I'm interested in your thoughts on this one.

John "Pondoro" Taylor said of the .416 Rigby that "it crumples a charging lion as few other weapons are capable of doing". Speaking of the .375 H & H magnum he quoted "undoubtably one of the deadliest weapons in existence".

What do you think.

Question:
Is the .416 Rigby a little or a lot more gun than the .375 H & H magnum?

Choices:
A little more gun.
A lot more gun.

 

Both are sure thing killers but the Rigby packs a significantly bigger punch, especially if loaded to equal pressure.

The 375H&H is the "all around" cartridge and the 416, in any guise, is at least twice that. Granted, 100 grains difference in bullet weights doesn't seem significant, but the 416 definitely hits harder(on both ends.)

The .375 H&H is OK for many things. No flies there. The .416 calibers are potent by comparison!

If you can handle one, there is no question which is the bigger gun.

I'm no 416 fan and don't see why the calibre is as popular as it is when it is bracketed by a better all rounder, the 375H&H and a plethora of better stoppers in .458".

But its 400 grainers are 33% more bullet than the 375, and that is a lot.

Of course they are 25% less than the .458" 500 grain standard and that is a lot too.

JPK

For DG, I don't believe in going for more than optimal bullet weight for caliber at 2,300-2,500 fps.

More speed will not make up for a smaller, lighter bullet.

When more power is wanted, I go for a substantially bigger, heavier bullet at roughly the same speed, which is optimal for DG, IMHO.

In .375, the 300 grain bullet at 2,500 fps is as deadly as it gets in that caliber, IMHO.

The next step up is the .416 with 400 grain bullets at 2,400 fps.

Next comes the .458 with 500 grainers at 2,300-2,400 fps.

Finally, IMHO, the practical power range tops out with the .500 launching 600 grain bullets at 2,400-2,500 fps. More than that is superfluous.

IMHO, each of these steps up is pretty darn close to an order of magnitude more powerful, at least as close as one can get to an order of magnitude with shoulder fired weapons.

More is better,if you shoot it as well.
If you can't shoot it, it can be a real problem. My 416 rem mag shoots flatter than my 375, a rigby has more potentional.

JD

I own a .375 H&H magnum in a classic stainless model 70 Winchester and used to own a .416 Remington magnum in a plain wood stocked model 70 Winchester. The .416 Remington magnum duplicates the performance of the Rigby round and was intended to do so. The reason the Rigby cartridge is so big is to get that 2400 fps with low pressure. I have handloaded for both the .375 H&H magnum and the .416 Remington magnum. When you are comparing apples to apples and oranges to oranges, that is to say, a handloaded 300 grain .375 bullet to a handloaded 400 grain .416 bullet, the .375 H&H magnum is by far a better long range gun and I have tested both to prove this. I also believe the .375 H&H allows a person the potential of better accuracy at longer ranges due to lower recoil. I have also loaded 350 grain bullets in the .416 Remington magnum and 270 grain bullets in the .375 H&H magnum. I have found again that the .375 H&H magnum is a better long range performer and allows more accuracy due to lower recoil. With 350 grain loads in the Remington cartridge at approximately 2700 fps and 270 grain loads in the H&H cartridge at 2800 fps I will take the .375 for long range applications every time. I do not understand how someone could get better long range performance out of a .416 caliber than a .375 caliber when all things are compared equally. All in all I would take the .375 H&H over the .416 every time for shooting plains game and dangerous game. If I was shooting mostly dangerous game I would definitely take the .416 caliber but would rather have a .458 Lott in a rifle that fit well. I may have a more radical view of the .416 calibers as I find them to be neither fish nor fowl just as a lot of folks think of the .375 H&H. Too small for the really big stuff and way too big for the smaller stuff. Not as flat shooting either. When was the last time you went into a store and found 350 grain loads for the .416 Remington magnum or Rigby? I never saw anything but 400 grain loads for either and this is why I had to start handloading for my .416 Remington. I can get 235 grain, 250 grain, 260 grain, 270 grain, 285 grain and 300 grain for the .375 H&H magnum in factory loads at several sporting goods store in St. Louis, Missouri. I guess I just don't see the value of the .416 range and would rather have a .375 and a .458. If only one gun I would still choose what most people would choose and pick the .375 H&H magnum.

jfm.

They are not comparable. The Four One Six is much more cartridge.

Although my 416 Rigby has slightly more recoil than the 375 H&H, IMHO the energy to recoil ratio is Ideal. I think I can get all the range out of it I need if I work up a load with 350 GR projectiles(although that remains to be seen). The only real gripes I have with the Rigby is.
#1 The cost of ammunition and brass. By the way does anyone know why I can get Hornady 416 Rigby for $66 per 20rds (just slightly more than 20 Norma cases), but Federal is $170 for 20rds??
#2 When fired from a bench with slight grip on the forearm impact @100yds is 4" higher than from standing (iron sights)

Right, I voted but but there is NO comparison. Why shoot a 375 when you can have a 416?

quote:

Originally posted by xm15e2m4:
Although my 416 Rigby has slightly more recoil than the 375 H&H, IMHO the energy to recoil ratio is Ideal. I think I can get all the range out of it I need if I work up a load with 350 GR projectiles(although that remains to be seen). The only real gripes I have with the Rigby is.
#1 The cost of ammunition and brass. By the way does anyone know why I can get Hornady 416 Rigby for $66 per 20rds (just slightly more than 20 Norma cases), but Federal is $170 for 20rds??
#2 When fired from a bench with slight grip on the forearm impact @100yds is 4" higher than from standing (iron sights)

#1: Because Federal products are uniformly overpriced.

#2: I don't know.

quote:

Originally posted by Rick Behling:
I'm interested in your thoughts on this one.

John "Pondoro" Taylor said of the .416 Rigby that "it crumples a charging lion as few other weapons are capable of doing". Speaking of the .375 H & H magnum he quoted "undoubtably one of the deadliest weapons in existence".

What do you think.

I have used both, on elephant, lion and buffalo. And niether me nor the PHs I was with could tell any difference in which one kills any better.

I would imagine anyone saying one kills any better than the other might be due the reaction of the animals in question - which could have exhibited the same reaction if shot with the same caliber.

Or a figment of their imagination!

quote:

Originally posted by Showbart:
Right, I voted but but there is NO comparison. Why shoot a 375 when you can have a 416?

Because my .375 H&H is my best all arounder and I have a .458 Lott for big stuff. My Africa battery is .300 H&H, .375 H&H, and .458 Lott and I've shot more things with the .375 than anything else. All one shot kills.

Comfortable, not as heavy, works like a charm, and is a bit more accurate than the .416 I had. Works nicely on big feral hogs too here in Texas.

Saeed, you have all of us at a big disadvantage as far as shooting time. You get to shoot as much as you want without problems whereas everyone else has to make time and travel a bit in order to get some range time. That's why you're so accurate with your "375" along with your home-made bullets.

Many factory 375s are in fact heavier than the same model in 416 because they use the same barrel blank. The last 1 or 2 iterations of M70 in 375 were muzzle heavy and out of balance. They needed a couple inches of bbl knocked off. Handled a Ruger yesterday and it was VERY muzzle heavy, very poor balance to me.

I had a Ruger "Super Magnum" in .416 Rigby, and found the gun too bulky, and heavy for my liking. I will stay with my Pre'64 Model 70 in .375 H&H Magnum. I feel that the .375 H&H Magnum has plenty of power for Africa's Big Five, and North America's Big Bears. The main reason is that I just enjoy hunting with the above rifle.

Yes all the Rugers feel bulky, the CZ better but still not perfect. The pre 64 M70 is very nice.

quote:

Originally posted by Showbart:
Yes all the Rugers feel bulky, the CZ better but still not perfect. The pre 64 M70 is very nice.

The CZ American Safari is a significant improvement in stocking over the Euro-style one.

quote:

Originally posted by tom`:
The CZ American Safari is a significant improvement in stocking over the Euro-style one.

I have a CZ Euro-style in 375. Fit and finish is very good although I needed to bed the action. When I was shopping, the American Safari was the worst I had looked at. The floor plate would not open because it was jameded into the wood and the barrel was pushing against the wood on one side..... just my experience.

quote:

Originally posted by JBoutfishn:

I have a CZ Euro-style in 375. Fit and finish is very good although I needed to bed the action. When I was shopping, the American Safari was the worst I had looked at. The floor plate would not open because it was jameded into the wood and the barrel was pushing against the wood on one side..... just my experience.

Mine was well finished and I've shot .375 in both style stocks, the American Safari is much more comfortable for me to shoot. Mixed feelings about the single set trigger but both come with that.

When I took it to Africa one of my friends who lives there from college was jealous that he still couldn't get that style stock in RSA at the time.

S'pose it depends on what you like and the luck of the draw as to manufacturing that day. There's no logical reason for one to be finished any better than the other.

CZ has definitely had QC issues. It has nothing to do with what typr stock the factory put on it.

There's now more fans here of the Bavarian stock.

I like the .416 Rigby out of the two calibers mentioned. I have had a small rationlization and sold my .375 H&H and kept my .416 Rigby

quote:

Originally posted by mrlexma:
For DG, I don't believe in going for more than optimal bullet weight for caliber at 2,300-2,500 fps.

More speed will not make up for a smaller, lighter bullet.

When more power is wanted, I go for a substantially bigger, heavier bullet at roughly the same speed, which is optimal for DG, IMHO.

In .375, the 300 grain bullet at 2,500 fps is as deadly as it gets in that caliber, IMHO.

The next step up is the .416 with 400 grain bullets at 2,400 fps.

Next comes the .458 with 500 grainers at 2,300-2,400 fps.

Finally, IMHO, the practical power range tops out with the .500 launching 600 grain bullets at 2,400-2,500 fps. More than that is superfluous.

IMHO, each of these steps up is pretty darn close to an order of magnitude more powerful, at least as close as one can get to an order of magnitude with shoulder fired weapons.

I agree with everything mrlexma said, although I personally prefer to substitute a .475 500gr bullet at 2500fps for the .458 500gr bullet at 2300-2400fps. And I don't mind adding one or two hundred fps to the .375 bullet, although I am not sure there is much difference in effectiveness in the field. Definitely within the same order of magnitude in both cases anyway.

Cheers,
Canuck

jfm
In my rifles the 416 did shoot flatter than the 375. Both rifles were 1/2 moa and the loads were with in a grain or two of max. of rl-15. I shot 270 and 350 gr TSX only. With a 200 yard zero I had a 1 1/2" more drop with the 375 than the 416 at 300 yards. past 300 yards the 416 held up much better.Both rifles were deadly on plains game,but the tsx were much too tough for any dramatic kills, most game fell with out takeing a step, zebra and blue wilderbesst ran some,even though shot through the heart.Longest shot was a black wildebeestat 320 yards with the 416.

JD

To me the .416 is preferable because it can use a bigger, heavier projectile and it's not belted. To me, belted cartridges are absolutely worthless.

quote:

Originally posted by pinotguy:
To me the .416 is preferable because it can use a bigger, heavier projectile and it's not belted. To me, belted cartridges are absolutely worthless.

Because you can crush fit them with a heavy bolt hand instead of trimming and forming cases to suit your chamber? "Worthless" belted cartridges have a pretty good history of killing things going back to about 1912 and they make a hell of a lot more sense for tropical climates than the new short mags everybody loves at the moment.

Friend of mine starts the same argument when he's drunk and we end up with him saying that "I can go to a gun show and put a random cartridge in a random chamber and it'll rattle around" and I say "But if it was your rifle you'd make sure your ammo was correct and their are advantages." Then we drink beer and talk about Lugers, Westley Richards guns, and SAAs. Forgotten until the next time.

quote:

Originally posted by pinotguy:
To me, belted cartridges are absolutely worthless.

I can understand a strong preference for un-belted carts, but have never figured how people can get that down on belts.

Canuck

quote:

Originally posted by tom`:

Because you can crush fit them with a heavy bolt hand instead of trimming and forming cases to suit your chamber? "Worthless" belted cartridges have a pretty good history of killing things going back to about 1912 and they make a hell of a lot more sense for tropical climates than the new short mags everybody loves at the moment.

Friend of mine starts the same argument when he's drunk and we end up with him saying that "I can go to a gun show and put a random cartridge in a random chamber and it'll rattle around" and I say "But if it was your rifle you'd make sure your ammo was correct and their are advantages." Then we drink beer and talk about Lugers, Westley Richards guns, and SAAs. Forgotten until the next time.

No, I don't believe in crush-fitting cartridges to fit a given chamber, especially when my rifles are involved. In fact, just the opposite. Rather, I consider belted cartridges to be worthless because a belt is completely unnecessary, it lessens the case capacity, and a belt looks unsightly. And, at least where bolt guns are concerned, belted cartridges do not feed as smoothly when compared to non-belted cases. For the record, I am not a fan of the short mags either. I think they are a gimmick at best. Where tropical climates are concerned, there are plenty of non-belted cartridges available - 416 Rigby, 404 Jeffrey, 425 WR, etc. to get the job done. None of these are ultra high-pressure either. To me, the question is "What benefit does a belt offer?"

quote:

Originally posted by pinotguy:
To me, the question is "What benefit does a belt offer?"

Years of load development and .375 H&H is a really good all arounder.

quote:

Originally posted by pinotguy:
To me the .416 is preferable because it can use a bigger, heavier projectile and it's not belted. To me, belted cartridges are absolutely worthless.

and that's your opinion, and we'll value it as that.

my opinion is that the belt has its place and function, and in great than .430 rifles, is generally required if one wants a factory turnbolt rifle in a .458, .470, .510, .550, or .620 rifle...

in fact, its a choice like ginger or marrianne... and, my answer is, of course, BOTH...

dont' go off into the "high pressure" land... the 404 is basically the same capacity as the 416 rem... and if you run the them at the same vels, the pressure is pretty darn close..
so dont' try to compare a 404 at 2200fps with a rem at 2400... either the rem at 2200 or the 404 at 2400.. both BASCIALLY have the same case.

and that lasts until you get to the rigby case... which is so huge it takes very specialized actions and/or gunsmiths to make work....

belts are worthless? nah, i just think you prefer unbelted rounds, and make your choices accordingly..

jeffe

jeffeosso, your last post was a very nice reply to pinotguy.

So often on here if some one disagrees with or just has a different opinion or point of view. It is put so strongly or even rudely.

That if some one disagrees with another persons opinion they are told they are stupid wrong an idiot ect. ect.

I just thought that reply was well put and wanted to give you a "tip of the hat" so to speak. Nicely and politely done.

Allen

If one can handle the recoil of the 416 remington or rigby, then it is a better choice for an all-around African gun in my opinion. As to whether which one has more killing power, obviously the 416 does... larger diameter, heavier bullets,and substantially more energy.

Many claim tha the 375 H&H is a much flatter shooting rifle, and therefore a better candidate to take to Africa. This point is really not valid, as can be seen in the ballistics website I have posted below. Also, the amount of energy the 416 retains is significantly more than the 375. This information is all off the remington ballistics website; the 270 grained H&H is on top, the 300 grained H&H is in the middle, and the 400 grained remy is on the bottom. I BELIEVE THIS CHART ESSENTIALLY PROVES MY POINT.

http://www.remington.com/products/ammunition/ballistics...75M1*RS375MA*RS416RA

My point; you get substantially more killing power with the 416, and it shoots almost as flat out to 300 yards. Although some will find the 375 more accurate because it has less recoil, not all shooters are recoil sensitive enough to have problems shooting the 416 straight. I own both and have found that at any range the 416 is just as accurate as the 375.

Basically, I find the 416 superior b/c it shoots just as flat as the 375, is just as accurate as the 375, makes a bigger hole, has greater penetration, and has substantially more killing power than the 375.

quote:

Originally posted by maddenwh:
If one can handle the recoil of the 416 remington or rigby, then it is a better choice for an all-around African gun in my opinion.

All depends on what you are shooting at. If you can afford to go to Africa to hunt you can afford to have more than one rifle. Both have their place. If you aim to pester big mean stuff, I suggest something bigger than a .416. For PG a 7mm or .300 Mag is a better idea to me hence my current battery of .300, .375, and .458 Lott. Being as I live in North America the .300s and .375s make more sense for domestic use than a .416 and are cheaper to shoot for practice.

Yes, this is all true, but he asked whether the 416 was a little or a lot more gun than the 375. Also, if you are taking 3 guns to Africa, there may not be a place for a 418 or a 375, but my point was that all things being equal, I would choose the 416 over the 375 for the trip b/c it can do everything the 375 can do with more power. Better to have too much gun than not enough.

For an example, I have a 470, 450 Ackley, 416 remy, a 375 , and a 9.3X74r. My ideal two gun battery would be the 416 and the 470. 416 can kill ele and shoots flat enough to take plains game a the same time. If I had to chose between the two on a trip, I would choose the remy b/c it has the edge performance wise.

You might ask why then do I even own the 375? I have a 375 for all the reasons Tom mentioned. It is better suited for N. American game, and it is cheaper to shoot with a larger variety of loading options. It is more versatile than the 416 here in the U.S., but in Africa, I give the remy or the rigby the upper hand b/c of its extra power.

thanks Allen.. I have been working on it

I voted the rigby as alot more gun due to much greater powder capacity and bullet wieght. It's my understanding that the 416 rigby can be loaded to match weatherby velocities which makes it very much more gun in my opinion although 2400 fps with a 400 grainer is just fine for me. As far as belts there are very few unbelted turnbolts above 416 without a rebated rim and a good many are wildcats based on the gibbs case. R.

The .416 Rigby is by far the better killer on paper, but paper is a poor comparitor..

In the field I'll be damned if I can tell any difference in a .375, 416 Rigby, 404 Jefferys, 450-400 or even a 470..I have seen some phenominal kills with all of them and I have seen some very questionalbe kills with all of them, and all this with well placed shots, good bullets and all things seeming equal..

I place more emphasis on good bullet construction, properly placed shots than I do on caliber, then I cross my fingers, pray to Diana and squeeeeeeze the shot off.

JD, I respect your experience with the .416 350 grain buller shooting flatter than the 270 grain in the .375 but it has not been my experience at all. The .375 always shot flatter than the .416 in my rifles but then every rifle is a different animal and I guess results will vary just as do the rifles themselves. As for choosing one over the other I guess I will go along with Saeed and choose the .375 caliber as I shoot it much better. It allows more accuracy for me which results in quicker kills for me. I guess it doesn't hurt siding with the choices of a fellow that has hunted more than all of us combined though, does it.

Thanks,

jfm

My 235 grain .375 H&H loads shoot plenty flat. They run about 3250. The 300s knock things flat at a slower speed.