If you were shopping I would say .300. Everyone I've taken on safari who has shot a .300 has done exceptionally well. If you can range and dial and use the TTSX you will do fine.
Love Swifts!
The only thing wrong with the .308 is that it is as common as muck.
Great rifle and Awsome Kudu. What scope does it wear?
@dogcat1
@Sabre - you gave the “perfect” description of the .308: “balance of low recoil, power, distance, availability…”. It is an extremely “efficient” cartridge.
What animals are you planning to take? Eland and zebra might be pushing it. I don't pay.much attention to those that say the chosen cartridge doesn't matter, and shot placement is the only consideration. Sjot.placement is, of course, the most.important thing, but it is.not the only thing. Some animals have big, tough shoulder bones that need to be broken and penetrated. I also !like a bullet that upsets drastically and exits. On my last safari I took a .300 WM with 200 grain AccuBonds. I found it to be superior to the .30-06 with 180 grain Partitions as the effect on game animals was much more dramatic. In NA, I I have used this combination to take a black bear and a bull moose. Except for the moose everything died at the shot. The moose wss.running st 165 yards and the guide was yelling at me to shoot him. I hit the bull in the hind leg with the first shot and he needed another which brings me to my next point. In the field game animals tend not to stand politely while you line up the perfect shot. Any hunter that says he has nevr.made a less than perfect shot is lying. Why use a less than ample cartridge?
The rifle sported an Inexpensive 2.5x10x50 Nikon Prostaff, Later I was told that Nikons were junk, I guess ignorance is bliss.
@doug, poor shooting or poor shot decisions - shooting running game when one is not well practiced doing so (which includes most hunters) - doesn’t matter what caliber or bullet is used - results will be poor or inconsistent.
@Rob404 - maybe Nikon Prostaff scopes are Not well regarded…but if yours holds zero and is clear enough for consistent accurate shooting So What?? It works for you. I have a cheap Tasco 3-9 x 32 that cost $50 and holds zero for the past 35 years - I’ve never bothered to upgrade it even though now all my other rifles have better Zeiss, Swaro, Trijicon, & Leupolds a top them —- that Tasco goes back to a time I couldn’t afford much and its taken much game. I admire fine scopes and now own many but I’ve never missed an animal due to my scope “quality”….and I try not to be a “Glass Snob”
