Gentlemen,
I would very much appreciate your thoughts on what I intend to be my one and only "Heavy" Rifle... I have a full Custom M70 Classic in .375 H&H and I am about to start on another Classic in .375 H&H to correct some of my earlier rifle's mistakes. It will be built on an Echols Magnum Legend Stock and use Darcy's 3 piece Oberndorf Bottom Metal with a Wiehe 4 round magazine and a steel extractor. There is a small chance it could go .375 Weatherby, however, more likely than not it will be a nimbler .375 H&H with a #4 or #4.5 Krieger CM Barrel at 22"... Maybe a Schmidt Bender with my favorite German No. 1...

On to the main question. I want to build a legitimate heavy. I'm strongly considering a Satterlee Arms Long Magnum setup in .450 Rigby with a 4 round drop magazine trigger guard. I realize this will be a 4-5 year project. The metal work likely being the quickest part of the entire affair. My questions are as follows:

1. If I build the .450 Rigby as a Heavy it is arguably a PH's Rifle and should be built with a single rear bridge, a round front, excellent irons. To say nothing of a traditional Mauser 98 flag safety that makes it impossible to mistake the safety condition with throwing the rifle to shoulder in eye line.

2. That being said he offers, and has built in .416 Rigby fashion, a double square bridge long magnum in .450 Rigby that has both bridges setup for either Smithson or a new copy of the late Mr. Burgess's Scope Ring. This does not make an integral quarter rib and front sight any less useful, however, it does require a Model 70 Safety and the whole purpose of the rifle begins to become somewhat muddled to me. The .450 Rigby is not, at least to my ignorant perspective, supposed to be all that versatile...

It is intended to put down African Buffalo and the like... If anything the scope might allow you to thread the needle should you have the skill to direct the .450 with the required precision. In short I am wondering if the .416 would not be far more ideal for scope use and the .450 more ideal for irons... Or am I failing to see the larger picture? Your thoughts are greatly appreciated...

Regards, Matt.

I am not an expert by any means. That said, I have talked with many, many PH's and outfitters and I have hunted Buffalo in Zimbabwe.

Craig Boddington and I are casual friends, and I have all of his books as well as many others. You will learn an awful from his book "Buffalo" alone about calibers for the real Big Boys.

I bought a CZ in 450 Dakota from Safari Kid about eight years ago. 2450+fps with 500gr bullets. Killed my Buffalo.

If I were you, and wanted that "one and only" I would:

A. If I wanted the satisfaction of having one built to my specs in six months or a bit more, buy a CZ 550 (416 Rigby bolt head) Magnum action from Brownells and send it to Wayne Jacobson at AHR or get one from him. He is the Shelby of CZ's. He probably has a couple 458 WM or Lott CZ barrels in his shop. He will fit the barrel, chamber it in 450 Rigby or Dakota, make a proper stock for it, and fine tune it.
You will have a rifle you can enjoy shooting by fall or early winter.

That will let you go about ordering the bits and pieces you have listed, and have it made to your specs. In the meantime, you will be shooting your 450.

B. Buy one out of the box from CZ. You get what you get, especially for wood, but you could be shooting it in two or three weeks.

I much prefer Option A. You will be able to sell it down the road when your fancy one is ready to deliver.

Rich

I would get a bolt rifle in 416 Rigby.I would not get a bolt rifle in .450 caliber or above but get a double instead.The 450 is a stopper and for short distances so it would be best to have the quick second shot.
If I was getting a bolt I would much prefer a custom like a Satterlee-he uses a stock guy who posts here too and you would get a fine rifle.The only downer in getting a custom would be the price.
A 450 bolt is a poor mans solution to hunting Africa so it would not make sense to go custom in this caliber.I think doing this would lower the value of the rifle too.

416 ruger MKII in stainless syt stock.

There is hardly a more durable capable handy bigger bore out there

there's a 458 lott ruger in the ads right now -

as this is to be your last and god know i have had some ugly ones

it appears simple based on your several comments

cut to the chase, call J.P. Smithson Gun Maker and set up a build based on your conference.

416 rigby with all the accouterments [also his specialty] seems a place to open talks, one night having had a spot of good scotch I may even upsize that to a 450 rigby kind of a thing

then the big questions, do i get it in classic wood, synthetic carbon fiber stock, or god forbid both interchangeable to hunt w

yes it will be a 3 year kind of a thing but when you are done you will be done. inside and out, from quick irons to effective snap off glass

now for the best part -- at the end of all this: it will not feel cheap, you won't be ashamed to take her down town and show her around to your better friends, nor will she let you down in a charge.

So there is just one more thing -- the long leged rather well formed ars "kind of a look" he slaps on those things will come in handy when you are sitting in the big chair next to the old dog laying by the hot fire of a cold winter night. Expect higher purpose to creep in as you hold a scotch tumbler in your right hand eyes lost deep in the flame and your left hand moving ever so subtle tracing her irresistible curves she laying there light to your lap. Each stroke gently pulling you back, back into unforgettable memories in far field and warmer reflections of other women, a bit deeper, yet no less rich.

Its at that point you will be grateful for the fit and finish you paid so dearly for.

the older you get the more you will feel it.

Matt,

I have kind of been down this road - have recently built (last 5yrs) a 416 Rigby and a 450 Rigby. Both were built on magnum length Double Square Bridge Mauser actions. The 416 was built on a Granite Mountain action and the 450 Rigby was built on a Satterlee action. Both actions have a 0.70" bolt diameter and not the larger 0.75" bolt diameter.....I would strongly recommend going with the 0.70" diameter bolt. Both of my rifles are set up with 1.5-5x VX3 scopes in claw mounts.....I would also recommend scoping both calibers. Iron sights are tough to use in low light or when the animal is standing in a shadow. I would try to keep the finished rifle weight at 9-1/2 pounds or less.....when loaded etc want to carry no more the 10 pounds in the African heat. Both calibers should hold 4 rounds down. Good iron sights are a must.

Duane Wiebe built both rifles. The 416 Rigby barrel was built by Ralf Martini. Both actions were put on a diet (trimmed up) to remove any excess metal/weight.

416 Rigby barrel with integral quarter rib & recoil lug



416 Rigby





Satterlee action - 450 Rigby











450 Rigby also has integral quarter rib and recoil lug

just a slight WOW! factor there...

I am hoping my 6,5 and 8mm X68 on 1090's come out this well.

MHC,
All I can say is incredible... You have helped me to make up my mind. I am going to build both. I have the resources, I think lest anything grand comes along, and I hopefully have the time. Further I have a fair relationship with Mr. Wiebe so far and could very well see us working together...

Single square bridge .450 Rigby with Flag Safety and Irons & matching Double Square Bridge .416 Rigby with M70 Safety and two Schmidt Benders in rings fitted(fore and aft) to the ring relief milled bridges... I will no doubt be in touch for a few pointers on setting up the barrels and having them stocked...

I would really like to go with something that LOOKS similar to the french walnut in this Model 70 built by J.M. Penrod, J.C. Tucker, and Terry Wallace. That said I dunno if .416/.450 Rigby French Walnut is different in grain structure, especially through the wrist, from .270 Winchester French Walnut... Likely so. Still I find this little sporter handsome... WILL be going with a PAD on the Rigbys...(grin)















Regards, Matt.

Matt,
If that .270 is available, I am a buyer!!!

Wow! That stock on the 270 is amazing.

I owned a CZ in 416 Rigby with Kevlar stock & had fun with it.

You are in a different zone! Wish you all the best and hope to see the picture when done.

BTW, I suspect that the Batogne Walnut may not be ideal for the heavy recoil rifles. I always thought that the English & Turkish species was the densest and best grain for heavy recoil guns.

dogcat,
I lucked upon it by accident. Turns out it was commissioned by a friend who passed before his time in 2011. I would not part with it for twice the price it was offered at.. Thank you for the thought though...

Nakihunter,
The stock is French Walnut, however, I suspect you are right. I've read enough to know what is passable for one is not ideal for the other...

The more I think about this, the more I want Stephen Heilmann to do the job. 7 out of 10 times when I fall head over heels for a rifle her has had a hand it in's construction. www.metalandwood.com

Will need to talk to him about Magnum Mauser Receivers as well...

Regards, Matt.

In my humble opinion, all any client hunter ever needs is a good .416 that he shoots well. I've got bigger, but I'm not carrying the "stopper" and I don't shoot the bigger rifles as well as my .416. Makes the choice easy.

quote:

Originally posted by lavaca:
In my humble opinion, all any client hunter ever needs is a good .416 that he shoots well. I've got bigger, but I'm not carrying the "stopper" and I don't shoot the bigger rifles as well as my .416. Makes the choice easy.

Best post on the thread

quote:

Originally posted by AnotherAZWriter:

quote:

Originally posted by lavaca:
In my humble opinion, all any client hunter ever needs is a good .416 that he shoots well. I've got bigger, but I'm not carrying the "stopper" and I don't shoot the bigger rifles as well as my .416. Makes the choice easy.

Best post on the thread

Not sure I follow your logic and here is why.

On the last tusk less elephant hunt I went on the PH had a 375hh and I had a 450Rigby.....the hunting was in thick brush and the elephants were encountered at hand shaking distances.....oh and they tended to be cheeky. Needless to say I didn't fill over gunned and questioned my intelligence more than once......but it's a free world, so you take what you want.

Originally posted by Nortman:
Matt: As you know of Echols rifles, I would do this, look at his Legend Heavy Sporter with peep/ghost sight.

Get a FN M98 action with the "proper safety for DG hungting", Wiebe bottom metal, McMillan stock, build a peep/ghost sight and a good front sight. What I mean is, just copy that rifle, with a M98 action.

Caliber 458 WM..


It would be a cross between Echols Heavy Legend sporter, and Phil Shomakers "Ole Ugly".

quote:

Originally posted by Nortman:
Originally posted by Nortman:
Matt: As you know of Echols rifles, I would do this, look at his Legend Heavy Sporter with peep/ghost sight.

Get a FN M98 action with the "proper safety for DG hungting", Wiebe bottom metal, McMillan stock, build a peep/ghost sight and a good front sight. What I mean is, just copy that rifle, with a M98 action.

Caliber 458 WM..


It would be a cross between Echols Heavy Legend sporter, and Phil Shomakers "Ole Ugly".

Nortman,
I know and respect Darcy. I have the privilege to talk with him for an hour every now and then and he is far, far too generous reading my posts on some sites and commenting via e-mail complete with personal pictures... A very kind man.

If I wanted a Legend Heavy Sporter with a peep sight in .458 WM I would call him and order one in .458 Lott. You can shoot one in the other but not vice versa... My desire there is subdued by Darcy's own commentary of those who know what they are getting themselves into and further that Leopold & Stevens tested one of his Legends in .458 Lott on some sort of Recoil Machine(I know that was weak) and they said it registered the "fastest recoil impulse(or word to that effect) that they had ever measured. That keeps me happy with a .375 H&H in a Legend. No real desire for more... Never had a desire for a .416 Remington as it loses the benefits of the huge Rigby case. Relatively low pressure and not as susceptible to the heat and vibration experienced in a rover over time. No doubt no round does well with this, however, some do better than others. Would guess the .416 Rigby would do better than the Remington of the same bore.

I suppose the reason I have not is that I am fascinated by Magnum Mauser's and proper English Walnut which Darcy WOULD & COULD do with a Hartmann & Weiss Action in one of his Classics. However, we would be on the other side of my limit for a "using rifle". It would be a looking rifle...

If I am fortunate, and I have been in many ways up to this point, I hope to have such a rifle built and serve me well in the field. I want to look at worn rust blueing and weathered walnut despite it's beauty and grain. A rifle that is a reminder of memories and NOT of how much I paid for at the time... To many superb builders in the using price range that can deliver what I am looking for... I may be proven wrong, however, if history is the best indicator of future events this is accurate IF you are careful and a little lucky.

Regards, Matt.

quote:

Originally posted by Matt in Virginia: ...not as susceptible to the heat and vibration experienced in a rover over time.

Hi Matt-

Would you mind explaining what you mean by this? Just curious. Thanks in advance.

Kenati,
In this instance I am living vicariously... I've read the .416 Remington particularly has proven susceptible to exposure to both heat and vibration from the safari vehicle. As I said before NO ammunition reacts well to exposure to heat and vibration, however, if what has been reported is true the old Rigby operating at significantly lower pressure(made possible by case volume) has done better than the relatively short exposure time the high pressure .416 Remington Magnum has done when exposed to similar conditions. The concept is simple enough just as the same case run at Weatherby Pressures would be as bad or worse...

Regards, Matt.

I've read the same, but only in relation to the use of certain types of powder and too short barrels.

I've not read anything in recent years suggesting that this is an ongoing problem.

MHC-TX

Your rifles are incredibly beautiful

One BIG question - both rifles have the front scope ring around the front objective lens! Did you have any problems with that?

I mounted my CZ4550 in 416 Rigby like that and bound the lens was squeezed and it started to get spots on it. Sent it off to Leupold for replacing the lens (along with photos) & they asked me not to mount the front ring around the lens but behind it.

I had the exact problem with another scope & rifle with same results - tiny "bubble" like spots on the lens. One of lens also chipped a bit at the edge.

quote:

Originally posted by Nakihunter:
MHC-TX

Your rifles are incredibly beautiful

One BIG question - both rifles have the front scope ring around the front objective lens! Did you have any problems with that?

I mounted my CZ4550 in 416 Rigby like that and bound the lens was squeezed and it started to get spots on it. Sent it off to Leupold for replacing the lens (along with photos) & they asked me not to mount the front ring around the lens but behind it.

I had the exact problem with another scope & rifle with same results - tiny "bubble" like spots on the lens. One of lens also chipped a bit at the edge.

I haven't had any problems with this set up with the Leupold vx3 on a 416 & 450 Rigby. Also, have a 375hh with a Swarovski z6 with the same set up (only 30mm tube) and no problems with it. This topic has gotten a lot of press on the Gunsmithing & Custom Gun sections......seems to be an emotional topic. The way Mr. Wiebe mounts the ring puts most of the ring in front of the lens.

quote:

Originally posted by Matt in Virginia:
Kenati,
In this instance I am living vicariously... I've read the .416 Remington particularly has proven susceptible to exposure to both heat and vibration from the safari vehicle. As I said before NO ammunition reacts well to exposure to heat and vibration, however, if what has been reported is true the old Rigby operating at significantly lower pressure(made possible by case volume) has done better than the relatively short exposure time the high pressure .416 Remington Magnum has done when exposed to similar conditions. The concept is simple enough just as the same case run at Weatherby Pressures would be as bad or worse...

Regards, Matt.

With all due respect, what you have read is an overly hyped issue that happened with early loads. With the powders available now, there are temp insensitive powders like Varget, and multiple powders that let you reach the magic 2400fps with a 400gr load and not have a compressed powder charge. There is load date available that can go beyond the 2400fps by a decent margin. There has been more than one person who has put the 416 rem to the test of hot texas summer weather, with no issues. I would be more worried with the 416 ruger for pressure issues than the Remington. Some people will simply not let what now is a myth, die. I would do more research on the issue, and you will see it's bogus these days.

quote:

Originally posted by Matt in Virginia:
Kenati,
In this instance I am living vicariously... I've read the .416 Remington particularly has proven susceptible to exposure to both heat and vibration from the safari vehicle. As I said before NO ammunition reacts well to exposure to heat and vibration, however, if what has been reported is true the old Rigby operating at significantly lower pressure(made possible by case volume) has done better than the relatively short exposure time the high pressure .416 Remington Magnum has done when exposed to similar conditions. The concept is simple enough just as the same case run at Weatherby Pressures would be as bad or worse...

Regards, Matt.

Thanks for the clarification. I too have a .416 Rigby and do take some peace of mind knowing I am not "hotrodding" the case to reach velocities even excess of 2,400 fps with 400 gr bullets. However, I was more baffled by the alleged vibration issue.

It seems all modern powers have coatings to control burn rate, so I assume vibration could erode or even begin to breakdown those powders, which in turn could lead to variations in burn rate and/or increased surface area, further leading to pressure issues.

But does anyone have any OBJECTIVE evidence to support this?

It would be an interesting experiment to place a few rounds (secured of course) into a paint mixer for various amounts of time and then pressure test the loads.

Again, just curious.

quote:

Originally posted by tygersman:
I've read the same, but only in relation to the use of certain types of powder and too short barrels.

I've not read anything in recent years suggesting that this is an ongoing problem.

This is why you need to finish your man cave... We have Dr. Frankenstein-like experiments to test these hypotheses and address the hearsay.

A couple of things come to mind so were I in your shoes..I first of all I would be perfectly content to hunt any animal on the planet with the .375 H&H..Its only bad side, according to my good friend and elephant hunter Johann Calitz, is poor shooting by those who cannot shoot.

Other than the .375, my favorite all time big bores include the .375 H&H and 9.3x62, the 404 Jefferys and most of all the .416 Rem. I like the .416 Rem. or Ruger mostly because it can be had on a 06 length action and Im opposed to bulky and over sized heavy rifles that I have to pack in all manor of weather, so Im good with the .416 Rem. as hard to beat.

The only reason I never preferred the .416 Rigby was size and bulk and the same ballistics as the 416 Rem or Ruger..The same for the 404 but to a lesser degree than the Rigby, however I suffer from nostalgia therefore the 404 was one of my all time favorites..I had several on 375 actions and on 30-06 actions but preferred the magnum Mauser actions as it had more room for the larger 404 case.

I assure you that the bad press on the 416 Rem was pure BS by someone who suffered from the delusion of adequacy..When a .416 or any caliber shows signs of pressure in any kind of weather it is because one used too much powder in it...African heat is no different than heat in the USA, I was raised and ranched on the Texas border and some days reached past 125 degrees in the shade..I have run test on big bore rifles and let them cook on truck hoods for hours then shot them..loaded to 2400 FPS none of the 40 calibers showed signs of pressure. I loaded a Rigby to 2700 FPS and it tested fine..The 416 Rem to 2450 FPS and the 404 to a bit over 2600 FPS and no problems..The 2400 FPS are the loads I used in Africa year after year, as have so many others.

Your question is and will be answered by those who are prejudice to what they own, a human failing of which I also am as guilty as the next guy.

I love my .450 Rigby and it shoots one-hole groups at 100 yards. Proper fit means less felt recoil, period. Go with what you can handle the best. I stop at the .450 class (.470-475 No. 2) as the next step up is not as pleasant for me to shoot (.500 NE).

I went simple and relatively cheap. A NH M70 416 Rem. I sent the bolt off to Dan for a touch of tig then it went to Tip Burns for a banded front sight and pre-64 African rear sight courtesy of Jim Wisner. Lastly a McM stock, Michael Scherz bases with Talley rings and all is good. It shoots very, very well and will see Zim in 2018.

MHC,

I just had to say that is an absolutely beautiful rifle you have. I am not ashamed to say that I am extremely jealous!

Boxhead,
Great choice on that Wisner pre war 375 sight..I built Palmer, who used to post here a 404 Jefferys on a magnum Mauser action and it had a quarter rib, so I ditched the base of the Wisner and installed the sight in the quarter rib..I loved it and I could change loads or whatever and wasn't locked in to one load with the adjustable sight..

Gentlemen,
So much is the case with repeating what one hears & reads from the gun scribes... I do apologize for perpetuating a rumor.

Boxhead,
The Talley Bases look a bit like a $750 custom item offered be an excellent metalsmith I know. Not quite but close...

Smart looking rifle by the way.. Silver's Pad or Winchester?

Regards, Matt.

Matt, my recommendation is if you're going to go for an anchoring rifle, particularly if you're having it built, go with a 500. A 505 Gibbs, or 500 Jeffery (I'd go with the Gibbs if your action has the bolt diameter) shooting a 570g bullet at 2150 fps won't kick any harder than a 450 Rigby and probably hit harder at the far end as long as you keep your shots under 150 yards. You can always load up your 570g bullets to 2500 fps if your shoulder can stand it, and then it will shoot as flat as your 450 Rigby and hit even harder.

Best of luck with your custom rifle.

If I had the recoil tolerance and money I would have a 450 Rigby on an FZH, with Smithsom mounts. I'd have the Smithson peep sight for 500-600gr big game bullets and a scope matched to 350gr TSX bullets with a 200 yard zero.

quote:

All I can say is incredible... You have helped me to make up my mind. I am going to build both

I knew there was not a first and last big bore.

Duane

I was referring to this picture posted earlier

quote:

Originally posted by Duane Wiebe (CG&R):

quote:

Originally posted by Nakihunter:
MHC-TX

Your rifles are incredibly beautiful

One BIG question - both rifles have the front scope ring around the front objective lens! Did you have any problems with that?

I mounted my CZ4550 in 416 Rigby like that and bound the lens was squeezed and it started to get spots on it. Sent it off to Leupold for replacing the lens (along with photos) & they asked me not to mount the front ring around the lens but behind it.

I had the exact problem with another scope & rifle with same results - tiny "bubble" like spots on the lens. One of lens also chipped a bit at the edge.

This ground has been plowed before. The front ring,. mounted at the front of a Leupold 1.5-5 does NOT cover the lens.. The lens is mounted far behind the front of the scope./ I suspect yours was mounted about 5/8" back from the front../.THEN it could tend to crush the lens,,.,especially on the thin tubes used by Leupold .

Mounting a ring over the lens is best handled by actually gluing the ring, and not using a cheater bar to tighten

Duane, so just where is the front lens on the straight tubed Leupold because if you position the front ring near enough at the front of the tube on the 1.5-5x VX3 then the front ring on Boxheads rifle shown in his photo post must be close to being over the front lens of the same scope (if it is the same)?

Although a different scope the front lens in my 2x20 EER Leupold is centred where the gold ring is on the tube, about 10mm back from the front. I've got the front ring well back from that.

The ground may have been ploughed before but I though it was a legitimate question especially now that there are two examples of front ring mountings. Make that 3.

BTW exquisite workmanship on those rifles.

I would never own a heavy rifle that could not do double duty with a low powered scope in QD mounts and a good set of express irons on the barrel as well.

Some will say that such a set up is not "possible" because of the higher line of sight needed for the scope.

But that is nonsense. A well-built heavy rifle absolutely can do double duty. Just a slight difference in head position and cheek pressure on the comb of the stock is all that is needed.

The key, of course, is the "well-built rifle" part!