I posed the following, seemingly simple question to the members of my Upland Journal Forums, and to hardcore bird hunters, weekend warriors, dog trainers, upland guides, field trialers, breeders, and sporting lodge owners: What is your chosen ruffed grouse hunting dog breed, what is it that you most like about them, and why have you stuck with them?

The answers were anything but simple. The truth is there is no best single breed of dog for hunting ruffed grouse. This has become clear to me after four decades of hunting grouse over most of the flushing and pointing breeds.

Unless someone is irrevocably breed blind, most bird dog people will readily agree. I was pleasantly surprised at how gracious those who contributed to my research were when discussing hunting dogs, even dog breeds that were not the ones they chose to run. Dog guys like dogs.

One thing that is completely agreed upon is that good breeding and diligent training are essential, but those characteristics can only go so far in developing the dog as a grouse dog.

Serious grouse hunters believe that bird contacts are paramount to developing a grouse dog, particularly in breeds that point. The grouse themselves teach the dogs how to handle grouse. Dogs just have to see a load of ruffed grouse — hundreds of them — before graduating from a bird dog to a “legit grouse dog.” Some dogs never get to wear the cap and tassel, some become good, and very few become great.

Why is that the case? Because ruffed grouse are arguably the hardest game bird for any dog to handle, and without question one of the most challenging for the wing shooter. There are a tremendous number of variables and preferences and expectations that impact the choosing and settling on a breed for ruffed grouse hunting.

Not all of the variables have to do with grouse. Some are directly related to a particular dog owner’s personality, or where they reside, or the time they have to hunt, and the type of grouse cover they typically hunt.

Will the dog be hunting small micro covers, or huge expansive cutovers? Will it be trained for field trials as well as hunting? Will it stay in the house and sleep on the bed? Will it perform double duty as a waterfowl dog? Will it shed like the dickens? The list is endless.

For some it’s basically the breed dear old dad always had, or a breed a person read about, or hunted over, or in many instances just plain liked the looks of.

In this article I’ll concentrate on two popular flushing breeds and three pointing breeds, and why people prefer these dogs for hunting ruffed grouse. This is in no way a poor reflection on other breeds. Remember what I said: There is no best grouse dog breed.

ENGLISH COCKERS: Big Hunt In A Small Package

There is little doubt that Field Bred English Cocker Spaniels or FBECS’s have experienced an upsurge in popularity for upland bird hunting. These little bird-seeking missiles are not to be confused with American Cocker Spaniels, which are bred for looks and as pets. And FBECS’s are not just small field-bred English Springer Spaniels (the springer, by the way, is my personal breed of choice). Do not make the mistake of muttering such a thing in a room of spaniel enthusiasts. They may have been separated by size centuries ago, but have developed their own unique personalities, yet retained all the best characteristics.

This flushing dog weighs in as small as 20 pounds and upwards of 35 pounds for a large male, and come in a variety of colors. I spoke to the owner of a guiding operation in northern Maine, who runs both FBEC’s and English Pointers, and he described them as having the heart of a big dog and the cuddle of a lapdog.

He not only uses them for hunting ruffed grouse, but also as non-slip retrievers with his pointers, where they flush and retrieve ahead of a point. Another friend of mine owns a well known Orvis-endorsed hunting and fishing operation in Maine. His personal dogs, which he hunts and guides with, are FBEC’s. Most of his guides run pointing breeds. Pointing dogs are traditional for grouse so most clients request hunting over them. But according to him, at the end of the day when the bragging begins, the cockers do as well if not better in finding birds and providing shots on grouse.

Owners of FBECS’s gush over their little charges. They love the dogs’ temperaments, house manners, trainability, and their remarkably manageable size.

That’s all well and good but can they handle and produce ruffed grouse for the average bird hunter? You bet they can. The consensus from those I spoke with is they are the right dog to hunt in poor scenting conditions, such as hot and windy days — situations that can compromise other dogs. They burrow intro the thick of cover, work close, roust out grouse to the gun, and retrieve crisply to hand. They are just plain fun to be around, and they can sit on your lap and lick your face on the drive home. What more can a bird hunter ask of a grouse dog?

LABRADOR RETRIEVERS: A Model For Every Grouse Hunter

Labrador Retrievers remind me of the venerable 12-gauge shotgun. They can do it all. The Lab has really made its mark in the ruffed grouse woods, and those running them never feel under gunned.

Although there are breed lines of pointing Labs, I’m focusing on flushing retrievers. They are hard to beat when you include their perpetually positive attitude and enthusiasm. These workhorses come in variety of sizes, depending on the breeding — from huge, block-headed, otter-tailed, cattail busters to smaller, more agile, and athletic dogs — which are increasingly popular with grouse hunters. They are black, chocolate or yellow and despite some opinions, all can make great hunters. Their wonderful personalities have made them a choice as pets for non-hunters, so always seek out a hunting line of Labs if you want one to team up with you to hunt grouse.

If properly trained they simply produce bird after bird for the gun and, being the consummate retriever, are unmatched in finding cripples and bringing any bird to hand.

Lab owners are extremely loyal to their breed, like their dogs are to them. They point out the unparalleled trust and teamwork they experience while hunting with their Labs. A particularly successful grouse hunter from Michigan I spoke with, who champions the smaller, more agile 50-pound Labs for grouse, expressed that a well bred Labrador is smart, easy to train, and can bounce back from training mistakes. Known for their overall durability, they can hunt in all conditions and cover types. When these grouse hunters empty the birds from their vests at the end of a hunt, the reason for running their labs for ruffed grouse is plain to see.

ENGLISH SETTERS: Grace And Beauty In The Woods

There is no question the English Setter is the quintessential and traditional grouse hunting dog. The sheer volume of responses I received from ES lovers proved that point.

This breed has gotten a load of ink in most classic grouse hunting literature, and is well represented in sporting art, for good reason. For a pointing dog they are the whole package of beauty, elegance, temperament and — best of all — they work on ruffed grouse.

Setters generally come in two types: Ryman and Llewellyn. The Ryman being a larger, closer working, and more methodical birddog that foot hunters prefer. Llewellyn’s are a smaller, faster bird-finding machine that hardcore hunters and field trailers gravitate to.

Regardless of type, they all share a gentle nature and picture perfect looks, as well as a good nose. Some of my Setter friends and contacts readily admit they prefer a slightly slower-moving dog that they can see and enjoy as it weaves through a fall cover, with the tinkling of a bell only adding to the experience. They live for the feathery classic point, and shooting at a bird is an afterthought.

Others want a firecracker that sizzles through the woods, reaching way out in search of birds, with the distant staccato beep from a collar signaling a point. After a location is found on the GPS receiver, they head into the cover and like to be rewarded with an opportunity for a shot. This is a breed that can fit differing personalities.

I’ve heard more legends of English Setters being good or great grouse dogs than any other breed. That might be a product of their popularity, or it might be why they are so popular. It doesn’t matter: they are a proven breed for grouse hunting and look damn stylish doing it. I heard from a fair share of earnest grouse hunters who experimented with a lot of dog breeds until they found their nirvana with English Setters.

GERMAN SHORTHAIRED POINTER: Bulletproof And Versatile

I have many friends and acquaintances who run GSP’s. That should say something about their popularity and effectiveness on grouse, given we live smack dab in ruffed grouse country.

And I had the pleasure of hunting over a particularly good one. I was impressed by this dog’s no-nonsense, workmanlike hunting style. He knew how to handle and point the skittish, if not schizoid, ruffed grouse found in mid-Maine, without a lot of showing off or fanfare. I think this is true of most dogs of this versatile breed.

That dog is over the rainbow bridge but the owner is now feeding two more GSP’s. I asked him why he sticks with them. He made the analogy that GSP’s are the Toyota Tacoma of the grouse hunting breeds. They are tough, dependable, and rarely break down. GSP owners relish the strength and durability and easy maintenance of their dogs, along with their ability to chill out in the house, but turn it on in the woods. Being a short-haired breed, little if any time needs to be wasted combing out burrs on the tailgate, leaving more time to hit the next cover.

I received input from a gentleman who runs a popular birddog website who hunts his shorthairs in a multiple of states and Canadian provinces. He expressed how his dogs consistently hunt at a comfortable range for the foot hunter, are staunch on a pinned grouse, but naturally relocate until they crack into a solid point when they hit the scent cone. A plus is they are largely natural retrievers, so few birds are lost. Versatile is the operative word; when not pointing grouse they can take on part-time work in a boat or blind retrieving waterfowl, and are handsome to boot.

BRITTANYS: The Whole Package In A Compact Size

These medium-sized, hard-working pointing dogs are rumored to have originated as poachers’ dogs, and are termed by some as “meat dogs.”

There’s nothing derogatory about that as far as I’m concerned, since despite all the aesthetics prevalent in grouse hunting lore, ultimately we are trying to add protein to our game vest.

This breed was originally dubbed a spaniel but the “spaniel” was officially removed in 1982. You have two choices of field stock Britts: American or French Brittany. Generally the American Britt is larger, lankier, and a bigger runner by design. The French Britt is more compact and generally a tighter worker. But despite “spaniel” being dropped from their name, both types have the merry, exuberant and biddable personality of a spaniel, with the point and the retrieve built in.

Britt owners I spoke with were a pragmatic group who weren’t enamored with classic high-tailed points (which is a good thing since Britts tails are docked). Britt owners appreciated the work ethic, nose and tenacity of their dogs.

A very good friend of mine who passed away a few years back adored his Brittanys, and I’ve never seen a closer bond than he had with his dogs. I had the privilege of grouse hunting with him in the states and in Canada. He was a solitary fellow, and when we met back at the truck, there was always a gleam in his eye, a grouse or two in hand, and of course a Britt by his side. If I get a pointing dog to add to my arsenal, it would likely be a Brittany.

You can’t go wrong with any of the breeds covered here if the dog is well bred, trained to your needs and expectations, and you put the dog on a load of grouse. Finding your breed for hunting ruffed grouse is like finding a spouse. There are matches made in heaven, but also mismatches. The trick is to date and play the field until you fall in love, and know when to throw in the towel and try another breed that fits you best.

Ultimately, at the end of the hunt, the measure of a grouse dog could be as simple as whether you enjoyed hunting with it, not how high a pile of feathers you’ve built by the end of a season.

What’s the most diverse group of guns in use by the world’s military forces?

It’s not rifles, or machine guns, or submachine guns, or even shotguns. Most successful long-gun fall into just a few different designs.

When you see oddball service rifles, you often see them plagued by issues of all kinds I.E. the INSAS, the FAMAS, the SA-80, and even the G36 have all had their problems.

The most diverse group of military weapons are handguns, aka sidearms. Even within certain countries, pistols can be diversely issued depending on the unit and mission.

Sometimes pistols are such a second thought they are a mishmash of different guns.

For example, see Israel at the near end of this list. Another challenge is how countries outside of Western Europe equip their military forces. In the Western World, there is a big move towards standardization that’s not present with other countries.

Several countries also don’t put out a press release when they purchase or adopt a new handgun, making it difficult to verify the information.

To be entirely fair, sidearms are just a step above bayonets on the necessity of military equipment priorities. Most countries issue them in small numbers to officers and specialists.

I put my best foot forward to come up with a comprehensive list of the sidearms from around the world. It was a little harder than I initially thought, but the research was still fascinating and fun.

With all this in mind, I’ve tried my hardest to verify the issuance of every firearm on this list. I set my parameters to general issue sidearms.

Some Special ops teams may use something different than the standard forces, and trying to catalog these weapons along with general sidearms would take several articles.

For example, the United States military alone issues the Beretta M9, the M17/18, the MEU/SOC 1911, the SIG P226, the M11A1, the P229R, the Glock 34, Glock 17, Glock 19, Glock 22, and many more we’ve likely never seen. It’s much more reasonable to focus on the general issue sidearms of these military forces.

Since several military forces have adopted the same gun, we’ll group those together to simplify things.

1. United States – SIG P320 Designated the M17/18

I was lucky enough to be at SHOT Show when it was announced that the SIG P320 would be adopted for military service with the U.S. Army. Needless to say, the folks at the SIG booth were quite excited.

The P320, designated the M17 and M18, was adopted in 9mm in full size (M17) and compact (M18) variants. The M17/18 series are quite advanced for military sidearms and feature red dot optics compatibility. Although red dots have not been issued as far as I know.

Like the P320 the ability exists to move the serialized fire control group to different grip modules. The military is quite strict with serial numbers and if the military allows the issued troop to choose a grip module they could get a gun that fits them. One size fits all is rarely a good idea.

Of course, the U.S. Military is nanny like and included a manual safety. In reality, more training would be more beneficial than a manual safety, but who am I to judge big army.

The M17 has since been adopted by the Air Force, the Navy, and the Marines. The M17 is currently being issued to combat arms units first in the U.S. Army. The Army plans to replace every M9 within ten years with an M17/18.

2. Commonwealth Club – The Browning Hi-Power

Canada, Australia, Bahrain, India, Thailand

The Browning Hi-Power is the European 1911.

What I mean by that is its popularity and longevity in military service. The Hi-Power has been used by just about everybody and in only the last few years have more modern designs replaced it.

The Hi-Power was one of the first high capacity 9mms that entered regular service. It’s a single action only weapon with a manual safety and a 13 round magazine. The Hi-Power is a beautiful gun that is robust and reliable.

It’s close to 100 years old and is still seeing war.

It’s one of the few guns to see action on both sides of WW2 in service with numerous Allied Forces, including the British, and in the hands of Germans. The Hi-Power is an excellent firearm and was a final fitting design for John Browning.

Its legacy of service across the world is nearly unmatched. Much like the sun never sets on the British empire, the sun doesn’t set on the Hi-Power. While it’s been produced mostly in Europe, the gun is also widely built in South American factories as well.

It’s been heavily used in Europe, the Middle East, Asia, and South America. From imported goods to domestic production copies, the Hi-Power is a legend in small arms design.

It’s currently the issued sidearm of Commonwealth countries like Canada and Australia, and as far out as India and Thailand.

3. 20+ Nations – The Glock 17, 19, and 34.

The United Kingdom, Sweden, Austria, Finland, Malaysia, Mexico (Navy), Montenegro, The Netherlands, New Zealand, Norway, Poland, Portugal, Romania, Switzerland, Yemen, Venezuela, Uruguay, India, and many more.

It would seemingly be easier to make a list of countries the Glock 9mm series doesn’t serve in. The weapon seems to be everywhere in the world.

Why not? The 9mm Glocks are the flagship of their handguns, and the only difference between the 17, 19, and 34 is barrel and grip length.

Glock 9mm pistols are legendary for their rugged and reliable design. These superbly simple guns work, and keep working. On top of that, Glock has logistics nailed with supplies and spare parts out the yin yang.

Generation wise it appears that Gen 3 and Gen 4 models are the most popular variants in the military market. The Glock series also seems to be the most popular choice in countries where Spec Ops have more leeway in choosing a handgun.

The Glock series of firearms are popular the world over for a good reason. They are accurate, easy to use, highly reliable, lightweight, and cheap. The price Glock sells their guns to Police Forces is criminally low, and I imagine the price for military forces is even smaller.

Penny pinchers often give a big say when it comes to new guns, and price always matters. Glock makes their weapons affordable while being high quality. As far as military sidearms go the Glock 17 will likely remain the most popular choice for some time to come.

If you want to get your own Glock, you should take a look at some of these articles:

• Best Glock (All Sizes & Calibers)
• Best 9mm Glock
• Best Glock Upgrades

4. Germany, Ireland, Greece, and Spain – The HK U.S.P.

I love the HK U.S.P. It’s one of my favorite DA/SA guns, and that’s saying a lot. The U.S.P., or universal self-loading pistol, is Heckler and Koch’s premier handgun design.

It’s a fascinating gun and while 9mm is the chosen NATO cartridge the USP was one of the first guns built around the 40 S&W. The gun was also chambered in 357 SIG, and later 45 A.C.P.

The U.S.P. stood apart from other polymer-frame guns of the time due to its mechanical recoil reduction system. This system is implemented with a heavy captive coil spring around the guide rod that reduced the force of the slide slinging rearward.

This buffers recoil by up to 30% according to H.K. The U.S.P. came to be because of the Offensive Handgun Weapon System, where it was tested alongside prototypes of the Mk 23 Mod 0. From the very beginning the gun was always meant to be a service pistol.

As a service weapon, it has been adopted by at least four countries as the general issue sidearm. In several more countries, it serves as a pistol for Special Operations units. Plus the U.S.P. C. is Jack Bauer’s gun of choice.

5. The French – M.A.C. Mle 50 and PAMAS G1

I’m not picking on the French, but any look into their current small arms will find them lacking. Their military is often ignored and their weapons are often quite old. There are two current service pistols in use, and neither is a new design.

First we have the ancient, but domestically designed M.A.C. Mle 50 and then the PAMAS G1. The PAMAS G1 is a licensed clone of the Beretta 92F and is built in France.

The 30-year-old G1 was supposed to replace the MAC Mle 50, but it seems the process has been moving along very slowly. They are looking to now replace both pistols as of March 2019.

The M.A.C. Mle 50 is a product of its time, and as a gun designed in 1950, that means it’s a single stack 9mm with nine rounds and a single-action design. It uses the Browning system like a Hi-Power and has an integral barrel feed ramp.

The M.A.C. 50 is a stout little gun that’s known for its durability, clearly, since it’s been around for nearly 70 years now.

The PAMAS G1 is a clone of the Beretta 92F made in France. There are a few differences between the PAMAS G1 and Beretta 92F. The G1 has a decocking lever only, and apparently, the French steel is more brittle.

Since it’s a 92F, it lacks the enlarged hammer axis pin that prevents the slide from accidentally leaving the gun and hitting the operator in the face. However, there is some speculation this was initially caused by +P+ ammo.

The French will likely adopt a Glock pistol, but until then, the M.A.C. and PAMAS are chugging along. The PAMAS is certainly a step up from the MAC, but both are likely well past their service life.

6. South Korea – The Daewoo K5

South Korea has a robust and well established domestic arms production history. Rather than just relying on the U.S., the Daewoo brand has produced most of South Korea’s military firearms.

The Daewoo K5 is an innovative and exciting firearm design that has served the Koreans since 1989.

The Daewoo K5 is a DA/SA pistol with a hammer, made on metal frame and is chambered in 9mm. The Daewoo K5 holds 15 rounds of 9mm, and in 1989 was quite high tech. It’s slightly dated now, but still an excellent combat pistol.

The K5 features an unusual trigger mechanism, sometimes called Triple action or Double action +. It’s quite similar to the P99, except with an actual hammer-fired handgun. The K5’s hammer can be decoked, while still maintaining mainspring compression.

The end result is a trigger pull with the length of a double-action trigger, but the weight of a single-action design. In the states, the Lionheart imported pistol had the same innovative feature. The K5 is a fascinating gun, and in 1989 showed a lot of innovative thought from Daewoo and South Korea.

Daewoo is an interesting company. They make everything from TVs to Cars, and handguns and assault rifles. If you need a slow, fuel-efficient car and a machine gun, call Daewoo.

7. China – Type 92

The Type 92, aka the QSZ-92, is China’s primary service sidearm. This recoil-operated, locked-breech pistol has a rotating barrel locking system like the Beretta PX4 series. This rotating barrel setup is supposed to improve reliability and decrease recoil.

This is an interesting little gun, and it was ahead of its time.

The Type 92 was designed in 1994 and featured a detachable steel frame that holds the fire control group. This sits in the plastic grip and acts very much like a SIG P320’s FCU. The frame can be removed and moved into different sized frames and grip designs.

Whether or not this was ever done remains to be seen. The gun is also chambered in the very odd 5.8x21mm round. This was China’s variant of the 5.7 and was designed to defeat soft armor.

It holds 20 rounds of the 5.8×21 round in a double-stack magazine and has a combination safety/decocker. It’s a DA/SA design and is issued lightly among Chinese forces.

9mm variants also exist for export… for reasons.

I’m betting the 5.8 round handles a lot like the 5.7, and it’s a shame we can’t find out for ourselves.

8. Russia – Makarov, and MP-443

Russian is a weird country for small arms.

Admittedly they are much more focused on their rifles than their handguns. That’s why the Makarov pistol is still around and kicking in use by their military forces. This Great Value brand Walther PP has been serving since 1951.

It’s a blowback-operated design that’s very compact for a service pistol. When your handgun is more or less used for executing traitors and subjugating people, I guess size doesn’t matter. The Makarov had a capacity of 8 rounds of what is essentially a +P .380 ACP round.

The most impressive thing about the Makarov is the fact it’s made of only 27 parts. This was perfect for the Soviet Union at the time. It is cheap and easy to produce, and had very few failure points.

The Makarov pistol has been around for so long because the former Soviet Union produced millions of them, and they are robust little pistols.

The MP 443 Grach, aka the PYa, is a more modern Russian service pistol that aims to replace the Makarov. The MP 443 is a modern 9mm Parabellum pistol with a 17 or 18 round magazine capacity. The MP 443 is slowly making its way into the hands of Russian forces, and the gun has been in mass production for eight years now.

The MP 443 is pretty standard as far as pistols go. It’s a DA/SA design that does allow the user to swap the slide stop lever and manual safety to the right and left sides of the gun. The MP 443 uses a Colt-Browning design and doesn’t do anything revolutionary.

So it’s a lot unlike bored Russians in that sense.

It is an all-steel gun, and while this adds to the gun’s weight, it is quite robust and durable. It needs to be to use the Russian armor piercing 9mm 7N21 armor-piercing round. This s a +P+ style round apparently and is a hard hitter

The MP 443 is another gun we will likely never see, but I doubt it does anything an old SW 3rd gen doesn’t do.

9. Belgium – FN Five-Seven

The Belgium FN Five-Seven pistol is an interesting firearm. It fires the 5.7x28mm round and was developed to share ammunition with the FN P90 PDW. The round it fires is similar to a rifle round in design and shape.

While the ammunition is long, it’s thin, and this allows the Five-Seven to hold 20 rounds in a flush-fitting magazine. The Five-Seven offers soft armor penetration and very low recoil on top of a flat shooting cartridge that can reach out to 100 yards.

This is a very easy shooting gun, and I can see why a military would adopt it. Plus it’s lightweight, reliable, and is unlike most handguns when it comes to armor and barrier penetration. The gun and the ammo is quite pricey though.

The gun is Belgium designed and is currently replacing the Browning Hi-Power with the Belgium Army. The Five-Seven also serves the Air Force, Special Forces Group, and Federal Police forces. The Five-Seven is an unconventional choice but is an effective weapon.

And of course, it is the firearm of Ivan Chesnokov fame.

10. Czech Republic – C.Z. 75 Phantom

The Czech Republic has a long history of private firearms ownership and is one of the few European countries to have a strong firearm’s civil rights. C.Z. is also one of my favorite personal gun makers.

The C.Z. 75 has been used extensively by their military for quite some time, and still serves in reserve units.

The C.Z. 75 Phantom is now the primary service pistol. This gun is similar in design to the classic C.Z. 75 but features a polymer frame, Picatinny rail, and a decocker only design. It also uses a larger 19 round magazine, but can also work with classic C.Z. 75 mags.

The C.Z. 75 Phantom is a robust and accurate weapon. The ergonomics are simply incredible, and C.Z. isn’t afraid to sell the gun in the States, so yay for us. The Phantom is a service pistol with the handling of a competition gun.

It has an excellent trigger, a low bore axis, and is well proven. The Phantom is an excellent gun, and it was a great choice by the Army of the Czech Republic.

11. South Africa – Vektor Z88 and SP1

South Africa has an exciting history of arms design and has both cloned and created their weapons. Their service handguns are a mixture of both. The Z88 was a domestically produced clone of the Beretta 92.

They couldn’t license it or receive handgun imports due to the arms embargo on South Africa at the time. Beretta also couldn’t sue because South African’s couldn’t come to court to defend themselves.

The Z88 was a direct clone of the Beretta 92 and, as such, is a DA/SA gun with a decoking safety and a 15 round magazine. The Z88 was a very well done clone and helped modernize the South African military. It still serves today in a limited role.

After the sanctions were lifted, Beretta was in a place where they could file lawsuits, so South Africa wisely changed the design and came up with the Vektor SP1. This gun utilized the same basic Beretta design with some changes. The safety was moved to the frame, the barrel was no longer exposed, and a 40 S&W variant was created.

The SP1 is a metal frame pistol, and it still utilizes Beretta magazines. It currently serves the South African National Defence Force and the Police Service. It admittedly looks very cool and while limited numbers were imported to the States I’ve never seen one in person.

The SP1 is reportedly a well made combat handgun, and since the weapon is based on a Beretta 92 it’s got a solid platform to start on. South Africa apparently likes the weapon enough that they’ve yet to start shopping for a new sidearm, even without an arms embargo.

12. Italy – Beretta 92FS

Beretta, the world’s oldest still-operating arms company, is an Italian firm. Are we at all surprised that the Italians are using one of Beretta’s most legendary handguns?

The 92FS has served several countries as a military and police sidearm, including our own, for more than 30 years.

The Italian military uses the Beretta 92FS. This DA/SA design features one of the best stock factory triggers on the market. The 92FS has a combination safety and decocker and excellent ergonomics outside of the safety.

The 92FS in it’s M9 form was the gun I used and it’s an excellent weapon. The 92FS is robust, reliable, and well-proven. The direct feed system and open slide design greatly increase the gun’s reliability.

Beretta’s and the U.S. Army’s numerous testing has shown that the weapon is extremely reliable and can take a ton of abuse before it cracks.

The all-metal frame pistol has very low recoil and handles like a dream. It’s perfect for both new recruits and expert shots. The 92FS is Italy’s standard service pistol, and there doesn’t seem to be a rush to swap it out.

13. Brazil – Taurus PT-92

The PT-92 is the Brazillian copy of the Beretta 92, made by Brazillian firm Taurus. It’s not an identical copy of the Beretta. Taurus makes these guns on original Beretta machinery left behind after Beretta’s military contract expired in Brazil.

The Taurus PT-92’s most significant and most noticeable change from the Italian Stallion was the use of a frame-mounted combination safety and decocker. Other than that, the PT-92 handles almost identically to the Beretta 92.

This includes the DA/A design, the direct feed design, and the double-stack magazine. The PT-92 has been serving the Brazillian military for decades now without much issue. The teething problems the Taurus guns sometimes have are seemingly not present in the P.T. 92’s design.

14. Israel… A Little Bit of Everything

Tracking down one service pistol for the Israeli army isn’t easy. It seems like they keep a bit of everything around.

The domestically produced Jericho pistol is in the inventory, as well as the SIG P226 and 228, the Hi-Power, the Glock 17 and 19 models, and more.

Researching this article has shown me that service pistols in the Israeli Army are highly uncommon. The Special Forces and Intelligence agencies all seem to have their particular pistol.

I mean, does the Uzi pistol count as a pistol?

The one common thread between Israeli pistols is that they are all quality options. They are well made, proven guns with a long history of service and success.

Conclusion

Service pistols are such a diverse subject to cover, guns that include both past and present designs. The current field of Service pistols around the world is massive, and I was left exhausted after researching and writing this article.

Service pistols are a fascinating subject to research, and I’m surprised to see such exciting diversity. I can’t possibly have conquered them all, so I ask you fine folks in the comments, which ones have I missed? Want more…check out Police Sidearms: From Past to Present.

Record Fish

Every angler considers bigger fish to be better in some way. The desire to catch bigger fish keeps the sport fresh for many people and for some, it’s the only reason they keep making casts or heading offshore. Here are some of the biggest fish ever caught in saltwater and the anglers who managed to bring them in.

What’s the Biggest Marlin Ever Caught?

When it comes to the largest marlin ever caught there can be a few different answers. The biggest marlin ever caught on rod and reel was a blue marlin out of Oahu, Hawaii. In 1970, a party of anglers fishing on the Coreene C, with Captain Cornelius Choy caught a blue marlin that weighed 1,805 pounds. This incredible fish became known as “Choy’s Monster” and hasn’t been broken for over 50 years.

The other answer for the largest marlin ever caught is a black marlin that was caught on August 4, 1953, by Alfred Glassell, Jr. This black marlin is the world record marlin according to IGFA rules. Regardless of rules this marlin is one of the one of the greatest catches in fishing the history. The black marlin was caught in Cabo Blanco, Peru, on the boat “Petrel” which was captained by Stirling Stuart. The record setting fish weighed in at 1,560 pounds and 14 and a half feet long.

What’s the Biggest Swordfish Ever Caught?

Back on May 7, 1953, Louis E. Marron caught the World Record swordfish while fishing in Iquique, Chile. Louis was fishing with his wife Genie, aboard a boat named “Flying Heart III” which was captained by Eddie Wall. This giant swordfish weighed 1,182 pounds and is still the IGFA all tackle world record.

What’s the Biggest Tuna Ever Caught?

For the largest tuna ever caught, we found both the bluefin and yellowfin world records. According to the IGFA, the bluefin tuna world record is currently held by Ken Fraser. On October 26, 1979, fishing with Captain Eric Samson on “Lady and Misty” from Port Hood, Nova Scotia, Ken managed to land a monster bluefin tuna weighing 1,496 pounds. This weight was taken after the fish had been dehydrating in the boat for nearly 10 hours.

The IGFA world record for the biggest yellowfin tuna was landed by Guy Yacom while fishing in Mexico on September 18th, 2012. This record-setting fish weighed an incredible 427 pounds. While it was not caught on rod and reel, a bigger yellowfin weighing 480 pounds was speared in 2018.

What’s the Biggest Grouper Ever Caught?

The goliath grouper is the largest grouper species in the world which means that naturally it’s responsible for the world record. The IGFA world record goliath grouper was caught May 20th, 1961 by Lynn Joyner in Fernandina Beach, Florida. This world record fish weighed an incredible 680 pounds and is unlikely to be broken with current laws banning anglers from targeting this fish or handling them outside of the water.

What’s the biggest Tarpon Ever Caught?

Finally the largest tarpon ever caught was taken off the coast of Rubane, Guinea-Bissau, Africa by Max Domecq. According to the IGFA records this inshore giant weighed 286 pounds, 9 ounces and likely was well over seven feet in length. While a story of an even bigger tarpon has come to light recently, it was not officially weighed but instead, it was released safely back into the ocean.

At SHOT Show 2024, Beretta treated us to one of the more exciting reveals during their special range event.

The Italian firearms company rolled out the Ultima Patrol…a new 12-gauge semi-automatic shotgun with a particular set of skills.

This black sheep of the A300 family is not into hunting or clays; it’s a tactical shotgun with modern features.

And while we had a brief encounter with it in Las Vegas, we weren’t going to leave a judgment call like this up to a first blush.

We got the A300 Ultima Patrol and practically ran to the range to test it out. So follow along as we walk through the specs, features, and performance.

Beretta A300 Ultima Patrol Review at a Glance

Pros

• Lightweight
• Upgraded features
• Reliable

Cons

• Rear QD hold

The Bottom Line

Beretta has done a bang-up job of packing a lot of features into this tactical semi-automatic shotgun while keeping the price reasonable.

Specs & Features

Specs

• Caliber: 12 gauge (3” chamber)
• Choke: Mobilchoke
• Length: 38”
• Barrel Length: 19.1”
• Action: Semi-auto (gas operated)
• Weight: 7.1 lbs.
• Capacity: 7+1
• Comes with: cardboard box, owner’s manual, extra spacers

Features

• Oversized controls
• Accessory mounts
• Enhanced loading port

Source: Beretta

Background

The Ultima Patrol is a new addition to the A300 family of shotguns which, up until now, has only offered hunting and sporting models.

Building on the same receiver, Beretta shortened the stock and included other features more befitting a tactical gun while keeping it in that middle-ground price range.

Many will draw the obvious comparisons to the 1301 and will want to know the main differences. The 1301 is made in Italy, while the Ultima Patrol is made in Tennessee.

In addition, the Ultima Patrol’s barrel is not cold hammer forged, but it does utilize a shorter forcing cone in conjunction with a falling lock bolt.

By contrast, the 1301 uses a longer forcing cone and rotating bolt head.

Who Is It For?

The owner’s manual states this shotgun is not recommended for hunting applications.

While birds of many a feather might rejoice at this news, who did the oldest gun manufacturer in the world have in mind for this shotgun?

While strictly a guess on my part, I suspect Beretta is trying to take advantage of that recent lull in production of the Remington 870 — a trusted accessory to many law enforcement agencies.

Should a worthy yet affordable alternative rise up, many departments would have to consider it.

The shortened overall length and features make this gun a fighter that’s easier to handle in confined spaces. It will be right at home in its namesake role in law enforcement agencies across the U.S.

However, those same features also make the Ultima Patrol a great option for a home defender.

The gun is pretty complete as is and could easily serve either role with minimal accessories.

Fit & Feel

The first thing I noticed about this shotgun was how light it is.

Beretta lists it at 7.1 pounds, but my scale showed it at 6 pounds, 15 ounces, with an optic added. Next was the texture on the grip and forend.

It’s aggressive, to say the least, and made of black plastic, but does a great job staying in your hands as a result. The only minor problem was the QD mount in the stock. It wouldn’t hold a QD.

After contacting Beretta, I trimmed back a little of the plastic around the recess. This worked like a charm.

The receiver of the model we tested was a very nice shade of grey with a flat finish, though there’s a black and camo model available too.

The sights are a ghost ring rear and a red fiber optic front. These were great, but I opted to use the included Picatinny rail on the top of the receiver to mount a red dot.

I don’t often expect much from a shotgun trigger, but the Patrol’s is nice.

It broke cleanly at an average of 2 pounds 13 ounces with zero pre-travel. Reset was crisp, audible, and tactile and occurred after a couple millimeters of return travel.

The magazine tube easily accommodated seven rounds of 2 3/4” shells, but I found I was also able to ghost-load another shell on top of the lifter.

With one in the chamber, this created a total capacity of 9 shells ready to go!

How Does It Shoot?

With the relatively light weight of the Ultima Patrol, I was curious to see how it would handle recoil. The butt pad isn’t enormous but consists of a gel-like rubber that does much to mitigate the jarring blow of 12-gauge shells.

The recoil is still substantial, but the gas system and butt pad make it manageable. We shot well over 150 rounds during testing and didn’t need ice or Advil at the end of the day.

I was impressed with the speed of the gun and how quickly I was able to empty the magazine, though Beretta says the 1301 is a little faster.

It took three runs of this drill to sufficiently heat up the barrel enough where caution was required on the reload.

Using the front sight, I experienced intuitive aiming, a comfortable cheek weld, and good eye alignment without having to adjust my head.

Later, the added height of the red dot broke my cheek weld slightly, but this was easily compensated for.

At SHOT Show, Beretta reps revealed to us that the Ultima Patrol was optimized for use with Federal’s Flitecontrol buckshot. They kindly sent along some for us to use during testing.

There is often a misconception about how much spread you get with shotgun pellets.

I patterned the Ultima Patrol at 10, 15, and 20 yards with Federal’s ammo and was impressed with the tightness of the groups.

Starting at 10 yards, the group of nine pellets was around 3 inches. Even at 20 yards, the pellets were spread over a group of only 7 inches.

With time and practice, a shooter could get comfortable making some shots requiring accuracy using this shotgun and ammo combo.

Another key point was loading. I’m no quad loader (yet), but I still enjoyed the work Beretta clearly put into the loading port, widening it and chamfering the edges.

With the right angle used, I didn’t catch my thumb on the lifter when stuffing shells, and I really appreciated that.

The included adhesive hook-and-loop strip was a welcome addition, and I stuck on some shell carriers to affect my reloads.

What Sets it Apart?

This is a tactical shotgun option that is feature-packed and has Beretta legacy but is made here in America for a price that’s mid-ranged. It’s not the 1301, but pretty darn close for several hundred dollars less.

By the Numbers

Reliability: 5/5

We ran around 150 shells through the Patrol, a variety of sizes and brands. Everything fed, fired, and ejected with perfect reliability.

Ergonomics: 4/5

The ergonomics on the Patrol are extremely sound. There currently isn’t an option for a pistol grip stock.

Accuracy: 4/5

We experienced good accuracy when testing the Patrol, particularly with the Flitecontrol ammunition.

Customization: 3/5

The M-LOK slits, pic rail, and QD ports are welcome additions you can use to add the accessories you like. In addition, the Patrol comes in black, gray, and tiger stripe camo.

Value: 4/5

With all the features in the Ultima Patrol and the mid-range price, it’s a compelling value and worth considering in lieu of the vaunted 1301.

Overall: 4/5

Upgrades for A300 Ultima Patrol

For testing purposes, we utilized the Bushnell RXS-250, and it handled the 12-gauge recoil from beginning to end without faltering.

This budget option was easily bright enough to see in direct sunlight, so bright in fact that it distorts a tiny bit on the highest setting.

Despite this minor issue, the dot was still very usable, with its 4 MOA dot offering 10 total brightness settings in an aluminum frame featuring multi-coated glass.

Final Verdict

Beretta is serving up a solid value in the A300 Ultima Patrol, offering a package not found on comparable guns at this price point.

Law enforcement administrators looking to outfit all their units will love the mileage they get with their budgets, and officers will enjoy the reliability and feature set.

The rest of us stand to benefit, too — by having access to a highly functioning, pedigreed, home defender made right here in America.

What’s your gut reaction to the A300 Ultima Patrol? Let us know in the comments below. Be sure to check out our top picks in 10 Best Home-Defense Tactical Shotguns [Hands-On]!

Like many unknowing dog owners, I used to allow my dogs to ride in the back seat or hitch of the car without worrying about their safety. They lay down and were calm, so I never saw a need to use a dog crate for car travel.

When I got Sitka, however, there was no sitting calmly in the car while I drove.

Sitka is anxious in the car, and after the first ride involved him lunging at trucks and motorcycles, pacing back and forth, and whining the entire time, I knew I needed a solution to keep us safe and sane.

Initially, I secured him using a harness system from Kurgo that is crash-tested and kept him from pacing, but he’d spin and tangle himself in the straps resulting in needing to pull over to untangle his legs periodically.

From there, I decided to look into a kennel and began intense research to find the best dog crates for car travel. I asked friends, polled my Instagram audience, read reviews, and emailed brands to create a list of potential candidates.

In this post, I feature the dog crates that I considered purchasing, which means they met the criteria I will explain below. I explain why I chose the one that I did and provide suggestions for why other brands might work best for your car situation and dog.

Don’t feel like reading all the research and just want to know my top pick?This is the crate I went with for myself.It’s one of the more expensive dog crates on the market, but it is worth every penny because I fully believe that in the event of an accident, Sitka will survive.

Why Should a Dog be in a Crate in the Car?

Even if your dog was like my first dogs and settled calmly in the car, it’s a good idea to secure them in a dog kennel in the event of a car accident.

Here are the three main reasons:

Safety

Think about it, we buckle up every time we get into the car, but many dog owners don’t often consider securing their dog. In a crash, unsecured dogs will become projectiles and can result in serious injuries and death.

Security

If you are injured in a car accident, your dog will be in a safe and secure spot where they cannot run away or bite anyone.

Restraint

When I drove with Sitka the first time, I was certain we would get into an accident. His movement and whining was so distracting that I couldn’t concentrate on driving.

In 2019, Volvo conducted a safety study that determined that unrestrained dogs led to significantly more unsafe driving behaviors, distracted driving, and increased stress for both the human and the dog.

In the Event of a Car Accident

In the unfortunate case that you are in a car accident, there are a few preparation steps to take to ensure the utmost safety for your pet.

This is especially important if you are injured and unable to tend to your dog after a crash.

Secure a laminated form on top of or inside of the kennel with the following information:

• Your first and last name
• Address
• Phone number
• Emergency contact for your dog who is authorized to make choices on your behalf
• Veterinarian
• Any allergies your dog may have
• Other pertinent information about your dog

Keep a spare leash and a muzzle in the car and include instructions about how to remove your dog from the kennel and where to take them until you are able to pick them up (i.e. with a friend or e nearest veterinarian).

When working with emergency personnel, if you are able to, communicate to them that you will be the one to remove your dog from the kennel.

I once saw a video posted on Instagram where a dog jumped out and started to run away when the firefighters removed him from his crate. Thankfully, he had his e-collar on and was able to be recalled back.

In stressful situations, dogs can bite or run away. Do as much as possible to prevent that from happening by communicating as best you can with emergency crews and in writing.

What to Look for In a Dog Crate for Car Travel

When deciding on the right dog crate for your needs, there are several factors to take into consideration that will ensure the best fit for your dog and car, and still meet safety requirements.

Size and Fit

When you measure your dog for the crate, you want a snug fit. Too much excess space means that they can become injured due to increased impact from a crash.

You also don’t want it too snug because then your dog won’t be able to move around to get comfortable.

Since most of the kennels in this article are not available to purchase in stores, testing fit is not an option. The best plan is to provide your dog and car’s measurements and dog’s weight to the manufacturer and work with them to determine best fit.

Material

To best protect your dog in the car, look for a dog crate that is made from a single piece of molded polyethylene. A single piece means that there are no weak points in the kennel that can fail in an impact.

Materials to avoid include:

• Wire
• Fabric
• Folding crates
• Traditional plastic “clamshell” dog crates.

Crash-testing

The Center for Pet Safety (CPS) conducted a series of crash tests for dog crates in partnership with Subaru of America in 2015. CPS evaluated crates that cost between $150 and $1000 and put them to a series of tests, including:

• The use of dummy dogs weighing 75 lbs
• Conducted two different crash test with rear seat folded in one and up in the second
• Simulated crashes at speeds of 30 mph

You can see the test results from the report here.

There are many dog crates out there that claim to be crash-tested, but because there is not the same requirement for testing the safety of dog crates as there is for cars or child seats, purchasers need to do their homework.

Since the most recent CPS test was performed in 2015, there are likely suitable kennels that didn’t make the list or new additions to the market that weren’t tested.

Email the manufacturer to ask about their crash testing protocols and read reviews from people whose dogs were in car crashes to validate the claims.

Strap Loops

Some dog crates come with strap loops that allow you to secure the kennel into your car. This is especially important for those whose dogs will ride in open bed trucks.

Different manufacturers may recommend different types of straps to tie down the kennel. Check in with them before purchasing if you plan to secure the kennel in your car.

Ventilation

It can get hot and stuffy inside of a plastic box, so when you’re looking for a crate for your dog for the car, make sure that it has good ventilation.

This means there are plenty of air holes on the sides that provide cross breezes.

Sizing Your Dog Crate for the Car

Depending on the kind of car you have and your dog’s size, different crates will fit differently. Further, placement depends on where your car’s crumple zones are located.

For example, the front and rear of many cars feature a crumple zone, designed to protect passengers, but that’s not where you want the kennel to sit.

You’ll want to check with your car’s manufacturer to determine where the crumple zones in your specific car are located. Next, measure to ensure the kennel will fit in the designated safe location.

The Best Dog Crates for Car Travel

I conducted deep research on several dog crates for car travel before making a decision. I visited several different websites and combed through reviews and talked to my community on Instagram to get their take on different kennels.

Some key features to look for include:

• carrying handles
• air vents
• warranties
• stackability for multiple dogs
• tie down options
• weight

A quality dog kennel that will protect your dog in the event of an accent is not cheap and you get what you pay for in most cases.

The typical wire cages or clamshell airline kennels are not suitable for safety in the event of a car crash. They will not protect your dog.

After all of my research, these are the brands that I considered, including the one I ultimately chose.

Top Pick for Dog Crate for Car Travel – Gunner Kennels

Gunner is an industry leader when it comes to dog crates the car. They are the only crate that passed in the 2015 CPS study and have a 5-Star Crash Test Rated designation from the organization.

Practically indestructible, Gunner tested the kennels by tossing the crate off a 200-foot cliff, dropping a 630-lb sled on it, shot it with a shotgun, and applying 4,000 lbs of pressure to it. All tests resulted in very little damage.

This is the kennel I use for Sitka currently. You can see my Gunner Dog Crate review here.

If you can’t afford a Gunner – Dakota 283

When I was fist looking into purchasing a dog crate for the car, I initially went with the Dakota G3 Medium. Although it’s not crash test rated, by CPS, the company has don extensive testing on the kennel.

Here’s what they said when I reached out to ask:

“We have done internal testing of our kennels through a variety of impact tests including 25 ft drop testing for impact and durability. Our testing drives us to test to failure on most tests so that we know limitations and strengths.

Additionally, and most important (sic) is that our kennels have been involved in several rollover accidents with the dog surviving uninjured. This is the ultimate test and testimonial to our design and performance.”

It’s important to consider that Dakota Kennels came out after CPS conducted the safety studies.

I chose the the Dakota G3 medium because it seemed like a good mix of the Ruffland and the Gunner Kennel, with a mid-range price tag. The military strength crate is made from a single piece of rotomolded Polyethylene that resists extreme impact.

I did like this kennel and felt very confident that it would protect my dog in the event of an accident. It was roomier than the Gunner, which isn’t ideal for car travel. It’s also taller, so blocked my rear vision more than the Gunner.

Dakota 283 generously provided a discount code for Long Haul Trekkers followers. Get 10% off your order with code SITKA10 at checkout.

Best Budget Pick – RuffLand

RuffLand Kennels (formerly known as Ruff Tuff Kennels) are the one of the most popular kennels for car travel. They’re very affordable and made from a durable one-piece roto-molded construction that can withstand heavy impact.

They were tested in the CPS crash test and performed well when placed in the rear cargo area against the rear seatback, however in the test without the seatback for reinforcement, the door completely separated from the crate and the dummy dog was not retained.

You can read more about the testing here.

RuffLand kennels are tapered to ensure full breathability, even with gear stacked right up against the crate. The brand also makes tie downs specifically for their kennels to ensure further security in the car.

Best Customizable Dog Crate for Car Travel – MIM Variocage

Regarded among the safest crash-tested dog kennels for car travel, Sweden-based MIM Variocages are the only dog cage in the world certified crash-tested for front, rear, and rollover impacts.

The brand will provide a free replacement in the event of an accident.

Variocages can be tailored to various vehicles and come in 4 models with over 14 adjustable sizes. The cages are designed with a crumple zone, similar to that of cars and feature a locking mechanism.

Do you use a dog crate for car travel?

Have you been in a car accident with your dog and have any tips to share?

A few years ago, I was listening to the Range podcast made by two of my friends—Julia Ritchey and Amy Westervelt. It’s a great show about life in the West, and this particular episode was about the controversies surrounding coyote hunting, but about halfway through the podcast, I noticed that people were pronouncing “coyote” two different ways: the three syllable “coyote” and the two-syllable “coyote.” Here are two clips:

Julia Ritchie (podcast host): After their first petition to get a coyote hunting ban failed, they tried again in November of last year, and about 40 people spoke. I tallied it up. (3:51-3:57)

Fred Knowlton (a retired professor who studied coyotes for 40 years): Personally, I don’t believe any of the coyote hunting expeditions by the general public are effective in reducing coyote numbers. (6:42-6:52)

I did some research and didn’t find anything definitive, and then I put the question out to the Grammar Girl Facebook page, and got more than 1,800 responses, which is why it’s nearly three years later that I’ve gone through all the comments, made a map, and am now telling you about it. Wow. Thanks for all that! I didn’t word the question in a way that makes this a scientific study, but 1,800 responses certainly rivals things I’ve seen published in journals.

Since then I’ve also done more research, so here’s what I found.

Many Ways to Pronounce ‘Coyote’

There are actually more than two different ways to pronounce it. You have “kai-oat-ee” and “kai-oat,” which you heard in the clips, but then some people pronounce it with a little bit of a different ending—“kai-oat-eh”—and people honoring the Spanish origin or who live near the Mexican border in the United States might pronounce it the Spanish way: “coy-yoh-tay.” And the Cambridge Dictionary says the British pronunciation is “coy-oh-tee.” So we can safely say there are at least five—five—different pronunciations that people are regularly using to describe this animal, and I bet there are some I haven’t even found. And that’s just in current times.

A publication from the late 1800sopens TEXT file by the American Dialect Society notes that at that time the word was often mispronounced as “cayote.” Although I’m guessing at the pronunciation. The “cay” part at the beginning is clear, but your guess is as good as mine as to how they meant people pronounced the last part. It could be “cay-oat.” It’s just spelled C-A-Y-O-T-E.

Most of what I’ll talk about next is just about the first two pronunciations because that’s what I asked people about, and I made a map of the responses. What will jump out at you first is that the “kai-oat” pronunciation is much more prominent in the middle of the United States than anywhere else—it spans a somewhat expanded Great Plains region.

All along the coasts and in the South and through the whole Minnesota-Wisconsin-Ohio region, people primarily seem to say “kai-oat-ee,” but in Montana, Wyoming, the Dakotas, Kansas, Nebraska, and Iowa, “kai-oat” seems dominant. Colorado, Texas, Oklahoma, and Arkansas seem like a mixed bag.

People from the University of South Dakota told me their mascot is the “kai-oat,” but that his name is Charlie, and sometimes they also call him Charlie “Kai-oat-ee.”

But when I started reading the comments themselves, two patterns emerged beyond big-picture geography.

Coyote: The Urban-Rural Divide

First, there seemed to be a clear rural-urban divide. People in cities are more likely to say “kai-oat-ee” and people who live in rural areas are more likely to say “kai-oat.” There were quite a few comments from people who said something like this:

I am from Los Angeles, and we say “kai-oat-ee,” but we would say “kai-oat” when we’re trying to sound like cowboys.

The Wile E. Coyote Influence

Second, there seems to be an age-related divide, with older people saying “kai-oat” and younger people saying “kai-oat-ee,” which, of course, leads us to Wile E. Coyote, the Loony Toons character who’s always getting an anvil dropped on his head by the Road Runner. That cartoon first appeared in 1949.

Many people speculate that younger, urban people say “kai-oat-ee” because the only experience they’ve had with coyotes is from the cartoons, and that may play a role, but I believe the three-syllable version is actually the older version since the word comes to English from the Mexican Spanish word “coy-yoh-tay,” which ultimately goes back to the Nahuatl word “coyotl.” (“koy-OH-tehl”)

I found one radio interview that said “kai-oat” was the original pronunciation in English, but it didn’t provide references, and I’m not convinced. The earliest citations in the Oxford English Dictionary seem to be a mix of the two-syllable and three-syllable version. It’s a mess. The first eight citations spell it seven different ways.

Noah Webster’s original dictionary, published in 1828, doesn’t appear to include the word. The Imperial Dictionary by John Ogilvie published in 1885 (an extension of Webster’s original dictionary), shows two pronunciations with the “kai-oat” pronunciation first, but Webster’s 1913 Unabridged Dictionaryopens TEXT file flips that around and shows the three-syllable pronunciation first, likely pronounced “coy-oh-te,” and then also appears to include an alternative two-syllable pronunciation. It seems that at least in the United States, people have pronounced it both ways for a long time.

For what it’s worth, the “kai-oat” pronunciation seems to be mostly limited to the United States and Canada. Nobody outside those two countries reported saying “kai-oat,” and the Oxford English Dictionary doesn’t include a two-syllable pronunciation. (But the Collins Dictionary does. Argg.)

‘Coyote’: Singular and Plural

And then there were a few comments that don’t fit any of the patterns, but seemed interesting enough to pass along. Two people, for example, said that they use “kai-oat-ee” as the singular, but “kai-oats” as the plural. And another person reported doing the exact opposite. I’m not sure what to make of that except that people are adapting the pronunciations to have different meanings.

‘Coyote’: Smugglers

Along the same lines, at least one person from southern California said he uses “kai-oat” for the animal and “kai-oat-ee” for a person who smuggles immigrants across the border.

‘Coyote’: A Mix of Pronunciations

Finally, there were multiple people who realized they say it both ways, and said they always feel like they aren’t even sure how it should be pronounced, and after going through all the comments and possibilities, I can say that I’m not surprised people are confused!

Quite a few people seem to use two different pronunciations depending on the context, whether they are talking about one or more animals, or even just randomly. Merriam-Webster calls the “kai-oat” pronunciation “chiefly Western,” but that’s not exactly what I found. Among my responses, almost nobody in California or Arizona reported saying “kai-oat,” for example. It could just be that the people in those states who say “kai-oat” aren’t active on my Facebook page, but that seems unlikely.

How to Pronounce ‘Coyote’

So after all this research, what do I think you should do?

If you’re in the U.S., both the two syllable and three syllable versions are fine. Use whatever you prefer or what’s dominant in your region.

But if you’re outside the U.S., it’s probably better to stick with a three-syllable version like “coy-oh-tee” or “kai-oat-ee.” But my research outside the U.S. isn’t as extensive, so if it’s important, you might want to look into it more.

Mignon Fogarty is Grammar Girl and the founder of Quick and Dirty Tips. Check out her New York Times best-seller, “ opens in a new windowGrammar Girl’s Quick and Dirty Tips for Better Writing.”

Same same…but different.

We’d love for a clear winner to emerge, but often, the reality is our subjective personal preferences are really the only sticks we have with which to measure competing options.

In many ways, this is the case with scope reticles and turrets measured in minutes-of-angle versus milliradians.

In fact, the last grudge match I mentioned above — between metric and imperial units — is apropos here, because MOA versus mil or mrad boils down to just that: a difference in how we format degrees of angular measure.

I know this can be confusing, but we’re going to break everything down and try to demystify the topic for those of us who just want to know what we should choose.

We’ll look at the differences between MOA and mil measurements, figure out what’s relevant to you as a shooter, and see if we can find any strong or even weak reasons to prefer one over the other.

What’s an MOA?

Minute-of-angle is just an angular measurement. It’s based off the number of degrees in a circle — 360 — and the number of minutes in a degree — 60. This is an arbitrary arrangement going all the way back to the Egyptians and Mesopotamians that is used simply to provide a standard of measurement.

They divided a circle into 360 degrees, basically because they used a base-60 numerical system (we use a base-10 system). So we do too. Because history.

OK, some of you might be saying … What does that even mean though? Think of it this way. Let’s say you’re looking at a target that’s 100 yards away. Now, imagine there’s nothing around or under you, and a circle appears around you, where you are at the center of the circle, and the outside edge of the circle passes through the direct center of the target.

If you divide that imaginary circle into 360 degrees or 360 pie slices, and you walk out and measure the distance between those degrees or slices, that distance would be 62.83 inches. This means that at 100 yards, 1 degree of angle measures 62.83 inches. Does that make sense?

Good. Now, if we were to further divide that degree by minutes, we’d get the number 1.047 inches, because there are 60 minutes in a degree.

By the way, isn’t it interesting that our measure of one minute-of-angle is very close to 1 inch at 100 yards? That’s partially why, when we’re sighting in a rifle using an MOA-based scope, we often shoot at targets with 1-inch grids on them. At 100 yards, if all of our shots hit within a single square, we can be sure we’re shooting a sub-MOA grouping.

Though this is purely coincidental, for our purposes as shooters, it’s extremely convenient, because this relationship between distance and minute-of-angle holds mostly true as we move out by 100-yard intervals. At 200 yards, one MOA equal 2.094 inches. Out to 1,000 yards, 1 MOA equals 10.47 inches.

You can find your MOA measurement by multiplying the distance in yards by 1.047, then dividing by 100. And at each increase of 100 yards, you’ll find that you’ve added roughly 1 inch to your MOA measurement. You’re basically just adjusting your measurement to “shooter’s MOA,” which is just your MOA rounded down to the nearest inch measurement.

What’s a Milliradian?

So, like MOA, a mil or mrad is just an angular measurement. The difference is, while there are 21,600 minutes in a circle, there are 6.2832 radians in a circle, and each radian has 1,000 milliradians in it, so there are 6,283.2 milliradians per circle.

Incidentally, a milliradian is a measurement derived from the International Standard of Measurements, which is the same system that gave us the metric system. So if you hate the metric system, you might want to stick with MOA.

Jokes aside, the only practical difference between MOA and mil is that the unit of measure is different. There’s nothing magical or mysterious going on here. We’re just talking about the same difference between inches and centimeters.

At 100 yards, a mil subtends — or measures, for our purposes — 3.6 inches. Just like 1 MOA measures roughly 1 inch at 100 yards. At 200 yards, 1 mil is 7.2 inches. At 1,000 yards, 1 mil is 36 inches.

To find your mil, just multiple your distance in yards by 3.6, and divide again by 100. That’s it. It’s that simple.

But Wait … Is It That Simple?

Let’s get into what the differences amount to. You probably immediately noticed that 21,600 minutes is a lot more than 6,283.2 milliradians. But you also know that scope adjustments are almost never done in one-MOA increments.

Instead, MOA scopes are generally adjusted on the ratio of one-quarter MOA per click (some shorter range or CQB scopes are in 1/2 MOA, check your user manual to be sure). That means for any MOA scope, 1 click will equal 0.25 inches at 100 yards (assuming your scope is in 1/4 MOA clicks).

Milliradians are also divided on most mil scopes by tenths. That means that each click on a mil scope is 0.36 inches at 100 yards.

In both cases, these finer adjustment intervals give us more precise control of where our reticle is pointing. Also, MOA-based scopes are a little more precise — 0.25 inches versus 0.36 inches at 100 yards.

That said, the difference isn’t substantial. At 1,000 yards, for instance, one-quarter MOA subtends to roughly 2.6 inches. At that same distance, one-tenth of a mil subtends to 3.6 inches.

There are confounding factors, of course. It’s possible to have a mil-dot reticle and a turret that adjusts using MOA. Also, to further complicate the issue, we need to consider whether the scope you’re using places the reticle on the first or second focal plane.

But how to actually make an adjustment at range, or what the difference between a first- and second-focal plane reticle is, are topics for another article.

Practical issues aside, there are so many factors to long-range shooting that this relatively miniscule difference in precision isn’t going to make or break your ability to hit your target. So, we’re left with personal preference to make our decision.

Let’s go over why we might choose one style over the other for our shooting pleasure.

Your Application Matters

Neither system is inherently superior to the other. In almost all situations, both systems of measurement will serve adequately for your shooting needs.

If you grew up hunting using MOA, and you’re familiar with that system, my suggestion is to stick with it if that’s your intended application. This is especially true for me, because I don’t advocate taking shots at game beyond 400 yards, in almost all circumstances. But that ethical question is for you to decide.

For the average shooter, I do think the practical relationship between 1 MOA at 100 yards and 10 MOA at 1,000 yards is somewhat easier to understand and use effectively.

If, however, you’re getting into long-range shooting as a sport, you’ll have a few more issues to consider, and you’ll very likely want to go with a mil-based scope. It’s safe to say that in tactical situations — and, by extension, sport-based long-range shooting applications — mil scopes have superseded MOA scopes.

Basically, because the mil system is popular with the military and law enforcement, the civilian market has adopted it as well. But this isn’t purely an aesthetic decision, in my opinion.

There are several reasons mil systems are popular, but it essentially boils down to two facts. Using mil turret adjustments is much simpler when ranging with mil-dot reticles because you don’t have to make an MOA-to-mil conversion, and you will have to make fewer clicks with a mil-based turret to make a correction (because MOA turrets are more precise, and thus require more adjustment clicks for a correction).

If you’re used to making that MOA-to-mil conversion, however, you might not think making the adjustment is difficult at all. Ultimately, you can train and become proficient with either system.

Now, all of this takes practice. When you’re shooting at long-range, you’ll inevitably be doing various mathematical calculations. When it comes to the difference between hitting a target or not, the simplest method is probably best.

This is a big part of the reason why the mil system has essentially taken over tactical and long-range shooting applications. At greater distances, many shooters basically just find it easier to use.

If that isn’t enough for you to choose mil for sport long-range shooting, consider this: it’s the system most other long-range sport shooters are migrating to, if they haven’t already. It makes sense to be on the same page for the sake of simplicity, in my opinion.

And I prefer to use an MOA scope, so I’m not just a mil fanboy.

Try Something New

Take my opinion with a grain of salt, and tinker around with each system if you can. Give both a try, or if you’re new to one of them, focus on that for a while. Make your own investigation, and figure out what works best for you.

Neither system is cooler than the other. Don’t just pick one or the other because of what the military uses, or because your grandfather refuses to try something new. We’re literally just talking about a standard of measurement, after all, and you can learn to become an excellent shooter with either one.

Do you use MOA or MIL? Have you switched from one system to the other? Tell us all about it in the comments! Looking for a badass scope? Take a look at the 9 Best Long Range Scopes!

“Nothing shoots flatter, hits harder,” said Alaskan Master Guide Coke Wallace nonchalantly, though with a slight grin. Without missing a beat, I added, “Or is more accurate.” Many riflemen can just as easily recite Weatherby’s immensely successful marketing motto; however, atop a ridgeline in the 49th state’s rugged interior, and nearly a quarter mile from a downed mountain monarch, that message rang especially true. And, on the cusp of Weatherby’s 70th anniversary, it couldn’t have been conveyed any better than with Roy Weatherby’s original magnum big-game chambering—the .270 Wby. Mag.

The BeginningsSimilar to that of bullet pioneer John A. Nosler, Roy Weatherby’s quest for “something better” had its origins in a failure in the hunting fields; in this case, it was a wounded—and ultimately lost—Utah mule deer buck in 1942. Reflecting on the unpleasant escapade, Weatherby pondered the virtues of high-velocity impacts; specifically, he theorized that total disintegration of the projectile maximized “shock,” even on less-than-ideal hits, and thus the result would be rapid expiration of the animal. Additionally, flatter trajectories and reduced time of flight reduced errors due to range misestimation and wind-driven bullet deflection, respectively. Weatherby’s thoughts on the matter first appeared in a rebuttal to a Sports Afield article entitled “Mania for Speed,” which was penned by Maj. Charles Askins. The result? A large portion of the magazine’s readers agreed with Weatherby’s beliefs, and some of them became his very first customers.

So began the Weatherby story.

According to Weatherby: The Man. The Gun. The Legend. by Grits and Tom Gresham, “By the time he started in business [1945], Roy had developed the .220 Rocket (based on the .220 Swift cartridge, with a changed taper and shoulder), the .257, .270, and .300 Weatherby Magnums.” Given the popularity of the .270 Win. at the time (and even now), it’s little wonder that the first of his proprietary magnum cartridges—developed in 1943—was a .270, too; however, his creation was a radical departure from normalcy. Weatherby first shortened the belted, .300 H&H Mag. case and greatly reduced its taper, thereby amassing additional space for propellant. Nosler Reloading Guide No. 7 reveals that the .270 Weatherby Magnum’s case capacity is approximately 82.0 grs. of water, which is about 17.4 grs. more than that of the Winchester cartridge. Next, he gave it an unusual, double-radius Venturi shoulder design, which, according to weatherby.com, “Increases the velocity of escaping gases without increasing the pressure within the cartridge, [and thus] results in higher velocity within standard pressure ranges.” Interestingly, whereas the .270 Winchester’s SAAMI-assigned maximum average pressure (MAP) is 65,000 p.s.i., once “adopted” in 1994, the .270 Weatherby Magnum’s MAP was set at 62,500 p.s.i.

Delving deeper, the .270 Win. has a maximum case length of 2.540″, so the .270 Wby. Mag. at 2.549″ is ever so slightly longer. Moreover, while the .270 Win.’s cartridge overall length (COL) is 3.340″, its Weatherby counterpart is a shorter 3.295″. The COL alone was instrumental in Weatherby’s initial success, as it was a relatively simple procedure to re-chamber an existing .270 Win.-chambered rifle for his brainchild; in fact, the process only required re-reaming the chamber and altering the bolt face diameter (0.473″ to 0.532″) and the magazine. Weatherby offered similar conversions from .300 H&H Mag. to his potent .300 Wby. Mag.

The aforementioned case characteristics all contributed to Weatherby achieving his vision, as when loaded with identical bullets, the .270 Wby. Mag.’s velocities bettered those of the Winchester by 150 f.p.s. to 400 f.p.s., depending on the projectile’s weight. The cartridge design alone was insufficient to achieve said velocities, however; Weatherby also had to extend the rifling-free “throat,” or “free bore,” considerably, thereby enabling greater velocity potential without excessive pressure. Currently, weatherby.com lists the freebore length of .270 Wby. Mag.-chambered Mark V rifles as measuring 0.378″. Additionally, typical barrel lengths were 26″ or longer, which permitted better consumption (or a more complete burn) of the propellant.

As previously mentioned, Weatherby desired “total disintegration” of the bullet. As cited in Gresham, in a letter to gun writer Sam Fadala, Weatherby wrote, “I am one who wants that bullet to completely disintegrate inside an animal’s body. It seems to do more damage, by far, than just normal expansion.” Given the standard “cup-and-core” construction of the majority of the projectiles available at that time (and even today), significant weight loss, if not outright disintegration, was relatively easily achieved at velocities approaching 3000 f.p.s.; however, Weatherby’s hotrod .270 eclipsed that number by a significant margin. For example, factory numbers reveal that most of Weatherby’s 130-gr., .270 Wby. Mag. loads typically attain in excess of 3300 f.p.s. In comparison, bullets of identical weight fired from a .270 Win. achieve around 3100 f.p.s.

Weatherby’s views on high-velocity impacts and the .270 Wby. Mag. weren’t based on conjecture either, but rather on experience. For example, as detailed in Gresham, on June 14, 1948, Weatherby wrote, “Doctor shot his waterbuck, a fine one, too, with my .270 Magnum, about 150 yards. The waterbuck went down with a shoulder shot. When we skinned this fellow out, one could hardly imagine an animal being able to move after being shot the way he was with that .270 Magnum—he was torn up inside terribly.” Furthermore, on June 21, 1948, Weatherby reflected, “One thing is sure and that is—the bullet must be traveling at a certain velocity when it hits the animal in order to kill it by shock, no matter where it hits. I must find out at what distance or the velocity the bullet must hit the animal so that the shock instantly kills it. The .270 Magnum with the 150-grain Core-Lokt is not it—at least it has not proven to be so far. I am convinced at this point the 130-grain .270 bullet is superior at almost any point.” Ultimately, Weatherby concluded, “Of course, velocity means greater killing energy at greater distances—it also means more shock and greater destruction, but there is no substitute for the right spot … .”

Closing The DistanceFrom 1945 until 2002, when Winchester introduced the .270 Winchester Short Magnum (WSM), the .270 Wby. Mag. had reigned supreme in the realm of commercially available .270 chamberings—though it was considered proprietary until adopted by SAAMI in 1994. Following on the heels of its .30-cal. sibling, the .300 WSM, which was unveiled in 2001, the .270 WSM features a short, 2.100″-long non-belted case that, when loaded to a maximum COL of 2.860″, enables it to be chambered in lighter, short-action rifles. Despite its squat appearance, the case has minimal taper—from 0.555″ at the web to 0.538″ at the start of the shoulder—and a sharp, 35-degree shoulder that maximizes capacity. In Nosler Reloading Manual No. 7, the company lists its capacity as being about 73 grs. of water, which is approximately 9 grs. less than that of the .270 Wby. Mag. Because of its 65,000-p.s.i. MAP, though, the .270 WSM’s achievable velocities with most bullet weights are relatively close to those of Weatherby’s .270; the difference is usually within 125 f.p.s. or less. One must realize, though, that whereas the .270 Wby. Mag. is typically tested with a 26″ barrel, the .270 WSM is clocked from a 24″ tube, so direct comparisons are somewhat apples-to-oranges affairs. Is this enough to account for the velocity difference? Perhaps.

Really “muddying the waters,” if you will, concerning .270 supremacy, was Hornady’s introduction of Superformance ammunition. Through the formulization of highly progressive propellants, the company was able to achieve velocity increases upward of 200 f.p.s. from standard chamberings. The .270 Win. was among them; in fact, the 130-gr. loads attain 3200 f.p.s., which is 150-f.p.s. faster than SAAMI spec for “standard” loads and within 75 f.p.s. of .270 WSM loads using the same bullet weight. Interestingly, this is recorded from 24″ barrels in both chamberings, so it is a just comparison. Moreover, given that the .270 Win. has 9 grs. less case capacity, that is quite a remarkable feat. Since then, Remington has introduced its own “higher-than-normal-velocity” ammunition called “HyperSonic,” so the trend is building.

Taking the aforementioned into account, where does the .270 Wby. Mag. stand? There’s no doubt that, among the commercially available .270 chamberings, the Weatherby Magnum is still the fastest. That being said, the margin by which it’s ahead isn’t nearly as great as in the past; many .270 Win. and .270 WSM offerings are less than 100-f.p.s. slower than comparable .270 Wby. Mag. offerings. But, the growth of “long-range” hunting and shooting and leadless bullets gives the edge to the .270 Wby. Mag. Specialty “long-range” and long-for-weight lead-free projectiles occupy considerably more usable propellant space than their standard counterparts, which plays to the .270 Wby. Mag.’s voluminous case. Take the Nosler 150-gr. AccuBond Long Range (ABLR) for example, which measures an impressive 1.425″. Despite the bullet’s incredible length, the .270 Wby. Mag.’s case still has ample space for the propellant needed to achieve high velocities—an important factor in reducing drop and wind deflection (less time to target means less exposure to environmental conditions). Higher retained velocity also yields increased on-target energy. Remember, outside of long-range-specific bullets, most big-game bullets’ lower velocity limit for reliable expansion is 1800 f.p.s., so any increase is appreciated.

The .270 Weatherby Magnum’s ForteIn May 2013, I learned that I would be fortunate enough to hunt Dall sheep with Midnight Sun Safaris the following August. Although selecting the appropriate pack, boots and clothing would prove to be challenging, choosing the caliber, rifle and optic did not. Given the arduous climbing that would take place daily, cutting kit (and personal) weight was essential, as every ounce counts. Moreover, what better way to celebrate the upcoming 70th anniversary of Weatherby, Inc., than to use the Mark V Ultra Lightweight in Roy Weatherby’s first magnum chambering? The .270 Wby. Mag. is, after all, perhaps the best-suited option for sheep in the entire line. In discussions with Justin Moore, internet marketing manager for Weatherby, Inc., however, he suggested that I use the company’s valued-priced (soft-point), spitzer load (see sidebar p. 53). A flat-base “cup-and-core” bullet for sheep? To say I was surprised would be an understatement. “Trust me,” said Moore. Lastly, a Trijicon 3-9X 40 mm AccuPoint in Leupold rings and bases topped the rig.

After two days in transit, including a magnificent train ride from Anchorage to Denali National Park, our group was picked up at the train station by Coke Wallace, and the subsequent morning we were ferried via a single-prop airplane to “Moody International,” which is what Wallace named base camp. After confirming the scopes’ zeroes, we were prepared (or so we thought) for what lay ahead; boy, were we wrong. The next day proved to be the most difficult that I had ever encountered. During the 10-plus-hour arduous ascent toward a large band of rams, more than once I appreciated my choice of rifle. Despite our full effort, the rams evaded us, which lead to a long, tiresome and wet walk back to the horses; however, with it approaching 1:30 a.m. the next day, physically and mentally exhausted, drenched to the bone, and still about a half-mile from the horses, we decided to stop and start a fire to warm up and rest. It was the coldest night I’ve ever experienced. Welcome to sheep hunting!

After reaching the horses midmorning on day two (in a pouring rain no less), we headed for base camp, where we regrouped for the subsequent morning’s hunt. On day three, shortly after arriving in an unexplored drainage, Wallace and fellow guide Justin Cox spotted five rams near the top of a distant ridgeline. A Swarovski spotting scope confirmed that one ram met the stringent criteria for being legal to shoot. With cartridges in the magazine, but not chambered, Wallace, Cox, Moore and I began an ascent that, because of the rams’ vantage point, forced us to alternate approaches on several occasions. After more than an hour of climbing, we were finally within striking distance. Careful not to skyline ourselves, Cox and I crawled in advance of the others to reach a predetermined location for the shot. Just prior to exposing myself to their excellent eyesight, I chambered a round and deployed the Harris bipod. As I did so, Cox confirmed that the rams were 375 yds. away; however, because a younger (non-legal) ram stood nearby the elder one, I would have to wait for a shot. Finally, the immature animal moved a safe distance to the right, enabling me to take a shot. Having memorized the “drops” and drift at various distances, and with a 10-m.p.h. full-value crosswind, I applied the correct dope and pressed the trigger. At the shot, the ram bounded forward and stood motionless. Thinking that I had missed, I cycled the bolt and sent another soft point downrange, at which point the ram dropped and began an uncontrollable fall into what would prove to be a difficult-to-reach crevasse.

After reaching the animal more than an hour later, it was revealed that the first shot entered about 6″ behind the right shoulder and exited about 2″ behind the other, while the second shot entered about 2″ behind the right shoulder and exited through the left shoulder; in other words, both were lethal hits. Inside, there was considerable damage to both the lungs and the heart. I couldn’t have asked for better performance from a bullet at any price point. In addition to getting a beautiful trophy, the ram provided the finest meat that I’ve ever eaten, all thanks to Roy Weatherby’s .270—his original magnum and still among the best for long-range hunting.

Weatherby 130-gr. Spitzer Ammunition High-quality ammunition generally carries an equally premium price tag, and that reality is among the most difficult things for non-handloaders and the less-well-heeled to overcome in shooting Weatherby cartridges. Fortunately, a few years ago the company began offering an economical line of soft-point ammunition. Much of the cost of Weatherby ammunition comes from Norma purchasing premium, American-made bullets, having them shipped to Sweden, loading them and then transporting the ammunition back to America. While the Norma plant waits for said bullets to arrive, there can be down times in production. But, because the company also manufactures bullets, the decision was made to load its standard, cup-and-core spitzer bullets into Weatherby cartridges. And, because no purchasing or shipping costs (to the facility) are incurred, the savings can be passed on to the consumer. In fact, the loads (available in .240 Wby. Mag., .257 Wby. Mag., 270 Wby. Mag. and .300 Wby. Mag.) retail for $43 per 20 rounds, though I’ve seen them on midwayusa.com for $38. That is about half the price of the company’s premium offerings. As for the .270, the bullet, which has a .359 ballistic coefficient, is rated as reaching 3280 f.p.s. Given its non-bonded construction and the fact that there’s no built-in “mechanical lock,” considerable expansion is assured. For game up to and including caribou, these value-priced bullets are a good option. They certainly worked well for my once-in-a-lifetime shot on a Dall sheep.—Aaron Carter

.270 Wby. Mag.-Chambered RiflesAlthough there have been various rifles chambered for .270 Wby. Mag. through the years, including the Winchester Model 70 and Ruger No. 1, today, most are found within the American-made Weatherby Mark V line. Though the cartridge has yet to be released in the economical, Japanese-manufactured Vanguard Series II rifles, I am hopeful that will soon change. Mark V-series rifles chambered in .270 Wby. Mag. are: Ultra Lightweight and RC, Accumark, Deluxe, Lasermark, Sporter, Fibermark Composite, Euromark, Accumark RC, and Terramark RC. Among the newest is the Ultra Lightweight RC, which made its debut in 2014 and has a hand-laminated, raised comb Monte Carlo-style stock, 26″ free-floated stainless barrel with target crown, CNC-machined 6061 T-6 aluminum bedding plate, and six- or nine-lug fluted body bolt, depending on the chambering selected.

After the hunt, I spent considerable time at the range to wring out the aforementioned rifle; in total, I expended more than 200 rounds in meeting the American Rifleman accuracy protocol and function-testing. Of the four loads tested—Weatherby 130-gr. TSX, 130-gr. Spitzer and 150-gr. Partition, and Norma USA 150-gr. Oryx—the most accurate proved to be the 150-gr. Partition, which averaged 1.07″ for five consecutive, five-shot groups. The other loads averaged 1.22″ (130-gr. TSX), 1.40″ (130-gr. Spitzer) and 1.57″ (150-gr. Oryx). Recorded by an Oehler Model 36 chronograph at 13 ft., the velocities were: 3103 f.p.s., 3419 f.p.s., 3339 f.p.s., and 3160 f.p.s., respectively. The Mark V Ultra Lightweight RC retails for $2,400. The least-costly Mark V is the Fibermark, which retails for $1,400. Outside of Weatherby, Inc., .270 Wby. Mag.-chambered rifles can also be had in the E.R. Shaw Mark VII. Assuredly other custom builders will offer the chambering as well; however, they may, or may not, include Weatherby’s lengthy freebore. That is worth inquiring about.—Aaron Carter