Home Forums Hunting & Shooting Ask The Gunwriters Ganyana on Rifle Power

Because we all know lions and elk are built similarly.

M1: I mean really....how far down the road do we have to go? Bob Lee grassed quite a few lions with a 270 Winchester and I personally know 4-5 people who have killed several grizzlies with one.

Ideal? No maybe not.Does it kill them? I guess it does or there would be no dead lions or grizzlies ever shot with a 270.

We are all entitled to our opinions but not our own facts.

An example may be that I would not choose a 243 for elk (opinion), but I know it kills them(fact).

Back around 1985 I was thinking about having a custom .270 bolt gun built.

Spent the money chasin' wenches instead and I still don't have a .270 although I caught a keeper wench finally. All I can afford today is .22 shorts.

Bob,

You are right about Africa providing more opportunity. Of course, some of this is exaggerated today by "game ranch" (fenced) hunting in South Africa and some other countries, though even that isn't necessarily shooting fish in a barrel. There are some tiny properties where animals are essentially put-and-take, like hatchery fish. But a fenced ranch of tens of thousands of acres is something else.

But most of Africa is fre-range, and even there the numbers of animals are far higher than in North America, for two reasons. First, winters aren't severe, though droughts can be. Second, there are far more kinds of animals. Even if you split North American big game animals into record-keeping categories, there are only about three dozen. In Africa there are at least 80 kinds of horned game alone.

All of this results in an abundance most Americans can't even imagine. Your point about 8-10 big mule deer or elk is actually fairly accurate. I have seen at least 50 MATURE kudu bulls, the equivalent of a 300" bull elk, in unfenced country in Namibia in a 10-day hunt, and over 1000 impala in one day in Tanzania, including a pile of mature rams, and single herds of over 1000 Cape buffalo in Botswana.

This is partly why African trophy standards for a week or 10-day hunt are higher than a North American hunt for mule deer or elk. Over there you're not just looking for a "legal" animal to kill, like a brow-tined bull elk in Montana, but a truly mature bull. The PH simply won't let you shoot anything smaller, and there are enough kudu in many parts of southern Africa that the only reason for not bringing home a good trophy is the search looking for an exceptional trophy. So there's no real reason to shoot beyond 350 yards--or 350 meters, however, you want to measure it.

Also, there's the standard African policy of charging a trophy fee anytime blood is drawn, whether or not the animal's recovered. This cuts down considerably on chancy shooting, whether at short or long range. While good African trackers (whether black or white) are fantastic, they aren't superhuman, and without some luck aren't going to be able to find an animal that's not pretty hard-hit, especially when the animals live in big herds--and many African animals do.

Plus, the meat is normally either sold or given to local tribes, so there's an additional incentive to recovering game, either monetary or necessary for hunting access. So in addition to the basic ethic of attempting to avoid wounding animals, there are other incentives to pass on iffy shots.

Then there's the terrain. While there is some open country in Africa, even there the thorny ground cover sometimes doesn't allow for the steady shooting positions required for long-range shooting. And even if the shooter can get steady, the animal may not be entirely visible. There are exceptions, since parts of South Africa and, especially, Namibia are a lot like Arizona or Wyoming, but again they're exceptions.

Much of the best hunting country is more or less level, but covered with thornbush and trees. In a lot of bushveld a 200-yard shot would be very long.

In many countries there's also the residual British-based hunting ethic that regards getting as close as possible far more commendable than making a longer shot.

So yeah, there is a considerable cultural divide.

I think it was Col. Chas Askins that quipped deer and lions are built the same. They both have four legs on all the same corners�.or something to that effect.

For the most part number 2 should read 200 yards. But then he needs to go look at the definition of ethics. For some that number could be much higher....

I"ve seen a lot of folks shoot at 300 on paper, not what you'd want flung at game generally speaking.

I can say the same about some people's shooting at 100 yards.

He probably didn't care too much about the differences. He was just worried about finding some more people to shoot.

Locate a good bullet through the vitals and game over irregardless of caliber. A 270 can most assuredly do this.

Until cartridge love is equal...

Gee's another tastes great less filling thread! The cartridge is nothing more than a launcher for the bullet, a good bullet regardless of size or weight that is reasonable is going to put game on the ground, if you can put that bullet in the right spot. Be it 243 or a 338 or anything in between. There are two issues here recoil, and over all rifle weight and fit. And then there is the Hunter/rifleman him or herself. Most will shoot a 270 for example better than a 300 Winnie or the like, and such rifle can be a tad lighter so one can carry it all day for a week or two. This stuff is not rocket science, for most of us big game hunting means White Tail Deer hunting, and with that anything from a 223 to a 30-06 is going to put venison in the freezer. Africa is for most a one time deal, so is Elk, Moose and sheep. As for shooting distances, do what you want to do and leave it at that. As for the cartridge in question, its dam hard to improve on!

Well said.

I hear you. It's always worked great for me and my family.

Strange that most African countries don't allow small arms to hunt large game by non resident hunters. By small arms I mean less than .375. Wonder why?

Strange that the .375 requirement applies to different game than we're talking about. Or did I miss a post on shooting elephant, hippo, rhino or buffalo?

Zimbabwe Requirements

Class A Game
5300 Joule (3909 Ft/LB)
Minimum caliber 9.2mm in diameter
(Elephant, Hippo, Buffalo)

- Class B Game
4300 Joule (2883 Ft/LB)
Minimum caliber 7.0mm in diameter
(Lion, Giraffe, Eland)

- Class C Game
3000 Joule (2213 Ft/LB)
Minimum caliber 7.0mm in diameter
(Leopard, Crocodile, Kudu, Oryx / Gemsbok, Hartebeest, Wildebeest, Zebra, Nyala, Sable Antelope, Waterbuck, Tsessebe, etc.)

- Class D Game (627 Ft/LB)
850 Joule
Minimum caliber 5.56mm in diameter
(Warthog, Impala, Reedbuck, Sitatunga, Duiker, Steenbok, Jackal, Game Birds, etc.)

But I have seen several authors who post on here regularly and occasionally state that a 270 is fine for black bears and they typically get bigger than lions, have teeth and claws and often aren't hunted with the benefit of a "professional hunter" beside you. What gives?

Whats also missing is that in general shooting in Africa is usually off of sticks, I contend that there are few who could hit the vitals consistently at the distances talked about with the first shot, does the caliber make a difference? sure its "easier" to shoot a smaller caliber accurately.

Dennis,

While some people might point out that lions are far more dangerous than black bears, especially when wounded, the big differences I've heard from several PH's are:

1) Lion hunters are often over-gunned, because....

2) Lions scare the schidt out of them, and....

3) Lion trophy fees are VERY expensive.

Have also heard the first two factors applied to the average Cape buffalo hunter, plus the hunter being middle-aged, tired and hot when he finally gets a shot.

Heath thinks Weatherby rifles are crap...
http://www.africahunting.com/thread...ofessional-hunter-proficiency-exam.2604/