I took RIPS advice and picked up a Kevlar stock from CZ. Its a real nice stock, reminds me of the older Remington 700 composite stocks with the spider web.


My problem is this stock too light, I weighed my rifle last night 8 pounds 2 ounces, that's beyond my self imposed recoil limit!


Does anyone have any recommendations for adding weight without butchering the stock, I've been there done that. (Butchering a stock)

Not too sure if any material removal is butchering but here is a suggestion.

I've seen one of those Paddlestick Ruger stocks
have weight added really well by gluing in lead
shot into the forend and butt.

It ended up nicely weighted (for a 338WM)
and well balanced.

Shouldn't take much hollowing out of the
forend to be able to add a little lead.

Just my HO.

Perhaps a mercury recoil reducer installed behind the recoil pad?

Kevlar is a bad idea for a DG rifle.
It has no give, which means you have to give. Basically its going to hurt more than most. It is way to light, and if you bang it on a rock it may shatter or crack. Part of the reason it is not widely used other than on target rifles with limited use where zero give is going to give better accuracy.

The mercury will help but you probably need to have it mounted on a frame which should have been part of the action mountings.

Good luck.

I have a fiberglass stock on my lott with a steel frame and the mercury. It shoots like a 375 even with full house loads.
You cannot break it short of taking a 20 pound hammer to it. It really is as strong as it gets.

I'd suggest a properly fitted mercury tube or tungsten bead recoil arrestor in the stock

The recoil reducers in the stock make sense but would not a like device be needed in the forend to keep the rifle in balance--i.e. not too butt heavy?
Cal

It could use about three pounds in the butt, its nose heavy right now. What kind of glue do you recommend? I have plenty of shot, who sells the glue?

There's a BIG difference between installing one & installing one properly & I'd strongly recommend you have a gunsmith that's experienced in installing them do it for you.

The reason I say that is if it's fitted at the wrong angle it won't be as effective as it should be & if not 110% rigid & immovable the stock can break.

I was going by this discussion.

http://forums.accuratereloadin...4711043/m/6621017221

quote:

Originally posted by shakari:
There's a BIG difference between installing one & installing one properly & I'd strongly recommend you have a gunsmith that's experienced in installing them do it for you.

The reason I say that is if it's fitted at the wrong angle it won't be as effective as it should be & if not 110% rigid & immovable the stock can break.

That's a problem for me, I don't have anyone around here I trust to do the work. The couple of gunsmiths I do trust couldn't get to it this calendar year. It looks like I'm going to have to "toughen up" because I'm not waiting and I'm done shipping guns.

OK.

I'm no gunsmith but as I understand it, you need to fit it at an angle so the mercury runs uphill as the rifle is in recoil & you need the strongest two part epoxy you can find & be sure not to leave any air bubbles.

A gunsmith I know (well renowned) uses buckshot and then fills with Acraglass.

quote:

Originally posted by Biebs:
A gunsmith I know (well renowned) uses buckshot and then fills with Acraglass.

The simple rules of physics, particularly Newton's 3rd law that says that for every action there is an equal & opposite reaction proves that's nowhere near as effective as a mercury tube.

The search function here will show you that has been debated ad nauseum. LOL

I had a gunsmith put epoxied shot into a 585 calibre on a kevlar stock and worked fine to reduce recoil. Cheaper than recoil reducers and I don't agree their is any extra benefit to them.

dobledown

re the Glue, just remember if you leave the gun in a confined space that chemical glues give off
bad chemicals that are not good for the blueing.

Hence why gun cases - well, proper English one's
- use Animal or vegetable glues.

quote:

Originally posted by Karl:
I don't agree their is any extra benefit to them.

If you use the search function here you'll find umpteen threads where it's been discussed, including simple kitchen experiments you can do in your own home that absolutely prove why they are considerably more effective than dead weight alone.

Newton wasn't wrong.

Don:

Unless you have your heart set on Kevlar, I would send it back and have them send you a laminate.

Shoot it. Use rl25 and Classic vels. You will be amazed

I think you have achieved a nearly perfect weight for a hunting rifle. You'll be carrying it far longer than you'll shoot it. You can take nearly any amount of recoil for two shots. Try some loads before you add weight. In my experience those Mercury Recoil reducers do little more than add very expensive weight. if necessary add shot and epoxy and balance the gun.-Rob

quote:

You'll be carrying it far longer than you'll shoot it. You can take nearly any amount of recoil for two shots.

Agreed, however the flinch you are going to build up shooting it that way in practice is going to make you miss a buffalo at 50 yards.

Unless you are a massochist (like Rob) or have amazingly high recoil tolerance, you are going to start to damage your shooting abilities.

To my mind it is easier to toughen up, pump some iron and get fit than it is to shoot a rifle that hurts you, accurately.

The 500 NE my wife had built is also 8 lbs, we shoot 570gr at 2080fps. Recoil is obviously a lot but not unpleasant and she weighs 110 lbs, I have shot up to 12 rounds a go. It is an absolute joy to hunt with. The stock has little drop, a well rounded comb with a large recoil pad. I would shoot that Kevlar stock first and see how the package comes together.

Good advise I guess, I had a composite stock from AHR that weighed the same as this one, and shooting 600 grains at 2350 would kick you out from under your hat. even my cast 700 grainers at 2100 hit hard.


I added weight to that stock, (about 3.5 pounds)and it was a pleasure to shoot.


I will shoot the rifle with this stock as is, and see how it goes. I will have to wait until the snow melts before I can make it up the hill to my range, we got hammered this year.


p.s. loading down isn't an option, if your gonna be stupid you better be tough.

600gr at 2350fps will catch my attention in a 8lbs package.....

I have a short barreled 500 Jeffery that I got off of Safari Kid. It is made by Mike at Bijou Creek. It weighs 6 lbs. 3oz. scoped. It is an eye opener when shooting. I guess I am used to it though. Heavy recoil, but shootable with practice. You definately feel it, but it doesn't hurt you. Tommy named it the Grizzinator.

Sorry, my 500 super lightweight weighs just under 7 lbs not 6lbs 3 oz. Got the weight mixed up with another lightweight gun I own, a 5.3 lb 458 Lott.

quote:

Originally posted by shakari:

quote:

Originally posted by Karl:
I don't agree their is any extra benefit to them.

If you use the search function here you'll find umpteen threads where it's been discussed, including simple kitchen experiments you can do in your own home that absolutely prove why they are considerably more effective than dead weight alone.

Newton wasn't wrong.

Shakari there are plenty of opinions supporting either position. Newtons laws are not under doubt, whether this device produces one of their effects to a noticeable degree is.Sorry I just don't find any difference with recoil reducers over some epoxied shot.

quote:

Originally posted by bigdoggy2bore:
Sorry, my 500 super lightweight weighs just under 7 lbs not 6lbs 3 oz. Got the weight mixed up with another lightweight gun I own, a 5.3 lb 458 Lott.

Ha-ha, that's like saying I got hit by a bus, not a truck! God Bless, that's got to be a violent ride bigdoggy. I know you have some big stuff, but a sub 7 pound 500 jeff is no joke!

After,shooting big stuff for years, I guess you get used to it.

Just ran the recoil numbers with my load out of an 8lb 2oz rifle.

166.6 ft lb

36.6 fps

Follow up shots should take a few minutes, after I regain consciousness!

doubledown this sort of goes along with my usual waffle as to the spirit of the safari rifle. If you are into the real tradition and even see yourself the frontier type in another life, get it made at traditional weight and fire enough shots to become an expert.

If you are an elderly dentist or banker or just want it for a specific hunt or two, get it at 6lbs, fire the two shots to get your trophy and be done with it.

I am not trying to sound denigrating to the latter group btw, that advice is solid for them. If you are only going to use it twice cut all the weight you can.

Decide whether you are the prolific shooter or the tropyy hunter and it will make the decision on weight and all the objective advice you are recieving a lot easier.

I am firmly in the other camp for the record which is also the minority, - build the traditional weight, learn to carry it, fire it a great deal.

quote:

Originally posted by Karl:

Shakari there are plenty of opinions supporting either position. Newtons laws are not under doubt, whether this device produces one of their effects to a noticeable degree is.Sorry I just don't find any difference with recoil reducers over some epoxied shot.

Karl,

This has all been discussed here on numerous occasions but here's a very simple way you can prove it to yourself and bear in mind that Hawking (and others including Newton) tell us that energy never disappears, it just changes form.

Take a solid weight such as the lead ball/epoxy mix you mention, fix it to a skateboard and apply a sudden measured force to one end and observe what happens.

Now remove the solid weight and replace it with a plastic bottle part filled with liquid to the same weight and apply the same sudden measured force.

You'll note that in the latter case, a wave momentarily appears in the liquid and this is caused by the transfer of energy so you have the transfer of energy in the wave in addition to the simple transfer of energy with the weight in this case.

In the first example there cannot be an energy wave because the material/weight is a solid rather than a liquid.

It's very simple physics but it does prove that a mercury tube is always more effective than a fixed, solid weight and if the tube is fitted correctly, ie at an angle and the liquid is forced to run uphill during the moment(s) of recoil, it becomes even more effective.

If you want to understand more or need further explanation just use the search function and you'll find even more detail.

Quite honestly and without meaning to start a barney, It always astounds me why so many people fail to understand the very simple science of this.

The hard thing is adding weight without ruining balance.

quote:

Originally posted by shakari:

quote:

Originally posted by Karl:

.

Karl,

This has all been discussed here on numerous occasions but here's a very simple way you can prove it to yourself and bear in mind that Hawking (and others including Newton) tell us that energy never disappears, it just changes form.

Take a solid weight such as the lead ball/epoxy mix you mention, fix it to a skateboard and apply a sudden measured force to one end and observe what happens.

Now remove the solid weight and replace it with a plastic bottle part filled with liquid to the same weight and apply the same sudden measured force.

You'll note that in the latter case, a wave momentarily appears in the liquid and this is caused by the transfer of energy so you have the transfer of energy in the wave in addition to the simple transfer of energy with the weight in this case.

In the first example there cannot be an energy wave because the material/weight is a solid rather than a liquid.

It's very simple physics but it does prove that a mercury tube is always more effective than a fixed, solid weight and if the tube is fitted correctly, ie at an angle and the liquid is forced to run uphill during the moment(s) of recoil, it becomes even more effective.

If you want to understand more or need further explanation just use the search function and you'll find even more detail.

Quite honestly and without meaning to start a barney, It always astounds me why so many people fail to understand the very simple science of this.

I am even more surprised some people are unable to read basic English.

Allow me to reiterate.


"Shakari there are plenty of opinions supporting either position(not to mention Rob the PHD scientist above as well). Newtons laws are not under doubt, whether this device produces one of their effects to a noticeable degree is.Sorry I just don't find any difference with recoil reducers over some epoxied shot"


Now if you really are not interested in starting a 'barney' you will allow two grown men have a difference of opinion.

On the other hand if you are interested in barneying I will be just posting my same statement again so you may find any of the barneys you are 'not interested in starting' dissapointingly boring

quote:

Originally posted by Karl:

I am even more surprised some people are unable to read basic English.

Allow me to reiterate.


"Shakari there are plenty of opinions supporting either position(not to mention Rob the PHD scientist above as well). Newtons laws are not under doubt, whether this device produces one of their effects to a noticeable degree is.Sorry I just don't find any difference with recoil reducers over some epoxied shot"


Now if you really are not interested in starting a 'barney' you will allow two grown men have a difference of opinion.

On the other hand if you are interested in barneying I will be just posting my same statement again so you may find any of the barneys you are 'not interested in starting' dissapointingly boring

Ah well...... you can lead a horse to water but you can't make him drink so I'll leave you to continue with your ill manners and stupidity.



Byeeeeeeee.

More importantly lets not detract from the OP's thread any further, now that will be ill mannered and stupid

quote:

Originally posted by snowhound:
Perhaps a mercury recoil reducer installed behind the recoil pad?

Harlan at Triple River Gunsmithing would be my choice to install a mercury recoil reducer. He does most of the CZ Custom Shop work. I have two in my 11.25 lb walnut stocked 500 Jeffery and the balance is just right for me (balance point at middle of the magazine floorplate), that may be too far back for lots of folks though.

doubledown,

I am really surprised that a CZ 550 Magnum in 500 Jeffery could be so light as 8 lbs. 2 oz.
In the Walnut stock they weigh about 10 to 10.5 pounds, like my 505 Gibbs. Do they put some lead in the butt of those CZ 500 Jeffery rifles?

Just switching to the CZ "Kevlar" stock will only take a half pound off the weight of a fat American style walnut stock,
and zero weight difference from the hogback Euro style.

I just weighed a CZ Kevlar stock: 2 lbs. 10 ounces.

42 ounces.

It is not a light stock.

It is also not made of solid, unyielding Kevlar
It is a composite with fiberglass, graphite, Kevlar, and full aluminum alloy endoskeleton bedding block.
Kevlar is just a serious sounding name for the stock made for CZ by Bell & Carlson.
It is probably a better recoil absorber than walnut or laminate.

My 23"-barreled 500 Mbogo CZ 550 Magnum (no. 6 Pac-Nor sporter) weighs about 9.5 pounds in either hogback walnut or Kevlar stock.

That should be about the same weight as your CZ 500 Jeffery.

Check your scales.

Karl: No barney here. I agree that the mercury recoil reducers are not worth the trouble for the little they do.
Physics-wise the only possible difference is spreading the recoil over a few miliseconds longer.
The recoil chicken just comes to roost with an imperceptibly slower flap of the wings.
The weight of mercury a-sloshin' is miniscule compared to the total weight of the gun.

The mercury tubes also contain significant lightening gas/air space to allow the mercury to slosh if it is to have any added effect besides weight.
Sacrifices the possible weight addition.
Total weight possible addition is better with lead.
You could do better by using tungsten shot or rod which is heavier than lead, and any good epoxy like Acraglass or JB Weld.

RIP, thanks for your knowledgeable post as always. Doubledown, I hope most of these posts have been helpful.

On a related but different topic, when I hear about 6 lb 500 Jefferys (not your post Doubledown), I always want to know if there's a brake on them (which cuts recoil by 30% to 50%). If not, good luck, I boxed (amateur) in the 60s and don't need to take any more shots to the head lol ...

Welcome Chuck,
Further incredulity at a CZ 550 Magnum, 500 Jeffery weighing 8 lbs. 2 oz. in a "Kevlar" stock:

I just weighed a brand new CZ 550 Magnum American Safari, Kevlar, .458 Lott and just as out of the box it weighs 9 lbs. 2 oz.
That barrel is same contour as they use on .375, .416, .458WinMag, and .458 Lott.
It is about a No.4 sporter contour with some weight added due to the integral rear sight base and secondary recoil lug contraption.
That is about as light as you can go on a 25" barrel for a .458, 25" muzzle diameter is 0.670".

An old CZ 550 Magnum Safari, Lux (hogback walnut stocked), .458WinMag rechambered to .458 Lott weighs 9 lbs. 10 oz.,
but it still has the F-chunk of steel recoil contraption in the forearm, has had double cross bolts added, and epoxy bedding with pillars, and dense walnut.
Same barrel contour.
Average bare-naked CZ Euro-hogback walnut stocks weigh only 2 pounds 8 oz., about the same as the CZ Kevlar stock.
The Phat American walnut stock weighs about a half-pound more than the CZ Kevlar.

The CZ 550 Magnum Safari Classic .505 Gibbs in Phat American walnut with cross bolts added, pillars and glass bedding, and F-chunk of steel in forearm,
has a 24" barrel that is 0.824" at muzzle diameter.
It has the same general conformation as the same make 500 Jeffery and weighs 10.56 lbs.
I have seen the CZ 500 Jeffery and noted it used the same barrel contour as the .505 Gibbs.
Mine has no mercury recoil suppressors in the butt nor muzzle brake.
Just switching it to a Kevlar stock could not take off any more than 1 pound.
I would expect it to weigh about 9 lbs. 8 oz. if I switched it to a Kevlar stock.

doubledown,
Are you pulling our legs?

Thanks for all the Ideas, I'm going to keep it as is for now. I have a composite stock I added weight to, that I can always throw it back it. I did the work, so it looks like it was in a street fight...and lost.

RIP, my CZ has a 23" barrel and my weight figure came off my digital 20 lbs postal scale, it very well could be out of calibration, but the weight I posted wasn't a guess on my part. At the same time I'm not going to question your experience over a Chinese scale.

Chuck, it is threaded for a brake, and that's how I shoot it at the range. I remember your pictures! That convinced me!