I recently shot my first .416 Taylor and was presently surprised. I had studied all the ballistics, but was driven to the Taylor primarily by the desire to build a light and short heavy rifle. The thing that really intrigues me after shooting is how efficient the cartridge is. I have never been one to put a lot of importance on this when performance suffers. Too many people have quoted efficiency and talked about this or that round being much more efficient and "only" a couple of hundred FPS slower than a larger one. However, in the case of the Taylor, it seems to enjoy that efficiency with almost no loss of performance. The Taylor commonly achieves similar velocities to the .416 Remington and .404, while burning 70-75 gr of powder vs 85-95 gr. Velocities are often close enough to be lost in the barrel length differences. Recoil seems mild for a cartridge of this size. A lot of this has to be due to the lower powder charge, which is major contributor to high velocity recoil.

Is this capacity vs performance relationship valid in general for big bores, or is the Taylor an anomaly? For whatever reason, it's a shame this will probably never be a commercial round. For the minimal difference, it would have been a supremely better choice than the one Remington made.

Art - It would probably help if you posted your load data and your chronograph results. You might want to toss in your barrel length & manufacture and bullet weight & type.

I'll do that when I get home. However, my question was intended to be generic. One gun doesn't prove anything. If you look at a lot of the loading data available, it seems that, for instance, the Taylor typically reaches about 2350 fps max with 400 grain bullets at "normal" pressures with 70-74 grains of a powder such as RL15. The .416 Remington generally is shown with max loads at 2400 to 2450fps and similar pressures, but with much higher powder charges, due to the larger case. It just seems that the Taylor case is an absolute optimum for this bore size. Most larger cases are simply burning more powder. Even the huge Rigby case, while lower in pressure, is not that much lower. ( I think this lower pressure factor is a carryover from Cordite 75 years ago and way over-emphasized with today's powders.)

While this relationship between small and large cases is always true, there is generally a little more return than found in the .416 bore. I just wondered if this diminished return is general as bores get bigger and bullets heavier, or if the Taylor just happens to be a perfect fit.

While I think the 416 Taylor is a neat round, and I just may have to build one down the road, I don't know that the differences between it and the rem mag are really as great as you are stating. I believe the rem mag burns some 10% more powder. I also think the Taylor comes up short on the 400 gr @ 2400 fps goal that the 40 cal folks strive for.

Personally, I don't see burning 10% more powder to gain an extra 100 fps to be a bad trade off, which is where I see the Taylor vs the rem mag. If you had to burn 20% more to gain 100 fps, like the ultra mags do, then I see it as a bumm deal.

Art - If you are using RL-15 and 74gr, how compressed is your load??? What bullet were you using? Please do post your data when you get home. I am very interested in seeing your results...

The Taylor, with a long barrel, is topped out at 2350... 2400 for a fast barrel... My starting loads for the 416 rem is 2385 (87 gr win 760) with 400 grain pills.

BUT
The taylor recoils less at 2350 than the reminton does at 2400, and it is VERY effecient.

Turn it another way...

Loaded to 2300, the taylor burns less powder, and is more effec, but it can not get into the 2400+ range.

I am a big fan of the taylor, and it's effec gets very close to the bottom of the 416 rem/rigby... but that's it's top..

Yet, it's like a 308/30-06 or 300 win/300 wound-a-beast... slight overlap, but the top performance always goto the bigger case

Take my 376 steyr, i can get 375 HH out of it, and that's IT.. the 375 CAN be loaded up another 100 or nearly 200 fps faster than the factory loads.

jeffe

I too have a taylor and 2350 is about maximum . I frankly could care less about efficiency in a DGR or any other cartridge for that matter. I simply want something that with a hunting length barrel(i.e 22-24 inches) will deliver 2400fps to a critter 25-75 yrds away with a 410 grain bullet. The Taylor simply can't do it and the Rigby can easily make this happen. Most of us stoke up a Rigby to 2450-2475 to ensure the magic 2400 at the target. I don't find the recoil of my Rigby to be perceptively greater than the Taylor. The only advantage of the Taylor is that it can be built on a M70 Short action which is easier to carry when your stalking Buff for hours at a time than a Large action Rigby. I've shot six BUFF so far with my Rigby and none with my Taylor.-Rob

Zero Drift,
Thought I'd throw in my imput garnered from a chrono session 2 days ago.
My Taylor is based on a Mauser 98 action and sports an E.R.Shaw, 23" barrel. I am able to load 400 grain Hornady softs out to 3.335 on this rifle. This allows up to 72.0 grains of Reloader15 to fill the case, showing the bullet to just touch the powder at seating. I do use a long drop tube when filling. There may be the slightest hint of compression starting; one more grain of powder's compression is easily felt at the press. I concure with the velocities the other gentlemen mentioned...2,350 fps is about tops. I have achieved 2,420 fps with IMR 4895; however, this load was showing slight flattening of the primer and was immediately rejected.
The following loads are where I settled after working up carefully!
Others: as always, make sure to start loads at a lower level; this fit MY RIFLE, and I have the only one of those. Start lower and work up.

Ambient temperature...+28 degree F.
Bullet...Hornady 400 grn. soft
Case...R&P 458 necked down
Primer...Federal 215 match
Powder...70.0 grn Rel 15
OAL...3.335
Velocity...2,315fps @ 10 rounds fired

Same information above but with:
72.0 grn Rel 15...
velocity...2,355fps @ 10 rounds fired.

best,
bhtr

Thanks very much for the actual load & performance data. I would imagine one could achieve 2400 fps from a Taylor if you were willing to seriously lean on chamber pressure. I have nothing against the Taylor at all. It is a very neat cartridge. I am not one of those guys who thinks 50 or 75 fps is a big deal. Funny how some folks think 400gr @ 2300fps is totally inadequate for dangerous game, yet 2400fps is perfect.

I have both a .416 Dakota and a .416 Rigby. Both of these cases can achieve 2500fps with no pressure concerns. I know several Rigby owners going well beyond these numbers with push! Why, I have no idea.

My .416 Taylor using Quality Cartridge brass or Remington .458 Win Mag brass necked down, will easily handle 75.0 grains of RL-15 powder, with mild compression, topped with a 400 grain Hornady RNSP. I use the F-215 primer. My barrel is a Shilen stainless 1 in 14" twist, 26" length.

This load gave 2415 fps MV average and put three bullets into just under an inch at 100 yards. No pressure signs.

This powder charge works in my gun. Others should work up from a prudent starting point.

The .416 Taylor is indeed a wonderful little cartridge. Efficient and practical.

My .416 Taylor on a Ruger Mark II stainless with steel floor plate, Ruger rings, Dakota express sights, Gentry barrel band sling base, and synthetic stock with 14" pull is a joy to handle and a great shooter. I do not consider the 26" barrel a handicap, anywhere.

Indeed, my .416 Taylor behaves just like Ray's 404 Jeffery.

I see the Taylor in synthetic and stainless as the Arctic .416, and the Rigby in Walnut and blue as the Tropical rifle End All.