Home Forums Hunting & Shooting Express Rifles and Big Bores Only Why I no longer defend the .458 Winchester magnum

Why I no longer defend the .458 Winchester Magnum.

For more years than I can remember I have been an staunch fan of the .458 Winchester Magnum. Having owned 2 rifles chambered for the .458WM at least I can speak from experience (even of it is somewhat limited) about the round.
I have not been able to fault either rifle and I have never experienced any problems when reloading the .458.
Despite all the positive experiences I've had with the .458 Winchester Magnum I can now no longer defend it.
Why not?
Because there's no point. People either don't listen - or they've already made up their mind about the .458 Winchester. I end up just getting frustrated, so now I'm just not going to bother. Instead of arguing about the .458 Winchester magnum I'm going to go out with mine and shoot big animals with it.
"Its poorly designed"
"It was all there was at the time"
"Lacks penetration"
"Too slow"
"Not powerful enough"
"Not enough case capacity"
"Caked powder and poor bullets"
"At least in a magnum length action it can be converted to the Lott"

Heard 'em all and to be honest I just get sick of it... and I it don't agree with any of the above.
I have no shares or stakes in Winchester. I had no part in the design of the .458. I didn't invent the round, so if people choose to use or not use it, it's of no consequence to me. My feelings aren't gonna get hurt, BUT, what does get me upset is when someone buys a perfectly good rifle and then converts to the Lott - usually without even firing the rifle first! Or because of horror stories they've heard about ammo that was manufactured decades ago!! That's like me saying "yeah, I drove a Chrysler 50 years ago and because of a bad experience I'll never drive one again!!" Gimme a break..
I'll be honest and say that I just don't get that kind of reasoning.
How many people buy a .30-06 for deer/ elk and then without firing it get it converted to the Ackley? Or buy a .300 Win Mag and then get it converted to .300 Weatherby? Not to many that I've met.
Now don't get me wrong, if someone wants a Ackley, or a Weatherby, or a Lott then that's all cool and groovy, good luck with your rifle and I'm sure that it'll serve you well.
BUT, if someone buys one because they feel that the original cartridges aren't up to the task - because they were told (or read something online) by an 'expert' that says they're not, that really gets me going.
I think my favourite one is in regards to the caked powder/ squib loads that the .458 is famous for. To say this didn't happen is a lie. It did and I don't doubt that it got many a person in serious trouble... or worse. The most common cause I hear for this is because of 'compressed ball powder' that glues together under the African heat and doesn't ignite properly.
The funny thing is that according to Winchester the original rounds WERE NOT loaded with ball powder! Winchester only changed to ball powder in the .458 some time in the late �70s or early �80s. Before then, the .458 was loaded with a cylindrical, short-grain double-base powder.
A gentleman by the name of Georg Grohmann also wrote about this in detail. He wrote a great article while working up loads for his .458 and quoting;
"But contrary to popular belief in certain quarters, old (1970s) Winchester ammo was not loaded with ball powder, but with a small-log, cylindrical, double base powder. None of the cartridges I had for testing contained compressed powder, neither was it caked. It was, however, cemented by chemical action. There were also undersize bullets. The end results were, in some cases, disastrous. Not only were velocities much reduced (as low as 1856 fps in my tests) but there were both hang fires and misfires! But it was NOT ball powder, neither was it compressed! There was about 1 mm of space between powder and bullet in the solid loads and about 2 mm in the softpoint loads. It was a short-grain, cylindrical, extruded double-base powder, resembling IMR 4320 in shape and size. (IMR powders are single-base, of course)."

Not good, not good at all, but also not due to caked ball powder. He goes on to further write;

"As for ball powder �caking� in compressed loads, this is another very persistent story. All I can say here is that I have been loading Win/Olin 748 ball powder in my .458 since October 1974. In unfired cases, my standard load is slightly compressed, yet I have never had a problem. In 2002, in order to check up on this, I disassembled some .458/748 loads, which I had put together in 1982! There was a little clumping of the powder, but no more than in cartridges I checked six months after loading. These rounds were re-assembled and then chronographed together with some cartridges, which had not been disturbed. Average MV was 2060 fps, exactly the same as what I got in 1982, when I checked some of the same batch of reloads."

So why then the bad performance of the .458 years and years ago? Well let's see, there's the stick powder having a chemical reaction and clumping together - even though it wasn't compressed, the original 'solids' blowing apart and being undersized and the production line spilling powder from the shells before the bullet was seated.
These problems have been fixed (decades ago!!) and it's a testament to the round's reliable performance on game that it's still so popular.

What about the stories I hear about the .458 being not powerful enough for elephant? Well, I've never shot an elephant and unless I win the lottery I probably never will. But I do own a chronograph. And I know that a 500gr bullet at between 2050 - 2200 fps will kill any elephant under any condition. I know this because even though I've never shot an elephant, Grobler, Harland, Aagaard, Duckworth and Thomson have. Around 20,000 actually and all with the 458wm.
And I also know that today, it's no problem to drive a 500gr bullet at these speeds, without super compressing (not that I think compressed loads are bad) or without sky high pressure. In fact the ADI loading manual lists the following STARTING loads for the .458 with the 500gr bullet, 70grs of AR2208 (Varget) for 2050fps and 70grs of AR 2206H (H4895) for 2070fps. These starting loads are as powerful as the factory ammo that culled 20,000 elephants, yet are not compressed and are very mild pressure wise. The .458 would probably be the most popular big bore here in Australia for hunting water buffalo and the such, and I'll tell you, in summertime up the Northern Territory, it gets as hot up there as anywhere in Africa. The loads that are listed in Australian manuals with Aussie ADI powders show that speeds up to 2205fps are possible (74grs AR2206H) without excess pressure and the N.T is where they are field tested.
I don't think that 2050 - 2200fps is to slow for anything that a .458 would be used on. It compares very favourably to the .470 Nitro and would probably surpasses it if the .470 was chronographed in the more realistic 24- 26" barrel instead of the usual 28" the .470 is credited with. Even if the .470 was 50fps or so quicker than the .458 the .458 has a higher S.D when both are fired with 500gr bullets. So on game they would be pretty much identical... except that the .458 can do it in a standard action - not a magnum. This is why I think that the .458 Winchester Magnum ISN'T a poorly designed round. Nitro performance out of a .30-06 sized action.

But what if you do have a .458 in a Magnum sized action like I do with my CZ550 Safari Magnum? Well according to the experts it simply makes sense to convert it to the Lott and it's a pretty cheap conversion. Well not getting it done is cheaper! One can load to an OAL of 3.8 in the CZ and all you need is a Lee Factory Crimp Die. They're about $15-20! The load that was recommended to me for my CZ taking advantage of the longer action was the 550gr Woodleigh and 74grs of AR2206. This load gives 2100 fps and over 5300 ft/lbs of energy. In what situation would this be lacking for dangerous game?
So before converting it to the Lott, why not just seat the bullets out deeper in the .458 Winchester and see how you go? Brass and components are cheaper and factory ammo is a lot more common. (I know that WM ammo can be used in the Lott but if you're gonna factory ammo just use the WM as is. And remember that factory ammo culled those 20,000 ele's.)

So this is why I no longer defend about the .458 Winchester Magnum.
I don't need to.
It has killed more dangerous game than any other cartridge and is now beyond criticism. People like Don Heath and Craig Boddington, who previously, were very outspoken about their dislike of the .458 have now called a truce with it. Why? Because there is nothing to criticise.. and there hasn't been for some time. Don Heath states that today there is nothing wrong with the .458 and Craig Boddington credits the .458 "as the gun that saved Africa". But I think that Craig sums up the .458 nicely with the following post;
"Even though (years ago) Winchester boldly dropped the .458 Winchester Magnum, it needs to stay. It is still the least expensive option for a true big bore, and despite the current popularity of .458-bashing, it is absolutely adequate for the world�s largest game."

And I couldn't agree more.

Nicely put.

I expect the anti-.458 Win mag crowd will be along shortly...

I don't care what anyone else uses, nor give a sheit if others disparage my choice. I've found the .458 WM loaded up with 450gr. North Forks and 72gr. of AA2230 works pretty damn well!

ditto...

To be honest I really didn't think most people were so much down on the 458 Win (in it's modern loadings) but a case of what has become the ascension of the Lott. More of a "With today's loads the Win is good but the Lott's better." kind of thing.

Still, I think the saying these days is "Haters gonna hate.".

I hope the anti-crowd and the haters don't come coz all I was trying to say was that the .458 Winchester Magnum is a perfectly suitable DG cartridge NOT that the .458 is better than any other cartridge.
I tried to be careful about not putting any other cartridge down while discussing the .458. It was never my intention to say it's better than a .416, .375, Lott etc.. they are all viable DG rounds so choose the one that takes your fancy.
I used to have a Zastava M70 in .375H&H that I spent quite a bit of money on, new laminate stock, barrel band fitted and a few other things and it was a really nice rifle. Super accurate too. But it just didn't do it for me. I then had it reamed to .375 Weatherby but I still wasn't in love with it. Truth be told I only bought the .375 coz I was looking for a .458 and couldn't find one. When a CZ550 .458 in as new conditioned turned up at my LGS I traded the .375 for the .458. (The previous owner bought 20 rounds he bought the rifle and a few days later returned the rifle to sell it with 16 rounds left. Who would've thought that an elephant gun would kick??)
Now living in Australia, the .375 would've been seen by many as a more sensible choice. Still really effective on our largest species (water buffalo) but shoots flatter for our other game. Also kicks less. But I wanted a .458 (always regretted selling my first one) so I got one.
That's why I totally get it when someone says they want a Lott over a WM. Or a .416 over a .470. Or a .375 over a .404. Coz that's what they want.. and if that's what you want than go get it and have fun with it.
They're all expensive to shoot, they all kick like hell and they'll all dispatch the largest animals that walk on the earth.
They're all different with their own little idiosyncrasies but they all get the job done.

Most big bore haters have never owned one. I learned that with the .460. Never met a single critic who ever owned one.

I have owned a few .458's and loaded for several more and like them very much, especially the model 70' with 22" barrels. Very handy in brush and quite capable a quarter mile out with some of the great spire pointed middle weights available.
John

I've never had a .458 and will probably never own one but I appreciate the analysis. Lots of good points.

About the only creditible round better than the 458 Win. Mag. in a standard length M-98 Mauser rifle, might, and I say "might", be a 450 on the 66 mm. long Ruger case. If I can't get my present 416 Wildcat made on the 375 Ruger case to put out the performance I want, I will make up one of the 450 Rugers on Virgin Ruger basic brass, chambered in a short chambered 458 Win mag. replacement barrel.

These little bears, will give you 458 Lott power out of a standard length Mauser action. But just like the 400 Whelens, they really need to be formed from cylindrical Ruger Basic Brass.

They probably won't have enough shoulders to be made commercially, and I will have to have my wildcat's name engraved on each, and every case, which I load up for Africa. Keeping it shorter than the 458 Win Mag. means that this smaller diameter case cannot go all the way into my Ruger's chamber.

I really like my 416 Wildcat's half inch long neck, so I would do a 450 Ruger wildcat, before I re-chambered it into the factory 416 Ruger.

I do think that the 458 Winchester Magnum is the obvious choice for a first time, Mauser M-98, D.G. rifle. Since I'm left handed, I also believe that a three position safety, (Mauser Wings), or (Win. model 70's), are absolutely needed.

The 458 has been doing a fine job of defending itself and anybody who lived behind one as well. Let the gun speak! Sure PHC scared us under the blanket reading by flashlight when we were kids about Afica heat causing all kinds of Hob with 458 WW solids, but time has been kind, I feel for those who used the cartridge.

Why I wonder, when the M-70 would easily handle a longer (Lott) design did Winchester make the round work in everybody's standard bolt gun? Was ammo sales more important than rifle+ammo sales (ala Weatherby).

Because at the time, short 2.5" magnums were the new vanilla.
Cheers...
Con

The 458 Nay-Sayers can hate all they want I have used mine for years will continue to do so and If I am ever lucky enough to go after a Cape Buffalo it's what I'll be carrying. Never did me any dirt.

Con,

And 2.5" magnums were the new vanilla because of the millions of 98 Mauser and 1903 Springfield "war surplus" rifles available at the time, which hundreds of thousands of gunsmiths were converting into various degrees of sporting rifle.

I've only fired one round from a 458 WinMag. It was a 500gr full house load, in a Mauser (I believe a CZ 550). That's a lot of horsepower!

My only big bore is a Marlin lever 45-70. That round has proven capable of bringing down pretty much anything with a pulse, and the 458 WinMag easily adds 300-400 fps to modern 45-70 speeds.

I'll have a .458 at the range tomorrow.
Wonderful toy to play with, capable of anything I am.

GuyM - "I expect the anti-.458 Win mag crowd will be along shortly"... believe you're right. Wait, I hear them now. All two of them. LOL Homesteader.

I gave up trying to defend the 458 in print when a couple of high profile gun writers decided to bash it, and anyone who used it, and began intentially mis-quoting Jack Lott and his reasoning for designing his longer version. I tried to convince editors to at least run an up to date article on it but since most of the have neither experience nor interest in the 458 they had no interest.

When I visit the annual SCI show I find it interesting that so many solid, reliable African PH's still regard the 458 as a superb stopping round.

That's kinda like the good ol' .30-30, people are amazed to find out it still works.

If I found myself in need of a Serious Stopper, I'd go straight to the .458 WinMag.

I found Jack Lott quite praised the 458 Win in later writing. Certainly his publications such as "Big Bore Rifles" gave it good press and he blamed one hunting mishap with Wally Johnson on poor initial bullet placement and bullet construction IIRC.

The 458 Win certainly does at least if not more than the classic Nitro 458 calibers in 24" or less barrels. It shoots like a pussy cat too.

Cheers, Chris

With his article in that magazine on Ultra Magnum Wildcats, I would have figured that he would have used the .450 G&A Short Mag or even the .460 G&A Mag for his own Wildcat since he developed them.

The cartridge we know as the .458 Lott was, according to him, the .450 Watts.