Forums
New posts
Search forums
What's new
Articles
Latest reviews
Author list
Classifieds
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles and first posts only
Search titles only
By:
New posts
Search forums
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Forums
Hunting
Elk Hunting
460 wby "ok for Elk"???
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="specweldtom" data-source="post: 359926" data-attributes="member: 2580"><p>Sounds like someone spooked you about the .460 recoil. Not so with 300 - 350gr bullets and the Accubrake. The Mk V .460 has a stock geometry that is very comfortable to me, and also manages recoil very well. I've shot all the Wby boomers, and with the basic .378 case cartridges, rifle weight and bullet weight mostly determine felt recoil. As rifle weight goes down and/or bullet weight goes up, recoil energy increases, but for some reason, felt recoil doesn't track. I think the difference is recoil velocity. The .460 with 350gr bullets doesn't seem to me to kick as hard as a .338 x .378 with the 300gr mk's. (Both rifles about the same weight). Don't let concern about recoil deter you from a .460. It don't have to be bad, but is a little intense with the 500gr factory ammo, or hard loaded 500gr handloads. Just load lighter bullets, and if you like, load down to .458 Win levels, or something equally wuss. (see my signature)</p><p></p><p>Speaking of bullets, a .458 bullet will not do excessive tissue damage. The jackets tend to be thicker and the velocities tend to be low enough to prevent grenading. You really do have to have a good solid backstop though. No different than the .30 x .378 or the .338 x .378, both of which I have hunted with and killed deer sized game, with considerable tissue damage, but with chest shots I didn't lose any more meat than with a 7-08, which I have also used (and like). </p><p></p><p>If there is a a Cabela's anywhere nearby, you might be able to handle and compare some of the big Weatherbys.</p><p></p><p>The .30 x .378 is a fine "all-around" cartridge, if there is such a thing. If you look at factory ammo or components though, they're only about 10% cheaper on average. Not much cheaper to shoot than a .460. Definitely better bullet choices available though, particularly for long range work.</p><p></p><p>There is a lot of historical evidence of very long range kills with the Sharps .45-70 to .45-120 cartridges. Modern .458 bullets are available for the .460 that will outperform the old .45 cal lead bullets used in the Sharps back in the day, and a .460 will blow the doors off any of the old Sharps cartridges. I have some 500gr Barnes X's that I turned boattails on, but never fired them. Ought to be a fine long range load in a .460 at about 2650fps, but belly-shooting with them would get real tiresome. Maybe the Accubrake would make them usable in the prone position?</p><p></p><p>Like to say this is just my 2 cents worth, but I got way to long-winded for that, Tom</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="specweldtom, post: 359926, member: 2580"] Sounds like someone spooked you about the .460 recoil. Not so with 300 - 350gr bullets and the Accubrake. The Mk V .460 has a stock geometry that is very comfortable to me, and also manages recoil very well. I've shot all the Wby boomers, and with the basic .378 case cartridges, rifle weight and bullet weight mostly determine felt recoil. As rifle weight goes down and/or bullet weight goes up, recoil energy increases, but for some reason, felt recoil doesn't track. I think the difference is recoil velocity. The .460 with 350gr bullets doesn't seem to me to kick as hard as a .338 x .378 with the 300gr mk's. (Both rifles about the same weight). Don't let concern about recoil deter you from a .460. It don't have to be bad, but is a little intense with the 500gr factory ammo, or hard loaded 500gr handloads. Just load lighter bullets, and if you like, load down to .458 Win levels, or something equally wuss. (see my signature) Speaking of bullets, a .458 bullet will not do excessive tissue damage. The jackets tend to be thicker and the velocities tend to be low enough to prevent grenading. You really do have to have a good solid backstop though. No different than the .30 x .378 or the .338 x .378, both of which I have hunted with and killed deer sized game, with considerable tissue damage, but with chest shots I didn't lose any more meat than with a 7-08, which I have also used (and like). If there is a a Cabela's anywhere nearby, you might be able to handle and compare some of the big Weatherbys. The .30 x .378 is a fine "all-around" cartridge, if there is such a thing. If you look at factory ammo or components though, they're only about 10% cheaper on average. Not much cheaper to shoot than a .460. Definitely better bullet choices available though, particularly for long range work. There is a lot of historical evidence of very long range kills with the Sharps .45-70 to .45-120 cartridges. Modern .458 bullets are available for the .460 that will outperform the old .45 cal lead bullets used in the Sharps back in the day, and a .460 will blow the doors off any of the old Sharps cartridges. I have some 500gr Barnes X's that I turned boattails on, but never fired them. Ought to be a fine long range load in a .460 at about 2650fps, but belly-shooting with them would get real tiresome. Maybe the Accubrake would make them usable in the prone position? Like to say this is just my 2 cents worth, but I got way to long-winded for that, Tom [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Forums
Hunting
Elk Hunting
460 wby "ok for Elk"???
Top