American DGRs & the .458 Win/.416 Rem cartridges are "Rubbish?"

The "African Hunter" had an article by Don Heath, titled, "Zimbabwe Professional Hunters ("Rifa") Proficiency Exam. The test examines the proficiency of PHs, and their weapons/cartridges, under the simulated stress of actual situations that a PH might encounter. African Hunter, "Lessons Learned".

Heath went onto list American DGRs and how poorly most did in the exam. Here are some comments and it makes me wonder if American production rifle makers know what they are doing?

Very Poor List of DGR (according to Heath)
In reference to DGRs.
The Weatherbys were the worst offenders, exibiting the "usual" accidental discharge/ feeding problems, slow to reload.

The Remington's 700s were referred to as a "Piss Poor" DGR.... broken extractor in the .416s/.375s... hardest of the rifle to refill the magazines, with rounds popping out during the speed reloading exercise.... double feeds.

Ruger's recent models of the DGR were not given high marks either, especially when the bolt is cycled rapidly.... failure to eject.... Cycling the bolt slow it's OK... BIG $$$$. He went on to say that the Ruger #1 is more safer/dependable than their bolt actions.

Semi Recommended
(After some work, but not the cartridges for the rifle)
Winchester CRF has problems with the factory stock cracking or worst... bedding should solve the problem.

The Winchester safety is on the wrong side.... Personally, I agree with Don Heath on the Safety's position for on/off and the stock problems.

Praise Worthy by Heath
Heath goes on to praise the Interarms MK Xs, Mannlicher, Bruno/CZ. These all have their individual problems.

Heath seems to be really down on the American Firms of DGRs and the .458 Win Mags/.416 Rem Mags, (problems with pressure and/or bullets pushing out of their crimps).

Now I'm somewhat confused as to which DGR to buy and in what caliber. I was looking at the Sako .416 Rem or the Winchester in .458 Win.
Is anyone familar with this article and the problems listed above? Any recommendations? <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/help.gif" alt="" />

That article is quite dated and a few inconsistencies and some of the problems addressed are no longer issues. The bottom line is that ANY mass produced rifle is hardly if ever, "battle ready" out of the box and require some tuning as is the case of the Ruger for example. All it needed was a polishing of the ejector rod and problem solved. Incidentally, Ruger DID listen and that is no longer an issue. Winchesters do require more attention lately than when they first re-introduced CRFs, but a good competent gunsmith can fine tune the rifle for a minimal cost and in my view is the best out there AS A STARTING POINT. I personally stay away from 700s, the extractors are prone to failure, particularly if dirt gets in the action ( not uncomon in Africa), I don't care for their glued on bolt handle, handle shape or position. The 416 Rem pressure problems have since long been corrected and the 458 Win mag has also been tweaked toperform nearly as well as it was intended. Personaly, I'd get a Model 70 in 416 Remington Magnum, have a good smith like MArk Penrod(there are a few good ones also that post here) tune it up and you'll have a great, reliable rifle that won't let you down. jorge

prospector,
I have worked for years as a gunsmith and am a graduate of Colorado School of Trades Gunsmithing program. I have 8 years of experience as a machinist. and I can tell you that NOTHING is perfect. Some things are very close though. These things cost a lot of money. They are usually hand polished by somone like D'arcy Echols.
If I was buying a factory made rifle for use as a dangerous game rifle, I would buy it well in advance of the hunting trip and shoot a case of ammunition through it. If there is a malfunction, I would box it up and send it back with a letter.
Quality control is a daily battle in any manufacturing company,
but they should stand behind what they sell. People are human and they make mistakes. A gunsmithing instructor once told me that the definition of a craftsman is someone who can cover up his mistakes so that he is the only one who knows what went wrong.
Great White North

Prospector,

I have talked to Don several times over the years about the results he was seeing as one of the examiners at Rifa. I have urged him to publish the results annually in African Hunter, as it is better for we hunters and shooters to get some realistic testing of our potential rifles.

I recommend you get yourself a .375 H&H, and have it reviewed by a gunsmith who knows heavy rifles. Then shoot it from field positions to learn how it operates. The best way to do this is to go to a school like Gunsite for a hunting rifle course.

My most recent rifle is one Jim Brockman built on a M99 action.

jim

I agree with Jorge and have maintained that position over several websites over a number of years. Especially for dangerous game, any factory rifle is a starting point and some of them are better than others. Certainly the Weatherby and Remington and even the vaunted Sako are less good than most. Once polished and tuned, the M70 and the CZ 550 are among the least bad. Perhaps the Ruger is in the middle. I would take none of them to Africa for buffalo, lion or elephant right out of the box and would happily carry any of the latter three after they had been skillfully worked over. As to the complaints about the .416 Remington, it is the modern equivilent in performance and pressure to the RWS loaded .404. I don't hear Mr. Heath making any fuss over that! As Jorge so succintly pointed out, this article is history.

Oldsarge,

That's a good philosophy and it makes plenty of sense indeed. NO rifle is necessarily dependable right out of the box and to assume so would be foolish. They're all a starting point... Some are closer to "ready" than others out of the box, but most can be made reliable and therefore suitable for dangerous work once they're been worked and tested thoroughly.

In my case - as a Ruger fan, if the ejection is the only problem they found with the Ruger RSM then that's a minor issue that's easily corrected.

I found this hard to go along with:

The Weatherbys were the worst offenders, exibiting the "usual" accidental discharge/ feeding problems, slow to reload

Assuming he was testing one of the Wbys based on the 378 case I would back the Wby against any other for reliable feeding and because of the vertical stack magazine and doubly so for big calibres with very blunt bullets. In addiition with the big calibres the big diamter case makes the chamber much bigger in diameter compared to the bullet.

Sometime ago I did test, admittedly this is extreme, with a Ruger 375 and M70 375 both loaded with 300 Hornady round noses and a 416 Wby with 400 Hornady round noses. All dummy rounds.

The rifle was put with the muzzle on the floor and the bolt open and then the bolt belted closed with a rubber mallet. The Wby never missed a beat. But the angle feed and blunt bullet caused the Ruger and M70 a problem. The very rapid closing of the bolt of course makes the cartrdidge bounce to far to one side an the blunt bullet catches the chamber. A 416 Rem would have been worse with the bigger bullet diamter and same chamber diamter.

In line feed might not be nice and eloquent like staggered feed but it will win on reliability everytime, assuming properly made rifles in either case.

I can't see how a 378 based Wby is slow to reload as you just open the floorplate and drop the rounds in.

Mike

I have been through this school as required for PH certification. I can agree with the Weatherby and Remington problems 100% as I witness these problems in person several times during the weeks of testing and field exams. I never saw a Ruger or Winchester CRF with a single problem. The single worst rifle during my schooling was the Browning A bolt of which there may not have been a single student who was able to pass using one. They may not have had one that was still functional by the time the testing was over either! The broken cast metal parts of that cheaply manufactured rifle was amazing. Since that testing I have seen several more fail in the field. I was standing behind a hunter of mine who was shooting off the hood of the truck one time. His A bolt Stainless stalker had the entire trigger guard and trigger shear clean off the bottom of his rifle at the recoil of the shot. I have seen several others lighlty dent the primers and not fire. Yet another had a barrel split from the end of the stock out to the muzzle. The list could go on and on. It's simply the worst firearm I have ever seen in my entire career.

I would also agree that the safety would be far more practical on the other side of a Model 70. However that would be the only thing I would change.

I agree with what the article said for the most part except for the safety on the Winchester. I'm not exactly sure when the article was written, but it must have been eons ago. The Winchester safety he is complaining about is the one that is used on the Pre-War Winchesters evidenced by the picture in the article. Of course it sucks! They haven't made that safety in years.

Here's the picture from the article and his comments are below the picture.



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

Longbob,
I would prefer the safety on the opposite side from what it currently resides on with new production rifles. It's much easier to manupulate it quickly using your thumb then by taking your trigger finger away from the trigger to switch it off and then move your finger back to the trigger.

This is not any issue at all for a sport hunter or casual user. However it's a significant issue for a dangerous game rifle needing to be shot under great stress and quickly. I rather doubt that I would be able to have a mod like that done to my guns now if available. I'm not sure that I would want to be searching for the safety. I have used the current design for far too long now to risk moving it.

If it were made on the opposite side to begin with the habits would have been formed properly from the beginning for me. Forcing the hunter to remove his finger from the trigger to close the safety was probably a good liability move. It's just not a good move for a DGR user.

That is good to know about the A-Bolt, your comments helped cure me of the fever of wanting one.

JJ,

When I was in Africa, my PH showed me his preferred method of keeping his rifle on safe and instructed me to do the same. This worked on my Ruger in 35 Whelen, but it would not work with my Winchester 458 Lott.

He would have me load the magazine and cycle a round into the chamber. Then he would have me lift the bolt up about halfway where there is a cocking detent. The rifle was unable to fire until the bolt is completely down. It made for a very natural movement to close the bolt as I was shouldering the rifle without any metallic noise. This will also work on my CZ as I found out later.

Because of the design difference of the Winchester, there is not a position that the bolt will stay steady. It will either stay closed (completely if the safety is on full safe) or it can work itself open and the round can fall out.

I'm not sure how you feel about that method, but it felt very natural in process.

Naah, just do like I did.

Open the bolt and remove the cartridge, close the bolt on the empty chamber, then engage the safety as usual.

When an animal is spotted, disengage the safety, aim and squeeze the trigger for a resounding Click!

Safe for you, the PH, the trackers, and the animals. <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/wink.gif" alt="" />

If anyone ever comes up with an aftermarket "silent" safety for a M70 they will sell millions.

JJ

So what I am understanding from all the poster (Thank You One & All), that the problems with the .458 Win and the .416 Rem Mags ammo have been resolved.

Winchester Model 70 and Ruger RSMs are reliable, (with proper time and shooting to confirm that) in a DGR. Years ago, I had a Ruger (not the RSM) shoot out of it stock. Is this still a common problem with Winchester, Ruger, & Sako?

What about the .416 Sako "Hunter" (not the newer '75') as a DGR?

I would like to purchase a rifle that has a reputation for being reliable from the start.

Jim,

That is too funny! It is also a great way to see if you have developed a flinch by falling forward after the "no fire." I've had one of my Weatherby's fail to pick up a round (most likely operator error) and it will clue me into wheither I'm flinching or not.

If you define reliable as 100% from the get-go, Contact Mr. D'Arcy Echols, John Ricks and a few others that for a price, they'll get you that 100%. Or for a lot less, refer to my initail post. Buy a 70 and for a couple of hundred bucks, you'll get the same effect. No Sakos or Remingtons for me thank you. jorge

JJHACK,

Why would you operate the safety of a model 70 with your trigger finger? I always used my thumb, at least to go from safe to fire. I can certainly see why you would think it awkward to use your trigger finger.

I do not want to lose the grip on my rifle so my thumb must be wrapped around the grip. I'm not sure how you shoulder the rifle and use your thumb? That is incredibly awkward to me. It's quite simple with the triger finger. Now if the safety were on the other side it would be a breeze to operate with the thumb.

It will work OK from the center position forward but from the furthest back position forward it's just not user friendly when shouldered. I'll gladly give up that one small negative trait to have the rest of the design though!

JJ,

When closing down the bolt, I find that my right hand position is not much different than when I am using my Citori shotgun with a tang safety. Obviously, my thumb is futher forward, but my three fingers are almost in the same position as is my trigger finger laying across the trigger guard. Seems very fast and very natural to me, but my right hand is very talented, also. <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/grin.gif" alt="" />

CZ 550, but only if you are shaped right to fit their stock. Good solid arm.

Interesting thread. Personally, I would recommend the Model 70. 30 years of exclusive use of this action gives me no cause for hesitation. I think it has the best adjustable factory tigger available, the bolt is extremely easy to field strip, and I love the way the safety is designed and works. With some trigger and bedding work, I have found accuaracy to be "more" than acceptable and usually outstanding for a factory gun.

JJHACK, concerning the safety, I have developed a habit of shooting with a grip that places my thumb along side the grip, rather that over it. I find this eliminates getting my thumb jambed into my nose during heavy recoil. It also allows my trigger finger to pull the trigger staight back as opposed to pulling up at an angle, and places my thumb directly behind the safety. Simply moving my hand forward pushes my thumb into the safety and moves it to the off position. My hand does not change its position and pulling it backwards places it in correctly on the grip again. It feels completely natural, altho that could be the result of years spent doing it this way.

I know that some folks feel that the safety is OK on the mod 70 and it is for all sport hunting. It's just that for a DGR its not quite right, and if you had to go through the exams with one you would see after shooting a few test rounds that it should be on the other side to be faster and make the gun "just right". It's a very small complaint and I am still very fast with it as it is. Obviously I passed the exams with my 375HH so It must be at least adequate. It is difficult to get through some of the exercises with any gun made. The time is so short and the government officials breathing down your neck with stop watch in hand. Everything seems easy after going through that nightmare of a pass fail shooting course like this.

Just as an example. One series of 3 targets is set at 30 meters 20 meters and 10 meters. The center one is about 10 yards to the right or left of the other two(random) you have ten seconds to put a bullet into each 4" square target. You start with the gun at your side safety on and the Instructor/ judge says "GO" you have to raise the gun take of the safety and put a hole in all 3 of those 4" black squares. During practice I was doing it nearly every time. On my first test round I did all three. However the judge who walks down to inspect only gave me credit for one. The edge of the black where it meets the white was broken on two of them . He said they did not count when "on the line" the holes had to be completely inside the black, without breaking the edge!!

Don't bother with trying a debate him, it ain't America! The margin for error is so slim that even an issue with the position of the safety could be the difference on this kind of test. Add to this the group of people watching you and it's quite nerve wracking to say the least. With this kind of testing done over and over for a long time every day. You begin to see what guns are failing to feed and eject or have other issues. Operator error may be the main reason but the CRF designs take much of the human eror out of the picture. The PF VS CRF, is debated by anyone who cares. However after going through the PH academy and seeing these things day in and day out is very convincing of what works and what does not.

Is there a website around that lists the shooting tests and minimum qualifications that are required to qualify for a Professional Hunter's license? Are the standards different between countries? Do you have to recertify from time to time or is it a one time deal?

JJ
Is the three target firing test done with open sights or scope?

I am also wondering how the double rifles do in this text?

I have seen multi-rapid fire moving target shotgun competitions where the over/under guys do about as well as the autoloaders.

JJHACK,

Thanks for the insights.

Live well

Whether the M70 safety is right or not quite right depends on prior training too. For example if you trained under Jeff Cooper you would have your strong-side (trigger finger side) thumb alongside the stock as part of your grip.

There are some European makers who build Mauser M98 pattern big game rifles with the M70 style safety and your choice of which side of the action it is on to keep us all happy. <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/wink.gif" alt="" />

jim

To JJHack,
I've always enjoyed reading what you have to say about rifles. It's informative and your experience lends great credibility to the things you say. However in this case I have to point out that my own experiences have been so very different from your own.

I've used Browning A bolts since they first came out. I've hunted every corner of British Columbia and spent a lot of time in the bush. Not only have they been the most accurate rifles that I've ever owned (out-of-the-box) compared to the Weatherby's, Remington's, Winchester's, Marlin's that I've owned. They have never failed me in anyway at any time while hunting.

While holding my Browning's, I have fallen in rivers, smashed into rocks, slid down the talus slopes, fallen out of trees and slipped off of logs. I've broken a number of scopes, a few slings and even a few bones. But so far I have yet to have a Browning rifle fail me in the field or at the range.

I'm not denying that what you say, based on your own experiences is untrue. But I would like to add that my own experiences vary 180� from your own. I would also like to add that I believe that if the experiences you mention in regards to Browning rifles are the norm - then the word would've gotten out by now, and they would not be the popular sellers that they are now. Hunters have a way of finding these things out based on their own experiences, and most hunters seem to find Browning rifles pretty satisfactory all in all.

Admittedly, I haven't had any African dirt get in my rifle - but I have had my share of British Columbia dirt. I've had temperatures that a varied from the desert heat, the temperatures on the ugly side of 20 below while hunting. I haven't been charged by any Cape buffaloes, but I have been charged by bears. I'm not the most careful man on earth, but it is interesting how two people can come to such opposite conclusions about a rifle based on their own experiences. I just wanted other hunters out there to realize that your own experiences with Browning rifles are hardly what I would call the norm - if they were, Browning wouldn't have as many repeat buyers as it does. I know a lot of people who've bought more than one Browning rifle.

As a former owner of many A Bolt rifles (both the early and later ABolt II versions), I agree with BC Brian's opinions on em. The A Bolt may not be the best candidate for a custom or even a DGR but I never had a single failure hunting big game with em. That included slipping and falling while crossing creeks, rockslides and slippery hillsides. A Bolts are one of the most popular bolt actions being used these days, mostly bought by the average hunter instead of the rifle loonies found on these forums. Every hunting camp in the world has its share of ABolt hunters who come through and successfully harvest game with em. Funny, I don't hear of many if any failures or jamming incidents.

As for the Remingtons not holding up under stressful situations, I should point that military snipers train and do battle with this rifle under some of the most demanding and stressful situations equal to any DGR hunting situation. Just take a good look at our boys in Afghanistan or Iraq, plenty of Rem 700s in action over there, where are the Win 70s or mausers?

MtnHtr

Remember one point of military equipment - low bid wins. Mossberg 590's were/are the official shotgun not Rem 870's.

And, a 308 vs 375 H&H. I'd hazard a guess an action that was perfectly servicable for a 308 might not be so with a 375 H&H under the same conditions.

One other point, those sniper 700's are 700's in name only. They've been reworked with replacement parts out the wazoo.

As for the low bid theory regarding military equipment that is bull$hit. If that were the case our troops would be using imported equipment from China. The Rem 700 has been used for awhile now, its proven itself. I dare you to print this BS over on one of the sniper forums................

And what PH's beloved Win70 is bone stock from the factory with no modifications or tuning?

MtnHtr

MH,
Ask Jack about ABolts when you pick up your moose.

I'm pretty sure he was there as I was beating the bolt of my buddy's 270 open on the top of a ridge in Idaho. A little dirt got in between the bolt body and the bolt head, and she locked up like a bank vault.

After a bit of "persuasion" with a piece of wood, she came loose.

Of course, my buddy still hunts the heck out of that rifle and hasn't had another problem before or since. That said, I've never seen another rifle lock up like that for no apparent reason.

That rifle is without a doubt the most accurate factory rifle I've ever seen though. If I posted some of the groups, people would scream BS!

CAS,

Apparently, "a little dirt" was reason enough! I had pine needles, dirt and ice in mine and never a failure except for rust. This included a 1 month hunt in the Idaho/Wyoming border area every year for 4yrs straight. I meet countless hunters toting em every year in the field and never a complaint! That does not mean the A Bolt is flawless or troublefree but neither is any other factory boltgun that I know of. When I was hunting moose in 03, I even ran into the Browning man who had racked up an impressive grand slam hunting sheep with his A Bolt. He was not a rifle loonie in a sense, just a hunter.

MtnHtr

Jeez, Brian, you must be one tough guy to have survived all of that excitement! I have spent more than 40 years in the most remote parts of B.C., Alberta and even the NWT, without having such mishaps occur. This includes many stints of 3-5.5 months alone on extremely isolated Forest Service fly-in posts, ski-mountaineering in the Kokanee Glacier park, solo climbing-trekking in many of the most rugged parts of our Province and fighting forest fires, running silvicultural projects and so forth.

You are just unlucky or maybe the BEARS love school teachers???? It does seem to me, though, that very little of this tale of derring-do is a real promotion for the A-Bolt as any rifle can and will fail under those circumstances; it's a wonder you have survived !!! <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/smile.gif" alt="" /> <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/smile.gif" alt="" /> <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/smile.gif" alt="" />

Guys, let me try and put this Abolt stuff to bed. AS you can imaguine I hunt with lots of guys that bring lots of different guns. I'm just an observer in this commentary stating what I have seen. I have no vested interest in any make or model. I'm not anti Browning. All, I said was based on my expereince I would never own one. It is by a large magin the rifle with the greatest failure rate in the field I have ever seen. From barrel split open, to cracked and sheard off triggers to rusted internals on a stainless steel rifle. Bound up firing pins, trigger guards broken off from recoil. Dounle feed jams, bolts that either will not open or will not close complete.Since 1981 I have been working in the hunting business and in all that time I have never seen a single failure of any type in any condition from a Ruger or a Winchester.

Granted this is just my own experience. Two rifle brands in all these years with ZERO failure or trouble and one brand in particular with an endless string of horrible to catastrophic failure. I'm just Human, and maybe with my engineering background I tend to think extremely logical. When I see both ends of the scale in regards to quality and durablity these three brands come to mind, two at one end and one at the other. Nope,.........it's not scientific but you gotta go with what you see first hand on some things.

To be fair I have seen a lot of guys come through with the A Bolts and never see even a tiny problem. One in particular last year was one of the best shots ever through our camp. Every animal went doen with a single shot even when running. He was an American FBI guy with a lot of Firearm training too.

Nothing personal guys, just observations over many years. I wish you all well with what ever you choose to own.

That "low bidder stuff" is not BS. Remington did underbid Winchester, and regarding stuff made in China, there is another component of the bidding process called OPEVAL (Operational Evaluation) and in that venue, that junk from China or any AK for that matter would fail miserably . There is LOT of work/changes that go into a 700 to make it into a sniper rifle, not least of which is the replacement of the extractor. And there are PLENTY of PHs that use Model 70s with ZERO modifications, except for the odd trigger adjustment, but that is a personal decision based on taste and not performance.

I don't doubt you folks that own Brownings love them, but it still does not alter the fact of the pot-metal trigger guard, rube-goldberg over-complicated bolt assembly, etc.

I gave my father in law a 270 Medallion a few years ago and he loves it. VERY, VERY accurate, but he is constantly having to clean out the bolt face because even a little dirt and the thing fails to eject. It's a very good looking rifle though. jorge

JJHack,

Thanks for the clarification - I have no doubts that what you've observed is true. I guess I've been lucky - or as Kutenay noted - very lucky to have survived my many mishaps! If there's a way too get into a dangerous spot or fall or get hurt - my wife knows - I'll find it. LOL!

I agree with your assesment of the complexity of the Browning design, and the pot metal parts, and the rusting issue. I have no quarrel with your observation that they might be the least durable of the bunch mentioned. It was just that I wanted to point out that they've proven far more durable than my own body. Before I'd worry about breaking any one of my Browning's - I'd want to get my injuries looked at by a doctor, as I think the gun's can take a lot more abuse than we can - most of the time. I've had great luck with Winchester's too - and they do strike me as being more ruggedly designed - not that that has ever been an issue for me.

If I might ask one more question, based on your own experiences - now that you've ranked the rifles on their durability, would you venture an opinion on how they rank (out of the box) for accuracy on average. I'd be interested in your observations. Thanks,

I dare you to post on one of the sniper forums a stock 700 is used by the military snipers. Just like they use stock M-16's and Berettas for the Camp Perry shoots.

Regardless of what you THINK, low bid wins the military contracts provided they meet the specs OR are the highest tested if nothing meets the spec (they get the bulk purchase) in which case supplemental items will be purchased to cover areas of non-compliance/special needs. The wonderful world of Mil-Spec makes for some very high low bids.

Grimel,

Please quote where I stated "stock 700s" are used by military snipers.According to your low bid theory, Remington 700s are used because they are the lowest bidder? So that makes the Rem 700 inferior to the Win 70 for sniper and tactical use? Even if both are highly modified?

So why do most of the law enforcement snipers choose the Rem 700 for their tactical sniper weapons? Is it because they are the low bidders also?

As for the Abolt, alot of hunters have enough faith in em to use em on high priced hunts. And I'm not stating the ABolt is the best choice, just trying to bring some reality to this thread.




MtnHtr

JJ,

Thought you might be interested in this pic a friend recently E mailed me. This gentleman hails from Utah (read Browning country), has worked as an engineer for NASA for the past twenty years. Apparently he was not worried about broken pot metal, jams, rust and the other problems you listed when he took this interior grizzly this past fall in Alaska. He works with and knows metallurgy and design fairly well I might add - its his job!


A Bolt , 300Win Mag

MtnHtr

Great picture and a super bear. To hell with which rifle he used. Compliment the hunter on getting a fine trophy !

700's having proved themselves (your words) implies in some way the military sniper rifles have relevence. They are 700's in name only. Yes, 700's are the low bid. Which is better is again a non-issue - they meet the mil-spec and are low bid - they win.

Why do most/many police pick 700's? The low bid/best deal and it's legally defensable - the military uses it, it's gotta be good.

Mtn Hunter, I think you missed much of my post. I certainly don't care what anyone uses. I have very accurately posted events I have seen first hand. Weigh them for yourself. It's free info which you can blow off and forget or take to heart when a future purchase is coming. Makes no difference to me whatever. If your Nasa metallurgy friend is happy and he killed a nice bear then I'm really happy for him. Lots of Brownings seem to make their owners very happy. I'm not in a position to judge them one way or another.

Again I posted factual real experiences I have seen first hand with Browning rifles. Not hearsay or any percieved vendetta against the company. Everyone should pick what they like and be happy. I know after what I have seen I'll never own one. But that's just one mans opinion here! I should add that some of the others who had the Brownings involved with these mishaps, have stated,.. in my presence that they would sell the one they had and also never own another one. But that is usually a quick comment after a catastrophic failure stated with emotion, not with logic. I'm confident that when they cooled down a bit or got home they may have had the warranty work done and settled back down a bit?

The two brothers that both bought brand new Abolts in 375HH for brown bear hunts and both heard them "click" and fail to fire in the same ten day hunt, then both used my rusty old absolutely blue-less piece of crap 375HH model 70 with a hacksawed off 20" barrel to take bears. I'm thinking those guns were returned to the dealer when they got home!

When the first brother shot at 50 yards and the gun just clicked and very lightly dented the primer. He used my 375HH and drilled the bear dead as a rock.

We tried to free up that rusted firing pin(Stainless steel?) but no luck. A few days later the other brother sets out with me and exactly the same thing click and a lightly dented primer. We were sure he accidentally took his brothers gun, but it was not. He could also not open the bolt to get the shell out for the longest time. This bear ran off and we lost the chance. He did kill another bear days later but not with his rifle.

Think that dealer got an ear full when these two brothers got home and visited that gun shop!

BC Brian, As far as accuracy goes, well I'm afraid your asking the wrong guy. I'm not into the whole obsessive accuracy game. If I shoot 2" at 100 yards I'm going hunting. I much prefer to spend my time in the bush not on the bench. Im a hunter only and not a target shooter or obsessive reloader. I doubt there is one in a thousand rifles made that are less accurate then I need. I only have a couple rifles and they are simple old and boring tools compared to what most guys pack around today. My 30/06 and 375 shoot good but I would never be able to tell you what they group with any accuracy to the statement.

When I lay the rifle down on a rest and verify that the hole is where the crosshairs were at, I'm good to go. I spend absolutley no more time bench testing than I have to. Since I handload hundreds of rounds at a time I only verify my loads when I open a new batch of dated ammo. After that check, i'm hunting again.

I don't shoot outside my comfort zone, I'm a ZERO risk kinda guy. I also shoot big game with my big game rifles so a 6" group at 300 yards is plenty small enough for me. My philosophy may not be for everyone but I'll tell you I have seen so many guys with long range tack driving gear and 50mm scopes blow shots at 150 yards that I'll stick with my style for the foreseable future.

I have never quite understood the mentality of preparing for the one in a million chance of a 450 yard shot that you develope your equipment and style around it. Yet the "gimmie" shots of 100-200 yards become a struggle to accomplish. This is not just a few hunters either. I have seen countless guys start looking for a rest or a seated position to hit an animal at 60 yards broadside. I guess those long range 14 pound rifles with that huge 50mm scope is hard to hold steady free hand? I have also seen them shoot clear over the back of game at 200 yards. Becuase the trajectory for a 450 yard shot requires a 300 yard zero. Now you have a 5 or 6" high point at 200 yards. So holding right on the game puts the bullet above the vitals. Add in the shakes, the stress, the wind, the rush, and who knows where that bullet hits! But that rifle is a tack driver at 450 yards?? To each his own I suppose!

I like the chambering. <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/grin.gif" alt="" />

Chuck

I think we'd get along famously. I'm already making plans to make my new Ruger 30-06 20" with a 2x scope. May or may not go syn stock.

As an outsider to the African hunt, it seems to me that the point that has been missed on the rifles falling apart, whatever make, model or whatever is: these aint' no whitetail deer rounds they are sending downrange. The .30-06 is one thing, the .375 H&H is a completly different beast. Step "up" to the .4xx, now you really got some [bleep] goin' on !!!

Personally when I have the chance to do the Africa thing, I will have the finest gunsmith I can find, (insert yours here:___________ ) work the rifle, any rifle, to the maximum it will do. If the Smith says it aint' good, I would rather buy another rifle of whatever make & redo it all, than have a great giant mudhole stomped in me by some badass critter...

Plus, you never get to re-hash your hunt here <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/tongue.gif" alt="" />

Pat

I agree totally with JJHack's observation on how field accuracy is infinitly more important than the ability to shoot small groups at the range.

When I was very young I used to come home from the range with paper "groups" to show my Dad - point being he could never get them as small as I could.

The first big buck presented itself on my very first hunting trip - right in the middle of the logging road at perhaps 75 to 100 yards away. My Dad said "Take him" - he didn't even bother watching - as he was reaching back over the seat to bring out the knives as I jumped out to shoot. BANG! Away sprang the deer - as untouched as the day it was born! I'd learned my lesson! From then on I stopped bragging about my groups sizes and started more creative shooting - like inflated balloons whipping across the land in heavy wind, like ravens in swaying trees and rocks on hillsides - from crazy angles - all offhand. I don't think I missed one big head in about the next 20 I shot at.

Having said that - I really care how well a rifle shoots. I don't care much about how small a group it shoots - if it shoots around an inch at a hundred yards. I'm not capable of any better in the field. And yet - to me, when a manufacturer sells a modern bolt action that's incapable of shooting close to an inch at a hundred - to me, that just screams out "LACK OF QUALITY" - and in a modern rifle - I see no excuse for it.

The way I see it - if a company doesn't care to produce a decently accurate rifle (the one area everyone checks out) how much can they be depended on to produce a quality product in the things I can't see or measure?

So for me - innaccurate rifles are just a sign of shoddy workmanship - and as such - I don't wish to encourage such a thing by spending my money on them. It has nothing to do with any "need".

Thanks to everyone for the fine comments and a special tip of my hat for this one in particular:

"I have never quite understood the mentality of preparing for the one in a million chance of a 450 yard shot that you develope your equipment and style around it. Yet the "gimmie" shots of 100-200 yards become a struggle to accomplish." - JJHACK

To each his own, but I've seen young hunters get carried away with the concept of "one aiming point fits all."

Also, what's wrong with the tang safety Ruger had on the M77? I thought that was an okay location.

Prospector:

Looks like I am late. This post has been around a while and the article apparently timed out.

Never-the-less, I made some remarkably astute decisions more than 50 years ago, when I was a young man, based on the knowledge and advice of a good friend who was my mentor and who has proven to be surprisingly accurate and knowledgeable.

I bought Mauser 98's. And in the ensuing years I have come to favor Mausers over others. I have several which date from the early 1900's upto the late 1900's.

The aparently not well known, but late and great, John Buhmiller was a gunsmith barrel maker from Montana who travelled to Tanzania numerous times and shot hundreds of animals in ALL categories. John also reworked his own rifles and made his own bullets. He is, in my estimation, the top expert who lamentable has received little notariety.

Johns preferred rifles were the Brevex Mauser's. They were infallible. He was in dicey situations repeatedly and his guns NEVER failed him. At times he dropped dangerous beasts literally at his toes.

I lived, and hunted, in Africa at the time John was travelling there but our trails never crossed, unfortunately.

I can't and won't say anything negative about American firearms. I have/had Winchesters, Brownings/ Rugers.

My clear preferences are the Mauser 98's and the Double Bridges. These are now available from Taconic Arms in New Hampshire, Vektor, South Afica and Sabi South Africa as well as some new upstarts in Europe who revived *( thankfully ) the old, defunct Mauser Oberndorf models.

Bill Tibbe

Bill Tibbe, some of my most pleasurable experiences in life have been based on the use of old Browning Safari rifles from the .300 Win Mag to the .458 and I heartily agree that the Mauser action is a fine thing. John Buhmiller knew what he and his work was about, too. Good stuff there.

I don't understand anyone having a problem with the Model 70 safety. I can flick mine back and forth with my thumb quickly and in complete silence. As for laying that thumb along side of the stock instead of wrapping it around the grip, no way. I feel I lose some control doing that. However, if you crawl the stock on a hard kicker that thumb may meet your nose with nasty results. Of course, crawling the stock on hard kickers is fraught with peril anyway.

About John Buhmiller dropping beasts at his feet...

John carried a permanant bruise on the inside of one of his calfs in the shape of a buffalo foot. On one of his hunts, he was shooting one of his own experimental single shot actions when the weapon jammed up after a shot - He was walking backward trying to clear the weapon and reload as the beast was charging and his "backups" were shooting - John tripped over a root, and sprawled backward onto the turf as the beast over-ran him and fell dead some 10 feet past him, after leaving its imprint on his leg.

I have to agree with JJ about most bolt actions having the safety on the wrong side...I just wish company's would either fit them on the left side of the action where they can be naturally operated with the thumb without breaking your shooting grip as on the FN Fal for instance ...failing that a tang safety would be good...The strangest safety I have seen is on one of the European rifles (a Sauer I think) and that is within the trigger guard...

Regards,

Pete

I have only owned one Browning rifle. It was the first and last. I bought it new in 2001 and it spent most of the year traveling from my home to the gunsmith to Browning and back. It was an A-Bolt stainless in .30-06. The biggest problem was miss-fires. It would dent the primer, and not fire. This was all with factory ammo. The second problem was that when it did fire you had a 50/50 chance of the bolt opening without beating the hell out of it with a rubber mallet. What a piece of crap.

BOWHUNR