I hate to jump in and keep this going, but this is a pet peeve of mine. Will is correct in that the difference in a Taylor and Rigby recoil is simply the momentum transfer difference of the powder. However, the difference is not simply the difference in weight. The momentum transfer of the bullet and the momentum transfer of the powder are calculated at their respective velocities. For cartridges in this general class, the velocity of the ejecta is generally acknowledged to be around 4700 to 4800 fps. For this reason, the difference in free recoil between the two loads is almost exactly twice the differential powder weight, assuming a 2400 fps load. I don't know what specific loads we are discussing, but a look at a couple of loading manuals will show that Rigby loads are by and large right around 100 grains of powder. Taylor loads are generally right at 70 gr. This is a 30 gr difference (on average) in powder charge which by the free recoil formula would be equivalent to changing bullet weight by 60 gr. This says that a Rigby shooting a 340 gr bullet at 2400 fps would recoil the same as an identical Taylor with a 400 gr load at 2400 fps.
I have several rifles in both these calibers, and that pretty much sums up my shooting experience. My Taylors with full bore loads seem to recoil about the same as a Rigby with 350 gr loads at 2400.

I don't think anyone would argue that dropping 60 grains from the bullet weight isn't a significant difference in recoil. Just look at all the recommendations above about starting with lighter bullets and working up.

None of this is to say that you can't learn to shoot comfortably with a Rigby. It's just that I think there is way too much advice for beginners to buy a Rigby or buy a Lott, when 30 gr of powder or 200-300 fps really do make quite a difference in recoil. Yes you can load a Rigby or Lott down, but they will still recoil more than a Taylor of 458 loaded down, and they may not be the best choice for someones first big bore. (At least with the Lott, you could shoot actual 458 loads for reduced recoil, but I think this is an emergency action. I for one wouldn't want to subject my chamber to the long term erosion of the shorter cartridges.)

Art S,

I don't understand this momentum transfer thing. My understanding of momentum transfer, from physics books, is that there must be a collision between two bodies before momentum can be transferred from one of the bodies to the other. Just were in the firing of a firearm does either the bullet or the powder collide with the shooter, heck both of these, the bullet and the powder, are going away from not toward the shooter!

Also, why does my friends Tikka 338 Win mag and my other friends Savage M110 30-06 both kick far more painfully than a Ruger M77 MkII RSM 416 Rigby loaded to 416 Weatherby levels? Specific loads are:
30-06 - 180 gr bullet with 53 gr H4350
338 Win Mag - 250 gr bullet with 67 gr H4350
416 Rigby - 350 gr bullet with 104 gr H4350

Thanks

Art,
very well said, and from a good experience POV... I hear some folks (not picking on you will) say "how slight can the difference be"... well, take 20gr out of your 416 rigby load and see how much lighter the kick is... Sure, you won't get the same velovity, but you will see a DRAMATIC change in recoil...

Allen,
Yes, if the pwoder differnce is signifigant, the felt recoil will be less. And a darn fine example of the difference

with a 10# 404 and a 10#416 rigby, 400gr at 2400 ... i have shot both of these loads, but placed into QL to get recoil...

404 79 gr, 53.33 ft-lb, 18.52fps
416 101.4gr = 63.61ft-lb and 20.22

You WILL notice the ~20% more felt recoil of the 416 rigby over the 404, and about 10% faster.... and for about 20 grains of powder,
the difference is about the same as a 375 hh, loaded to 2600 with a 300gr bullet (seems nearly everyone does this) in a 9# gun... 43.32, 17.59...

So, if one feels going from a warmly loaded 375 to a spec loaded 416 rigby is "HUGE", then they would instanstly relize, upon shooting, that 1/2 of "HUGE" is a lot... and that 1/2 of huge is about 20gr of powder in this case...

BTW, the step from 375 to 416 is a small one.. the step from either to a lott is a LARGE one.


jeffe

As long as I am on pet peeves connected to this subject, let me air out the other one I mentioned. I don't know how many times I have seen someone advised here to buy a Lott, because you can always shoot 458 for practice. I think this is terrible advice. Prolonged shooting of 458 in a Lott chamber will yield erosion in the front of the chamber in exactly the same way it does in the throat of a normal chamber. Given the clearance and its length in front of the cartridge, there will likely be considerable blowby until the bullet fully engages, and the erosion may actually be much more severe. It is not inconcieveable that long term use could alter/roughen the front of the chamber to the point that Lott ammo would be sticky on extraction. I would view the firing of short ammuntion as an emergency move only, not as a cheap practice method. I know this is done in revolvers frequently, but pressures and velocities are much lower and erosion less of an issue.

Art S,

Where is the collision between the shooter and the bullet/gas for the momentum transfer?

There is no momentum before the explosion resulting from the ignition of the propellent. The energy from the explosion is transformed into momentum when the pressure is applied, equally in all directions, to the initially inert bullet and rifle. If the bullet were welded into the case you would have a bomb. The pressure exerted on the rifle, which may weigh ten pounds, is equal to the pressure applied to the bullet, which may weigh 400 grains. It is easier to overcome the inertia of the 400 grain bullet than it is to overcome the inertia of the ten pound rifle.

This may be totally wrong but I felt pretty good saying it.

quote:

Originally posted by Will:

A 400 gr. bullet leaving at 2400 fps is the same from wherever it is coming...

That's completely true, but it's not true that what happens to the person behind the gun will be the same in all cases.

What happens to the person behind the gun will depend on (among other things):

1. The weight of the rifle.

2. The shape of the stock.

3. The amount (weight) of the powder in the charge that propels the bullet. (The powder, along with the bullet, is part of the ejecta from the cartridge when it is fired, so the powder weight and velocity needs to be included in the calculation of recoil.)

4. The physical position of the person firing the rifle and the way he/she handles the rifle.

I'm as guilty as everyone else in using the term "momentum transfer". What actually happens is that the generation of the gas and its subsequent expansion imparts a momentum to both the bullet, the rifle, and the ejecta. The momentum is generated, not transfered. Empirical correlations have tended to focus on the bullet and the ejecta at the muzzle, but actually the momentum builds over a period of time. Until the point the bullet exits the muzzle, the rifle is basically accelerating in one direction and the bullet and ejecta in the opposite. Once the bullet leaves the muzzle, there is no more interaction between the rifle and bullet weight. However, the ejecta accelerates to a much higher velocity, and the rifle accelerates in the opposite, increasing its momentum. Think of the rifle as a rocket during this phase.

With all due respect to Americans hunters. Why are Americans so scared of recoil? You never read any British or European hunters talk of recoil!!!

I also feel that most local ranges are set up for shooting big cal. guns! H&H shooting grounds in the UK has a great standup bench for want of a better description, this is very comfortable to shoot big guns from.

I personally like to shoot big guns off the bonnet of my jeep. Take care not to shoot too close to the windscreen it will Break!

reddy375, Americans want to shoot their rifles accurately and well. And while they may have the reputation of macho dumbbells in Europe, they take a pretty practical view on at least one thing and that is shooting firearms. If you can't stand the recoil you will not shoot it well. You're right about Europeans and you can ask almost any PH in Africa his experience with Europeans who show up with 460 Weatherbys.

quote:

Originally posted by Will:
A 400 gr. bullet leaving at 2400 fps is the same from wherever it is coming, except on AR.

Fear not there will be a flood of reports that a Taylor will recoil less, or is it more, than a Rigby, and the other way for a Remington.
!

Yes, in total isolation, the bullet at 2400fps is the same.. but the amount of powder burnt to get there, the weight of the rifle, and the shape of it.. heck, you could even have a 400gr "rocket" that had basically zero recoil...

Take 20 grains out of your 416 rigby load and see if it kicks the same... sure, it doesn't do 2400fps anymore...

but that's about the load of a 416 rem, now aint it

Being a CZ 416 Rigby shooter, FWIW I'll put my 2 cents in...

I had the Ruger 416 Magnum years ago. I practiced with it off the sticks and took it hunting a few times. It was pretty heavy, and was not very well balanced for a tree-lean or even the sitting position. There was so much added weight forward of the action (due to the rib) that off-hand shooting was simply out of the question.

I sold the Ruger and bought a CZ Magnum in 416 the following year. I must say that I have been very happy with the choice. The CZ is better balanced and is simply more comfortable to shoot. I think the overall finish quality of the Ruger was better, but that doesn't mean much when some old dugga boy is coming out of the bush to ask you on a date!

Make no mistake on recoil, however. It is stout. I really would not recommend shooting from the bench at all. That would be a very good way to develop a flinch. Some years ago I made up a heavy walnut load-testing sled and always use it for velocity and accuracy testing on my heavy rifles. I only fire my 416 sitting, standing, on the sticks or off-hand.

I honestly believe that anyone that can shoot a 375 can shoot a 416 equally as well, and the 458 winmag is more or less in the same field... it's not until you get to about 2250 with a 500gr that recoil becomes an issue, that you have to train HARD to ignore or at elast do the same thing, every time.

compared to a 458 lott and up, the 416 rigby is a PLEASANT level of recoil, and the 416 taylor is a bump...

then again, that's speaking from the other side of 116ft-lb...


I'll say it again, the ALL of the 416s are fairly easy to learn to shoot, if you are willing to practice and work up to it.

jeffe

Ooooh, I'm at the center of controversy? My perfect chance to make up some other mumbo-jumbo!

The recoil thing is just personal. Given the same rifle, stock, etc., you can warm up to recoil given enough exposure but to what level is a personal thing. Saying, for example, that the Lott is no worse than the 416's, which are no worse than the 375, which is no worse than.... is just not true.

I can handle the 416's and the 458 WM in light rilfes (in my particular case 7.5 lbs. and 8.3 lbs., respectively) but I admit that the jump to the Lott or even less with a poorly designed stock is beyond my recoil tolerance, except when actually hunting. The 9.3 lb. Lott I had was brutal even shooting off-hand at the range. The 9.5 lb. 470 NE I had was just as brutal. 4 or 5 rounds and headache central.

So when the 8 lb. Lott is done, it will only be fed light loads until I am amongst the jumbo.

I used to live in fear of the 7mm Rem. Hey, if you can't stand the recoil, why not just admit it and more on, or try to gradually sneak up on it? I would recommend that the big guns be approached gradually! It usually works.

Bill,
I said the 458 WM is no worse than the 416, and specifically say the lott is a whole nother animal...

change the gun parameters, of course you change the recoil picture...

apple to apples, not organges to blue, k?

*I* find a 9.5# lott to be a good recoil level to begin to think "okay, this one kicks"... but I shoot an 8.25# 458wm.. and it's a ball.. i built it for my youngest son, when he was 16... and all of 5'6, 135# dripping wet... he's now asking for my 500 jeffe, which is a BRUTE at 9.5#, 2450 fps

Jeffe,

Indeed we are on the same page.

Jeffe: What's a good weight for a bolt 450 Dakota, 10lb give or take? jorge

quote:

Originally posted by jorge:
Jeffe: What's a good weight for a bolt 450 Dakota, 10lb give or take? jorge

Jorge,
what does the dakota do, 2400? 10#, with the correct LOP would be a fun rifle

Bill,
we gernerally are

jeffe

Yep, 2400. Working the LOP issues as we speak...jorge

AllenBosely:

I think you said it all in the first sentence of your post about "being a little concerned about recoil". To be honest, this old retired hunter thinks of that kind of wording as saying that recoil does matter. I'm not meaning to insult you. (I have had a life long sensitivity to muzzle blast. Anything over 3000 fps going out the muzzle will get a reaction from me) Of course, I think the 375 is a fine cartridge ( my user name says so!) I will say that the ability to shoot with no thought whatever of a flinch goes a long ways in placing a bullet effectively. I shot the 416 Rigby AFTER I came back from a one time trip (sadly, only one trip) to Africa where my 375 dropped a buff. A friend invited me to shoot the rifle. (Sadly, I don't remember the make) I found the rifle to be somewhat sharper in recoil than the 375 -but not to the point of rattling my back teeth. I had shot my PH's DB 470 about a half dozen times and still found the recoil similar to the 375, of course a little heavier ( a push rather than a kick) I never got back to Africa to shoot at a buff again. I used to say that if I ever went back to shoot at a buff at 35 yards that I would use a 76mm recoilless rifle (and the 375 had finished him with the first shot) I became a believer in the old joke about the man who was asked why he carried a 600 Nitro Express -at the time, the largest rifle caliber available -"because it's the biggest I can get!". If you feel comfortable with the 416 Rigby, then that's what you want to carry. Just my thoughts.