The .700 Nitro express elephant gun

[Neubob]

.700 nitro express built on a .50 bmg bolt action

My question is, why would anyone even bother with these monster loads anymore when you have the high-velocity .50 bmg available to the civilian market. Comparing the stats, the BMG offers practically the same muzzle energy, only with a lighter bullet travelling at higher velocity, and ultimately, better accuracy downrange. If the hunters are looking for a deeper wound channel, I'm sure the .50 round will not dissapoint either, no matter how big the target?

.50 history and ballistics

Big game hunters are a bit of a mystery to me, but in the creation of the .700 Nitro, they were looking for absurd close range stopping power--the sort that would put a charging elepaphant down in its tracks at ranges of under 100 yards. Why hasn't the .50 bmg made these lumbering rounds obsolete? The rifles built for the .50 have been made to absorb much of the recoil, and yet, bring all, of not more, if the desired power.

Is it just nostalgia, or do archaic calibers actually offers something the BMG doesn't?a comparison of casings

[Viking]

Range matters not in an elephant gun. This is the range you need to put down an elephant at, and you only get one shot:

[Neubob]

Right, range doesn't matter. The point was, however, that the BMG delivers as much, if not more energy at the muzzle, and, on top of that, has the enviable ability to retain that energy at longer distances....

Given the choice of two weapons, the one that delivers 6 tons of stopping power at the muzzle, verses one that delivers the same six tons, but reliquinshes that energy at a slower rate(and is thus to put that same charging elephant down at greater ranges--if necessary), not to mention is less taxing on the shoulder, why bother with the .700 artillery piece?

[Viking]

Perhaps the same difference as the 9mm vs. the .45 ACP. Penetrating power vs. stopping power?

[Neubob]

Maybe.... Personally, I think there may be an element of traditionalism with these guys. If they're ready to spend the kind of money they would have to to buy a proper elephant gun, I'm thinking that the prospect of weilding a piece military hardware might seem a bit vulgar.

[mentalguy]

I'd use a Barret 50. cal semi-auto for a quick 2nd shot. Maybe not as much stopping power but a 5 or 10 round magazine makes it worth it.

[Masherbrum]

Originally posted by Neubob
My question is, why would anyone even bother with these monster loads anymore when you have the high-velocity .50 bmg available to the civilian market.

Is it just nostalgia, or do archaic calibers actually offers something the BMG doesn't?

When YOU shoot an elephant come talk.   But you seem to have never done this, and are trying to justify bashing a tried and true caliber.   I'm trying to be nice here, forgive me.  

You don't just "take a Barret" on Safari.     This is too funny.

[Hornet33]

Because anyone can fire a .50BMG.....it takes a real mans man to fire a .700 Nitro:D  (and yes I have fired one:aok ) I admit I wanted to cry afterwards but I pulled the freakin trigger.

Back to the subject at hand though on a serious note. You can't really "toss" any of the .50bmg rifles to your shoulder for a quick shot. Things are just too dang heavy. The .700 rifles that are out there can be easily carried out in the bush and can be brought to bear on a target quickly. That's why they are still used.

[Neubob]

Originally posted by Masherbrum
When YOU shoot an elephant come talk.   But you seem to have never done this, and are trying to justify bashing a tried and true caliber.   I'm trying to be nice here, forgive me.  

You don't just "take a Barret" on Safari.     This is too funny.

I don't think you've shot one either, though.

As far as 'just taking a barret' on safari, I never suggested this. In fact, I don't remember mentioning the barret at all. I was posing a question about the various cartridges. One was invented at the end of the 19th century, the other, on the other hand, has been 'tried and true' in over 80 years of armed combat. When the elephant gun cartiridges of the Nitro tyoe were invented, the high-velocity rifle cartidge was still a relatively new concept. The mouser and springfield were still relative babes in the world of firearms.

The question is valid. One caliber or the other. To level the field, imagine a relativeylr rudimentary bolt action firing either. Both deliver the similar muzzle energy, one of them is limited to close range, the other, not as much.

No. I've never shot an elephant. I also wasn't bashing anything. I only asked a question.

Originally posted by Hornet33
Back to the subject at hand though on a serious note. You can't really "toss" any of the .50bmg rifles to your shoulder for a quick shot. Things are just too dang heavy. The .700 rifles that are out there can be easily carried out in the bush and can be brought to bear on a target quickly. That's why they are still used.

These elephant rifles weigh in at around 20lbs, though.... They that much lighter than their .50 bmg equivalents?

[AquaShrimp]

What kind of monster shoots an animal as rare as an elephant?

[FiLtH]

No kiddin Aqua...I'd rather do something more sporting like fishing for Yangtze River Dolphin.

[Neubob]

Originally posted by AquaShrimp
What kind of monster shoots an animal as rare as an elephant?

Well, clearly Karaya and I haven't....

This question is theoretical. If you want to editorialize, go start a thread about how inhumane it is to shoot an 8 ton animal.

[Masherbrum]

Originally posted by Neubob
Well, clearly Karaya and I haven't....

This question is theoretical. If you want to editorialize, go start a thread about how inhumane it is to shoot an 8 ton animal.

I'm a hunter.   So take your backpedalling elsewhere.  

You have yet to see the point.   The point is a .50 cal would demolish the animal.  , but I bet "you already knew that right"?

[Debonair]

Originally posted by Neubob
Well, clearly Karaya and I haven't....

This question is theoretical. If you want to editorialize, go start a thread about how inhumane it is to shoot an 8 ton animal.

if that ain't  a straight line for some really good "your mom" jokes, nuthing is lmao

[Neubob]

Originally posted by Masherbrum
I'm a hunter.   So take your backpedalling elsewhere.  

You have yet to see the point.   The point is a .50 cal would demolish the animal.  , but I bet "you already knew that right"?

Well, from the reading I've done, I've come to understand that the .700, and other loads like it, are designed to stop dangerous animals that are already charging, with one shot, usually at close range. Basically, as a last-ditch resort for self-defense, not so much the actual act of hunting. So, given that goal, I'd expect that 'demolishing' an animal is exactly what they hunter would want at that point. And if so, why not then use the .50? As a hunter, maybe you could shed some light on this in a practical manner. Or not, up to you.

If you want to pick a fight, however, go do it elsewhere. I asked a simple question and was looking for a simple answer.