African Safari 2012 - The update thread

[Rob]

thanks.  Now I have an image in my head.

[Rob]

Bullets bullets bullets…

What to do about bullets.

Once again I am putting way too much thought into bullet selection.

PROJECT #1-Playing with 4 traditional bullets
For the buff gun, I have been playing with and getting good results from 4 bullets.  I intend to select two for the trip.  A solid and an expander.  The bullets I am playing with are:
-500 grain Swift A frame
-500 grain Barnes TSX FB
-500 Grain Barnes Banded solid
-480 Grain Woodleigh Hydrostatic stabilized Solid

These are all shooting about 2400 FPS and they all group well at 100 yards.
Over the weekend I decided to try an experiment.  I did a four shot group with one of each rounds.  See photo: 

A 3.25 inch group is not exactly what I would call a good thing-I have been getting 3-4 shot groups of 1 inch to 2.25 inches at the 100 yard mark using a single bullet style.  Given that my shooting will probably be at 50 yards or less, 3.25 inches is not horrible.  I’d still rather see it down to around 2 inches at 100 yards.
I think I need to slow down the Woodleigh a little to see if I can get smaller groups.  That will be the next plan 

PROJECT #2- Cutting Edge Bullets
http://site.cuttingedgebullets.com/
I have been eyeing these bullets for some time.  I finally ordered some on Friday that I will play with.  Basically, CEB makes a solid and expanding bullet pair that are supposed to both have the same POI.  I ordered a set of 480 grain solids and the corresponding 450 grain NonCon expanding bullet.

Here is where it gets interesting.

Unlike a traditional expanding bullet, where you measure success by expansion and weight retention, these expanding bullets are designed to lose their petals upon penetration. The petals continue to tumble and penetrate, spreading out in a star like pattern, while the “core” of the bullet behaves like a solid and penetrates in a straight line.
So you get the best of both worlds.  Very cool concept and it has been proven in the field in Africa. 

Michael458 in the Accurate Reloading forum has done EXTENSIVE testing on this both at his private range, as well as in the field.    For more than you ever wanted to know, read through his thread (the CEB bullets start somewhere in the middle of the 180+ pages of thread!)
http://forums.accuratereloading.com/eve/forums/a/tpc/f/4711043/m/2861098911

Michael tests in wet newspaper.  He places what he calls “witness cards” every 4 inches in the column of paper.  He can then pull out the cards and see cross sections of the wound channel.  Here is one of his cards I pulled from the Cutting Edge web site.

Anyway, I can’t wait to play with these bullets!!!  I ordered some in 458 cal, 375 cal, and a small bore that I plan to see if I can get a load worked up in time for my upcoming Pronghorn trip.

PROJECT #3-reseating and crimping (NERD ALERT!  Skip this section if you bore easily)
So I have been thinking a lot about the impact recoil has on shells in the magazine.  First here is some info I have learned (probably a penetrating insight into the obvious for everyone else, but I am a slow learner and it’s my thread so there!)
Rule #1:  Mass wants to stay put.  So if an object is not part of the gun, or attached in such a way as it is unmovable relative to the gun, it will start to move after the gun does.
Rule #2:  Speaking in terms of a time curve, Recoil starts suddenly and sharply, and then reduces slowly as it is absorbed by your body.  i.e.:

I base these two “rules” on a couple experiences I have had over the past few months. 

First:  As detailed above, when shooting my 375 HH with the scope rings not fully engaged on the bases, or quite tight enough, the scope moved forward.  I would have thought the scope would have moved rearward.  However, because the scope was not secure, and the majority of the impact occurs in the beginning of the recoil curve, not the end, the scope moved forward.

Second:  I was shooting my 45/70 Government Revolver a while back, and I unloaded the revolver after taking a shot or two.  When I did, I noticed that the bullets had moved forward in the case a good 1/10th of an inch (even though they were well crimped with a lee factory crimp die!).  This was caused by the heavy recoil.  When a shell is inserted into the cylinder, it is prevented from passing through the cylinder by the rim on the case.  This rim effectively makes the brass part of the gun from a recoil perspective.  The bullet however is not as securely fastened to the brass so when the gun and brass move rearward, the bullet wants to stay put, and moves forward in the case (or the case moves out from under the bullet).

Third:  While shooting my 300 WSM at Boomershoot last April, I noted that if I removed a shell from the magazine that was in the magazine during a firing, the nose of my match king bullets were “roughed up” and marred.  Because the cartridge is not secured to the gun (as it is with a revolver) the gun effectively “crashes” into the nose of the bullet upon recoil.  This could move the bullet rearward in the case!

So this is what I have found:
1.   Cartridges that are in a firearm that are secured with a rim, or otherwise held static relative to the gun when fired (revolvers, double rifles), will tend to see the bullet travel forward in the brass due to the brass essentially moving out from under the bullet during the recoil process.
2.   Cartridges that are loose in a magazine (Tubular, box, etc) and are not held static relative to the gun when fired (bolt action rifles, lever rifles, etc) will tend to see the bullet pushed further into the brass due to the bullet nose crashing into the front of the magazine (or other bullets in the case of a tubular mag).

Since I am shooting from bolt action box mags, this will impact how I crimp.  I want to crimp into the canaleur (SP?) such that the leading edge of the case mouth is touching the forward edge of the canaleur.  That way, if the bullet starts to move rearward upon striking the front of the magazine after the first shot, it will have to overcome the lip of the canaleur before it can be pushed further into the case. 
I started putting some time thinking on this topic after the Montana Big Bore shoot.  As mentioned above, my rifle failed on me during the charging buffalo scenario.  The failure occurred while trying to chamber a follow up round after firing my first shot.  I was firing a shell I did not re-load (got a good deal on some loaded 450 Dakota brass so I jumped on it and wanted to shoot it up to get the brass).

I did not inspect the shell prior to shooting it (my bad), and upon extraction you can see where the lip of the brass caught on the chamber wall while feeding. See photo:

There is also evidence on the tip of the bullet that it struck the front of the mag at some point. 

My working theory on this is that one of two things happened:
-The case had a pre-existing burr on the lip that caught while trying to feed
-the first shot pushed the bullet into the case, disrupted the crimp and somehow warped the brass which caught while trying to feed.

[Rob]

I reworked my 450 Dakota shells last night.

1.  In an effort to move the POI down to the same as the TSX and Swift A frame, I pulled bullets and reduced the loads by 7 grains each for my two solids (the 500 grain Barnes Banded Solid, and the 480 Grain Woodleigh Hydrostatic stabilized Bullet)
     -The Barnes Solid I dropped from 107 grains of H4350 to 100 grains for 6 shells.  I tried to reseat them so that the lip of the brass sat up against leading edge of the forward Canaleur.  I was able to do this on the reduced load, but when I tried to lower the bullet for the 107 grain load, the powder was too compacted and I could not move the bullet any lower. 
     -The Woodleigh I dropped from 105 grains of H4350 down to 98.  I also reseated the lip to the leading edge of the forward Canaleur.
2.  I reseated the TSX and Swift A frames to the leading edge of the forward Canaleur.

Again, I did this for two reasons:
-reduced loads are to see if I can get the POI closer for the expanding and solid bullets I am playing with.
-Seating the bullets deeper is to see if I can keep recoil from moving the bullets in the case while in the magazine during a firing.

We shall see if this makes any difference!

Photo is of the reworked shells.  From left to right:
1.  480 grain Woodliegh with 98 grains H4350
2.  500 grain Barnes Banded Solid with 100 grains H4350
3.  500 grain Barnes Banded solid with 107 grains of H4350 (note I could not seat the bulelt any deeper due to a full case)
4.  500 grain Barnes TSX FB with 107 grains of H4350
5.  500 grain Swift A Frame with 105 grains of H4350

[Rob]

CEB bullets.  I ordered some last week and I don’t think I have ever been so excited for a package to arrive!  I was hoping they would be here on Friday, but alas, they did not arrive.  I came home on Monday, and alas, they were not there.  I came home on Tuesday, and there was a package in the package locker!  But alas, it was not my bullets.  I was fixing dinner moping around the house, when the UPS driver pulled up in front of the house.  It was 6:30 PM so I was not expecting a delivery that late!  Low and behold, my box was delivered!

I immediate hit the reloading room and started to play.  I had ordered the following:
.457 Caliber
   -480 grain Solid BBW#13
   -450 grain NonCon HP BBW#13
.375 Caliber
   -300 Grain Solid BBW#13
   -275 grain Solid BBW#13
.223 Caliber
   -55 Grain NonCon HP BBW#13
Note that the .457 and .223 bullets are undersized by .001.  I was told this was not an issue.  Also note that the .223 caliber bullets are brand new and not even offered on their website yet.  I called and spoke to their engineer last week and asked him about them.  He said they had just come off the line and would be available in time for my order.  He also said they were experimenting with some snap in ballistic tips that are supposed to improve the BC of the bullets significantly.  He offered to send me some to try out which was very cool.  Rumor has it they are playing with .308 caliber bullets too… 

I want to use these bullets in Wyoming so my first priority was loading up some 55 grain NonCons for my 22.250.  I have a 55 grain Hornady V-Max that patterns OK (in general the slow twist on my 22.250 does not favor heavier bullets).  It uses 32.8 grains of Varget and measures 2.041 OAL to the Ojive (not tip). 

Based on this, I loaded up 20 shells with Varget in 5 different powder weights ranging from Min to Max for a 55 grain Hornady V-Max.  I had to alter the OAL measurements as the Ojive is totally different on these bullets.  I picked a seating depth that:
-   Was about the same as what I was seeing for HP bullets for other rounds
-   Was just inside the most forward crimping band on the bullet.
-   Allowed the shell to feed through the magazine and into the chamber without issues.
I also loaded up 12 more shells in three different OAL’s using 32.8 grains of Varget (the load my Hornady V-max liked best)
Tonight I will load up some 375 HH and 450 Dakota shells as well.  I plan to taking a ½ day tomorrow and shoot these at 100 yards over a chrony to see what happens.  Once I get a load nailed down, I plan to snap in the ballistic tips CEB gave me to

Here are some photos.
Photo 1:  Boxed bullets
Photo 2:  a line up of bullets (note the size of the hollow point)
500 grain Barnes Banded solid (.458)
480 grain CEB Solid (.458)
500 Grain Barnes TSX (.458)
450 Grain CEB NonCon HP (.485)
300 grain CEB Solid (.375)
275 Grain CEB NonCon HP (.375)
Photos 3:  a loaded 22.250, a 450 grain CEB NonCon in .458, a 55 grain NonCon in .223
Photo #4:  A .458 CEB NonCon with a .223 55 grain Non Con in it’s hollow point (I was bored)
Photo #5:  55 grain Hornady V-Max next to a 55 grain CEB (see what I mean about the Ojive)
Photo #6:  top view of the CEB bullets-again, look at the size of the hollow point.

[Rob]

I was able to load up some 375 HH and 450 Dakota shells on Tuesday night, and I took the morning of Wednesday off to go to Kenmore before work and do some range testing.  I got some very mixed results.  First, here are the loads I tested.

 

When loading I noticed some interesting things about the bullets. 

First, I took 10 of the 300 grain .375 caliber solids and measured the overall length, and weighed them.  They came to +/- .001in in length, and +/- 0.1 grains in weight (my scale only goes to 1/10 of a grain).  That is the most consistent I have seen with bullets – including Barnes TSX and Sierra Match kings.  The consistency in length made seating to a consistent overall length a breeze. 

Second thing I noticed occurred when I loaded up the 450 Dakota rounds.  The CEB bullets I chose were .457 in diameter.  This is .001 undersized.  Not a big deal in terms of shooting, but it did make a difference when seating the bullets.  Basically, the case neck does not grab the bullet as tightly. 

I had originally planned to load 100 and 105 grain loads of H4530 to see what kind of accuracy and velocities I would get (I am getting ~2400 fps with the other bullets and those charges).  105 grains of H4350 in a 450 Dakota is pretty compressed.  Infact, it is so compressed that I was unable to fully seat the Cutting edge bullets to the proper OAL.  I would run the shell through the die, the powder would compress, and then, because the bullets were undersized and moved up and down the case neck pretty easily, the powder would spring back up and raise the bullet about .1 inches above my target OAL.  I was forced to drop the load to 102 grains to allow the bullets to seat properly.  Also; due to the under-sizing of the bullets, the bullets could be spun in the case and plucked by hand (they would not “fall out” but with a little wiggling, they could be extracted by hand).  Once the crimp was applied, the bullets no longer spun or moved in any way.  This made for a somewhat frustrating seating process.

The 375 HH bullets loaded with zero issues.  Same with the 22.250 bullets. 

Loads in hand, I hit the range.  Here I had a very mixed bag of results.  Let’s start with the bad news.  Loads for the 22.250.  (note, all tests were done at 100 yards, from a bench, 65 degrees with  1-3 mph winds coming from the right side)

I have very high hopes for these.  Even though my gun (1:14 twist) does not like heavier bullets, I found a load that shoots a 55 grain Hornady V Max at about 1.5 MOA.  (It shoots about 1 MOA using 40 grain Hornady VMax).  I had loaded some variations of this load using the CEB bullets.  I fired a set of 4 off (34.6 grains of Varget).  I shot 2 rounds and did not see where they hit on the paper.  I fired two more, and finally saw what looked to be two pair of touching holes about 1 inch apart, but quite low.  No big deal, I can move the scope – and for all appearances these were shooting better than the Hornady Vmax.  I was getting excited! 

I adjusted the scope, and took 4 more shots with the 33 gr of Varget loads.  I looked and looked for the holes, and finally, way up in the upper left side I saw more sets of 2 holes, however they were about 3 inches apart.  This was quite a difference with only a one grain drop in powder.

Someone called a cease fire so I took advantage of this and ran down to look at the holes.  Wow.  Clearly something was wrong.  I found 7 holes in the paper, and one in the wood cross beam above the target.  What I had thought were double punches, were in-fact, elongated holes with a tear in the 10 to 12o’clock position.  See photo:
 

My groups were actually more like 12 to 14 inches at 100 yards, not 1-3 as I thought.
I shot a fast group of 3 with my 55 grain Hornady V Max bullets to make sure it was not my scope that was screwed up.  I got a group about 2 inches (the gun shoots better than that, I was just testing a theory so I did not put much time into the group)  These holes were nice and crisp
 

I got to looking at them and I am 99% sure that due to the huge variation in group size from a known good gun, and the odd shaped holes, I have some keyholing going on.
I looked up the definition of keyholing and found this:
keyhole or keyholing: Refers to the shape of the hole left in a paper target by a bullet fired down a gun barrel which has a diameter larger than the bullet or who fails to properly stabilize the bullet. A bullet fired in this manner tends to wobble or tumble as it moves through the air and leaves a "keyhole" shaped hole in a paper target instead of a round one.

Given these are .223 diameter bullets rather than .224, and given the slow twist of my rifle, I think this is exactly what is happening.  So the bullets are sound, just not ones I can use in my rifle.  If they come out with a .224 caliber, I will be all for trying them out again.

Also- it is worth noting that the velocities were quite consistent for my loads with no more than 64 FPS variance for each 4 shot set.
 

On to the 450 Dakota.  I consider this OK news.  The good news is, the 450 Dakota rounds shot with about the same degree of accuracy as my other loads;  1.5 to 3 inch groups at 100 yards.  All these made nice crisp holes so there was no keyholing even though they are undersized. By .001 just like the bullets I shot from the 22.250.

The bad news is, that due to the lower powder charge, I was only able to get 2,250 to 2,350 FPS out of these.  Given these have a lower SD, I kinda need to at least get 2,400 fps out of them.    You can see in the table below, moving to a slower lighter bullet means I drop nearly 900 Foot pounds in energy, and 12% loss in momentum.
   500 grains @ 2400 fps
480 grains @ 2350fps
450 grains @ 2350 fps

Sectional Density   0.341   0.327   0.306
Muzzle Energy (ft/lbs)   6397   5888   5520
Momentum Value (lb/FPS)   171.4   161.1   151.1

To equal the energy of the 500 grain bullets, I’d need to get the 450 grainer moving at 2550 fps.  And the momentum would still be lower than the 500 grain bullets.

This makes me think I’ll be better served shooting either the Swift A frame or TSX as my expander, and the Woodleigh Hydrostatic Stabilized as my solid.  I’ll need to ponder this a while.

The great news is, Monique, my 375 HH – the pickiest gun I own - LOVES these bullets.  I shot 8 four shot sets on Wednesday.  Groups averaged 1.1 inches in diameter and the range was 0.615 to 1.550 in size.  By contrast, most of my groups with Tipped TSX, Barnes Banded solids, and Swift A frames were around 1.5 inches with a range of 0.96 inches all the way up to 2.8!  (Monique is not a fan of Swift A frames, I had several 2 plus inch groups from that bullet).
 


The even better news is, the faster the bullet moves, the better the groups seem to get.  I am showing no signs of pressure at 70 grains of RL 15 so I might even bump that up a little and see if I can get those bullets moving around 2700 FPS.  The 70 grain solids averaged to 2541 FPS, and the 275 grain NonCon averaged out to 2508.  Very close.
The best news of all is; the groups were all very close in point of impact.  This has been a major issue with this gun.  Between the 67 and 70 grain powder loads, and across both bullet types, I did not see more than a 1.9 inch variance in Point of impact.  This is a huge relief and burden off my back!

[h20hunter]

Ah.....Monique......I'm thinking she is the jewel and you may not put her down the whole trip. The more times you take her out the better she seems to treat you.

[Rob]

Indeed she is.  I may take her out to shoot my Pronghorn next week!  I just need to put a 200 yard zero on her and see what she does at 300 yards.  If I can get that done on Saturday, that's probably what I'll do.  I'd like to get a kill under her belt before the trip.

Looks like more time at the reloading bench tonight...

[Rob]

I chatted with Dan from Cutting Edge Bullets on my results.

In a nut shell, he recommended a load for my 375 HH that should get me up over 2600 FPS, Advised I drop to lighter bullets in my 450 Dakota as they are a .458 caliber bullet and should seat better, and on the 22.250, he confirmed what I was thinking, wrong bullet for the gun.  the long 55 grain mono metal bullets won't stabilize in a 1:14 twist barrel.

I'll post some quotes from his email below in a bit.

[Rob]

450 Dakota:
Dan indicated he was not liking the undersized bulelts for bolt guns and recommended I go to their 450 Solid/420 NonCon in .458 rather than the 480 solid/450 nonCon Combo in .457.  Here is what he said regarding my concerns about dropping to lighter bullets and the associated loss of SD:

Your calculations are correct for conventional bullets and conventional thinking. However, the DGBR and DGBR-HP NonCon’s are very non conventional bullets and we have proven sectional density means absolutely nothing when it comes to penetration with these bullets. Think about this, our 62gr solid .223 penetrates 50 to 57” in the wet pack media. That is 2-3 times deeper than any spitzer or round nose type bullet of 250 grains or more including ours. This proves penetration has more to do with the nose profile than sectional density. The hollow point NonCons do not penetrate nearly as deep but the base still penetrates deeper than any spitzer bullet with the added devastating terminal affects. Also, when talking about energy, one must think about how much energy is transferred to the animal instead of total energy. Expended energy outside of the animal will absolutely do you no good when putting animals on the ground. I assure you our NonCon hollow points transfer much more energy to the animal than any bullet on the market even at substantially lower speeds while still producing pass through performance. Don’t get me wrong, the faster they are traveling when they hit the more devastating they will be but even at slower speeds you will not have an issue with absolutely pounding the snot out of any animal down to 1600fps impact speed. You can see the difference impact speeds make on Michaels AR thread with the new 130gr .308 bullets he tested in a 308 Winchester and 300 win mag. http://forums.accuratereloading.com/eve/forums/a/tpc/f/4711043/m/2861098911/p/188

22.250
On the 22.250, he said that it is difficult to get long brass bullets to stabilize in slow twist barresl even at high velocities-and it would not be uncommon to see key holes.  They don’t test out of a 22.250 for that very reason.  The .223 55 grain bullet is designed for a faster twist barrel like a 1:9.  He also said they are testing a Solid 40 grain bullet that should work very well in a 1:14 twist barrel. 

He also said they are testing .308 caliber bullets.  I find this pretty exciting as I want to load some up for my 300 WM.  Hopefully .338 will be next…

[Rob]

Super quick update.

Just got back from Wyoming where I was able to test out the .375 Cutting Edge Bullets in the BBW#13 NonCon HP (275 grains) on a pronghorn.  Now I know, this is overkill for a pronghorn.  Massive overkill.  But it was one of the few places I was going to be able to test drive these bullets prior to my trip on actual game.

Here is a photo of the exit wound.  This shot was fired from 110 yards and entered the back of the neck-exiting the front of the neck.  The exit hole is a little over 3 inches in diameter.

I guess these NonCons are quite able to punch a hole...

[h20hunter]

Dead right there and then some.

[Rob]

The good, the bad and the ugly, that is what this thread is about, right?  Time for some ugly.  Sorry this is so long of a post!

Big Controversy on the AR board has just erupted.  I think it has all wrapped up now, so I thought I’d type up a quick recap.  You can read the full thread in all its ugliness here if you are so inclined.  It has all the usual call to arms, pitchforks, torches, soap operas, drama, and couch side quarterbacking that one would normally expect to see from any Internet forum on a topic like this.

http://forums.accuratereloading.com/eve/forums/a/tpc/f/1411043/m/7691078561/p/1

First of all, you need to know the players and their roles.
1.    Client:  The hunter who paid for the safari and pulled the trigger on the safari.
2.   The Outfitter: (Jimba Safaris run by Wayne Dietrechsen).  This is the guy who runs the actual hunting camp, has access to the hunting concession, etc.
3.   The Professional Hunter (AKA the PH): In this case the PH was a guy named Tim Lamprecht.  This is the “guide” who goes with the Client on the day to day hunts.  He works for the Outfitter, and is accountable for making sure the client shoots animals in line with what he is allowed and wants to shoot.
4.   The Booking Agent:   (Adam Clements Safari Trackers) The job of the booking agent is to connect clients with outfitters.  They also manage the transfer of funds.  They make their money as a percentage of the daily rate charged.  They do not make money on trophy fees.

So here is the situation:
Client wants to go on a Safari and get the best price for a hunt that will target Buffalo, Elephant, and Leopard.  He contacts the Booking Agent, gives him the details of what he wants.  The Booking agent lays out pros and cons of a few different hunts and they choose Jimba Safaris in Zimbabwe as the Outfitter.  Expected hunt will run about 30K.  Adam had some concerns with one of the PH’s at Jimba (Tim) and Specifically told Wayne that he was not to be in contact with his clients as there have been complaints in the past that he was lazy, rude and generally not a good PH to hunt with.  Wayne agrees.

Client goes on the trip in Mid September. He posts a request for assistance on the AR forum for a hunt he feels has gone poorly.  Essentially, he states:
-He shot an old Kudu past it’s prime (read this as smaller rack, but old animal.  This is considered a good trophy in African terms).  They used the truck to run it down and cut it off so they could make the shot. (not considered an ethical practice.)
-He shot what I would call an OK impala
-He shot a leopard that was pretty good.
-he shot a bushbuck from a boat (this is illegal in Zim).
-He shot an elephant (more on this in a moment)

The Outfitter went against the Booking Agent’s requirement and had Tim be the PH for the Client.  This was told to the Client before he left the US, but he did not let the booking agent know.  True to expectations, the Client was NOT impressed with the PH.  Complaints included poor pre-baiting for Leopard (baits not correctly covered to prevent vulture raids), Moody -  Would get angry if he missed shots.  Would stop speaking to him, etc, pressuring him to go fishing rather than hunting, etc.  He described him as Jeckle and Hyde.  One thing EVERYONE agrees on is that the PH was horrible. 

Now let’s get to the crux of the controversy.  The elephant. The Client claims, that while chasing Buffalo, they encountered an Elephant.  The PH told him to shoot the Elephant so he did.  I am not going to post the photos, as I don’t think that is my place, but you can see them on page one of the thread linked at the start of this post. 
Now I assume there are not many Elephant hunters on this forum.  I myself an not an elephant hunter.  But I have been to a zoo, and I’d like to think that even a newbie like me could tell that this elephant is a calf. 

No I realize that proportionally small elephants and large elephants have a tusk to body size  ratio that is similar.  However, good grief!  Elephants are judged based on pounds of ivory.  The area he hunted in was not known for big bulls, but 25-40 pound bulls were reported to be reasonable expectations.  A quick search of the African hunting reports would yield photos that will show how small the elephant pictured was.  This calf had tusks in the 10 pound range.

<<armchair quaretback warning>>
Who is to blame for this?  I maintain that the PH holds 80% of the accountability.  It is his job to show an inexperienced hunter the difference between a good bull, and a bad bull.  If he says “take it” then the hunter should have a reasonable expectation that it is a decent sized animal.  I maintain (and I think I am in a minority) that the Client holds at least 25% accountability.  He should be headed to Africa with a general idea of what a good animal is relative to a poor animal.  Now if they were Kudu hunting, and taking a shot at 150 yards, I would not expect the Client to know the difference between a 55 inch kudu and a 40 inch kudu.  However I would expect them to know a 20 inch kudu is sub par.

Elephants are usually shot at between 25 and 75 yards.  Based on the photos, I’d say this is also a very close shot.  I cannot imagine how the client and the PH did not know this was a calf.
<<End of armchair Quarterback warning>>

OK.  Client returns to US.  I am not clear on this, but it seems as though about 4 weeks after the hunt, he contacted the Booking agent to complain about the Calf.  (who wouldn’t??).  The booking agent finds out for the first time that the PH was swapped out AND that the Client knew of the swap but never told the booking agent.  While in contact with the booking agent, the client posts the story on AR. Many folks call for a lynch mob to come take out the Booking Agent, the PH and the outfitter.  A few attack the Client.

Meanwhile, Adam is in contact with the Outfitter trying to work out a refund.  The trophy fee for a bull elephant is 10K.  While talking to the Outfitter and trying to negotiate a deal, he finds out the following newsflash:
]On the day the Elephant was shot, they also shot and wounded a Buffalo.  After tracking it for a while they gave it up for lost.  There was a government game scout with them.  The Govt. requires that Outfitter charge the clients for wounded game.  The charge for a Buff is 3K.  The Client then bribes the game scout 300 bucks to look the other way.  (the buff was found dead a few weeks later).  Both of these points were verified by the Client.  This next comment is hearsay from what appears to be a disreputable Outfitter, but he said the client was really mad about the Buffalo and just wanted to kill something.  So they shot the elephant.
So, now we find out that the Client has done a series of dumb things.  Several illegal.
1.   Did not inform his booking agent until after the hunt that the PH he was to keep clear of was assigned to him before he even left US soil (dumb)
2.   Wounded a buffalo and did not pay the trophy fee (Illegal)
3.   Bribed a game scout to look the other way (illegal)
4.   Shot a Calf Elephant on the advice of the PH (Dumb)
5.   Ran down a Kudu with a vehicle (ethically questionable)
6.   Shot a Bushbuck from a boat (illegal)

While all this was happening (or perhaps a few weeks prior) the booking agent transferred funds to pay for the trophy fees of the hunt.  I am not sure why this happened.  It is not clear.  I’d expect a booking agent to hold onto the funds while disputes are still in question.  My only thought on this is:
1.   The hunter did not bring up the issues for several weeks after return, and that the money was transferred while the Outfitter thought all was well.
2.   The money was transferred by someone in the Booking agents office by accident (right hand not knowing what the left hand is doing).

By posting the issue in public prior to resolution, the booking agent claims (and I tend to agree) that the outfitter saw the controversy about his company, got mad as the full story was not being told, and basically told the Booking agent to go pound sand.  No refund would be issued.

In the end, the booking agent agreed to do the following:
1.    Refund his commission to the Client (1800)
2.   Arranged the option for the Client to go back to the same outfitter for a make-up hunt.  12.5K all inclusive including trophy fees.
3.   5,000 credit towards another Safari

<<armchair quarterback alert!>>
In my opinion:
1.    The Client is either incredibly naïve, or crooked, or trying to exploit publicity to get a better deal. 
2.   The PH is a total scumbag.
3.   The outfitter has real integrity issues
4.   The Booking agent went above and beyond to try and make this right in spite of 1,2, and 3, however I am left wondering why he was doing business with Jimbo in the first place, and why the funds were transferred prior to Client agreement.
5.   The client should not have posted in the public forum what was happening until the situation was resolved, or negotiations had stalled.  Neither was the case.
<<End of armchair Quarterback warning>>


Now, why am I concerned with this controversy you may ask?

Well, I booked my Safari through Adam Clements Safari Trackers.  I think after looking at all this, I feel better having gone through this booking agent than if I had gone it alone.  I believe that the Client got better service, and better opportunities once things went south than if he had booked directly.  As for my two concerns with the Booking Agent (Why Jimbo, and why were the funds released) I think both of these are mitigated:
•   I did extensive research on Terry Anders (my outfitter) and his prior hunts and have found happy clients.
•   I got a personal verbal recommendation for the from a well-respected outfit that hunts on the Save while at the SCI show in January.
•   I met Terry and found him to be pleasant to talk with.
•   My booking agent will be at the same camp we will be at 1 month before we arrive so I can get a first-hand assessment of the camp and operation.
•   I plan to communicate with my booking agent prior and immediately after the hunt.  If there are any issues that would warrant holding funds, I will have given him notice of this well before it is time to transfer funds.

So what started out as a controversy that had me feeling a little uncomfortable with the booking agent I had chosen to work with, ended with me having even more comfort and confidence that he will fight for me should things go awry.

[jager]

Wow! I haven't read the whole thread yet, but that elephant is a baby! The hunter doesn't sound like a very ethical guy...nor the PH.
I would think that the hunter would have to bear some of the responsibility for shooting that calf. I mean come on...!
I may have more comments later...

[Rob]

Yeah, it is a very young calf.  I just cannot imagine seeing that in my sight picture and not having alarm bells blaring in my head.

The PH and Outfitter should take the majority of the blame.    The Booking agent took it in the shorts both from a reputation perspective, and financially.  The Client is taking the plea of ignorance, but I am having somewhat of a hard time with that.

Tragic all the way around regardless.

[Rob]

Spent a few minutes at the range last weekend and I played with increasing the load on my 375 HH.  Currently I am using the CEB BBW#13 in a 300 grain solid, and the matching 275 grain NonCon HP.  I found that if using 69 grains of RL15 for the HP, and 70 grains of RL15 in the Solid, I am getting 2,510ish FPS in MV, and the groups I am getting at 100 and 200 yards are very consistent (posts and photos are above).

I'd like to increase the charge to get the speed up a little bit.  I tested 73 grains in the Solid, and 72 grains in the NonCon and I am happy to say, that while the primers are starting to get pretty flat, there are no signs of excessive pressure.

I have not chrony'd the load yet, but past chrony work has shown that for every grain of powder I add, I get an increase of 30 FPS.  Based on this I should see about 2600 FPS out of these loads.  I am not sure I can push this load any faster as I think I'll start seeing craters or primer extrusion.

I'll need to test these for accuracy too, but I think they will stay accurate.  Assuming they stay accurate, this will give me an 8% increase in Muzzle Velocity (4164 to 4504 foot pounds), and a 4% increase in Momentum.  Cutting Edge said they were getting 2600 FPS out of 68 grains of I 4064 so I may give that a go next.  I'd like to see these over 2700 fps if possible.  This will increase my ME by 17% to 4857 foot pounds, and my momentum by 8%.  All this gives a bullet that hits harder and penetrate deeper.  I suppose they shoot flatter as well, but since I am told that all my shooting will be between 25 and 75 yards with a long shot being closer to 150, I don’t think that matters much.