I have a m77 MK II in .416 Ruger being made that will be sporting a factory walnut stock from another M77 Mk II. Rifle will be scoped with VX-2 1-4 Leupold. On the bathroom scale, loaded I am getting about 8 lbs. What is the ideal weight I should be looking for? Thanks

I would say you were just about right. I've never been much for really heavy weight rifles. Since when I'm in d g country I pretty much hunt everything with a d g caliber and the rifle gets packs around far more than it gets shot. Some guys have told me their 416 Taylor HAS to weigh 10~11 lbs. Yuk!! My last one weighed 9.5 and I gave it to a young guy. Probably more important than the actual weight is the balance. My 458 is balanced at the forward action screw. It is fast in a fight but harder to hit with for the longer precision shots. A friends 416 Rem has a fair amount of barrel hang and is great for more precise shots. As in he can center punch clay pigeons are 200 meters off hand with it. His rifle weighs about a pound more than my 458.

Might be good to remember that while gumboot may not be recoil proof ... he seems to be recoil resistant!

I need at least another pound for me. Maybe I am a bit lanky (tall thin) or weak?, but that is my thought. I am probably being conservative (meaning the weight helps me). I dont have a large sample of 416 guns fired to draw on. My Ruger RSM Rigby before mounting scope seemed to handle the recoil fine, with scope pretty sweet. Since you asked, your plan sounds more along lines for a 375 than a 416.

The Ruger Alaskan 375 is 8lbs. That sounds fine by me. And loaded with a scope even finer.

It would be interesting if you would report back after building and shooting the gun. I'd be curious who made the better guess here.

I would like that 8 pounds loaded and scope.
Closer to 7 the better.
Shoot 400 @ 2,200 unless you are going big and nasty.

8 to 9 will be just fine ,, remember, under 100lbs, the accuracy of your bathroom scale may be 5 lbs ...

8 lbs is a plenty. You don't want more than that. Would be better if the rifle weighed 7-7.5 and if you added a small leupold, bases, rings, that's 1 lb more. Most of the B&Ms come in at 8 to 8.5 with AI wood stocks and scope. Some with the Ultimate stocks come in 1.5 lbs less, which is great as well! 416s don't have much recoil.

Michael

I like my 416 taylor at the 10lbs it weights scoped loaded and slinged I don't think I would want a 416 ruger any lighter.

Just to muddy the water and be a pain in the ass, I vote for 9lbs all up. I've walked over hill an' dale with 7lb rifles and 10lb rifles. At the end of the day, they ALL feel heavy. Go too light and you won't shoot it much -translates into not being very practiced with it when the balloon goes up.
-Take care, Nick

I like 416s to weigh under 8 pounds with scope removed and no more than 8 1/2 pounds scoped. When an unscoped 416 gets around 8 1/2 pounds, it's too heavy for my taste.

So most of you would say yes to the out of the box Ruger Alaskan at 7.75 pounds!

For a big bore,I'd go with 9 3/4lbs- no scope and empty with most of the weight being near the action screw or the rear sight area.

I always considered that a 458 Win should weigh at least 10 lbs. Then I bought a Browning Safari in 458 Win. It only weighs 7 lbs. 13 Ozs. Much to my amazement the felt recoil is much less than either of my 465 or 470 doubles that weigh over 10 lbs. It is entirely due to the stock design of the Browning.

465H&H

quote:

Originally posted by 465H&H:
I always considered that a 458 Win should weigh at least 10 lbs. Then I bought a Browning Safari in 458 Win. It only weighs 7 lbs. 13 Ozs. Much to my amazement the felt recoil is much less than either of my 465 or 470 doubles that weigh over 10 lbs. It is entirely due to the stock design of the Browning.

465H&H

Felt recoil is never less,IMO.The stock design will determine if the muzzle will rise or come straight back.On a big bore a slanted obendorf style stock will cause muzle lift and you could end up getting the hit by the action in the head.

I understand where you are coming from, but I disagree in that "felt recoil is never less". My experience is the complete opposite.

The energies generated may be equal, but how these energies are distributed through the stock to the end-user can be changed dramatically. Weight is one, and is only one factor, when all else is equal. But, materials and material design of the stock substrate can be a factor when overall weight is identical. Recoil pad materials, design, and shape can be a factor when overall weight is identical. Differing overall fit and design of the stock shape can distribute the energies over a broader area when the weight is identical. Etc., etc., etc.....

Weight is indeed a factor that can alter felt recoil, but proper execution of the other factors above, can also dramatically alter the end-user's felt recoil, even when the weight is unchanged. A mere throwing on of excessive weight, in the former, to tackle recoil IS NOT a universal method to reach the best overall results. Whereas the proper execution of the later, in additon to having regards to weight, CAN result in a better balance of the overall handling characteristics of the rifle while keeping recoil within the end-user's range of tolerance.

This topic relates to a 416Ruger, which basically can be related to most standard 416s such as the Rem and Rigby. Recoil generated from these cartridges ARE NOT that extreme, and can easily be mitigated in a well handling, normal sporter weight package. There are no universal requirements for a 416 to be built around a truck axle to tame any exessive recoil. There are no energy levels inherent within a well stocked 416Ruger that would require one to absolutely RUIN the sporter weight design of its platform.

Not everyone road hunts out of a hunting vehicle. Though these designs could be used with equal success out of such road hunting styles, their design is such that they can excel in areas that may require one to hunt many, many miles while living out of a backpack and a pair of boots. If throwing four or five pounds of excessive weight onto a sporter weight 30-06, 300WM, or 338WM would ruin its overall handling characteristics, well it would also ruin the 416Ruger just the same.

Best

When I first started shooting big bores I thought that the recoil was different when I shot off the bench,standing,using different rifles, after I cleaned etc... Now,after firing 4000 or so rds I realized that it was all in my imagination.In other words,just because you may think that you felt less recoil does not mean you actually had less recoil.A 416 will kick like a 416 regardless if you have a plastic stock,a rifle with a slanted stock,longer barell or whatever.I am glad I got over this recoil crap and focus on more productive areas.Oh yes,to feel the same recoil each time you need to place the stock pad on the same spot on your shoulder and keep it there for each shot,which requires skill to do.

With all else being identical, technique alone can dramatically alter end user felt recoil. One could use proper technique with zero issue. Another can shoot the same rifle with improper technique where the user induces slop. The user then tends to stay stationary while the rifle gets a running start before abruptly hitting the stationary shooter. Recoil energies are identical between the two, yet the first guy has zero issue while the second guy is physically injured requiring medical attention with a severely bruised shoulder, broken nose, and laceration over the eye. I think it fair to say THERE WAS A MONUMENTAL HUGE DIFFERENCE IN FELT RECOIL BETWEEN THE TWO!

Regardless chambering, shooting from a seated bench restricts the shooter's ability to manage the recoil over a larger portion of their stature. Recoil forces are then concentrated into a smaller area. Recoil energies are the same, but they are distributed over a smaller area of the end user, which does result in a greater felt recoil.

There are far more factors involved than weight alone.

Best

I am sure if I placed the butt on my head I would feel more recoil too.

No you wouldn't

And every on e knows synthetic stocks asbsorbe recoil .

9 1/2 pounds with a scope is about right for me. Personally I don't mind carrying a 9-10 pound rifle all day and I find heavier rifles to be easier to shoot, and recoil less.

quote:

Originally posted by 300magman:
I have a m77 MK II in .416 Ruger being made that will be sporting a factory walnut stock from another M77 Mk II. Rifle will be scoped with VX-2 1-4 Leupold. On the bathroom scale, loaded I am getting about 8 lbs. What is the ideal weight I should be looking for? Thanks

I don't mean to avoid or confuse the question, but really the answer probably varies from one guy to the next. Also, the answer probably varies in relation to some other factors. The way the rifle fits you is the first variable that will affect felt recoil. The quality of the recoil pad, etc., etc.

A lot about recoil is in a guy's head too. For example, I think I can truely feel more recoil when my 458 has a scope on it compared to shooting it with iron sights only. Obviously that's imagined, especially since the rifle is lighter without the scope and rings.

Anyway, I place a lot of importance in good stock fit, and good recoil pad, and good technique in holding the rifle right. It would bother me if I had to tote around an extra pound or two, just to compensate for failing to do something to manage the recoil of a lighter and handier rifle.

My 458 is relatively light. I don't know its actual weight. The way I deal with it is handload at my tolerance level, and shoot for fun and practice. Soon enough, I find that I can step it up a bit. So far, I haven't topped out, and there's still some room in the case for more powder, just in case it's needed.

I just picked up a pound of AA 2230 for just that purpose. I'm kinda thinking one of those 350gr TSX bullets at 2500fps would be sorta fun, and would basically turn a black bear inside out. Hopefully it would make a big impact on a brown bear's disposition too, if needed.

KB

With a 350gr TSX @ 2500 f p s. If you can see a line to the chest cavity or the heart in particular. There is no angle on a big bear where you can't get a killing shot if you are in the 25yard range or closer.

My Remington 416 rem mag Big Game Rifle is about 8.5 including the scope a 3x9 Nikon with Burris Signature rings on weaver bases with a sling and 4 rounds.I like to shoot 350 gr Speer Mag tips at 2400 fps .It will kill anything in North America.I am really suprised that the 416 Ruger has not taken off better than it has.I have seen very few for sale .I thought they would sell like hotcakes in Alaska .I hope it does not disapear.There is a big need for 416s under $1000 .I bought all of my 416s for around $600 each including the Remington Big Game Rifles and my Model 70 Win .I paid $1000 for my stainles kevelar stocked model 700 416 .I really like it alot but I added a muzzle break and a floorplate from a 700 bdl.The 416 416 is alot of gun for the money.I think you will really like it!!!

Rifle weight, just like caliber, cartridge case, bullet weight, stock material and beauty...is in the eye of the beholder...whatever happens to float your boat.

Perception(likes and dislikes)is subjective, constrained by past training/learning, and so forth. It's YOUR toy, make it fit YOUR concept of beauty.

There isn't anything right or wrong about rifle weight per caliber except maybe it takes a gorilla to handle a 5 pound 458 Lott or larger.

Luck

My 500 Jeffery weighs 11.5 lbs with scope and I wouldn't want it an ounce lighter ... Wouldn't want someone to have to remove the scope surgically from my skull ....