Heath is very opinionated and very brash, but I don't know of any other tests that pit so many different manufacturers products (purchased products, not specially selected by the manufacturer) in real world hunting situations and honestly report the findings. One reason Heath can do this, if I'm not mistaken, is he is sole owner and editor for African Hunter.

The conditions and situations in these tests may not be applicable where you hunt, take for instance a harsh cold weather environment full of freezing rain, snow, or temps in the minus 40-60 degree range. Maybe some that pass the muster in Africa would fail miserably in Alaska, but unfortunately, we don't have very many exact duplication of circumstantial tests here that Heath is running in Africa.

I really appreciate the reports and tests he conducts, but his frankness is a bit harsh...

Nothing in that review seemed out of line to me. Just an honest assessment of what was experienced in the field. Everyone knows Weatherby performance comes at the cost of higher chamber pressures in conjunction with increased powder capacity. I try to develop my hunting loads for the .270 Wthby and .340 Wthby in the spring when it's similar in temperature to the fall/winter when the hunting takes place. Perhaps some of the Hodgdon Extreme powders will alleviate this problem and not hurt performance. I guess it doesn't bother me as much as some because I would take a M70 or a M98 over a M700 any day. I've never owned a M77, and likely never will, as the trigger on a Savage is better. I think this article is an excellent wake up for us as shooters, because you sure as heck won't hear if from the "bought an paid for" gun writers in most of the magazines we read. I also don't think it's unfair to point out that a lot of the things, not limited to guns, that are sold here are crap. There is very little of anything that is of good quality at a affordable price that is sold in the US any longer. It's either Wal-Mart or out of the price range of 80% of the population unless a professional grade tool or item is warranted for professional use. I guess I'll keep buying M70's

I think the Old Boy is right on about a lot of DGR rifles! I wouldn't own a Remington to hunt D. Game, don't like push fed guns for such an event.

I am found of my model 70 Winchesters and find that with the 3 position safety on the right side, has NOT hindered me in any way shape or form while hunting. Besides the real safety is between ones ears, once I set foot into the animals living room so to speak........that safety is never thought about, the rifle remains on fire position only.

Actually Heath is writing up an addendum of sorts. Several PH's have responded that a 3 position safety on the right side of a firearm (if the shooter is right handed) doesn't cause any problems. Heath is retracting his M70 saftey being on the wrong side statement. I honestly don't think my hands are big enough to operate a 3 position horizontal safety on the left side of a rifle, if the rifle has a chunky wrist to it.

I have to agree with 2bits saying the best safety is between your ears, and to be honest, I much prefer tang safeties, because that is what I got used to growing up and that is what Ruger puts on their No.1's. I'm not adverse to a 3 position safety, but I do have to think about it when I use one.

Actually Heath is writing up an addendum of sorts. Several PH's have responded that a 3 position safety on the right side of a firearm (if the shooter is right handed) doesn't cause any problems. Heath is retracting his M70 saftey being on the wrong side statement. I honestly don't think my hands are big enough to operate a 3 position horizontal safety on the left side of a rifle, if the rifle has a chunky wrist to it.

I have to agree with 2bits saying the best safety is between your ears, and to be honest, I much prefer tang safeties, because that is what I got used to growing up and that is what Ruger puts on their No.1's. I'm not adverse to a 3 position safety, but I do have to think about it when I use one.


.338 and ALL----You took the words right out of my mouth sir!
As a young boy and so on while growing up hunting, one sort of gets used to the shotguns and rifles he or she comes in contact with over the years. Most of them had what is known as a simple "Slide Tang" safety.

When I got old enough to hunt with a model 70 Winchester made in the early 50's. I soon came to realize that the difference was more than just cosmetic in looks. The difference caused me to miss a chance at a very large whitetail buck that season.

Pulling the trigger for at least a couple of minutes , it seemed like a very long time though. I realized some time later in my quest, that the safety was still on safe position. Being used to the Tang of Old and not being as familiar as I should have been with my weapon, cost me the the opportunity of a lifetime buck.

I decided that I was never again going to be bothered with pushing a button below, or sliding my thumb on a tang etc. Keep em ALL the same Guys and Gals! Now that's why all my hunting guns for the most part have the same stock and fit, same safety etc. My 270 is just like my .375H&H, only a tad heavier.

Like all you gentlemen, I've read the report. I'm also a subscriber to that magazine.
Lets understand where this guy is coming from. These were not the BS "tests" in the newstand rags -as was pointed out. These were observations during the testing of Professional Hunters in Zimbabwe. These are the guys that pick up the slack after somebody muffs a shot. We Americans; because of work, family obligations, and the thousand of other things that infringe upon our time, just don't shoot. So our of the shelf rifles work for us. You guys remember pre 64 Winchesters (70's) commanding such a premium, because of the claw extractor. Before they saw the light and reintoduced the "pre 64 action". The Remington (as well as Savage) is a wonderful, accurate rifle - but not the rifle for dangerous game FOR PROFESSIONAL HUNTERS - for the client who is backed up by the PH incase the brown stuff hits the fan - yes the Remington is wonderful. The PH is there for our safety, and they are -by and large- super terrific guys, but they go into the bush to finnish off stuff that got away. There rifles are evaluated on a different standard. Does anybody remember the old Browning bolt actions? These were made by FN in Belgium. Those were gems. Look at the old stuff. We pay large bucks for those old Browning Safaris, Winchersters, and other Mauser rifles that were put together by craftsmen - not accountants and lawyers. Lets face it the stuff that comes off the shelf needs an overhaul before it even gets to the range. Most all need new triggers. They need to be bedded. The stocks are not designd for large calibers. Even the Ruger M-77, and I'm refering to their top end gun, needs help. How many have hefted the rifle? The stock is great for most Americans because it (the rifle) is shot at the range. The gun weighs way to much and that forearm belong on a varmint rifle. For most Americans, I agree that the article seems cutting. But it's not. I have hunted dangerous game in Africa and I used a Blaser rifle in .416 Remington. It worked fine and the rifle does not have a claw extractor. What the rifle does have is ease in transport. One case - much smaller then the average Gun Guard box. And it fits into a duffle bag (if the airline baggage thieves don't know it's there then they can't steel it). The case carries two barrels that interchange into the same receiver. I also increased the versatility of my .416 barrel by using Blaser QD scope mounts.
Now I do not walk in the bush after game eight months out of the year. I'm a city guy who's of the "four wheels beats two heals" mind set. BUT my PH, on my elephant hunt, does walk in the bush all the time (in fact is a PH in other African countries). He carried a Browning (FN Mauser action) in .458 without a scope. His rifle weighed about seven pounds. For fun he could shoot grouse on the wing with the .458, and I never seen him miss. A PH does not baby his gun like the American. No stock wax, really worn bluing, scratches, dings, and alot of other abuse that makes some people shake their heads in disbelief. His rifle has to work flawlessly. No high gloss stock, push feed action, or cosmetic nonsense. When it comes to dangerous game rifles there are certain non-negotable standards. Another thing that we Americans don't realize is that due to high import tarrifs, your PH might only have one rifle. We have ALOT.

Like all you gentlemen, I've read the report. I'm also a subscriber to that magazine.
Lets understand where this guy is coming from. These were not the BS "tests" in the newstand rags -as was pointed out. These were observations during the testing of Professional Hunters in Zimbabwe. These are the guys that pick up the slack after somebody muffs a shot. We Americans; because of work, family obligations, and the thousand of other things that infringe upon our time, just don't shoot. So our of the shelf rifles work for us. You guys remember pre 64 Winchesters (70's) commanding such a premium, because of the claw extractor. Before they saw the light and reintoduced the "pre 64 action". The Remington (as well as Savage) is a wonderful, accurate rifle - but not the rifle for dangerous game FOR PROFESSIONAL HUNTERS - for the client who is backed up by the PH incase the brown stuff hits the fan - yes the Remington is wonderful. The PH is there for our safety, and they are -by and large- super terrific guys, but they go into the bush to finnish off stuff that got away. There rifles are evaluated on a different standard. Does anybody remember the old Browning bolt actions? These were made by FN in Belgium. Those were gems. Look at the old stuff. We pay large bucks for those old Browning Safaris, Winchersters, and other Mauser rifles that were put together by craftsmen - not accountants and lawyers. Lets face it the stuff that comes off the shelf needs an overhaul before it even gets to the range. Most all need new triggers. They need to be bedded. The stocks are not designd for large calibers. Even the Ruger M-77, and I'm refering to their top end gun, needs help. How many have hefted the rifle? The stock is great for most Americans because it (the rifle) is shot at the range. The gun weighs way to much and that forearm belong on a varmint rifle. For most Americans, I agree that the article seems cutting. But it's not. I have hunted dangerous game in Africa and I used a Blaser rifle in .416 Remington. It worked fine and the rifle does not have a claw extractor. What the rifle does have is ease in transport. One case - much smaller then the average Gun Guard box. And it fits into a duffle bag (if the airline baggage thieves don't know it's there then they can't steel it). The case carries two barrels that interchange into the same receiver. I also increased the versatility of my .416 barrel by using Blaser QD scope mounts.
Now I do not walk in the bush after game eight months out of the year. I'm a city guy who's of the "four wheels beats two heals" mind set. BUT my PH, on my elephant hunt, does walk in the bush all the time (in fact is a PH in other African countries). He carried a Browning (FN Mauser action) in .458 without a scope. His rifle weighed about seven pounds. For fun he could shoot grouse on the wing with the .458, and I never seen him miss. A PH does not baby his gun like the American. No stock wax, really worn bluing, scratches, dings, and alot of other abuse that makes some people shake their heads in disbelief. His rifle has to work flawlessly. No high gloss stock, push feed action, or cosmetic nonsense. When it comes to dangerous game rifles there are certain non-negotable standards. Another thing that we Americans don't realize is that due to high import tarrifs, your PH might only have one rifle. We have ALOT.

I am curious to know if that .416 Blaser of yours is a semi auto or a bolt action? I have seen a couple of the semi auto's malfunction is why I asked.

The Belgium Brownings of years gone by, where great dangerous game rifles. I bought two in the early 60's, a 300 Winchesterr magnum and a 458 Winchester magnum. Sold the .458 a couple of years later to someone going to Alaska.

The Blaser is a bolt action of sorts. It's a straight pull bolt action, like the old Lee Navy's. It takes a little getting used to because we are used to "working" a bolt. It's actually quite fast once you get the hang of it.
I've not had a feeding problem because, when the bolt is pulled back, the charged magazine positions a cartridge in dirct line with the bore. When I first used this gun, I was on a Mule deer hunt in new Mexico. It was impressive. When I brought it to Africa, it impressed the PH.

Excellent article. Good information.
I have not hunted Africa, but have an opinion on the topic of the article.
As someone mentioned, there are "Non-negotiable standards" regarding dangerous game rifles. This man was tough on many guns, but not unfairly so. If anyone was unhappy by their favorites coming out poorly, they should consider the consequences of failure in the African bush. And perhaps re-think their choices. Actually I'm surprised the writer was as civil about the matter as he was. A firearm that would tend to get someone killed because of poor design or performance is truly worse than useless, it instills false confidence in it's user.

As "Hunters" we have different standards than someone that puts themself, and more to the point, others, in harms way. To fail in the performance of one's job as a PH means death or permanent injury to self or to the client. To have a rifle that is not up to the job in this situation is foolish at best, and criminal at worst. "World Class Performance" takes it's full meaning here, the best in the world. "Almost as good as" isn't good enough.

Few of us will ever be in a situation where the continuation of our life hinges on ABSOLUTELY FLAWLESS performanec of a rifle or ammunition. If we have an occasional hangup in feed or ejection, a bad cartridge or one that fails to eject, a gun that is slow to reload, maybe we miss a once in a lifetime shot at an elk, we get upset, or we just shrug our shoulders and go on, philosophizing "the gun has other attributes" etc. It simply doesn't affect us the same way.

Alaska can be a dangerous place in regard to animals, but even Alaska doesn't have the number of species that can take exception to your continuing living and the capability to do something about it. Nevertheless, all I've heard about bear guides is they tend to be fairly conservative in rifle selection as well.

This man wrote about an issue that is very serious. I don't feel he was unfair or off base in any way. Opinionated? Yes, but opinions defined by experience.

Too bad we don't have more gun writers equally straightforward.

Someone pointed out that certain rifles were probably fine for "hunters" even if not up to the job for a profesional. My personal inclination is to have a rifle that is the best I can get. I have sold many that over time failed in some way or didn't live up to expectations. I hunt alone much of the time, and spend a fair amount of time through the year camping and roaming the mountains where the grizzlies live. I don't like guns that don't work 100%. Col. Whelen(?) said "only accurate rifles are interesting". If not completely reliable, accuracy means little.

Heath was right about most bolt rifle safeties being slow and awkward to use. The sliding tang safety seems the fastest. Am looking into having my FN Mauser converted to this type. Expensive work, but if it saves the day just once, what's it worth?

Good article! Hope the gun manufacturers will take note - Most of the deficiencies Don Heath described can be remedied.

It takes a **** of a lot of money to get a better rifle than a CZ 550 Magnum. They are perfect (set trigger, safety, stock design), but they are better than a factory M70 any day for stuff that can get you.

The new American Magnum, with a laminate stock sounds about perfect. I am going to change out the safety, and trigger, and glass bed the thing, and remove the forward sling stud on mine when it comes in. Probably put a low powered Schmidt and Bender scope (they are cheaper than Swarovski here in Spain) and hunt my Wisent and Yak this fall with it.

Welcome to the forum, and please consider telling us more about the hunting you do in Spain or elsewhere.

I think there is a lot to agree with about his article. I am not fond of the new M70 rifles, the quality sucks. Remington M700 safeties are tiny, Ruger M77 MKII African models have really small bolts, and everything else is crap. For my hide, I would rather spend $3000-5000 on a good reasonably used custom mauser rifle than risk death or a beat with a $850 dollar production night mare.

Excellent article... The moral of the story is that few if any rifles are perfect out of the box. The crucial thing is that YOUR RIFLE has been thoroughly field-tested in every way before you go into the bush with it after ornery critters. Whether or not it has this or that feature may be a subject of discussion, but if it feeds/fires/ejects EVERY TIME WITHOUT FAIL then you'll have no troubles.

Train with your DG rifle regularly in all field positions and with a fully loaded magazine at all times - practice your snapshots, multiple quick shots, etc. Take it deer hunting, plink coyotes with it throughout the year, etc and make it so familiar it's a part of you. Then when the chips are down you'll react and fire without any conscious thought at all and those shots will go right where you're looking.

Nearly any quality bolt gun can be made into a fine DG rifle with some effort and fine-tuning. It's the folks that assume that just because they spent $2000-3000 on a rifle that it will automatically be a reliable tool that get smacked down by their PH when they arrive in country and have the floor plate fall open upon firing. This can only happen if you haven't prepared ahead of time.

His style may be a bit harsh, but he's talking from extensive real-world experience and that's preferable to theory and talk.

I noticed the same anti-american rifle attitude. You have to respect his experience but he has an abrasive way with words. He managed to attack all the brands of rifles I own.

Well Hot **** - You shou;d sell those rifles off real soon - to me at half price.

Just kidding you, Bigfoot. Rifles used in Africa live a hard life and most African PHs are NOT gun looneys like most of us good old USofA boys.


I've seen once beautiful, pre-64 Winchester .458 magnums that were issued to "game scouts" that literally could not have the bolt closed due to the crap and crud that had accumulated. STocks were split, barrels almost b;locked, and THESE are the guys supposed to take care of shooting a buffalo of of your back? Not really, the PH will tale care of that little problem, but these were the guys that WERE supposed to kill crop raiders and people eating nasties. In my humble opinion there had never been even a single day when their rifles actually would function.

I found a few rifles listed that I own, and I have done enough work on curing the ills of these rifles that I'd bet - and have bet - my life on each and every one. A good man knows his rifle, has tested what it will do when the doo-doo hits the rotary impeller, can shoot the bloody thing well enough to hit a soccer ball at fifty yards every time, and cares for the rifle. Do this and you will never have any of trhe prob;lems those poor trainees had.

Terry

I think there is a lot to agree with about his article. I am not fond of the new M70 rifles, the quality sucks. Remington M700 safeties are tiny, Ruger M77 MKII African models have really small bolts, and everything else is crap. For my hide, I would rather spend $3000-5000 on a good reasonably used custom mauser rifle than risk death or a beat with a $850 dollar production night mare.

Most everyone agrees that Mr. Heath is well qualified, and has many valid pointswhich relate to the PH's needs of knowingwith absolute certainty that the rifle will perform . OK. He doesn't like American manufacturer's offerings. OK.
Maybe I just missed it,but.......what rifle is recommended? What advice could a learner use from Mr. Heath's years of experience and knowledge to purchase a rifle which could be modified and how what modifications would be recommended? As it stands now, the recommendation would be to stay home if you have one of the many weapons panned by this article. Is that the point?

For the money and practically speaking how could you beat the newer, controlled feed Winchester model 70 for African hunting?

I'd rather have the tang safety. How much would it cost to have this done to a model 70?

deglen,
About 3/4 of the way through the article, Heath mentions a few of the brands he does like. Any of the designs that stay true to the Mauser 98 wins favor with most PH's. Heath also likes the CZ or BRNO rifles, as well as a few other European made rifles.

His major complaint with the Winchester M70's that he has come across recently was that he felt the safety was on the wrong side. Sounds like he prefers the way Winchester put the safeties on their pre-war M70's. A little later he retracted that statement, saying that he felt anyone that used one of the newer Winchesters for any length of time would become very familiar with the safety and it would not hinder its operation.

The only thing Heath didn't like about the new CZ rifles were they are chambered in 458 Winchester Magnum, and like many of the older PH's, he distrusts that cartridge, feeling the 458 Lott is much better (many feel the Winchester version's case is just too short and creates too high pressures to get the bullet to the required velocities).

Gentelmen and Ladies:
I would like to add a caution to all of you who are hunting with a modern Ruger firearm. I have three Ruger #1 rifles,
45-70,375 H&H Magnum Tropical and a 243 Winchester, and a Ruger Super Red Hawk in the 44 magnum handgun. I have had mis-fires in three of the firearms at least once.It has occured several times with the Super Red Hawk, at least once with the 375 H&H magnum, and several times with the 45-70. The 243 Winchester is a new rifle so I haven't fired it yet .I reload all my ammo and have posted this problem on the various boards. I prime with a Lee auto-prime. Numerious replies have offered ideas for the problem. I thought it was only me.
However, after reading Gun Notes in Hamilton Bowens web site.. http://www.bowenclassicarms.com ,I now realize it may be a Ruger problem. On the Ruger Super Red Hawk the firing pin is shorter than the industry standard. Click on News on the web site, then click on Gun Notes. If the Red Hawk has a short firing pin then it is likely that the #1's will have a short firing pin. You might call this an issue of using a Lawyer's firing pin, safer to a fault.The rest of the problem is likely me with an occasional primer that is a smige high so that the short firing pin does't do its job. If you are hunting something that may hurt you and you use a Ruger, I would suggest that you check the firing pin.The only game that I hunt that may come after me is an Angry wild boar that takes exception to being shot, My super Red Hawk has been sent to Bowen Classic Arms for a once over and the Standard Issue Package.

Gentelmen and Ladies:
I would like to add a caution to all of you who are hunting with a modern Ruger firearm. I have three Ruger #1 rifles,
45-70,375 H&H Magnum Tropical and a 243 Winchester, and a Ruger Super Red Hawk in the 44 magnum handgun. I have had mis-fires in three of the firearms at least once.It has occured several times with the Super Red Hawk, at least once with the 375 H&H magnum, and several times with the 45-70. The 243 Winchester is a new rifle so I haven't fired it yet .I reload all my ammo and have posted this problem on the various boards. I prime with a Lee auto-prime. Numerious replies have offered ideas for the problem. I thought it was only me.
However, after reading Gun Notes in Hamilton Bowens web site.. http://www.bowenclassicarms.com ,I now realize it may be a Ruger problem. On the Ruger Super Red Hawk the firing pin is shorter than the industry standard. Click on News on the web site, then click on Gun Notes. If the Red Hawk has a short firing pin then it is likely that the #1's will have a short firing pin. You might call this an issue of using a Lawyer's firing pin, safer to a fault.The rest of the problem is likely me with an occasional primer that is a smige high so that the short firing pin does't do its job. If you are hunting something that may hurt you and you use a Ruger, I would suggest that you check the firing pin.The only game that I hunt that may come after me is an Angry wild boar that takes exception to being shot, My super Red Hawk has been sent to Bowen Classic Arms for a once over and the Standard Issue Package.


Dear Swifty -

Sounds like Ruger had better start sending Firagra - viagara for their firing pins - with their rifles and handguns!

My Ruger #1 and #3 have performed perfectly in all respacts. Very accurate, total reliability, and as fast handling as any rifle extant.

If, as planned, I take the #3 in .45-70 to Africa on a buffalo hunt this fall I will report back on performance, but I expect no problems as I have fired both of these rifles, with my handloads, a couple of thousand times each. My only complaint is that the steel buttplate on the #3 chews a hole in my shoulder, removing the skin, when practicing rapid fire with 500 grain solids for more than twenty rounds. No buff is going to need that much pursuasion to retire from the field or die on it so I am not terribly concerned about what I now call "#3 Shoulder!"
Good luck with your short firing pins.

Terry

Listen gentleman, the man knows what he is talking about. RELIABILITY IS FOREMOST. COST IS THIRD. Anyone who would hunt dangerous game with an off the shelf American rifle either does not give a darn about their life, or is just a fool. Any P-H that uses one is criminally neglegent. That is my opinion,

Edited for language and advertising.

Reading the article, the author states (something to the effect) that many of the rifles were so mucked-up and dirty that they wouldn't function correctly. Is that the fault of the rifle, or the user?!!

I have a Ruger 458 Lott, and realizing I've put something of only around 100 rounds through it, those round have been fed from the magazine with no malfunctions. So I have to wonder, do PH's expect rifles that have ridden around in a dusty vehicle for 5 days uncleaned to function flawlessly? Isn't there some expectation of responsibility to keep your rifle clean and functioning, or is this just a bash on rifles other than doubles, which would for the most part be immune to that abuse by the nature of their construction?

Well one thing for sure everyone's got an opinion, right wrong or indifferent. I've no experience in Africa, but know several folks that have had the chance to hunt there and have used Remingtons, Rugers, Sako's, Browning's and Winchesters all with pretty good luck. I've spent some time in Alaska and used both a Sako, Ruger and Remington with great results for Dangerous game.

I've got to agree with Shawn that keeping a rifle in good shape seems to work well and "sold American".

I found he was a bit too brash but did seem to know his stuff. What I found really intriguing was the "bullet creep" out of the case over the passing of time.

I am intreagued of the repeated references to a rifle I have grown attached to. It is a Belgian Browning Safari on a Mauser action. Mine is 300 Win mag. It wears a Leupold fixed 6x and shoots just like it should.
Recently I have been considering a trip across the pond and think this may be a good plains rifle. I like it better than any of my other bolt actions.
Problem is the cape buffalo that I want. All I have is a Ruger Tropical in 458 Win mag. I am left handed and can't afford a double gun. Too late in life to go left on the bolt guns. I would be forever lost. What to do......
Bestboss

I am intreagued of the repeated references to a rifle I have grown attached to. It is a Belgian Browning Safari on a Mauser action. Mine is 300 Win mag. It wears a Leupold fixed 6x and shoots just like it should.
Recently I have been considering a trip across the pond and think this may be a good plains rifle. I like it better than any of my other bolt actions.
Problem is the cape buffalo that I want. All I have is a Ruger Tropical in 458 Win mag. I am left handed and can't afford a double gun. Too late in life to go left on the bolt guns. I would be forever lost. What to do......
Bestboss
Your 300 Win Mag, especially that wonderful Browning FN, will be great on plainsgame. I used a 300 H&H and it performed great. I have a thread around here somewhere about my trip to Zim in 2005. Hunting in an area, like I did, where there a lot of buff and elephants, I think a 375 H&H/Ruger or 416 Rigby/Rem Mag/Ruger would have been a better idea. Any of those certainly have a flat enough trajectory for plainsgame and enough "bottom" to handle that unexpected big buff or ele should you find it necessary or desirable...

Like all you gentlemen, I've read the report. I'm also a subscriber to that magazine.
----------- He carried a Browning (FN Mauser action) in .458 without a scope. His rifle weighed about seven pounds. For fun he could shoot grouse on the wing with the .458, and I never seen him miss. -----.

Dear Sir,
Does the phrase "grouse on the wing" mean he shot it with the rifle in flight? I have heard of people shooting game birds in flight with rifles but never seen it myself.

Naveed

interesting and to the point for sure...
best boss.. have you considered perhaps getting a double rifle built on a double shotgun platform by a smith like JR Huntington.. he seems to do a good job and affordable by most standards... it interests me, no doubt, but I will likely not get there to the african continent...
I wonder if the conditions required the guns to lack attention for several days in filthy conditions, etc. when I first learned that the military choice of auto guns had to be meticulously cleaned to function all the time or appeard to require that I was astounded.. I never left my guns so filthy they would not function... but my favorite is a ruger one and it is my most used long gun... it would be hard to get it dirty enough to fail to function.. the only problem is the one shot... a double or a mauser based bolt gun is probably the best choice for the PH and any hunter who wants to be as sure as they want to be about getting it done regardless... I can see that point... if I spend the bucks for africa I will spend the bucks for a gun for africa probably.... and try to get the best I can and practice with it too.. the shortest learning curve for a ruger one shooter is a double gun probably... interesting read and thought provoking discussion ... wow
dk

i dont care what this fellow heath says, you load a 45-70 hot enough....whooo!, in a marlin 1895..whoo! double whammy! that'll take care of them all...and then some...granted, you 're a good shot of course, and know when to pick and choose.

trey,
on what do you base those comments, figures on paper or actual experience?

Oh my gosh. I can't believe I found you guys. It is so great to find like minded individuals. I guess I just hang out with the wrong people ! I learned my lesson on "control round feeding" years ago. Fortunately before I ever faced dangerous game.

When I hunt in Africa, I am after the rush. In my view the PH is there to back me up if everything goes balls up. I have always made it clear to my PH that I didn't expect him to shoot anything unless it was absolutely last resort and then think again !

Personally, I would be apalled if my PH had to shoot something because I screwed up. With that said, I'm not going to carry a questionable firearm because I know the PH is there.

Anyway, again, wow! I am so happy to find you guys. My friends all think I'm either a snob or a bit daft because I won't own a push feed weapon. When you've shortstroked one and had it jam ... you just don't want to ever go there again.

I tried to go to the above link and couldn't connect. Can anybody help me with that ? I'd love to read the article.

IF anyone is interested in my idea of fine weaponry you are welcome to click on my Profile and take a look at my website. I have them on display there.

Again guys ... Mucho Gusto ! It's a pleasure and I look forward to some great conversations.

Cheers,
Richard

Having been there and done that several times ..

Africa is no place for your weapon to go south ..

BUT

the PH has a completely different role ..

his job is to keep you out of trouble ...

So he has a different set of requirements in a rifle ..

Arizona, I know I ain't Bill Hickok but what the heck. I can still pretend !

I agree with everything you say about the responsibilities of the PH. I'd like to comment on the respnsibilities of the hunter.

Obviously, It's whatever the hunter wants it to be and he can get the guide to agree to. I've been lucky in that regard.

When I hunt dangerous game, I'm in it for the rush. If there's no risk, where's the danger? It takes me a whole lot of work to save up a whole lot of money so that I can put myself in front of a charging bull elephant. I sure as heck don't want some PH having to take that away from me because I foolishly screwed up.

That's one extreme, I guess. Here's another. What about archer hunting dangerous game? I met and loved one of the greatest archers of our time. Without mentioning his name, he was the first in modern day to kill a Polar Bear. BUT,it took him three tries. He did it with a long bow. The first two times he had to be backed up by professinals with big guns. Kudos to him and he's the first guy to do it. But to me it just a bit like playin'. I mean not serious. I mean, what the heck, if it doesn't work out, you've always got a pro bcking you up.

As they say nowadays, just "not the way I roll".

Just my .02.

Cheers,
Richard

trey,
on what do you base those comments, figures on paper or actual experience?

well, truth be told, ive never used my 45-70s on abg, so i suppose it could be paper...but..in physics, if all circumstances are alike, and two projectiles of identical weight and density are being propelled at roughly (roughly as in plus or minus 100fps) the same velocity, youre gonna get roughly the same effects...

what about all those guys who have taken abg w/ the old springfield cartridge?...there was aguy, i cant remeber his name, but he wrote an article about using and loading his 45-70 for cape buff in zimbabwe i think, it was featured in shooting times...i wont quote it cuz, i cant remeber all the details, but he was quite successful in his endeavours....reason being...he was a good shot...and chose his shots very carefully...that is my point.

I am interested in the original article too. I did some research on the web and found out a couple of things:

1) I had saved pointers to a couple of great articles from the African-hunter site only to find that it had gone under. However, a while back I found most of the site in an archive that is still available: http://www.cybertorpedo.com/africanhunter I wasn't however able to find the article in the archive either. :mad: There is some terrific stuff in the archive on other rifles I own (.303 British and .375 H&H)


2) I found this on a Spanish speaking site, however it was posted as is with no translation needed (go figure). Is this the article?


Rifle Lessons learned from the Zimbabwe Professional Hunter Proficiency Exam
By Don Heath

Every year Zimbabwe holds two events which provide the perfect testing ground for rifles. These are the Rifa Professional Hunter and Guides training/refresher course, and the actual proficiency exam itself. As shooting is an important attribute of both a hunter and a guide, marksmanship and speed and dexterity of handling and reloading a rifle under great stress are fully tested with quite high grades required to pass. Consequently a fair amount of time at the Rifa refresher course is set aside to riflemanship. Most of the hunters have grown up with firearms, but a great many of the guides have simply grown up in the bush and the only hunting they may have done before commencing with their apprenticeships has been with spear or bow. The confidence with a rifle needed to protect one's clients in a close quarters contact with lion, elephant, hippo or buff requires complete familiarity with the rifle and a good deal of practice as well. During this year's Rifa course about 600 heavy calibre rounds went down range whilst on the proficiency some 50 shots went into dangerous game and over 500 crashing down range on a variety of shoots. All in all the five day refresher course and the week long exam provide an excellent opportunity to evaluate the different makes of rifle.

Most rifles work perfectly on range when zeroing a rifle or shooting off sticks in an accuracy test. A surprisingly large number fall apart as soon as the pressure is on and you have to shoot and reload in a hurry. Ten rifles out of 32 on the Rifa course came up with a problem, whilst 17 out of 51 came up short in one way or another on the actual exam. Only training can render one competent to carry a rifle in the bush and that is not the topic of this article, but it pains me to see poorly paid apprentices shelling out hard earned cash for sub standard rifles, especially sub standard new rifles. Also many of the student/candidates were well aware of the flaws with their rifles, but with all the hassles of licencing plus the costs involved in doing a trade, they were unable to change them. This article is intended as a guide so new purchasers don't get burned.

To set the tone, I think nobody sums up the American attitude to rifles better than W.W. Greener in his classic book The Gun and its Development (1910 edition). "In no country are better sportsmen to be found than in the United States of America, nor does any country posses keener buyers or better men of business, yet in no country is so much worthless rubbish of the (mass production) gun-factories offered for sale. The Boers are a race of sportsmen, but it is of no use to offer them rubbish at any price, and the author can hardly believe that the astute American will sacrifice everything to cheapness". That fortnight in the Zambezi valley showed that not a lot has changed in the last 90 years except that nasty rather than purely cheap describes most of America's offerings in the dangerous rifle field.

I'll start with my least favourite rifle:- the Weatherby. We don't often see them out here, thank goodness. The one we had this year exhibited the usual Weatherby failing of going off when the safety catch was disengaged. Like all I've seen with this problem, they work fine on the range. It is only after they have been bounced, bumped or jolted whilst loaded and on safe that they do this. I'm sure the problem is correctable and not all do it, however, this one would also not extract at all after the eighth round. It showed decidedly sticky extraction after the first three shots and finally died on number eight. It gives me great pleasure than to dig out my 2lb hammer and beat the bolt of a new rifle open whilst giving the owner a lecture on the benefits of reloading. Weatherby factory ammo always gives extraction problems and needs to be down loaded for use in hot conditions. The .460 is notorious and this .416 proved no different.


Remington 700 safety catch - a persistent problem. Too small and located on the "wrong" side of the action for a right-handed person. Frequently accidentally knocked on during reloading

Remington 700. The 700 may be a very fine hunting rifle. I don't know because I've never used one, but I do know that it is a piss poor dangerous game rifle especially in .416 Rem calibre. Apart from the odd inexplicable misfire, a broken extractor cost us an elephant wounded and lost at Rifa. This is not the first year that I've seen a broken extractor on a Remington 700 in .416 either. In addition they are just about the hardest rifle to refill the magazine in a hurry. My memories this year of students and candidates using them is that of youngsters frantically trying to thrust cartridges into the mag, only to have a double feed, the rounds pop straight back out or many other problems. A two round reload took on average, twice as long with the Model 700's as it did with just about any other make of rifle. The difference between the Remington and the Weatherby is that the latter can be downloaded a little so as to operate flawlessly and the safety fixed, whilst I do not know that anything can be done with the Remingtons except to re-barrel them to a plains game cartridge and leave them at home when out after the dangerous stuff. To be fair though, all of the extraction problems seem to be confined to rifles in .416 and .375. and they seem reasonably reliable in .458 provided you are prepared to tolerate the awkwardness of the reload. I am not. A good single shot or even a Weatherby is a better choice.


The Remington's push-feed bolt - the plunger/ejector works fine. The pathetically small sprung-loaded extractor breaks frequently and doesn't always extract the case.

Then we come to one that surprises me. Ruger. The early Ruger M77's with the non rotating claw extractors but still a push feed mechanism, in .458 Win could be relied upon to jam if the bolt was worked quickly. In the 1980's the National Parks culling teams found this out the hard way and the new Rugers were quickly disposed of or issued to stations where a heavy rifle was seldom required. The new MkII Ruger with a proper controlled feed seemed to be a vast improvement and were reputed to work a whole lot better and of course come at a top dollar price. I learned differently. All but one out of seven I've seen or handled this year (6 in .416 Rigby and one .458 Win) would not eject if the bolt was opened vigorously. Slow down just a fraction and they throw the empty case half way into the next province. For a client coming out to Africa this may be acceptable. Any really fast fancy shooting is going to be the PH's.

For the Professional Hunter or Guide though, a rifle that is guaranteed not to eject when worked at speed is a death sentence waiting to happen. The fault lies with the sprung loaded ejector that springs into place as the bolt is withdrawn. Work the bolt at a moderate speed and the ejector is in place to cleanly throw the case clear. Work the bolt fast and the ejector is still on its way up when the case passes over it. A few will work provided the ejector is scrupulously clean and well oiled but many will not do even that (and how do you keep it clean AND oiled in the usual dusty conditions?). A much stronger spring and a little polishing of the raceway that it fits into may cure the problem, but they are not safe as they come from the factory. A local gun shop tells me that they have sent two new rifles back this year because of this problem, and our local top gunsmith tells me that while most can be made to work perfectly, some cannot. Ruger needs to wake up, their No.1, single shot rifle is a far safer and more dependable weapon than their bolt action.

The Browning A Bolt. The Jury is still out on this as there are very few around at present and all the ones I've seen have been left handed models. One out of two had a problem with the magazine. Beating the floor plate back down with a rock is nearly as much fun as taking a hammer to a Weatherby. I must say I really LIKE the safety catch. It is certainly the best out of any of the rifles I've used this year, but I'm not sure on the push feed and extractor. Time will tell, but I have no intention of being the guinea pig.


Top - a pre '64 Winchester M70.
Bottom - Ruger M77 - fitted with the best option in safety catches - a shotgun-type tang safety.

Winchesters new M70 with the controlled feed back, is light years ahead of the old version which just about rivalled the Remington 700. I have only three complaints about the new ones. The bolt anti bind rail on one of them bent and briefly jammed the rifle, but I threw it away and the rifle worked just fine after that. The stocks need to be properly bedded and pinned. They are a good shape, nice wood, but they crack (and worse) if you don't take them to somebody and have the bedding seen to before you start throwing a few hundred rounds down range. My biggest gripe about the Winchester is that the safety catch is on the WRONG side. On the right handed model, the safety catch is perfect for a left hander and visa versa on the left handed edition. Heavens to Hiawatha, surely somebody at US Repeating Arms (who make Winchester) has walked outside and tried to swing the rifle up for a snap shot from either the trail or from a sling! You cannot grab the pistol grip and take the safety off in one movement, and on average it took Winchester owners a second longer to disengage the safety and fire the first shot compared to Mausers or Browning A Bolts. Time and fumbling around with an awkward safety can get you killed in a tight corner, and the real insult is that they make both, and that the current "left handed" safety is quicker and easier to use for a right hander than a Mauser type "flag" safety. More and more PH's are seeing the light and fitting a good Ghost ring aperture sight to their dangerous game rifles so I suppose the pathetic excuse of a rear sight that Winchester fits at the factory can be ignored.

Interarms Mk X. Apart from the fact that the barrels are soft and wear out very quickly, these are intrinsically sound rifles that are simply shoddily put together. They are famed for springing the magazine floor plate open and dumping the contents on the firers feet. Never seen one that wouldn't feed reliably though, and with a little bit of gun smithing to make the safety catch more positive (it is also on the "wrong" side) so that it doesn't get accidentally swept on as the bolt is opened (or accidentally knocked off in the bush) and the stock properly bedded to cure the "magazine dump" they can be made into very workable rifles. They are though, very definitely rifles that you take first to your gunsmith and only then into the bush as the two students at Rifa discovered.

That sums up the American offerings for this year. The Winchester is definitely the best, but it still requires work and a replacement safety and rear sight when it comes out of the box before it can be considered serviceable.


The Bruno (CZ) 550 - A good basic rifle with Mauser-type extractor and excellent sights. The safety catch though is small, and again on the wrong side for a right hander.

Most of the European made rifles are priced well out of the reach of all learners and even most qualified PH's. The one Mannlicher in evidence this year worked superbly with much to recommend it if you can stomach the price. By far the most common big game rifles we see here, and the biggest single make on the exam, was the Bruno/CZ.

This is one of the most rugged but also the cheapest heavy rifles available in Africa and has been for many years now. There have also been a variety of different models. The early ones dating from the fifties and sixties were absolutely tops (I have a 1950 model), and these probably represent the best buys on the second hand market along with the Fabrique National made Mausers. The current models coming out are not bad, but far from perfect. CZ has finally got around to doing something about the safety catch which was perfect on the 1950's models (which was superior to an original Mauser) and singularly awful there after as it worked the wrong way around (back to fire) and was located on the wrong side of the action. The safety still isn't great, being small and still located on the wrong side of the receiver for a right handed person. It also comes on and off too easily. The biggest problem that arose with them was the firer accidentally knocking on the safety whilst manipulating the bolt. At least five Bruno/CZ owners had trouble with this either during the training sessions or in the exam.


The standard by which others are judged. A standard Mauser - serviceable safety catch, claw extractor and decent sights

Another problem patently apparent with all of the .458 Win models is that they will not reliably feed soft point ammunition until quite a lot of work has been done to the magazine box and feed. The .458 Win case is simply too short for the huge Bruno magnum action (which comfortably accommodates the .416 Rigby round), and the rounds slide around in that cavernous magazine under recoil and then feeding problems occur. The best thing anybody can do with a Bruno/CZ in .458 Win is to have a competent gunsmith re-chamber it to .458 Lott. This not only solves the feeding troubles but also gets away from the problems of the .458 Win cartridge. The only problem now though is that the stock needs to be properly bedded and pinned or it will crack. The other interesting phenomena arose with some of the older rifles chambered in .375 H&H. The chambers were fantastically oversize, and the spent cartridge cases emerge looking like an Ackley or Weatherby improved round. The head space is fine and it is not dangerous but forget about reloading. One thing is for sure, a little dirt in the action isn't going to tie up these rifles!

The remainder of the field was made up of Mauser actioned rifles. The original Mauser in .404 and the FN in .458 worked great, as expected. The trouble for a learner Hunter or Guide is that these makes are hard to come by. Original Mausers are beginning to wear out, and apart from .404 and 9,3x62, most are chambered for rounds unsuitable for serious hunting. As soon as you see a Mauser chambered in .458 or .375 you know that it is a conversion, (see my comments on custom rifles below). FN's are seldom seen on the second hand market. They represent the peak in the Mauser rifles development, and those lucky enough to own one seldom find a reason good enough to sell it.


The good (left), and the bad (right) in open sights. The Winchester offering on the right is virtually useless in a hurry.

"Custom Rifles". The Mauser is one of my all time favourite rifles, but apart from a very few original rifles all the ones we see are "custom" built. This year's exam reiterated that a "custom" rifle can vary greatly in quality. Two were fine, the other two not. There are an awful lot of armourers out there posing as gunsmiths, and only the best gunsmiths should be allowed to build a dangerous game rifle. The biggest problem with all custom Mausers occurs with the feed. Mausers were originally built with the magazine boxes machined to match the cartridge for which the rifle was being chambered. The magazine box on a 9,3 is quite different from that for a 8x57. Too many "gunsmiths" simply screw on a .458 barrel and forget that the magazine box must be altered (best option) or the feed rails extensively worked. I had a .308 Mauser that had been converted from a 7x57. It gave endless feeding trouble until I got it to a top 'smith. The conversion from 8x57 to .308 works fine but the 7mm magazine box is too narrow at the front and problems arise. One custom Mauser on the exam would not feed more than one round from the magazine and even loading a second round half way in so that it could be chambered (giving the shooter two rounds before a reload) was a bother. The fancy stock, the Ghost ring sight, etc did not alter the fact that this was a useless rifle. One of the two candidates who's custom Mausers worked on the exam told me that she had had feeding trouble and had taken the rifles to a competent gun smith to have the problem solved. It had cost a considerable amount of time and money to get her rifle into full working order. The last was from a local supplier of custom rifles who knows about such things and the requirements for absolute reliability, and it worked great. I retain an intrinsic mistrust of any "custom" rifle unless I've tried it thoroughly and I know who built it. That is the biggest advantage of purchasing a new "custom" rifle locally. It's guaranteed and you can take it back at the slightest sign of trouble. It should also come with all the required "extras" such as sights, safety and stock bedding already attended to.

We didn't see any of the English made rifles this year, but as a warning to potential purchasers there is a considerable difference between an English top grade rifle and a second or third class weapon. Back when they were originally sold the purchaser knew what he was getting, but these days any rifle with an English makers name on it is taken as being a good quality rifle. This is decidedly not true. Perhaps the two best examples are the Westley-Richards .425 "White Hunter" models and some (but decidedly not all) of the Cogswell and Harrison .404's. Westley Richards turned out a great many superb .425's but they also produced a cheap line intended for government service or the "native" trade, known as the "White Hunter" model. These were built on war surplus K98 Mauser actions, without due attention to magazine box dimensions or the feed rails. They make a Weatherby cross Remington 700 look like a dream rifle. Much the same can be said for some of the Cogswells built on war surplus P14 actions. The second grade guns work fine, but the third grade weapons are on a par with the "White Hunter".

That completes the overview on this season's rifles. Too much rubbish is being sold, at vastly inflated prices that will get a tyro hunter killed. It annoys me, to put it mildly!

My last observations were on ammunition. Heavy calibre ammo is expensive, especially for apprentices who are on nominal salaries. The ammo produced for the training and exams tends to be old and scrounged from any available source so all sorts of "ammo" related problems occur. Most ammo is remarkably long lived. I and a few others are still using vintage Kynoch ammo in our rifles for training with only the occasional hangfire, and those confined to early (pre 1960) lots. Two calibres though have a very definite shelf life. .458 Win mag and .416 Rem. A quick glance at the round will often reveal that the bullet has begun to move forward out of the case and the factory crimp is gone as the bullet moves out past the cannelure. I presume that this phenomenon is caused by the heavily compressed powder charge expanding with the heat or perhaps the brass just gets weak after a number of years of holding a bullet back that is constantly trying to pop out of the case and begins to let go. Whatever the reason, this causes two problems. Firstly the cartridges often no longer fit in the magazine perfectly causing feeding trouble (particularly noticeable in short actioned rifles like FN's, Interarms or Mausers). The second is that velocity becomes erratic. How old is old? And how long does this take to occur? I have seen the bullets creeping out of the cases on most makes of .458 ammo but it is often difficult to determine exactly how old. In 1991, however, National Parks purchased a huge batch of A Square monolithics for use in the culling programme. Almost all of this ammo is now beginning to push the bullets out of the case. In 1996 I chronographed a selection of this ammo, which was then still in good condition. Velocity averaged 2174fps with a mean deviation of 37fps. After seeing what was happening to the ammo, I chronographed the same batches again recently. Mean velocity was 1780fps and mean deviation was 180fps. A few rounds where the bullets had not begun to pull themselves were fine delivering the original specs, but most is now reject - less than ten years from date of manufacture to throw away! For hunters this is not often a problem since their ammo gets used up at a regular rate, but with too many guides, the "good" carry ammo sits in their gun belts for years.


Winchester M70 safety catch - awkward for a right-hander.

.416 Rem is another problem cartridge in this regard. One candidate had some fairly fresh (so he thought) Federal trophy bonded rounds. 17 out of twenty in the box were beginning to shed their bullets. Velocity for the 400grn bullets varied from 2120fps to 2390fps. Another disquieting fact about the .416 Rem cartridge is beginning to show. Inexplicable pressure problems in the occasional factory round. As mentioned under the Remington rifles, the model 700's in .416 seem to break extractors with unreasonable regularity. Is this due to pressure problems with the cartridge as much as design failure of the rifle? I have seen stuck cases and had to beat the bolts open on other makes of rifle chambered for this round before this last exam. Nimrod cartridges also tell me that they have had great difficulty coming up with a good load for the .416 Rem due to the occasional pressure spike. PMP in South Africa reported likewise.

One last, fairly humorous incident occurred which simply confirms my case against Weatherby. An apprentice PH was using a rifle chambered for the .375 H&H. He had a whole pile of ammo given to him by a client, which was .375 H&H made by Weatherby. He also had a few rounds though that were also head stamped "Weatherby" and marked .375 but they were .375 Weatherby rather than Holland & Holland. I've never seen a rifle chambered for .375 Weatherby but the rounds sure didn't fit into chamber of the said fellow's rifle and caused an almighty jam. It was during a training session at Rifa so we all simply had a good laugh.

The lesson though remains. Cycle each round through the chamber of your rifle before you put it in the magazine or your cartridge belt. Reloads especially but even the best factory ammo may be damaged or not quite what it seems at first glance.





© African Hunter Magazine 1980-2003. No portion of this publication may be reproduced without permission.

Wow, I just finished reading it. It sure sounds like the article based on the comments earlier in this thread. Too bad I couldn't get the pictures. He is opinionated about American rifles, but I can see why he would be so critical. He has a bunch of young (or not) men training to be PHs. They will be putting their lives on the line because their responsibility is to clean the messes the clients make. For example, he might be tracking a wounded cape buff that will storm out of the bush just a few yards away and he must be lightning fast to bring his gun up, take the safety off, and fire. I can forgive the author some of his comments in light of this.

I have a CZ (BRNO) 550 in .375 H&H. It fared OK in his review, mine is the newer variety, so aside from the safety, I think it would pass muster. I wonder what he would say about a Marlin 1895 guide gun?? There is supposed to be an African PH using one now, using wide meplat hard cast bullets.

Very interesting article. Anybody can write an article. I very much agree with most of the findings of the article. I don't agree with his view of the pre-64 Model 70. I prefer the pre-64 to the later "classic". He says he likes the classic better but then faults the difference.

I wouldn't take ANY new bolt action into the field without slicking it up a bit, at least not after dangerous game.

The failure of the "push" feeds certainly isn't anything new. A hunter with a Rem 700 hunting dangerous game is an accident waiting to happen.

The quality of the later model mauser "knock off's" is readily apparent when compared to an FN or pre-war original.

I think the world of Roy Weatherby and he fathered a great many concepts that are accepted today. BUT, Americans have a thing about the "biggest". People jumped all over the Weatherby bandwagon but as far as I'm concerned it's a case of "if it ain't broke, don't fix it". It's true he figured out a way to max velocities on just about every caliber in existence but to what end? Overly sensitive rounds on a push feed rifle. You sure don't need that for dangerous game. If you follow Weatherby's philosophy, then a rifle that fired a 20mm cannon shot would be about perfect !

I am somewhat surprised that there is no mention of the Blaser in his review. I am sure that none of the students could afford one.

One of my best friends just bought one and he's all flipped out about changing barrels. The gun itself just seems way over complicated with way too many things that could go wrong. I'm curious as to your thoughts on this rifle.

A good article. Thanks for digging it up !

So.... you'd feel that a P.H. with a push-feed Remington was irresponsible?

So.... you'd feel that a P.H. with a push-feed Remington was irresponsible?

I could give a resounding YES ! But there is more to the answer than that. I don't want to get into a racial thing because it's not racial. It's economic. The PH's (what used to be called White Hunters) that I have had contact were all mostly "old hands". They had a rifle that they knew they could count on. I never saw ANYTHING but an early Mauser action. I haven't seen any doubles but that is mostly economic as well. The blacks (commonly referred to as game scouts ) generally have whatever gun they are given by the safari outfit they work for or some rifle they've managed to obtain. The ones I have seen have been piss poor in quality and maintenance. This is an economic issue. I know there are black PH's who do a great job so please don't call me out on the "race" thing.

So, what I am getting to, is your question of are they irresponsible. Well, there are lots of other possibilities. They are poor. They don't know any better. It's all they could get. Etc. Etc.

You can count on the guy with the Remington getting off one shot. You can't count on a second. Since we are discussing a PH backing you up, hopefully one round will do it.

This whole PH "backing you up" thing, seems to mean different things to different people.

It's like sky diving. We are talking about the importance of the quality of our backup chute. If you are using your backup chute, things have already gone to ****. I think the main chute deserves at least the same attention as the backup.

i disagree completely with the notion that push feed weapons are any more prone to malfunction than CRF weapons and i don't even own a 'push feed' weapon.
i have seen too many in the hands of highly experienced african PH's, (white ones) used expertly and for many years! some even own CRF weapons and prefer and swear by the push feed models.
i also know first hand that CRF weapons can and often are 'short stroked' with the result being the next round in the mag. being partially released without the spent being ejected, creating a jam.
what 450NE says about apprentice PH's having substandard weapons and ammo is very true and i have experience with this as well. often this ammo comes from US clients in the form of overloaded and unsafe handloads. some 458 handloads i saw earlier this year would'nt even chamber because of over compressed powder load bulging the case at the base of the bullet. some light monolithic solid.
to state offhand that use of push feed weapons is irresponsible is unfair in my opinion. i've seen them used too effectively for too many years on too much game to buy into it.

So Ross Seyfried was an irresponsible PH, then?

I hope you don't consider CZ mausers "knock offs"! Maybe the Zavasta (or whatever it is that has a Remington name)? The CZs are improvements over the BRNOs especially with regards to fit and finish, but are essentially the same company that was making additional mausers for the Nazi's in WWII. The author talks about them in this article and in others at that archive site.

i disagree completely with the notion that push feed weapons are any more prone to malfunction than CRF weapons and i don't even own a 'push feed' weapon.
i have seen too many in the hands of highly experienced african PH's, (white ones) used expertly and for many years! some even own CRF weapons and prefer and swear by the push feed models.
i also know first hand that CRF weapons can and often are 'short stroked' with the result being the next round in the mag. being partially released without the spent being ejected, creating a jam.
what 450NE says about apprentice PH's having substandard weapons and ammo is very true and i have experience with this as well. often this ammo comes from US clients in the form of overloaded and unsafe handloads. some 458 handloads i saw earlier this year would'nt even chamber because of over compressed powder load bulging the case at the base of the bullet. some light monolithic solid.
to state offhand that use of push feed weapons is irresponsible is unfair in my opinion. i've seen them used too effectively for too many years on too much game to buy into it.

Okay. One point at a time. I have never seen a PH with a push feed rifle. So you are seeing many of the best PH's out there with push feed ?
Okay, if you say so.

Your description of the CRF jamming is actually what happens with push feed. It CAN'T happen with CRF. It has a fixed ejector which won't force the ejection until the round is clear of the chamber. Not just that little button on a spring. And the round is locked on to the bolt, not just flopping around.

I have personal experience with this. I was hunting deer in S. Texas. I came upon a gully and jumped a nice buck. I missed with my first shot and short stroked the bolt in my eagerness. Locked up the whole thing as i watched the deer disappear. Glad it wasn't dangerous game.

You don't know me. I'll put my shooting against anybody on this board except for competing bench rest shooters. I am a great shot. I couldn't believe I had jammed my gun with that deer. It was a costly mistake and definitely operator error.

Mike G. I knew you were setting me up for a "gotcha" with your question. I'm not the one who brought up the term "responsible" in conjunction with this subject.

It's a matter of "preference". Maybe a Kia isn't as safe as a Volvo, but that doesn't make Kia owners "irresponsible". The Volvo owner might argue that he prefers to have his kids riding in the safest car possible and the Kia driver says he can't afford it. That doesn't make one person good or bad. In fact, if the Kia driver is a better he may be safer anyway. Who knows.

Let's not make this a "good people use one gun" and "bad people use another". That's hardly the point.

We are having a theoretical conversation. If the operator of the gun makes no mistakes, hey there's no problem whatsoever. That's just not the universe I live in. I live in a world where mistakes do get made, sometimes even by me. Shortstroking a bolt action because I got over enthusiastic and leaving my PH in the precarious position of having to jump in to save his client doesn't seem very responsible either.

As an aside. I spoke to one of my hunting buddies yesterday who took off to Botswana this morning. He had been talking to a mutual friend and a PH we used in Tanzania. He's been doing PH work for thirty years. He's pretty much seen everything. He got his leg tore up pretty bad. He had a wounded buff charge. His usual handling of such a situation is to wait for the buff to get close and then despatch him with a careful shot. This often resulted in a dead buff dropping at his feet. Well, this time, he said that the bullet his the boss just right and bounced off!@#@! Man, that would suck !

Anyway, he ended up with a torn up leg. Very lucky.

The round was a .458 Winchester. I haven't gotten to talk to him and grill him about this yet. I can't imagine that he had a "soft" in there but then again I can't imagine the bullet bouncing off at close range like that.

Now. Let's turn this around for a minute. Can any of you tell me what's GOOD about a push feed weapon? I can give you a few. They are much cheaper to make. A Remington is made out of a piece of pipe. A Mauser or Winchester action is labor intensive to make therefore expensive.

Secondly, a push feed action is theoretically more accurate. Because of the "pipe" action, the pressures are transferred more equally to and through the action. I've never seen a bench rest gun that wasn't push feed.

T-Bone.

It's not a personal issue. "knock off" has a negative connotation to it but it's no big deal. It's good that someone is making the old actions.

But here's the deal. You compare them to the WWII actions as proof of how great they are. You should know that the WWII actions are the worst of the lot. The prewar actions are far superior, not just in craftsmanship but also in the quality of steel. Custom gun makers are aware of that and will usually not use later actions. The problem was that after the war started, the Reich was unable to maintain quality standards due to the greatly increased production.

T-Bone.

It's not a personal issue. "knock off" has a negative connotation to it but it's no big deal. It's good that someone is making the old actions.

But here's the deal. You compare them to the WWII actions as proof of how great they are. You should know that the WWII actions are the worst of the lot. The prewar actions are far superior, not just in craftsmanship but also in the quality of steel. Custom gun makers are aware of that and will usually not use later actions. The problem was that after the war started, the Reich was unable to maintain quality standards due to the greatly increased production.

OK, I know what you are talking about. There was a problem with late war/post war production. It has been speculated that this was intentional because Czechoslovakia was an occupied country and they had no love for their captors - who knows. The production issue is even mentioned in the quoted article. However, they have improved quite a bit in the intervening years.

My point in comparing was simply to state that they are genuine Mauser actions and have been so for a long time. They are made with much more steel than today's steel/plastic guns. They are not perfect, but a great starting point for the money, and I think the fit and finish are far better than most 'production' guns. If you have not looked at one lately, you might want to - there is a reason they are quite popular in Africa.

You are absolutely correct. They are Mausers and I would have absolutely no hesitancy in using one for any game including dangerous. I would do the routine stuff like slicking it up and so forth. But heck yeah. I say the same for ANY gun maker out there that builds a genuine Mauser action.

I mean, it's only the greatest action ever designed. The pre64 is a "knock off" (or should we say variant LOL!).

This is sort of off topic ... but not really. We are talking about dangerous game rifles and we are talking about rifle actions.

To pursue the rifle action side of things for a minute let me say this.

If you want the best of all possible worlds, there is an alternative. There is no question that a Remington action, being based on a simple piece of pipe, is incredibly strong and rigid. The Pret64/Mauser has control round feeding.

If somebody would only come up with both, we'd have it made.

Well, it turns out someone has. I wanted an ultimate long range rifle for deer hunting. I hunted in Mexico and South Texas where very long shots were sometimes necessary.

I decided on the 7mmSTW. I love that round. This was before anybody was making factory rifles for this caliber. I needed a strong action long enough for the STW. I wasn't willing to give up control round feeding. Just around that time, McMillan came out with their Talon action. This IS THE PERFECT ACTION ! Okay, just kidding.

Anyway, it's a Remington action with a Mauser/Winchester bolt. I got one in stainless and I would highly recommend it if you are having a custom rifle made. But they aren't cheap. You can even get them built in titanium.

(I'm a bit out of touch. I just did a search and couldn't find McMillan. Please don't tell me they are gone ! )

Well, you are the one with the absolute strong opinions.... be prepared to back them up.

Seyfried has written of his fondness for Weatherby rifles / cartridges for dangerous game, and also of using a .416 Remington / Rem 700 for a backup rifle.

So, if you think you have more experience / knowledge than a PH who has been licensed in several countries, by all means, go ahead and post.

Just don't be surprised when you get called on them.

Mike, Thanks for bringing it up. You are right. I do have strong opinions. I pride myself on being willing to learn but fortunately haven't gotten to this age without thinking I learned anything either. It's not like I haven't been paying attention! I'm willing to back up my opinions and certainly don't mind getting called on them.

I think it's great that you like push feed guns. They probably sell ten times the number of rifles in push feed as they do in CRF. My goodness. I'm know some great hunters who use push feed. It's cool with me. It's a free country.

People carry different guns for all kinds of reasons. I know people who won't hunt with anything except what their daddy left 'em. That's cool. Far be it from me to try to explain human behavior. It's all good.

Please answer my question. What are the positive aspects that make push feed rifles superior in your view. I've already brought up "reduced production costs" and "more inherent rigidity". I'd be curious to what other advantages there are.

Not wanting to get embroiled in a peeing contest on hunting dangerous game (I've never hunted them) and am a staunch believer in CRF rifles. Yet, the ONE good thing about the push-feeds is the enclosed cartridge case head. Have several of the old tang-safety Ruger M77's and wish they had the bolt system of the newer 77MkII's.

Have to say that fella that wrote the article sure whacked the US rifle makers. I guess if you count the five years and several Grizzlies and Alaska Kodiaks I shot as dangerous game I've a little experience.

All were shot with a Remington 700 in 8mm Rem mag with 220 grain Sierra Game King bullets at just over 3000 fps which I've been shooting since 1978. My hunting partner up there was doing the same thing with a push feed Sako in that dreaded 375 Weatherby caliber the above writer talked about.

Kinda wish I'd of known how crappy those push feed rifles were and how unreliable they were. I've never short stroked one or jammed one in the 40 years I've used them. I've always figured you just gotta pull the bolt back to it stops before pushing it forward. Interesting discussion on the ammo creeping out of the cases though, I've never experienced that, but I usually shoot it up before it gets very old.

I did run a small gunsmith business for a lot of years and even though I've seen failures in weapons, nothing like the percentage of failures the fella described in such short a time frame. Most of the Smiths I know building custom rifles on Mauser actions are pretty savvy about the feeding needs of the rifles they build. Along with that lots of the later Mauser rifles built are using modern commercial Mauser actions. It does seem funny that a good percentage of the sniper/tactical rifles sold are built on Remington actions.

Like kdub I won't get into a peeing contest, but lots of folks I know in Alaska shoot push feed rifles for big bears without any problems in Alaska and Canada. Even some of the guides I know carry them, but that's neither here nor there really.

I've never been to Africa and at this stage of my life don't plan on going, but I've a friend that's planning a trip in 09 and I have recommended him a CZ 416 Rigby. I thought that looked like a pretty nice rifle for everything from elephant to plains game and it was available under a grand. He was initially thinking of having an extra Remington 700 converted to something, but by the time the smith got it done it would have topped 2 grand. Lots of money for a one time hunt perhaps.

I didn't say I was in favor of any action type. In fact I hunt with a variety of odds and ends, basically, and would give the action type pretty much the least amount of thought when going to Africa or anyplace else.

I agree the Rem 700 action is cheaper to make, but I don't agree that it has more 'inherent rigidity'. A Mauser or Win Mod 70 action is machined from a solid block of steel, including the recoil lug. The Mod 700 (and A-bolt) has a recoil lug that's a flat piece of steel compressed between the barrel and action. Which is more rigid? The homogeneous action/recoil lug action, of course, because there isn't a gap in the steel grain allowing flex between the surfaces like there is with the Mod 700 action/recoil lug. Not that I think it matters one bit in this discussion!

Accuracy? The Mod 700 seems to have the edge from what I've experienced, and from what bench rest shooters are choosing. But given this thread, does it matter if you have 2 MOA or 1/2 MOA, when mostly dealing in 50 yards or less with dangerous game? Maybe in the confidence in your rifle in practice, but not in real practicality.

I mostly prefer CRF's in the Mod 70 and Mauser 98 varieties, but I have several makes of push feeds, including Mod 700's, Mod 70 post-'64, Browning A-bolt, Steyr SBS. Not with ANY of them have I had a misfeed due to slow stroking, upside-down feeding when the varmints are attacking, etc. Well, other than the Mod 700 17 Rem, that requires a spacer block in the magazine due to the very short cartridge. But I won't be taking it after DG!

Practice with your chosen rifle, and if that practice reveals problems, whether inherent rifle problems or operator problems, better try something else when going after DG.

The original article kind of got my goat with its criticism of basically all American rifles, when the problems, to me, seemed to be not keeping the rifle clean and serviceable, and not using good quality ammo that wasn't left on the vehicle dash baking in the sun, or overloaded ammo for the conditions (temperature)!

Disclosure: I'm just an armchair DG hunter so far, but have prepared and am practicing with a Mauser 98 416 Taylor and Ruger RSM 458 Lott. Haven't had my nerves tested in a Mark Sullivan 'Black Death' buff charge!:p

Quote; "Okay. One point at a time. I have never seen a PH with a push feed rifle. So you are seeing many of the
best PH's out there with push feed ?
Okay, if you say so.

Your description of the CRF jamming is actually what happens with push feed. It CAN'T happen with CRF. It has a fixed ejector which won't force the ejection until the round is clear of the chamber. Not just that little button on a spring. And the round is locked on to the bolt, not just flopping around."

never said many of the best PH's, i said highly experienced PH's.
as for the rest well, i know for a fact it CAN happen but don't really care to argue about it.
meanwhile, if i'm ever caught hanging upside down from a tree while being charged by an elephant or a grizzly, i'll rest easily knowing my rifles will feed properly if the inverted sight picture results in a missed first shot

Shawn, the round receiver guns are in fact more rigid.... but this is an issue with extreme precision target rifles, not hunting rifles.

Take a mauser action apart, everything off of it including the barrel, and there's not much left. Most of the metal is in the bottom and left side of the action.

It's more evenly distributed in a 700 et al.

Like I said not that it means squat for hunting. But it is true. Also, the mausers don't have much of a recoil lug. They are intended to be used with a cross bolt. Now that is in fact an issue on a hard-recoiling chambering, because you sure can split a stock.

Per Mikes post one of the things that many early accuracy seekers did was use a solid bottom mauser action, this is what I was doing in the early 60's to seek a stiffer action for bench rest competition. I built a beautiful 222 bench rest gun using one can't remember the barrel on it, but it was a heavy bench class gun. It was shooting under .3 groups at a hundred and .7 plus a little groups at 200 yard competition.

Then along came the sleeved round actions which appeared to be a little stiffer and certainly were less expensive even with the sleeving and put my beautiful solid bottom Mauser out of competition. Boy was I griped.

Anyway I turned the barrel down to a varmint taper, Put on a flat bottomed varmint stock and used it for a 400 yard ground squirrel gun. You could still headshoot ground squirrels at 200 yards consistently with the B&L 6 by 24 scope on it.

As for a dangerous game rifle Mikes right half minute of angle or one minute of angle differences doesn't mean squat. At the time I had enough money invested in that 222 that I didn't want to start over. It did go on to win a bunch of the local turkey shoots though for years afterward. After the third year of cleaning up on the turkey shoots with it the folks wouldn't let me bring that gun anymore. I started bringing a Win 52 target rifle that out to a 75 yards was durn near as accurate. It wasn't long and I ended up just a spectator at the turkey shoots. Some folks are just not any fun.

Shawn, the round receiver guns are in fact more rigid.... but this is an issue with extreme precision target rifles, not hunting rifles.

Take a mauser action apart, everything off of it including the barrel, and there's not much left. Most of the metal is in the bottom and left side of the action.

It's more evenly distributed in a 700 et al.

Like I said not that it means squat for hunting. But it is true. Also, the mausers don't have much of a recoil lug. They are intended to be used with a cross bolt. Now that is in fact an issue on a hard-recoiling chambering, because you sure can split a stock.

Ah, I understand now...I think. There is - at least overall - less material removed from the Mod 700-type action, with not one side or the other being overly more weak than another, at least compared to a Mauser or Mod 70-type action. Makes sense.

Sirs;
Finn Agaard used a push feed Winchester mod. 70 in 458 Winchester as his "stopping rifle."
Check me out - A-Square shooters manual "any shot you want."
I still like the 9.3X64 (ballistic equivalent of the 375 H&H) and the 416 Taylor (duplicates Rigby velocities). and even the 9.3X62. If you're using a Mauser length (3.4") action I find these very good.
If you like push feed (I do) look at the "A-Square" rifles built on the P17 model Enfield.
If you hunt Africa by all means get the A-Square Shooters Manual - Any Shot you Want. These guys are the "big-boys" of the big bores clear up to the 577 Tyranosaur!
I think it's the finest manual on earth!
HNB.

Sirs;
Finn Agaard used a push feed Winchester mod. 70 in 458 Winchester as his "stopping rifle."
Check me out - A-Square shooters manual "any shot you want."
I still like the 9.3X64 (ballistic equivalent of the 375 H&H) and the 416 Taylor (duplicates Rigby velocities). and even the 9.3X62. If you're using a Mauser length (3.4") action I find these very good.
If you like push feed (I do) look at the "A-Square" rifles built on the P17 model Enfield.
If you hunt Africa by all means get the A-Square Shooters Manual - Any Shot you Want. These guys are the "big-boys" of the big bores clear up to the 577 Tyranosaur!
I think it's the finest manual on earth!
HNB.

Interesting post. If you are a fan of the 1917 Enfield, you might want to rethink your opinion of the push feed vs. control round feed argument. The 1917 Enfield action is a direct Mauser deriviative and as such is "control round feed".

In fact, if you take another look at the A-Square catalog you might find the following:

" Controlled Round Feed - All A-Square rifles are true controlled round feed with a non-rotating claw extractor. Every round is held under control from the time the shooter places it into the magazine until the ejector kicks it out of the rifle. An A-Square rifle will even feed upside down."

As to why A Square would only use control round feeding for their rifles you might find further info about the founder of A Square, LTC Alphin. A Square claims:

His private experiments, which commenced in the early sixties, began to bear fruit in 1975. Applying his knowledge to the problem of large bore rifles, LTC Alphin made break-throughs in rifle, cartridge and projectile design and, by 1979, established the A-Square company, Inc.

He has spent over1000 days in the field in Africa, and his designs are created specifically to answer the needs of trophy hunters and professional hunters. LTC Alphin knows what it means to risk his life on his gear in the field. His designs are intended for those who do likewise.

Cheers.

I don't really have a dog in this hunt, but Africa is a dream that I will probably never be able to afford, and I have done a lot of reading on it. I do know that Craig Boddington, who while not a PH, has done about a zillion safaris, and says a quality firearm will feed reliable whether CRF or PF. I have some modern mausers (CZ) with serious lugs and CRF, but I also have a wonderful big bore levergun in 45-70 that I would love to take over there.

I would think you could take whatever you want as long as it is .375 or greater (for DG that is), and you can shoot it well - and under stress.

Now a PH is another matter. I think I'll let them decide what they would rather have.