Duke’s sole varmint rifle today — his Remington Model 700 ADL .222 Remington
Magnum — is used to stop coyotes from making a meal of their dogs or cats.
Readers of my work over the decades may be surprised to learn my primary rifle interest in the late 1970s to early 1980s was varmint rifles and many of my early articles concerned them. Prior to moving lock, stock and barrel to Montana in the mid-1970s I was mostly a handgun shooter. In southwestern West Virginia where I grew up, there simply was not much purpose for rifles. I did buy a Model 1903A3 Springfield with which I made my introduction to bullet casting for rifles. Before moving to Montana I doubt if I’d ever fired any rifle at a target more than 75 yards distant.
About 15 years ago Duke was invited on a “ground squirrel safari” in Oregon. He attended
with this Savage Model 11F .223 Remington and fired over 1,000 rounds in five days.
Target-Rich Environment
The area of Montana where I made my home had prairie dogs, “gophers” (actually ground squirrels), rock chucks and coyotes. In order to hit the ground running so as to become a rifleman, I bought a dedicated varmint rifle ahead of time. That’s when I learned buying anything with no experience in the subject was bound to be a mistake.
The rifle I bought was a Ruger No. 1 single shot with varmint-weight barrel chambered for .22-250. It wasn’t too much of a mistake. The real problem was I put a 20X Lyman Super Targetspot scope on it. I discovered my error on my very first outing. Two local fellows invited me along to shoot “gophers” out to about 200 yards. I don’t remember the makes of their rifles except they were bolt actions chambered for the .222 Remington. I do remember they had moderate power scopes. They would call out the location of a “gopher” such as, “Look just to the left of that boulder!” In the narrow field of view with the 20X scope I couldn’t even find the boulder before one of them zapped the gopher. I didn’t get off very many shots that day.
However, the experience launched me into varmint shooting. Quickly the Ruger single-shot rifle and Lyman scope were traded and I purchased a Ruger Model 77 .22-250 bolt action. Its scope was a 6X Leupold. With this outfit I could at least hit a few gophers on my next outing. However, a little math showed I was burning about twice the powder my cohorts were using in their .222 Remingtons. So the Ruger was sold and replaced with a .222 Remington Model 700V (heavyweight barrel). For its scope I purchased one of the new Weaver T10s. Instead of using ordinary reloading dies and press, I switched over to Bonanza’s competition dies and one of their nifty presses with its seating-die/shell holder alignment system.
Finally, with a bit of load development trying different powders and bullets, I hit upon a load combination that would consistently shoot 1″ five-shot groups at 100 yards. Still I wasn’t satisfied. Next I bought a slightly used Model 700V .222 Remington because it had a synthetic stock with an aluminum bedding block. Brother, was that thing accurate!
Sub-1″ groups were common. For a time I turned into an accuracy nut. I wanted tighter groups and by selling off some “stuff” I bought a Remington 40X-BR .222 Remington and a case-neck-turning kit (brand unremembered). Atop the Remington I mounted a Lyman LWBR 20X scope. (LWBR stood for light weight bench rest.) Now I could shoot half-inch 100 yard groups and sometimes quarter-inch groups. It was fun and educational but I was back to too much scope and a difficult rifle to pack about.
Duke’s varmint choices: (L-R) .222 Remington, .223 Remington and the .222 Remington Magnum.
Duke kept his .222 Remington Magnum M700 because it shoots groups such as this.
It’s Only Money
Being unmarried in those days, when cash was available it went for more varmint rifles. Walkabout ones with standard-weight barrels became my fancy such as a Remington Model 700 .222 Remington Magnum. A Remington Model 600 6mm, a Ruger Model 77 .243 Winchester, a Ruger Model 77 .220 Swift and a pre-64 Winchester Model 70 .220 Swift were purchased. I even got a couple of .25-06s loading them with 75-grain bullets at very high velocities.
Then I burned out and my inborn interests in history returned. All those rifles were sold bar one — the standard-weight .222 Remington Magnum Model 700 ADL. I still have it.
About 15 years back I was invited on a ground squirrel shoot in Oregon. There wasn’t enough brass for my .222 Mag so I bought a Savage Model 11F .223 Remington. I shot over 1,000 rounds through it in five days, then later gave it to a friend’s son when he turned 13. My only varmint rifle now is my trusty .222 Remington Magnum. It serves for the occasional coyote trying for an easy meal with one of our pets.
While bolt-action .22 Rimfire rifles are commonplace today, it took quite a long time for that action type to arrive on the scene.
By Layne Simpson
Repeating rifles in .22 Rimfire of American design have been with us for a very long time, but it took a while for the bolt action to arrive. The first repeater on the scene was the Winchester Model 1873 lever action introduced during that year. At that time the .22 Long Rifle had yet to be introduced by J. Stevens Arms & Tool Co., so during the first 14 years of production, the ’73 was available only in .22 Short and .22 Long.
Winchester’s second repeater, the slide-action Model 1890, was available in .22 Short, .22 Long, .22 Long Rifle, and .22 WRF. It was followed by the Model 1903, a semiautomatic rifle chambered only for the “22 Winchester Automatic Rim Fire Smokeless” cartridge. During the first two decades of the 20th century, Winchester introduced several .22 Rimfires on turnbolt actions, but all were inexpensive single shots loved and cherished by farm boys all across America.
Winchester finally got around to offering a bolt-action repeater in 1920, and the company did it big time with the Model 52 target rifle. During the next 60 years, it was offered in many variations, including the Sporting Rifle, which still ranks as one of the all-time great small-game guns. The Model 52 was discontinued in 1980 and was followed by several less expensive bolt-action repeaters.
Remington introduced its first multiple-shot bolt action, the Model 34, in 1932. Many others followed, with the Model 40X (1955) and the Model 540/541 (1972) considered by many to be the cream of the crop out of the Ilion, New York, factory. The 40X was Remington’s rather belated target-rifle reply to the Winchester 52, and the 540/541 series was aimed at the Winchester Model 75. The Model 541-T was less expensive than the 40X, and while not as accurate, mine carves out extremely small groups when fed match ammo. One of the more interesting rifles from Remington was a member of the company’s “Nylon” family of rifles called the Model 11. It and its lever-action and semiautomatic mates came and went during the 1960s.
Bolt-action .22 Rimfire rifles are commonplace today and include some classic models, but in the beginning, it took a long time for that type of rimfire rifle to arrive on the scene.From left to right:1. 1922 Springfield2. Winchester M52 Sporter3. Kimber M824. Remington 541-T5. Ruger American Rimfire6. Kleinguenther K-227. Remington M5048. Ruger 77/22
Marlin’s first bolt-action repeater, the Model 80, was introduced in 1936, and that company went on to produce more rifles of the type than any other company in the United States. In those days, Harrington & Richardson, Mossberg, and Stevens were also big players in the game. When Daisy introduced its Legacy 2202, I looked into my crystal ball and saw immediate success. After all, many of us started out with BB guns built by Daisy, so it seemed only logical that everyone would want a .22 Rimfire built by the same company. Unfortunately, no.
The very first repeating rifles had detachable box magazines of single-column design, but later, the tubular magazine also had its time in the limelight. And while most tubular magazines were attached beneath the barrel, Winchester chose to place it inside the buttstock of the 1960’s Model 141. Like the classic Browning Autoloading Rifle of yesteryear, it was loaded from the rear. Some companies offered the same model with either type of magazine, and the one with a tubular magazine was usually a bit more expensive because it cost more to build.
In addition to having a huge capacity advantage, the tubular magazine won’t go astray in the field whereas the detachable design was fated to be lost. Filling that long tube with cartridges adds enough weight to deflect the muzzle of the barrel slightly downward, and while there may be some difference in bullet points of impact between the first shot and the last shot in that type of magazine, most rabbits, bushytails, chipmunks, and empty tin cans have failed to notice through the years. An exposed tubular magazine should be more easily damaged by hard knocks than the detachable magazine, but a few decades of exploring used-gun racks in gunshops have revealed very few that actually were.
Photo Gallery
Most rifles today have detachable magazines, and with the exception of the rotary magazine of Ruger’s Model 77/22 (and its imitators), most are of single-stack design. To my eyes, a rifle with a detachable magazine is a bit more pleasing to the eye than one with a tubular magazine hanging beneath its barrel. Another advantage of detachable magazines is quick reloading: simply replace the empty with the full and keep on shooting. On the negative side, with that little box magazine removed, its feed lips are subject to damage, although it is not a common event. When the capacity of a single-stacker exceeds five or six rounds, it extends below the belly of the rifle to interfere with one-hand comfortable carry. It also seems to vary more in reliability from maker to maker than a tubular magazine. Some are most definitely easier to load than others.
SEE PHOTO GALLERY
Breech lockup of many thousands of .22 Rimfire rifles built through the years has been accomplished by nothing more than the root of the bolt handle bearing on the front of the receiver bridge. While strength has proven to be more than adequate, the designers of some rifles added a locking lug on the bolt body opposite the bolt handle.
The All-Important Chamber
Most factory rifles have a sporting chamber dimensioned large enough to ensure trouble-free functioning even when the chamber becomes quite dirty. At the opposite extreme is the match chamber that has much tighter dimensions. In addition to having a diameter that more closely matches that of the .22 Long Rifle case, its shorter length causes the bullet of a chambered round to be engaged by the rifling. That along with the higher quality of match-grade barrels improves accuracy far beyond what is commonly achieved with a barrel of lesser quality having a sporting chamber.
Competition rifles made by Anschutz, Bleiker, and others have match chambers, and match-grade barrels with the same type of chamber are available from several sources. (Lilja is one of the most popular.) A couple of my small-game rifles have match chambers, but be aware of the fact that with the bullet of a chambered round wedged tightly into the rifling, the extractor of a rifle may slip over the rim of a chambered round should unloading become necessary when crossing a fence or for other reasons of safety.
The shorter the match-dimensioned chamber, the deeper the bullet seats into the rifling of the barrel. As you can see in the Pacific Tool & Gauge reamer chart shown on page 42, the chamber introduced by Winchester many years ago in the Model 52 is the shortest commonly available. When a cartridge is pushed into it, an additional 0.020 inch of its bullet is engaged by the rifling as compared to a standard match chamber.
Dimensions of the Bentz chamber are tighter than those for the sporting chamber but a bit more generous than for the match chamber. And while its length places the bullet of a chambered cartridge closer to the rifling than in a sporting chamber, it is not engaged by the rifling as in a match chamber. This is why it is often chosen when seeking the best accuracy possible from a semiautomatic rifle. As illustrated by the reamer chart, there are many options in chambers. Some are from firearms manufacturers and barrelmakers, while others are from gunsmiths who specialize in building extremely accurate rifles.
Before leaving the subject, I will add that due to their longer cases, Aguila Super Maximum as well as CCI Stinger and CCI Quik-Shok should be fired only in a chamber with sporting dimensions or in a custom chamber sized specifically for them. Chambering one of those cartridges in a match, Bentz, or other short chamber forces the mouth of the case hard into the rifling leade, and that increases the grip of the case on the bullet for a dramatic increase in chamber pressure.
SEE PHOTO GALLERY
For various reasons explained in the text, the locking strengths of some bolts ended up being far greater than necessary for the .22 Rimfire. The bolt of the Remington 541-T (left) has nine locking lugs, while the bolts of the Remington 40X (center) and the Ruger 77/22 (right) have two massive lugs.
Lockup Variations
The maximum chamber pressure for the .22 Long Rifle cartridge is only 24,000 psi, so the strongest of actions is not required for containing it during firing. Breech lockup in thousands of rifles chambered for it through the decades is accomplished by nothing more than the root of the bolt handle bearing on the front of the receiver bridge, and it has proven to be quite satisfactory. The .22 WMR operates at the same pressure, but due to greater surface area of its case, it pushes against the bolt with a bit more force. The same goes for the .17 HMR at 26,000 psi.
Most centerfire cartridges operate at considerably higher pressures, so a front-locking bolt is best for them because it minimizes momentary receiver stretch and bolt compression. The use of lugs at the front of the bolt requires positioning a detachable magazine quite some distance from the breech end of the barrel, and coaxing the stubby .22 LR cartridge across that space and into the chamber is an engineering challenge commonly eliminated by positioning the locking lugs toward the rear of the bolt. Back thrust applied to the bolt by rimfire cartridges is much lower than for most centerfires, so rear-locking bolts have proven to be quite successful through the years.
While root-of-bolt-handle lockup alone works fine on plinking and hunting rifles, a rifle with opposed locking lugs does a better job of concentrically stabilizing a bolt during firing, and builders of upper-level rifles tend to utilize them. Winchester handled that very nicely with the Model 52 by adding a locking lug on the opposite side of the bolt, adjacent to the root of the bolt handle. Through the years that same style of lockup has been seen on quite a few other high-quality rifles from Cooper (Model 57M), Kimber (Model 82), Remington (Model 504), Anschutz, and others.
The rear locking lugs of some .22 Rimfire rifles were made more massive than they had to be for various reasons. When designing the Model 40X target rifle during the early 1950s, Mike Walker of Remington built it around the Model 722 centerfire action. He gave the rifle a two-piece bolt of the same diameter as the Model 722 with the front, non-rotating section containing twin extractors and the rear section having extremely large, dual-opposed locking lugs.
When designing the Model 77/22 during the early 1980s, engineers at Ruger envisioned a future centerfire version of the same rifle chambered for the .22 Hornet, .44 Remington, and others. To handle the additional strain, they utilized the design of the Model 40X bolt.
Back to Remington, the Model 788 centerfire introduced in 1967 has nine rear-positioned locking lugs. Remington introduced its 500 series of rifles during that same year, and the bolts of all of them, including those in 5mm Remington Magnum, were a scaled-down version of the Model 788 bolt except with six locking lugs rather than nine. This is why shooters often referred to those rifles as “baby 788s.” They were accurate.
SEE PHOTO GALLERY
The Kleinguenther K-22 has a couple of locking lugs at the front of its bolt, which is quite unusual for .22 Rimfire rifles.
Each time I shoot my 1922 Springfield with match ammo I am reminded that if a rear locking lug is quite large, just one will be enough for achieving excellent accuracy. There is something else unique about that wonderful rifle; mine is the M2 version with an adjustment screw resting parallel to the bolt body inside its locking lug. The armorer who assembled the rifle back in the 1930s used the screw to adjust headspace and then locked it in place. It is doubtful that the rifle will ever develop excessive headspace, but if it does, the adjustment screw can be used to correct it.
Not all .22s have had rear-locking bolts. One of the finest and most accurate small-game rifles in my battery was built by Robert Kleinguenther who founded Kleinguenther Distinctive Firearms of Seguin, Texas, in 1970. Called the K-22, its barreled action was made by the German firm Voere, and it is one of only two .22 Rimfire rifles I have shot that has dual locking lugs at the very front of the bolt. Cartridge feeding from its detachable magazine has always been smooth and trouble-free.
The Mauser Model 201 is pretty much the same rifle as the Kleinguenther K-22, including front locking lugs. During the 1990s it was being brought into the United States by Precision Imports. I used one of those rifles on a prairie dog shoot, and it was chambered for an experimental cartridge made by Federal by necking down the .22 WMR case to .17 caliber. The cartridge did not have an official name, so when writing about it in 1992, I called it the .17 FMR. I’m sure the folks at Hornady are glad Federal never got around to loading the cartridge because about 10 years later Hornady introduced it as the .17 HMR.
I would be remiss if I didn’t mention the bolt-action .22s made by CZ-USA. I have worked with several in the past, and in my experience, they were all excellent guns. The company’s Model 455 line has grown to include numerous versions, and its switch-barrel design allows the user to own one action and barrels in .22 LR, .22 WMR, and .17 HMR. I have found these rifles to be quite good.
Not long back, several fellow gun club members and I were discussing favorites when the question of which rifles of American design are the finest ever built. The Winchester Model 52, Kimber Model 82, Remington 40X, Ruger 77/22, and Cooper Model 57M got the most votes. Those of us who started out with .22s seem to never outgrow them.
The S&W Military & Police .38 Special rests on a copy of early advertising.
From the Taffin Dictionary of Sixgunning — “Perfect Packin’ Pistol is a title given to a sixgun or semi-automatic with a barrel not less than 4″, nor more than 5-1/2″, which can be carried easily all day in a well-designed holster, placed under a bed roll comfortably at night and can be expected to handle any situation which should arise.”
This definition takes in a lot of territory and obviously it depends where the bearer of such a PPP normally finds himself/herself. Whether daily travels take one on concrete, sagebrush, foothills, forests, or mountains, the encounters likely to occur have a great bearing on the caliber chosen have the duty. We will be taking a look at the epitome of Perfect Packin’ Pistols, namely the 4″ Double Action Smith & Wesson.
This pre-war long action .38/44 Heavy Duty is probably the finest
double-action shooting sixgun ever offered.
In The Beginning
To come up with the .38 Special, D.B. Wesson, along with his son, took a good look at the .38 Long Colt, the official U.S. Military Chambering at the time. The brass case was lengthened to accommodate 21-1/2 grains of black powder instead of the standard 18 and the bullet weight was increased from 150 grains to a round-nosed 158-grain bullet.
The new revolver was the first K-Frame and was given the name of Military & Police. For the next half-century plus, it would be found in the holsters of thousands upon thousands of police officers. Over the decades it would be made in the standard barrel configuration as well as a heavy barrel model in both blued and stainless finish. Bill Jordan especially liked the 4″ Heavy Barrel Military & Police in his exhibitions of fast double-action shooting.
With the coming of smokeless powder, the .38 Special was found to be especially accurate and from the very beginning the M&P was offered with target sights. Production of all civilian revolvers was shut down during WWII, however with the end of the war S&W began the development of what would become one of the finest target revolvers ever offered — the K-22.
The Personification of the PPP is the epic S&W Combat Masterpiece.
A Masterpiece
The K-22 was introduced in December 1946 and six months later the first K-38, followed almost immediately by the K-32, arrived. These were all given the title of Masterpiece, which was definitely fitting. I have examples of all three revolvers chambered in .22 Long Rifle, .32 Smith & Wesson Long and .38 Special. They were and are excellent target pistols but too long to be classified as a PPP. This matter was handled in 1950 with the arrival of the 4″ Combat Masterpiece. This magnificent revolver was available in both .22 and .38 with a few examples and .32 Long.
In 1957 the .38 Special Combat Masterpiece became the Model 15 with the .22 Long Rifle version known as the Model 18. For situations where either one of these chamberings will suffice, it would be pretty difficult to find a better choice than the Combat Masterpiece.
The .38 Special, although a great choice for target shooting or plinking, left a lot to be desired in its original round-nosed 158-grain version. After WWI ended, our society was rapidly changing from an agrarian one and many of those who had been content to stay on the farm were now gravitating to the large cities; couple this with Prohibition and the easy money to be made outside the law — as well as the arrival of a new breed of criminal robbing banks escaping in a super-fast V8 powered sedan — and peace officers certainly found themselves behind the times.
The standard .38 Special that had served law officers for nearly 30 years suddenly had to compete with criminals firing .45s and automatic weapons from an automobile. Those little slow moving .38s either bounced off car bodies and windshields or at the very best, offered shallow penetration. Something had to be done to help officers. Smith & Wesson decided a newer and, more powerful, .38 Special was needed and the result was the .38/44 Heavy Duty.
Smith & Wesson, in conjunction with Winchester, in 1930 changed the standard .38 Special using a round-nosed bullet at around 850 fps to a flat-nosed semi-wadcutter design traveling 300 fps faster, and also added a metal-penetrating version. To house this new round, S&W simply used their 1926 Model, or 3rd Model Hand Ejector .44 Special with a .38 Special barrel and cylinder. The result was a much heavier sixgun than the S&W Military & Police and it did an excellent job of dampening recoil even with the new load.
The Military & Police has always been a relatively easy gun to shoot, however this new .38/44 had such a slick action and heavy cylinder it almost seemed to shoot by itself once the trigger action is started. From my perspective it is the finest .38 ever produced; and I am certainly not alone in this assessment. The following came from Elmer Keith.
“About a year ago Smith & Wesson heeded the demand for a heavier .38 with their new .38/44. This weapon was designed primarily as a police weapon and brought out on their .44 Military frame, to my notion the best sized and shaped frame of any double action for my individual hand.”
Whether in the standard barrel configuration or the Heavy Barrel
version at right, the .38 Special M&P delivers.
A New Start
The introduction of the .38/44 sixgun and cartridge did get the .38 Special up off its knees. However, this was only the beginning. The fixed-sighted .38/44 Heavy Duty was offered in barrel lengths of 4″, 5″ and 6-1/2″. In 1931 this latter model was upgraded with the addition of adjustable sights and introduced as the .38/44 Outdoorsman. Just as its name suggests, it became very popular as a field and hunting sixgun. A few were made with the 5″ length and I am certain there were those who shortened the barrel to an easy packing 4″. I had planned to do this someday, however someday has not yet arrived. My itch has been scratched with the use of .38 Special loads in the 4″ S&W Highway Patrolman.
In the early 1930s Col. Doug Wesson and writer/ballistician Phil Sharpe began working together on a new project using the .38/44. Sharpe had the .38 Special lengthened and their work together resulted in one of the finest sixgun/cartridge combinations, the .357 Registered Magnum and the .357 Magnum itself. Smith & Wesson Historian Roy Jinks called it the greatest sixgunning development of the 20th century. I will not argue with the assessment!
Bullet selection is always an important consideration when preparing for a hunt. However, choosing the appropriate bullet literally becomes a matter of life and death if you’ll be hunting dangerous game like cape buffalo.
The good news is that most of the big ammunition companies now offer several different lines of ammunition that are specifically designed for hunting thick-skinned, dangerous game. In particular, Nosler manufactures its Safari Ammunition line specifically for those hunters.
Before going into detail on Nosler Safari Ammunition, I’d like to provide a little bit of background on the sort of bullet performance hunters pursuing thick-skinned dangerous game (cape buffalo in particular) really need while they’re afield.
You’ve probably heard it before, but it bears repeating here: cape buffalo are really, really big and really, really tough. As a point of reference, a big bull can weigh twice as much as a mature bull elk.
Buffalo have thick hides, dense muscles, and heavy bones that are known for defeating lightly constructed bullets. Since buffalo are often encountered at close range and in thick cover, the margin for error is very small and more than a few hunters have lost their lives (or spent time in a hospital) as a result of poor bullet performance.
With this in mind, heavy for caliber, controlled-expansion bullets are essential for hunting buffalo. In short, you want a bullet that will reliably expand to a certain point in order to cause lots of tissue damage, but not expand so much that it won’t reliably penetrate deep enough to reach the vitals.
At the same time, most professional hunters recommend chambering a good quality expanding bullet for the first shot and loading non-expanding bullets for all subsequent shots. This is because the first shot will most likely be taken at a broadside or slightly quartering angle.
Since those shooting angles minimize the distance a bullet must penetrate to reach the vitals, expanding bullets are better choices because they make a larger wound channel, cause more damage to the internal organs of the buffalo, and are less likely to exit and unintentionally wound another buffalo in the herd than non-expanding bullets.
However, follow-up shots will most likely be taken at less desirable angles and expanding bullets do not typically penetrate quite as well as non-expanding bullets of the same caliber and weight. For this reason, non-expanding bullets are better choices for follow-up shots because they can be relied upon for the necessary amount of penetration to reach the vitals from non-ideal angles.
So, most dangerous game hunters need a mix of good quality controlled-expansion bullets and non-expanding solids that shoot to the same point of impact. Fortunately, product lines like Barnes’ VOR-TX Safari, Federal Premium’s Safari Cape-Shok, Hornady’s Dangerous Game Series, and Nosler’s Safari Ammunition are all designed to provide that sort of performance.
Nosler worked in partnership with Norma Precision to manufacture its Safari Ammunition. This ammo pairs their legendary Partition Bullet with Nosler Safari Solid bullets of the same weight that also shoot to the same point of impact.
On one hand, the Partition delivers rapid and violent, yet controlled expansion that is deadly on all manner of game from impala and whitetail deer all the way up to moose and eland. It’s also a good choice for initial shots on buffalo.
On the other hand, the Nosler Solid bullets are tough, flat-nosed, homogenous projectiles that can be relied upon for deep, straight-line penetration through thick muscles and heavy bones of even the largest creatures. These projectiles are wonderful choices for follow-up shots on buffalo as well as for shots on smaller game like steenbok and duiker to minimize damage to the hides.
Nosler Safari Grade ammunition is currently available in the following cartridges and bullet weights: 9.3x62mm Mauser (286gr), .375 Flanged (300gr), .375 H&H Magnum (300gr), .404 Jeffery (400gr), .416 Remington Magnum (400gr), .416 Rigby (400gr), .450 Rigby (500gr), .458 Winchester Magnum (500gr), .458 Lott (500gr), .470 Nitro Express (500gr), .500 Nitro Express (570gr), 500/416 Nitro Express (400gr), 500 Jeffery (570gr), and .505 Gibbs (525gr).
So, if you’re looking for the right ammo to take on safari with dangerous game on the menu, then you should really consider using Nosler Safari Ammunition. This is some versatile rifle ammunition that you can depend on when the chips are down.
Share this article
About the Author
John McAdams is a proficient blogger, longtime hunter, experienced shooter, and veteran of combat tours with the U.S. Army in Iraq and Afghanistan. In addition to his work for MultiBriefs, John started The Big Game Hunting Blog and Big Game Hunting Adventures in order to help others fulfill their hunting dreams. Be sure to subscribe to his show: the Big Game Hunting Podcast.
