In my copy of the July issue of The Hunting Report, which I received today, there was brief discussion of the appropriate caliber for hunting nilgai - an animal I have never seen in the wild, let alone hunted.
In the June issue, an individual had said he used a .416 (didn't say which one) he planned to take to Africa to shoot Nilgai in Texas. Apparently this set someone off, who actually phone The Hunting Report to say that he believed that the .416 was 'inadequate' for nilgai, and that nothing smaller than a .458 Win Mag would be appropriate.
I was more than a bit surprised by this statement (and that anyone would feel strongly enough to call!). I've shot elephant with a .375 H&H and while I thought I was a bit under-gunned, I've never questioned that my .416 Rigby is entirely appropriate for elephant. And if it's appropriate for elephant, is should be more than enough for nilgai.
I also think that the .458 Win Mag, in factory loads, has very little additional punch than the .416, if any. Note that the caller did not say the .458 Lott, which would be a much different comparison - this was the Win Mag. In addition, while I would never have called the .416 flat shooting, it sure seems to be when compared to the .458 Win Mag. And aren't Nilgai typically taken at a distance?
I have never found a PH in Africa who thought so highly of the .458 Win Mag (even if he had one) that he would take it over the .416 Rigby for any purpose. Maybe I'm talking to the wrong PH's?
So this takes me to the two issues. Who thinks the .458 Win Mag is a better caliber for tough game than the .416 Rigby (or Remmington, or Taylor . . . or maybe the Weatherby Magnum?), and who thinks that you need to go to a .40 caliber to shoot nilgai?