Ray B,

Is that one of the Talley bases with ring integral to the base?

Sambarman338,
Working on your book now, following proper reading procedures.

Hope to get to range tomorrow.

Rip ...

Yes, the bottom side of the base fits the rifle and the top of it is the lower half of the ring. They are a light alloy and weigh several ounces less than the Redfield style bases and rings. Not an issue being attached to the 404, but being one piece it does result in one less thing to go wrong/work loose. I may swap out the bases on the other "featherweight" rifles, although I've long been a proponent of keeping the extra weight off of the waistline as a higher priority than the rifle.

Yep, good plan, pending the Bubba Gunwerkes SSEB-WM70P64 base.

The SSEB-WM70C ("C" for "Classic" which will cover most all Post-'63 M70 Winchesters) is going to be needed for this:



I have another .416 RemMag Winchester M70 that is prettier than the above, so don't much mind making the above an action donor.

The Nikon SlugHunter in Burris Xtreme Tactical rings fits here, on half of a front cross-slot, need a further extension to the rear base.
At least I was headed in the right direction with this .416 RemMag, Ross Seyfried would have approved:

After much soul searching, I have decided not to destroy the only .395 H&H (on a Pre-'64 M70, weighing only 7 lbs), the only .395 H&H in the world.
It is the perfect .395 H&H. A work of art by Rusty McGee. I cannot disrespect his work.

I have also decided to respect a CZ 550 Magnum that was re-chambered from .458 WIN to .458 Lott,
also by Rusty McGee.
It has an unchanged, residual SAAMI .458 WIN throat swallowing the SAAMI .458 Lott short throat.
Better than current SAAMI .458 Lott throat, and better than old original CIP .458 Lott throat that has since been updated to same as SAAMI.
I admit that it may be superior with short, light bullets due to the longer brass in the longer box magazine.
A .458 WIN cannot fully make use of the 3.8" box when limited to the shorter bullets.

So, the plan for the Ultimate .458 WIN, is just to convert a Connecticut Classic, Plain Jane, .416 Remington Magnum
with a .416 barrel a little bigger than No.5 Sporter,
and a 3-pound, phatboy stock.
It weighs 9 lbs 2 oz.
Came out of Connecticut about 1998.
It has a 1-pc bottom metal, which I prefer over the Pre-'64 2-pc.
At least 2 pounds can be taken off by changing both the stock and barrel.
I might be able to get this one down to 7 lbs 2 oz as a .458 WIN.
It will handle 3.600" COL in the magazine, and will eject a loaded/unfired cartridge of 3.730" COL.
And this rifle feeds FN solids of up to 3.500" COL very well.
Fantastic.
I got it all figured out, for the next .458 WIN,
and then I have one more after that, maybe ...

Two more replies and then we move on to page 75, for THE MISSION!

Rip ...

2 pounds of B&C instead of 3 pounds of walnut?

http://www.bellandcarlson.com/



Bell & Carlson stocks are fantastic.
$272 plus $15 S&H will get you one for M70 SA or LA, same price for the CZ 550 Magnum.
Your choice of color from B&C direct and almost half the price CZ-USA used to ask for them.
The B&C M70 sporter is just like the one on the factory Winchester M70 Extreme Weather.
With the full bedding block through grip to front sling swivel screw hole:
This would be better than trying to make a "Brown Pound'r" hold up to a .458 WIN.
There is the Crux of the matter.
After I added steel to the Pound'r, it would have been a 2-Pound'r anyway.

Rip ...

Those are my 3 favorite colors (including reply above this one) offered for these high-quality, very reasonably priced rifle stocks.

I do not care much for this color offering:



Last post before page 75, for THE MISSION.

Rip ...

quote:

Tell me a little bit more about this optic..

I have considered trying to find one of the old Nikon Monarch Africans.. You can occasionally find "new" old stock in the $250 range...

But at the price point, the Nikon Black Force 1000 with the illuminated reticle seems like a much better buy (brand new for $320 on Amazon).. Its got a 30mm tube, side focus, illuminated dot, etc.. that the African doesnt have.. for only a few bucks more)..

How has it held up to 458WM recoil so far?

Im looking for something that will stand up to several hundred rounds of 416 Taylor and not give me a problem..

Do you think the Black Force 1000 is up to that? (I thought these scopes were originally designed for AR type platforms? maybe I missed something...)...

Thanks!

Nikon's BLACK Series of optics will work for whatever application you need it too. I recently saw a BLACK FORCE1000 on a shotgun! It'll take the recoil and not let you down. It is also backed by Nikon's No Fault Policy including the electronics. That is a great set up and the mount looks rock stable!

mdwest and Barton Hege,

Thanks for the page-turner post, and the input on the Nikon Black Force 1000.

That is a new one for me, suggested by member Cold Trigger Finger.
Still waiting to try it when the weather breaks. Just waiting for some clear sky, or some bright white clouds instead of dark grey ones.

It seems to have all the bells and whistles for an AR or a shotgun, glad to hear from from Barton he knows of one proven rugged.

The Nikon SlugHunter has taken over 400 rounds of .458 WIN up to and including 500-grain TSX at +2300 fps in LongCOL loading. Still good.

I have loaded the .458 WinRuger at 3.340" to 3.350" COL for the BlackForce checkout,
starting with:

400-grain HV and 80.0, 81.0, and 82.0 grains of AA-2230 ... fills the case.
500-grain DGX and 74.0, 75.0, and 76.0 grains of AA-2230 ... does not fill the case.

Oops ...skies are brightening ...

Rip ...

My other concern knowing it was originally designed for an AR platform was eye relief.. but it looks like the Black Force 1000 has that covered very well...

Nikon Monarch African = 4.0 - 4.1" of eye relief
Zeiss V4 1-4x24 (another option I was considering.. but significantly more expensive) = 3.5" of eye relief
Nikon Black Force 1000 = 3.8-4.1" of eye relief..

I've got the Zeiss V4 mentioned above on a Win 70 in 375 H&H... shooting full power 300gr loads, the 3.5" is more than adequate..

I would assume 3.8-4.1" on the Black Force would be plenty for full power 416's...

Wheels are definitely turning now.. I am suddenly very interested in this optic..

At no time did I fear for my eyebrow today.
15 shots on the Nikon BlackForce all accounted for below.
The illuminated reticle still works.
I will continue working it over with 400-grain softs at +2500 fps, and 450-grain solids at +2350 fps, which is adequate recoil for an adequate test.
And those two bullet weights cover any really big game, with the right makes of bullets.

Rifle weighs 8 lbs 8 oz with scope bases only (8x40-ed & J-B-Welded).
Scope is 16.4 ounces: About 1 lb
Scope & low 30mm Burris rings: 1 lb 6 oz.
That is 9#14oz before adding the ammo.
The slip-on pad adds 4 oz.
10#2oz with no ammo.
I'll simply do the recoil calculations based on a 10-pound rifle for comparative thinking.

Will see if it can go +400 rounds like the Nikon SlugHunter did on Chimera WinCzechster.
Woodie will get a pounding.
Hey! I did not plan that pun. It just happened.
Another reply for the results ...

Rip ...

An accounting for all 15 shots, requires this.
This rifle and 500-grain DGX bullet at +2200 fps does hilarious things:
First of all, it shoots more like a shotgun pattern, and it shoots a lot lower at 25 yards with 500-grainer at 2233 fps than the 400-grainer at 2527 fps.
OK, understandable.
But if you speed the 500-grainer up to only 2255 fps,
it shoots a lot lower than expected, at only 25 yards!
The 3-shot groups are close to overlapping,
but the second group of three 500-grainers was aimed 3" higher than the first:



This rifle does not like the DGX with AA-2230.

I was displaced by a grandfather out there with a 6 y.o. granddaughter and a pink chipmunk rifle today. Nice.

They had the only spot on the rifle range that is level enough to stand a tripod-mounted chronograph on and still be able to see a target.
50 yards only is my usual for chronographing.

So the Range Master gave me dispensation to do the chronographing at the 25-yard pistol range, since nobody else was there.
Perfectly level and protected from the wind there, by side berms.
Nice.

I now have some loads to go back and shoot at longer ranges, no chrono needed, praise The Lord!
I used the same brand of chronograph today as member 4sixteen has pictured lately: Caldwell.
Mine is the "G2" that has some built in lighting if it gets too dark. Sensors sit at the top and look down at the base of the triangle.
Worked fine after 4 PM today, no artificial lighting needed.
Low-angle sun illuminated the bottom screens well.
Supposed to work from 20*F to 140*F.
Winter is coming!



That is one of 4 optical chronographs that I have to destroy before thinking of "LabRadar."
This one was bought over a year ago, just now getting to try to destroy it.

Lighting is not a problem now, except I will have to go to "the country range" to shoot at dusk or dawn
for low light check on how the illuminated reticle works in dim light.
Yep, The BlackForce still lights its reticle after 15 shots! Whoo hoo!

Rip ...

Another point:
A LongCOL .458 WIN (3.6" box) gives up nothing to a ShortCOL .458 WinRuger (3.4" box).
Load results are almost identical, but the .458 WIN is a little slicker to feed and crowds magazine depth and width less.
This dramatically reinforces what can be done with a slightly longer-loaded .458 WIN.
The only drawback is you need a 3.6" magazine box instead of 3.4". I'll gladly deal with my pet's necessity.
The .458 WIN is better than a .458 Lott if both are coming from a 3.6" magazine box.

Rip ...

My big hangup with the BR 1000 is it's moa and not mils. I don't mind the 2nd focal plane.
Believe it or not, I actually range with the reticle. At least on ruminate and smaller game.
Its good to hear the 1-4 can take shotgun recoil.

Each click of adjustment on the Nikon BF is 0.5 MOA.
That is very close to 1/8" at 25 yards.
After 15 shots, the half-inch nuts on the Burris Xtreme Tactical rings were not quite "white-knuckle tight."
Next time I will torque to 65 inch-pounds with a FatWrench and see if they loosen then.
A 30mm-tubed scope that weighs 16.4 oz is pushing the envelope on a .458 Win.
But it is a happy push so far.

Rip ...

quote:

Originally posted by RIP:
the .458 WIN is a little slicker to feed :
Rip ...

Than the WinRuger


Do you attribute this to the slightly narrower WinMag or the lack of a shoulder?

Ray,
It is the overall, taper from belt to case mouth that makes those .458 WIN carts pack better in the magazine of this MkX Mauser.
It holds 3 down with .458 WIN, but cannot quite make 3 down with .458 WinRuger, due to the width at the shoulder of the latter.
A Ruger Hawkeye box is a little roomier, would hold 3 down with .458 WinRuger.

I just got stuck with a .458 WinRuger because of the chamber rings FROM THE FACTORY.
That is how Woodelle Whitworth became Woodie Whitworth.
Disgusting!

I am going to get some 30mm OEM Ruger rings for Alderella "Knik Knocker" Ruger, and switch the Nikon BlackForce over.
Further Nikon BF testing will be with the .458 WIN.
Same 400-grainers at +2500 fps.
Same 450-grainers at nigh onto 2400 fps.

Rip ...

Of course Alderella Ruger will be loaded LongCOL
in preparation for the ultimate, as yet unnamed, Winchester, a .458 WIN 3.6-Inch ...
Oh! That's it! Ultima is her name!

Rip ...

My brain works fine with MOA instead of mils.
MOA is more straightforward IMHO, by a factor of 3.6, at least!
So the center dot of the SpeedForce reticle is 2 MOA.
That means it takes 2 clicks of the scope to go from top edge of the center dot to the center of the center dot.
But then there is the complication of a bullet trajectory.

NIKON SPOT-ON takes care of that:

Handy for when you have that .458 WIN zeroed at 100 yards with the BlackForce scope and want to shoot a little farther:

Just for yuks, here is some ballistic data out to 2500 yards:

If the scope is zeroed for 200 yards, the bullet is less than 2.5" high at 100 yards: +2.47" at 100 yards.

If the scope is zeroed at 25 yards, the bullet is less than 3" high at 100 yards: +2.92" at 100 yards.
It is then back on zero again at 215 yards,
1 foot low at 320 yards,
2 feet low at 380 yards,
3 feet low at 425 yards,
4 feet low at 465 yards,
and about 5 feet low at 500 yards.
How inconvenient!
Better carry the handy-dandy Nikon reference material in my pocket.

Not sure about that reticle, RIP. To me it's kinda fiddly and a bit Von Däniken.

One thing does confuse me. At 1500 yards the drop relative to line of sight becomes more than drop from the muzzle. this doesn't seem correct, but as I say, it's confusing. But then a holdover of more than 750 feet does not seem like a shot that I would have a probability of hitting anything other than the ground.

Glad to see you using Spot On! I have worked with both the designer and the computer brains behind this program. It truly does work but as with any program, it is only as good as the data you enter. Measuring sight height, MV with a chronograph are just 2 examples. I have worked with groups brand new to BDC reticles and watched guys turn into believers when they blow up a 4 inch jar of tannerite at 600 yards or hit a can of soda at 600+. As with any scope,rifle and ammo combination being realistic is also important. Just because the data says it can be done doesn't mean it's the right thing to do. Using a 1-4 magnification scope, realistically what is the furtest shot you would take? My son has used that scope to take a pig at just over 300 yards, I on the other hand probably wouldn't shoot at game beyond 250 yards.

Going by the old rule of 1 power mag increase per 100 yards. A 4 power scope is at least fine to 400.
Depending on light and things. 400 is totally doable with the 1-4×24 SWFA SS Classic I used for 2 caribou seasons so far.

In a former life I would regularly put shot in the black at 500 yards using a no power front sight blade and rear aperture. the thought of not only being able to skip the sight alignment and focus changes from front sight to target would have made 1000 yard shots (a mere twice as far) seem entirely possible - but that was then and now is now- 50 years later.

quote:

Originally posted by sambarman338:
Not sure about that reticle, RIP. To me it's kinda fiddly and a bit Von Däniken.

sambarman338,

I am not sure about your disdain for modern scopes either,
but I am working on it with reference to other material.
By the time I learn something about scopes I will feel like I have an advanced degree in gunnacology,
the Munitions Doctorate in Gunnacology.
Gunnacology is a field that imbraces all aspects of weapons and ammunition, all materiel of war and sport hunting and shooting.
Remember, all gunporn is not without redeeming social value, just some of it.
I am sure your work is going to add much to THE MISSION.

Front cover:


Back cover:


"Sam B. Mann" is another variation on "sambarman338."

The book is not about the "Scopes Monkey Trial" though that comes to mind at first glance at the cover.
But it is about "evolution" of scopes, not monkeys to men.

Rip ...

quote:

Originally posted by Ray B:
One thing does confuse me. At 1500 yards the drop relative to line of sight becomes more than drop from the muzzle. this doesn't seem correct, but as I say, it's confusing. But then a holdover of more than 750 feet does not seem like a shot that I would have a probability of hitting anything other than the ground.

Ray B,

Of course my inclusion of ballistics to 2500 yards is just a bit of monkey business to stimulate MISSION SUPPORT.
Thank you.

Could it be that "Path" bullet in tracking the trajectory has gone up and is coming down at more of an angle than the "Drop" bullet that just started off level and never got the extra height.
So the "Path" bullet is diving with a little extra speed and passes up the "Drop" bullet on the negative Y axis.
Maybe remaining velocity applies only to the "Path" bullet.
I don't know.
Just trying to make some sense of the apparent monkey business in the numbers.
If Barton Hege worked on the program, maybe he knows?

Rip ...

quote:

Originally posted by Barton Hege:
Glad to see you using Spot On! I have worked with both the designer and the computer brains behind this program ...

Barton Hege,

Thanks for the reply. Yep love the Nikon Spot ON!
Can you help us with the monkey business on "Path" bullet being lower than the "Drop" bullet at 1525 yards and beyond?

Blame Cold Trigger Finger for getting me on the BlackForce-SpeedForce kick.

Rip ...

The something wrong, RIP: I had to look five places down the page to find this thread.

quote:

Originally posted by sambarman338:
The something wrong, RIP: I had to look five places down the page to find this thread.

Well, thanks for the btt, Sam B. Mann.

I am at a loss except to say I am waiting for Midway USA to deliver the last set of 30mm Ruger rings that were in stock, of the type I wanted.

Might as well add that a Ruger No.1 in .458 WIN, patterned after this .500 A-Square would be a hoot,
except to use an even longer octagon barrel and no muzzle brake needed:





Note that the Gunsmith did mill out the slot for the H&H moon bead this time around, so it does fold down all the way.
It is a shame that ERA does not make them work as they come from NECG, I cannot understand that.
The ramp front sight is held on with a single 8x40 screw and JB weld. Gunsmith milled the hole for screw and added that to the single set screw from ERA.
He also milled the bottom of the ramp for a perfect fit to barrel that is 1.000" diameter at 27" length.



It is 29" with brake screwed on.
Like a 25"-barreled bolt action.
Light and handy.
11.25 lbs with slip-on rubber recoil pad and NECG peep on the Picatinny rail.
A scope adds another pound or two or three.
It depends on the scope used and the 4 rings used:



And the Rusty McGee tang safety mod:



Still trying to figure out how to put a tang sight on a Ruger No.1 for that special octagon-barreled .458 WIN,
the one meant for bison shooting re-enactments with a cowboy hat worn for increased authenticity.

Rip ...