A GUIDE'S NOTES
.416 Remington
A Dangerous Game Rifle

Hunting large dangerous game is not a lot different than hunting any other game except for the fact the beast might, at some point, decide to attack the hunter. When that happens the bigger the gun one is carrying the better. If bore size were the only consideration, though, everyone would be carrying some sort of portable field artillery piece. Bore size, however, is not, and never has been, a substitute for precise bullet placement, and light rifles and smaller calibers are more comfortable to carry and easier to shoot accurately.

This fact has posed a conundrum for hunters for over a century. D.W.M. "Karomojo" Bell is undoubtedly the most famous hunter whom advocates of light, smallbore rifles and precise bullet placement bring into any argument of bore size. Bell is credited with killing over 1,000 elephants with solid 160-grain bullets in the 6.5 Mannlicher-Schönauer and 175-grain bullets in the 7mm Mauser. He was undoubtedly a superb shot, capable of hitting flying birds with his rifle and, by his own accounts, exceedingly lucky. The argument that since Bell did it on elephants then anyone can do it is hardly convincing. People have fallen from airplanes without parachutes and survived, but the practice is hardly to be recommended.

On the other side of the equation are the large bore fanatics and their paragon Elmer Keith, who once stated the .375 H&H was a pretty good deer rifle. I actually believe there was a bit of tongue-in-cheek to some of Elmer's stories, but he was an honest-to-gosh believer in large bores. Heavy bullets and stupefying energies are directly correlated with brutal recoil, however, and most of us mere mortals cannot shoot to our best abilities knowing each time we close our eyes and yank the trigger we're going to get hammered. Eventually we all migrate toward some sort of compromise caliber depending upon our ability to handle recoil.

I have been hunting dangerous game and experimenting with large caliber rifles for nearly three decades. In this time I have hunted on four continents and, at one time or another, been a firm subscriber to each theory. I have experienced a few spitting distance, blood and thunder, kill or be killed charges, but they were usually a result of poor tactics or planning on someone's part - usually mine.

As a professional hunting guide I get to see numerous hunters shooting various rifles, calibers and bullets. A majority are competent if not good shots, but each year one or two can be counted on to misplace their bullets. I am then required to use my rifle either to assure a humane kill or to prevent the animal from escaping or charging. Very early in my career I learned if I were ready, attentive and in range, I could usually hit the animal solidly before it had recovered, thereby settling the matter. Any caliber and bullet satisfactory for hunting the animal worked fine for this. I completely subscribed to Karomojo Bell's placement-is-all-it-takes theory. I used a .30-06 and 200-grain Nosler Partition pushed to 2,700 fps and was completely satisfied. Experience, however, often has a way of dispelling even the best theory.

There have been all sorts of theories postulated on how to measure stopping power. I don't have any new formulas. The simple fact is hunters bring about the death of an animal by one of two means. Either a bullet disrupts the brain or spinal cord (central nervous system) and causes instantaneous death or else the animal dies of shock caused by massive blood loss, which results in the brain shutting down. Precise bullet placement will cause this, but so will very large holes. It is an irrefutable fact that large holes bleed more than smaller ones and two holes more than one. Large, heavy bullets are also better at breaking down heavy bones and immobilizing large beasts. Elmer Keith knew this. So do most professional hunters around the world.

Fifteen years ago I built a serious stopping rifle for use in Alaska. Reliability and dependability, of course, were paramount, but power, accuracy, weight, fit and feel were also important factors. I used a .458 Winchester Interarms Mk X Mauser barreled action, a modified fiberglass stock and a Leupold 2x compact scope. The rifle has served me well, but in the past few years there has been a plethora of new calibers, rifles, bullets, sights, mounts and stocks introduced, options that weren't available when the rifle was assembled. I decided to see what was available and to build another rifle.

Other rifles besides the .458 are occasionally used; I have a reproduction Model 1886 Browning/Winchester .45-70 carbine and a Bauska actioned .505 Gibbs. Both are powerful, reliable short-range stoppers, and I see no reason to scope either of them. They are used for special purposes: the Browning daily when guiding salmon fishermen and bear photographers and the Gibbs when someone wants to get up close and personal and stick an arrow in a massive brown bear.

When the .458 was originally built, extensive range testing of the speed and accuracy of various iron and scope sights was done and a low-power scope was settled on. Electronic red dot sights were not then available, and I wanted to try them. My 17-year-old son Taj and I spent an afternoon switching various sights back and forth between our rifles testing for speed and accuracy.

In order to be purely scientific, I suppose we should have used only one rifle and switched the sights on it, but our times and results were consistent with a similar test I did in 1984 with only the .458. My son's younger reflexes resulted in faster times with most sights, but I think familiarity with individual rifles and scopes might have affected some scores.

We conducted our tests with the shooter facing sideways to the target and, on command from the timer with a stopwatch, turning and firing as quickly as possible and hitting a paper plate 25 yards away. We used open V iron sights, large "ghost ring" peep sights, low-power scopes (Leupold 2x and 1-4x variable set at 1x) and Bushnell's red dot Holosight. We each fired five times with each sight and computed the average. Holosight and open V tests were done with a Mauser actioned .375 Scovill. The peep sight and 21/2x scope were with our individual Mauser actioned .458s. The 1x scope test was fired with a Mauser .35 Whelen. Following are the results of our testing for speed (in seconds).

The Bushnell Holosight proved to be rugged, extremely fast and accurate on target acquisition. It cannot, however, be mounted low over the receiver, which forced us to shoot without our cheeks firmly on the stock. On a heavy recoiling rifle this can be painful. Many states (Alaska included) have also made it illegal to hunt big game with any electronic sight. The Holosight is a remarkable piece of technology and is proving ideal for handgun target shooting. It would also be great for certain specialized operations, such as nighttime culling operations, but I am a firm believer in the K.I.S.S. (keep it simple, stupid) principle for backup rifles, and if the battery fails you have no sight.

In the iron sight category, the open V was marginally faster than the peep on large, close targets, but the peep was noticeably more accurate, especially as the range increased. If I were using iron sights only I would definitely choose a peep. For me a low-power scope proved to be the fastest by far. Scopes also proved to be the most accurate for both of us. Besides speed, a scope allows one to see and identify the target better. At dusk or in thick brush, it enables the hunter the ability to accurately place a killing shot. A scope also facilitates bullet placement at longer ranges, and most wounded game will initially try to run away rather than attack. Being able to stop a fleeing animal is the best way to avoid having to wrinkle them out of the pucker brush.
My first choice of action type for a dangerous game rifle is still one form or another of the rugged, tried and true Mauser Model 98. That said, I have no problem with Winchester lever actions, good double guns, Springfields, Enfields, Winchester Model 70s or the new Ruger MKII. When Winchester offered the new Model 70 classic in stainless steel I immediately ordered one. I had always thought stainless steel would offer some very real advantages around saltwater and in wet environs.

Caliber choice was the area I had agonized over the longest when I built my .458 Winchester Magnum. I previously had used a .375 H&H and found little to criticize. My favorite bullets back then were the Nosler Partition, and when Nosler dropped the .375 during the 1970s, I was unable to acquire a suitable substitute. The next logical step up, caliber-wise, at that time was the .458 Winchester Magnum. With it I discovered bullet weight and bore size really do matter. I missed the versatility and trajectory of the .375 H&H though.

When Remington introduced its .416 magnum and Ruger the .416 Rigby, there was a slow ground swell of Alaskan guides, especially on Kodiak Island and the Alaskan Peninsula, who traded in their .338s, .375s, .404s, .458s and even one .500 Nitro for the new .416s. Brown bears in these areas can reach 1,500 pounds in body weight, and while they might hide in thick willow and alder patches, they are just as commonly seen on beaches and open grassy flats. The .416s offered both the trajectory of the wonderful .375 H&H yet with a bit more horsepower.

I sent my Winchester action off to Dick Nickel (Ridgetop Sporting Goods, PO Box 306, Eatonville WA 98328) for installation of a Douglas premium stainless .416 Remington barrel. As an experiment I also added a KDF slimline muzzle brake, which reduced recoil of the .416 to that of a .30-06.

Reliability should not be compromised in a rifle for dangerous game. Having heard from numerous sources that the original cast steel Winchester extractor was prone to breaking, I installed Jim Wisner's (P.M. Enterprises, 146 Curtis Hill Rd., Chehalis WA 98532) extra rugged Model 70 extractor. Jim also makes a stronger magazine spring that makes for more positive and reliable feeding, which was also installed.

I still cannot imagine why anyone would want to utilize a wooden stock on a serious using rifle. One look at the world's current assault rifles, target and benchrest rifles leaves little doubt to the practical superiority of synthetic stocks. I have recognized their benefits since acquiring a Stevens .22/410 over and under with a Tennite stock in the 1950s. A decade with Remington Nylon 66s and Uncle Sam's M-16s did nothing to dissuade my opinion. The early Brown precision fiberglass stock that I modified to fit my .458 has been the most rugged and stable stock I have ever used.

I have always been a firm believer in the axiom "beauty is as beauty does," but early glass stocks (and to be honest many modern ones as well) suffered from a terminal case of ugliness. One glowing exception is the Pacific Research Rimrock stock. It is a clean, sophisticated design that compares favorably with the very best custom stocks and comes fully inletted and finished with sharp, attractive moulded checkering. It is lightweight, stable and strong with ropes of fiberglass imbedded in high stress areas. It comes with a standard matte black finish but can also be ordered with your choice of patterned material under the top gel coat layer. I ordered one in a fall foliage camouflage pattern for the .416. The sighting system on my old .458 utilizes a Redfield dovetail type scope mount with a Pilkington lever for fast, easy removal of the little Leupold 21/2x compact scope. The system has worked well over the years, and I have removed and installed it hundreds of times; however, the solid dovetail mounts and bases are beginning to show signs of wear. It does not have wear adjustments like the similar but expensive European mounts. The scope does not return to point of impact as reliably as it once did.

Leupold now makes a detachable set of rings and bases they call QR (quick release), which was ordered for the .416 and was found to be excellent. The stout cylindrical stud projecting below the rings drops easily into the receptacle in the bases. Levers are mounted on the base and simply and securely lock the rings down with only a half turn. On a trip to Africa where the .416 would be used, two previously sighted-in scopes (a Leupold 1.5-5x Vari-X III and a Nikon 2-7x) were transported in my carryon luggage. Both were sighted in prior to leaving, and upon arrival in Zimbabwe both were spot on. I am not fully convinced a dangerous game rifle has to have a fast detachable scope, but the ruggedness and repeatability of the Leupold QR system does offer a definite advantage for the world traveler.

One of the hoped for benefits of the .416 was its versatility by virtue of a relatively flat trajectory. Once the rifle was assembled, I set out to work up a single load, being a firm believer in using a rifle for its intended purpose and using one load for everything. My choice of bullets for the .45-70, .458 and .505 is pretty much limited to roundnose projectiles. With the .416 there were numerous excellent choices.

The selection of bullets today is a far cry from even 10 years ago. Besides the standard production bullets, we have a plethora of premium "carriage trade" bullets. I have used, or seen used, virtually all of them, and most are truly outstanding. For heavy, large game I am a fan of the Barnes X-Bullet. I hear complaints occasionally about them fouling rifle bores, but on a hunting rifle that is a minor complaint, especially in light of their performance. I obtained a batch of the new XLC-coated, 325-grain .416 bullets, and 83 grains of Reloder 15 pushed them along at 2,600 fps in my rifle. Three-shot, 100-yard groups clustered around an inch, and the bore showed no sign of copper fouling.

I finished the rifle just before the spring brown bear season, and after feeding more than 100 rounds through the action to check for function, I decided to take it on the hunt. I was guiding a bow hunter who was hoping for an honest 10-foot boar. We passed up a few smaller ones and couldn't get within range on one monster, so by day 10 he decided to use his rifle. Since he had not planned on using it, he had given no thought to his ammunition. When we opened the case to his .300 Winchester Magnum, we found the only ammunition was 150-grain Nosler Ballistic Tips - a great bullet for long-range shooting of whitetail deer but definitely a poor choice for shooting a 1,000-pound bear at 50 yards, which is exactly what happened the following day.

We were stalking a large boar meandering through chest-high willows. Realizing we could get no closer due to noise, the hunter put his bow aside and unslung the rifle. When the bear stood up to scratch its back on a tree, the hunter fired, and the bear immediately dropped to all fours and took off uphill for thicker brush. All I could see was a rippling wake through the willows as it ran, and I had no idea where or how hard it was hit. There was a small patch of open tundra between the willows and the heavy alders; when the bear reached it, I placed one 325-grain X-Bullet on the point of its shoulder. The boar's front end collapsed, and he slid to a stop at the edge of the alders. The bullet had broken both shoulders and was perfectly mushroomed in the outside leg. Later we discovered the hunter had placed his bullet well centered in the chest, but penetration was only 6 inches.

A month later I accompanied my friend Pat Acciavatti on safari to Zimbabwe and Mozambique. He brought a .338 Winchester Magnum, and I took the new .416. As it turned out Pat liked the .416 so well we both used it for everything. Cape buffalo, kudu, sable, crocodile, leopard, no matter what the game or the range, a single, well-placed X-Bullet was all that was required. The .416 had the energy required to pile up a Cape buffalo at 50 feet, the accuracy to brain shoot a crocodile at 150 yards and the trajectory to hit impala at 250 yards. Pat even used it to snipe a few baboons at over 300 yards for use as leopard bait. In all, 33 animals fell to the .416 in 16 days. Doug Kok, our PH, was impressed with both the rifle and the bullets. In talking to other PHs and local hunters, I discovered the .416 Remington Magnum and Barnes X-Bullets had sterling reputations in Zimbabwe and Mozambique.

The rifle has a few quirks I did not anticipate though. I discovered stainless steel actions do not operate as slick as carbon steel actions. Any moving parts that rub must receive lubrication or else galling can occur. Also the recoil reducing "sissy slots" cause severe and painful muzzle blast.

Any way you look at it, however, the .416 Remington Magnum, the Barnes X-Bullets, the stainless steel Model 70 action, the new Rimrock stock and the Leupold QR scope mounts all offer some benefits over rifles I have used in the past. The .416 combines the versatility and trajectory of the .375 H&H with the energy levels of the .458 Winchester Magnum. It is one great rifle.