458 Win Mag vs 458 Lott

[Royal27]

Not sure if you've noticed, but in the loading manuals the Lott beats the WM by less than 100 fps in most cases. And those loads are usually around 109% load density. Now who's doing the clumping dance???

All you really need is a .45/70 anyway.

 

[TOBY458]

All you really need is a .45/70 anyway.

True! But now I no longer own one!

 

[WAB]

Just couldn’t help yourself could ya Royal!?!

 

[Forrest Halley]

Not sure if you've noticed, but in the loading manuals the Lott beats the WM by less than 100 fps in most cases. And those loads are usually around 109% load density. Now who's doing the clumping dance???

Not me, I have a Lott. The loading manuals are written by lawyers. Clumpity Clump Clump! Clumpity Clump Clump look at Willy go! Willy Makeit out the barrel? Maybe we'll never know!

 

[Royal27]

Just couldn’t help yourself could ya Royal!?!

Not even for one second

 

[CoElkHunter]

Not me, I have a Lott. The loading manuals are written by lawyers. Clumpity Clump Clump! Clumpity Clump Clump look at Willy go! Willy Makeit out the barrel? Maybe we'll never know!

Forrest,
Maybe you should get a .458 B&M? No powder clumping or compression and Lott velocities out of a 20” barrel!
CEH

 

[Timbo]

Not me, I have a Lott. The loading manuals are written by lawyers. Clumpity Clump Clump! Clumpity Clump Clump look at Willy go! Willy Makeit out the barrel? Maybe we'll never know!

Well the 458 Win Mag has served me well for a lot of DG I've taken - and all 1-shot kills, from 15 to 120yds (and that hippo was on the run too!!) - using 500gr projectiles. So, I don't really know what your problem is.

Guys who use that 50yr old "clumping" arguement just haven't realised that todays powders are far more efficient which makes any slur on the 458 Win Mag an irrelevance. But o
to be fair please remember that Jack Lott developed his cartridge because he got injured on a hunt and blamed the incident on the 458 Win Mag - or so the story goes. In reality he caused his his own injuries because he acted against his PH's advice. So in actual fact the Lott was spawned from one man's stupid error of judgement.

But for me, I'll keep using my 458 Win Mag because it's proven time and again to get the job done - as vouched for by my PH (with 40yrs experience) who said to me: "I'd happily go up against anything with this guy backing me up with his 458!!" High praise indeed for the capabilities of the 458 Win Mag.

 

[CoElkHunter]

Well the 458 Win Mag has served me well for a lot of DG I've taken - and all 1-shot kills, from 15 to 120yds (and that hippo was on the run too!!) - using 500gr projectiles. So, I don't really know what your problem is.

Guys who use that 50yr old "clumping" arguement just haven't realised that todays powders are far more efficient which makes any slur on the 458 Win Mag an irrelevance. But o
to be fair please remember that Jack Lott developed his cartridge because he got injured on a hunt and blamed the incident on the 458 Win Mag - or so the story goes. In reality he caused his his own injuries because he acted against his PH's advice. So in actual fact the Lott was spawned from one man's stupid error of judgement.

But for me, I'll keep using my 458 Win Mag because it's proven time and again to get the job done - as vouched for by my PH (with 40yrs experience) who said to me: "I'd happily go up against anything with this guy backing me up with his 458!!" High praise indeed for the capabilities of the 458 Win Mag.

Thank you! If/when I make it to Africa for a Cape Buffalo hunt, my only request is to be able to use my CZ .458WM for the hunt. Preferably with open sights? 450gr Barnes or a Swift or Woodleigh bullet ought to work? I know a .375 or .416 would be better, but I don’t care. Mature bull, 50-75 meters, is enough for me!

 

[Timbo]

Thank you! If/when I make it to Africa for a Cape Buffalo hunt, my only request is to be able to use my CZ .458WM for the hunt. Preferably with open sights? 450gr Barnes or a Swift or Woodleigh bullet ought to work? I know a .375 or .416 would be better, but I don’t care. Mature bull, 50-75 meters, is enough for me!

Cape Buff hunting IS addictive!! The more I hunt buff, the more I want to do it!! In Zambia I took 4 DG - 2 of which were buff!! My pet load in my 458 Win Mag is 72gr of AR2206H driving either Woodleigh's 500gr RNSN or FMJs: with no compression issues. These projectiles have the same BC and therefore I get cloverleaf groups at 75yds - and they've worked EVERY time!!

Best of luck - and I hope you too get happily infected with the bug!!

 

[John J]

Forrest,
Maybe you should get a .458 B&M? No powder clumping or compression and Lott velocities out of a 20” barrel!
CEH

That's what I'm going to do.

 

[nksmfamjp]

I tried to read it all and I will comment where I should. I studied 458 WM and Lott. I decided to go Lott because I’m a reloader and components are same price, but I can get more out of the Lott. I’m not afraid of load testing near max either.

First a comment about Hornady data. That is not really 458 Lott maximum data, IMO. That said there is none that I can find out there. Like most straight wall cartridges, in my hunt for max, I found pretty severe load compression....that’s ok, I also found the velocity I was looking for.

I have the Winchester 70. It is a late New Haven Safari Express rifle with the old trigger. Dennis Olson out of Plains MT converted to Lott for me. He also shortened the barrel, corrected the bedding, regulated the trigger, lengthened the pull, put a Kickeeze pad on it and updated the sights.....Amazing rifle! Very easy for me to shoot heavy loads from.....although, I’m still developing my appetite for those!

I believe the conversion was remove the magazine block, lengthen the bolt stroke, replace or adjust the ejector and rechamber, but I never asked for the full story.

500’s at 2300fps, this is a real stopper on a reasonable budget

 

[CoElkHunter]

Cape Buff hunting IS addictive!! The more I hunt buff, the more I want to do it!! In Zambia I took 4 DG - 2 of which were buff!! My pet load in my 458 Win Mag is 72gr of AR2206H driving either Woodleigh's 500gr RNSN or FMJs: with no compression issues. These projectiles have the same BC and therefore I get cloverleaf groups at 75yds - and they've worked EVERY time!!

Best of luck - and I hope you too get happily infected with the bug!!

AR2206H=? In the U.S. ? I’ve loaded up some 450gr Barnes TSX with 70gr of H335 for practice. If ever quits snowing here and the temp gets above 32 F, I’ll get to the range? It’s supposed to this weekend!
Thanks!

 

[fourfive8]

AR 2206 H is equivalent to H4895. Here's a handy table that shows ADI powders imported by Hodgdon and relabeled. Also a link to a chart by ADI

http://www.adi-powders.com.au/powder-equivalents/

 

[CoElkHunter]

AR 2206 H is equivalent to H4895 here. Here's a link to a chart by ADI
http://www.adi-powders.com.au/powder-equivalents/

Interesting this chart shows H4895 and IMR4895 interchangeable? Most things I’ve read states the IMR is faster and not to load IMR with the H data, but you CAN load the H to the IMR data? And interestingly, it shows H335 compatible with W748? I have a lot of 748, but no data for loading the Barnes 450 and 500gr TSXs with it? I guess I do now, as long as I can cram enough of the 748 powder into the case! Ha! Ha!

 

[fourfive8]

Yes kind of. The small table shows those ADI powders that Hodgdon imports and simply relabels. So they ARE the same powder- realizing of course that lot to lot differences may exist within the same powder.

However, the ADI chart is like many of these charts and appears to show equivalent burn rates within the sample standard deviations as found in any comparison. Agreed, most sources showing ballistics lab results do show a slight difference between H4895 and IMR4895. Whether those differences are significant or if they are simply a result of basic lot to lot differences, who knows? My take on it is that you can use the ADI to Hodgdon table as exactly same powder match using all due prudence for reloading. But the chart is only a guideline for equivalency and should be used as such. If using the chart for loading, I would reduce recommended, upper end charge by at least 10-15% and work up. Always best to find a reference for any powder for a load in at least one source.

 

[CoElkHunter]

Yes kind of. The small table shows those ADI powders that Hodgdon imports and simply relabels. So they ARE the same powder- realizing of course that lot to lot differences may exist within the same powder.

However, the ADI chart is like many of these charts and appears to show equivalent burn rates within the sample standard deviations as found in any comparison. Agreed, most sources showing ballistics lab results do show a slight difference between H4895 and IMR4895. Whether those differences are significant or if they are simply a result of basic lot to lot differences, who knows? My take on it is that you can use the ADI to Hodgdon table as exactly same powder match using all due prudence for reloading. But the chart is only a guideline for equivalency and should be used as such. If using the chart for loading, I would reduce recommended, upper end charge by at least 10% and work up.

I agree. The loads would be just mid range for practice anyways. The 4895 powder sure seems to have a wide range of cartridge applications? I’ve never used it, but will consider it in the future. Thanks!

 

[fourfive8]

Yes, both H4895 and IMR4895 are very useful powders. They seem to fall in a sort of middle burn rate cluster of single base, extruded powders like 4320, 4350, 4064, Varget, N140, N150, etc. If the basic physical form, or coating or the basic chemical nature of a powder changes then burn rate/progressive pressure properties can change rapidly. Examples of differences could include: granule size, shape, or physical properties, type of coating and whether or not nitro glycerine has been added (making it a double base).

Here's another chart that I use for cross referencing and confirming. Can never have too many tables and charts or too much data.

 

[Forrest Halley]

Well the 458 Win Mag has served me well for a lot of DG I've taken - and all 1-shot kills, from 15 to 120yds (and that hippo was on the run too!!) - using 500gr projectiles. So, I don't really know what your problem is.

Guys who use that 50yr old "clumping" arguement just haven't realised that todays powders are far more efficient which makes any slur on the 458 Win Mag an irrelevance. But o
to be fair please remember that Jack Lott developed his cartridge because he got injured on a hunt and blamed the incident on the 458 Win Mag - or so the story goes. In reality he caused his his own injuries because he acted against his PH's advice. So in actual fact the Lott was spawned from one man's stupid error of judgement.

But for me, I'll keep using my 458 Win Mag because it's proven time and again to get the job done - as vouched for by my PH (with 40yrs experience) who said to me: "I'd happily go up against anything with this guy backing me up with his 458!!" High praise indeed for the capabilities of the 458 Win Mag.

I'll say nice things about your shooting abilities if you pay my salary too. I know it made you feel good, but it's lip service from a professional that relies upon tips and repeat business. You may or may not be able to shoot well, but I favor that if the former were true, you wouldn't be wasting your time chasing pot stirring comments with anecdotal rebuttal.

I like the Lott for the ability to be able to shoot two lengths of ammunition out of it safely. I really could care less about any perceived limitations of the WM. It is a fun pot to stir simply for the passionate debate on both sides of the fence. Please do expand upon Lott's poor judgement. I'm not going to lengthen my chamber or set the barrel back either way, but errors are fun to learn from ahead of time. I'm not disappointed in the result of his poor judgement. It makes me happy every time I touch it off.

I think the B&M is out of my range for many reasons. Mostly brass availability and secondarily, I think it probably recoils too much for me to enjoy it on any scale.

I'm happy with my lovely Lott and her three .375 friends.

 

[Hyde Hunter]

not trying to hijack this thread but before finding this site I was looking for a 458 Lott then I came upon Accurate Loading site I looked at the big bore section and found 186 pages on the 458 Win mag verses 458 Lott after reading I purchased a Cz 550 458 Win Mag and now I have started loading it as a 458Win V using 450 Barnes TSX bullets loading the bullets long which is working great and lower pressure and of course no jam issues as the bullets are being loaded to 3.70 inches. give that thread a read and see what you think, by the way I did load a 458 Lott years ago and liked it very much

 

[Timbo]

I'll say nice things about your shooting abilities if you pay my salary too. I know it made you feel good, but it's lip service from a professional that relies upon tips and repeat business. You may or may not be able to shoot well, but I favor that if the former were true, you wouldn't be wasting your time chasing pot stirring comments with anecdotal rebuttal.

I like the Lott for the ability to be able to shoot two lengths of ammunition out of it safely. I really could care less about any perceived limitations of the WM. It is a fun pot to stir simply for the passionate debate on both sides of the fence. Please do expand upon Lott's poor judgement. I'm not going to lengthen my chamber or set the barrel back either way, but errors are fun to learn from ahead of time. I'm not disappointed in the result of his poor judgement. It makes me happy every time I touch it off.

I think the B&M is out of my range for many reasons. Mostly brass availability and secondarily, I think it probably recoils too much for me to enjoy it on any scale.

I'm happy with my lovely Lott and her three .375 friends.

Wow! Who's upset now? Touched a nerve?

The comment he made wasn't lip service, as you assume, as it was directed towards a group of other PHs we were with. It's cheap for you to call a comment as anecdotal, but nevertheless it was made in no connection to him fishing for a future salary, or, by me "pot stirring" as you seem to believe. When I got my 458 Win Mag, the Lott was still very much a wildcat which faced abortion if no company cared take it on. In the decades since, I've done quite a bit of hunting with it, and love it because the 458 Win Mag is very capable in doing the job I want. Period, and that's the point I made. But IMO your thinking and attitude, in your responses, reveals much more about your character than anything else.

In kind, it makes me happy, too, that every time you "touch one off", you'll never forget the fact that you're perpetuating the culmination of one man's error of judgement - compounded by his refusal to later admit to it - so all I can say is: enjoy your touching!!

In kind, too, please don't forget, too, that there are far better calibres than either the 458 Win Mag or the Lott - 500 Nitro, 505 Gibbs (which does work in a bolt action) etc. With much better calibres around why not get a 577 Tyranosaur? Then you could enjoy "pot stirring" with everybody else here - if indeed that's your game.