To each there own, mine have removeable breaks for general purposes and if I want to set somebody up with a stunt load they can get the full value of it, so be it to them. I like very much having the option of a removable break, with the break is just beneficial for load developement at the range, personaslly I can't take the punishment from long sessions without it. I wiegh less than 160 lbs and shoot rifles close to 3/4 of my body wieght in recoil force, so a little help is good for extended practice and developement at the range.
Rodney.

When I practice, I use hearing protection, when/if I hunt I do not. Hunting with 505, maybe local, doubtful.

I read somewhere, and yes this could all be BS, but it was on the web: That some PH in Africa do not allow clients to use brakes. ??

The brake seems logical for load development.

I just ran some more numbers in the recoil calculator. A 577/585xxx, 750gr 2100 fps in a 16 lb rifle generates 74ft-lb recoil. No brake. Sweet. Even at 14-15 pounds. Whats wrong with that? If a person builds a 10-12 lb gun with a brake. Then removes the brake its going to kick like hell. Up front the gun needs to have the weight, balance, bbl length based on weather a brake will be used or not. I think my CZ 505 is about a pound light for me. The price was right and now I have a benchmark to gauge any future purchases.

Men have hunted in Africa using 505 Gibbs and 500 Jeffery rifles without muzzle brakes. Thats not too say I could do that, but some did. I guess they used 525 gr bullets.

The sellers of the shoulder padding make some tall claims, sounds worth a try.

My minimum goal is too fire an occasional 3 shot, 50 yrd target with full power loads and go home without a bruised shoulder.

I haven't used a lead sled with any rifle, but I'd like to hear opinions on them strictly for load development (not sighting in or anything else). Once I have a good load developed I tend to stick with it, so if a lead sled is a good idea for the big boomers I'll try and borrow one since I'll only use it for a session or two. I am concerned about stock splitting and scope breakage using a lead sled though.

Chuck

338User, I sent a email to tech support at Norma. They stated new proprietary powder Not MRP2 but would give me no further information. They also have no plans to sell cases for the 505 Gibbs.

quote:

Originally posted by 338User:

quote:

Originally posted by doclee:
338User,
Do you think that Norma uses MR2 in the PH ammo for the Gibbs? This is the powder that that they list in their manual for the 525 grain Woodleigh.

Hi Doclee, I have no idea what they use, but at 137.5 gn and producing 1900 fps in my rifle, it must be quite a lot slower burning than what I am using.

Also forgot to mention one of my likings to a muzzle break is that I've recently had problems with my back and cannot take the abuse for at least another year , so that being said a little help with the big ones is good for me. Rodney.

Heh....

Not readin my writing, Rob, Foobar?
I never said I would shoot any cannon without hearing protection. Hell no!
I said I would not HUNT with hearing protection.(unless it is a suppressor, but I did not write that).
And I see no reason to hunt with an ultra bore.

Are you guys trying to tell me that you do not like recoil? That you do not shoot the big boomers for the fun??

I would gladly take Robs offer, but I am pretty sure I would not last long! I would probably toss in the towel before we reached the 12GFH at all.
I am not trying to rain on anyones parade, just saying that I do not get muzzlebrakes.
I do not get the beauty of shooting ultra big boomers, if they behave like your regular big boomer.

But I still respect your opinions, and am glad you have fun!

I've hunted with some of the best PH's in Africa .Thats 10 trips, guys. I'm no African Virgin and there are 50-60 dead critters in my game room to prove it.! No PH ever questioned my use of a muzzel brake. If he did, I'd be outa there in a second and the PH might need a trip to Jo Burg for the surgical removal of my muzzel brake. No one ever complained and I have brought some big stuff to Africa. A few guys stuck their fingers in their ears, but mostly were happy to see DG dead on the ground without the need for follow-ups. In the field I never used hearing protection and never will. Never ever was bothered by the sound of the gun either. Frankly I dont like recoil at all and do everything I possibly can to minimize it. No I dont enjoy it at all. I like what big guns do on the other end! You know, huge gaping bloody holes, smashed bones, red mist, Death Bellows. that stuff.-Rob

I tend to oversimplify things, but in regard to muzzle breaks I have to ask...why not? If I ever decide to no use mine I will just unscrew it and screw on the thread cap. It will take 20 seconds to change it out. Until then it lets me shoot more and hurt less!

I have also personally found the PAST Super Mag Plus Recoil Shield to work very well for range use.

I have no personal experience with lead sleads but the word around my range(s) is the risk of stock cracks is higher.

Back as early as 1911 some men headed off to Africa hunting with a 505 gibbs. I would like to replicate that fantasy here at home using a similar classic weapon.

I agree, no reason not to use a muzzle brake. its a personal choice. I don't see any difference between using a brake and just reducing the load by 50%.

There is nothing wrong with using an electric trolling motor and fish finder radar. Its not the same as fly fishing in waders, but the fish are caught all the same and both are legit sports. Some go one way and some go the other.

Fourbore- The only reason to use a Gibbs class rifle is for increased margin for error in shot placement and STOPPING POWER! Reducing the load by 50% basically turns a Gibbs into a 50-70. My point is a muzzel brake lets you use the gun for its intended purpose without having to deal with the obnoxious level of Recoil! BTW the .505 Gibbs was never real popular because most people could not shoot it!
Seriously, Your learning a critical lesson. Shoot the most gun your comfortable with and can reliably hit a pie plate 5 times off hand at 50 yrds, rapid fire. Maybe you need to work up to a Gibbs and use a .416 Rigby. Nothing wrong with that choice.-Rob

I really don't think your ears have read the part about the difference between HUNTING and TARGET shooting...maybe you can tune out the noise and recoil when your adrenaline is pumping, but physically speaking, you still get the same amount whether you are sitting/standing developing loads or whacking some beasty.

I don't play with the big boomers because I'm all macho...I do it because I've run the gamut in the shooting sports and ran out of things to do...I was more interested in hi-velo than hi-caliber up until a few years ago. I don't enjoy the recoil of my big shooters...pecker waving has never been my strong suit..I quit competing a long time ago because I got tired of the BS when I wouldn't take the trophy's when I did win...and that's why those have muzzle brakes, weigh 10-15 lbs, have thick recoil pads, thumbhole stocks and any other recoil reducing mechanism I can find or use...some day I might have one with a hydraulic stock..just to check it out...As Rob said...what happens on the other end is the interesting part, not bragging about how much whacking around you can take.

I grew up with the thought of killing...whatever you kill...as quickly as possible and use the biggest shooter you can to get that job accomplished...having an animal suffer and/or die slowly because you didn't do you job is inexcusable, I don't care where or what you hunt.

Besides, in todays world, whacking some large beasty seems passe...not like in the "Olden days"...maybe getting rid of the excess human population and letting the animals alone for a few hundred years would allow the stock to increase and some to become real trophys.

Using whatever means at your disposal to accomplish that goal is the main point...and using a muzzle brake to reduce the felt recoil and stop the jitters or jerks, goes a long way in the accuracy department and putting the bullet where it belongs to accomplish that goal is the issue...something too many machomen seem to forget when they are waving their woodys.

And, sometimes a response just isn't warranted or worth the time...the "stuff" I've read about MB reminds me what and why the human race is facing the problems we have now...

Use one or don't...it doesn't matter to me...your choice...I bother opening my face because it might give some information for those that haven't locked themselves in a small box yet to mull over. If you've already made up your mind...well...

Physically speaking I can shoot most of my big ones in the range of 50-100 rounds, over time before I've had enough...BUT...after about a dozen rounds my body is literaly vibrating from the recoil and I start having trouble with trigger control, sight alignment and so forth...I just start shaking and need a rest. Cranking off a mag full of full loads from two heavy calibers one right after the other at 50 yards and I have to stop and smell the roses a while.

Enjoy your toys.

This has been an interesting thread. Granted the big bores pack a whallop and anything to reduce the recoil is certainly wanted by most.

There are people with much more experience than I with the thumpers. So here is the question on muzzle brakes. Keeping in mine that I'm one of the few Weatherby supporters around here. The case in point here is a 416 Mark V with the screw on AccuBrake.

I recently went to the range with a friend, he had in tow with him his 378 WM that had been magna ported. I put about 5 rounds through this rifle and it was really quite pleasant to shoot, more so than my 416 with the brake. I'm sure a great deal of it was perception. The noise of course was greatly reduced compared to the braked 416. This range trip has me thinking about magna porting the might 416. Some of the difference may have been all of the Internet stories about what a beast the 378 WM was too.

So the question is how do the muzzle brakes compare to magna porting?

Cheers,
Sam

Magna porting works( usually surprisingly well and so does lots of small holes) but IMHO will never be as effective as a well designed MB. Some designs can approach a 50% recoil reduction at the expense of rearward blast. That angled blast actually pulls the gun from your shoulder. Remember that a MB works most effectively on High pressure cartridges and less so for low pressure ones. Why? Muzzel pressures are almost invariably extremely high even in 26 inch barrels! This is the reason that the WBY line benefits so much from them as do the 300 Ultramag based cartridges. Both could use an extra 6 inches of barrel, but would be too ungainly! Felt recoil is basically a function of bullet weight and pressure curve. Cases that push a heavy bullet with a steep rising pressure curve will be perceived to HURT LIKE HELL by most shooters. I have not run the math, but I'd imagine a 600 gr bullet at 2500fps from a Gibbs with certain powders fits that equation.Thats probably 80% of a .50BMG(750gr at 2700). How many folks do you see shooting a .50BMg without a Brake? These are exactly the cartridges that will benefit most from a MB too. Hope this helps.-Rob

I ran the calculations for you fourbore. Here they are:

Cartridge: .458 lott
Bullet Weight: 500 grains
Muzzle Velocity: 2150 fps
Average Powder Weight: 75 grains
7000 grains = 1 pound
Powder Gas Velocity = 5200 fps

MV = MV, therefore;

Bullet Weight/7000 x Bullet Velocity + Powder Charge/7000 x Powder Gas Velocity = Rifle Weight x Rifle Recoil Velocity, therefore;

Rifle weight equals 9 pounds to determine Rifle Recoil Velocity in order to calculate Kinetic Energy, therefore;

[500/7000 x 2150] + [75/7000 x 5200] = 9 x Rifle Recoil Velocity, therefore;

[153.57 + 55.71] /9 = Rifle Recoil Velocity = Free Recoil Velocity, therefore;

Rifle Recoil Velocity = 23.25 fps for a .458 Lott weighing 9 pounds. For comparison purposes, the Rifle Recoil Velocity of .30-06 weighing 8.5 pounds firing a 180 grain bullet is 12.71 fps.

Now we can calculate Kinetic Energy (KE) expressed in ft. lbs:

KE = Mass times Velocity squared / Gravitational Constant, therefore;

KE = [9 x 23.25 x 23.25] / 64.32, therefore;

KE = 75.64 ft. lbs. = Free Recoil Energy for .458 Lott weighing 9 pounds.


Cartridge: .505 Gibbs
Bullet Weight: 600 grains
Muzzle Velocity: 2100 fps
Average Powder Weight: 130 grains
7000 grains = 1 pound
Powder Gas Velocity = 5200 fps

MV = MV, therefore;

Bullet Weight/7000 x Bullet Velocity + Powder Charge/7000 x Powder Gas Velocity = Rifle Weight x Rifle Recoil Velocity, therefore;

Rifle weight equals 10 pounds to determine Rifle Recoil Velocity in order to calculate Kinetic Energy, therefore;

[600/7000 x 2100] + [130/7000 x 5200] = 10 x Rifle Recoil Velocity, therefore;

[180.00 + 96.57] /10 = Rifle Recoil Velocity = Free Recoil Velocity, therefore;

Rifle Recoil Velocity = 27.65 fps for a .505 Gibbs weighing 10 pounds. For comparison purposes, the Rifle Recoil Velocity of .30-06 weighing 8.5 pounds firing a 180 grain bullet is 12.71 fps.

Now we can calculate Kinetic Energy (KE) expressed in ft. lbs:

KE = Mass times Velocity squared / Gravitational Constant, therefore;

KE = [10 x 27.65 x 27.65] / 64.32, therefore;

KE = 118.86 ft. lbs. = Free Recoil Energy for .505 Gibbs weighing 10 pounds.

Buliwyf

Muzzle brakes just vent the gas jet roughly 90° around the brake diameter or some segment of it, which is a large part of the recoil impulse...depending on the area of the brake vents and the direction of the gas jet, the brake is "more or less" "better or worse" than a different brake.

The reason why the brakes on something like a 50 BMG is so effective is due mostly to the design and physics associated with that design...AND those types of brakes work best within a small velocity window...i.e.,...the effectiveness of the brake depends on the bullet and powder weight...change those parameters and the brake can pull the rifle out of your hands or even increase the recoil impulse.

Magna porting has been around a long time...I have one pistol left out of quite a few pistols and rifles I had Magnaported way back in the day. The porting worked well and was optimized for each caliber and cartridge...it always made a difference.

The ones I make are just copies of someone elses designs making sure the vent area is as large as possible compared to the bore area...I don't have any software or enough math skills to calculate the actual flow characteristics...

The larger the powder amount, the larger the gas volume...the gas volume that gets vented is a function of the bore size vs barrel length vs time...large amounts of gas volume and a small bore makes the gas flow vent time longer, relatively speaking, and carries the recoil over a longer time period...a large gas volume, large bore and large vents get the gas out quicker...lots of factors enter the picture...Look at picutes of the differtent MB's...those with large vent holes are "quick dump" types...they let the gas out quickly and are usually found on the largest calibers with the largest case volumes...AND...subjectivity is right at the top when it comes to what really happens and the explanation of the phenomenon.

Most of us get the apples and the cumquats all mixed together and once "whatever happened" is in the mind, it is very difficult to get it changed. Not many of us will own up to being "wrong"...using the term loosely...we will defend our position to the death rather than switch or try something new many times.

Good thing farmers/ranchers are like that, otherwise we wouldn't have anything to eat. The last time a bull ran my azz over, I got up, dusted my self off and told the cow boss he could keep his smelly, filthy things and went to town...haven't climbed aboard any kind of animal since.

You just have to figure out what it means to you and accept it or try different approaches to find one that suits you...it's all fun and games...smoke and mirrors...Laurel and Hardy.

There are many very good descriptions of how MB's work if you search the web... I came across an engineer that designed a physics software program to calculate the optimum shape and size for any caliber...I saved the information and link but W98 went Murphy on me and I lost it...I've been looking for it ever since.

Enjoy your toys.

Thanks Rob & Foobar for your insight into this. I know with the AccuBreak the noise is what makes it so intimidating to me when I pull this rifle out. The recoil itself doesn't bother me. The 378 just didn't seem to have deafening blast due to the way the gas was routed.

I've shot the 416 without the break, it will knock you for a loop if you don't know what to expect but it is managable.

Thanks again for your imput.

Cheers,
Sam

All of this is interesting and informative. However, from the practical/experience point of view, I'd like to share some comments: 1) About a dozen years ago I shot a black bear with my Ruger M77 in 458 Win Mag. It was one of the first M77's in 458 with a 22" tube. The load was 73grs of AA2015 behind a 350gr Speer at about 2350fps(Not a "hot" load). Bear shows up and I pop him as he's going almost directly away at around 65 - 70yds. I shoot from the left side, and was shooting without ear protection. I felt a sharp pain in my right ear (the one closest to the muzzle). Bear falls down in tall grass but appears to still be wiggling, so I fired a couple more shots until he appears to stop "wiggling"; I can't really see him all that well in the tall grass. As it turns out, the last two shots were a bit high and he dies of the first shot. But those last two shots also inflict pain to my right ear. For at least three months, I had an almost unbearable ringing in that ear. As it turned out, the ear drum was perforated and I'm practically deaf in that ear today with still some ringing noise.

I got rid of that gun shortly thereafter.

2) I'm a great fan of 45-70s. About 6 or 7 yrs ago I got the notion I'd like an 18.5" GG instead of my 22" Marlin. One of the features was that my Marlin didn't have the Ballard type rifling, so I would also get that with the GG. What I also got (unfortunately) was the ported barrel (they only came in that version at the time). I soon got rid of it because I wanted to preserve the bit of hearing I had left. I went back to a 22" Marlin sans porting!

3)Today, I own a CZ550 in 458 Win Mag with 25" barrel. Without porting or muzzle brake. It's not needed on that gun because of its balance and weight. With a fixed 4X Burris and Warne QD rings it comes in at 10.2 lbs. With 4 rounds in magazine (depending on load, add about .44 lbs. With six rounds, add .66 lbs. So, in "fighting form" it comes in at about 11 lbs with nylon sling. I carried that for moose hunting in N. Ontario last October 8hrs every day for 5 1/2 days. I felt no pain from the weight. In fact, it's balance is superb and had a moose be in my sights out at 300 yds (didn't happen), the load and rifle would have been able to nail it with a little help from yours truly. The recoil from the load I was using (81grs of RL-7 behind a 350TSX at 2700 fps)was only about 46 ft-lbs!

I fired many 500gr Hornady's at the bench from 2200 fps to nearly Lott speeds (2300 fps). Possible because of the long mag and throat. There is a marked difference in recoil from 2200 fps to 2300 fps! 2300 fps snaps my neck and gives me a headache. 2200 does not. My shoulder is never an issue as I use lots of protection and I almost never hear the rifle go off because of extra protection and partial deafness. But there IS a noted difference between 2200 and 2300 fps in REAL recoil which math doesn't show!

4) One final note: I also have a Ruger No.1 in 45-70 Improved (long-throated). So, in effect it's a 22", 7.8 lb (with scope)458 Win Mag. Shooting the 500gr Hornady at 2200 fps, numbers say the recoil is 80 ft-lbs. To me it's no worse than my CZ at 2200, where math says recoil is about 67 ft-lbs. They appear the same.
The Ruger is faster (because of light weight)and the CZ is heavier (but slower). But, the CZ at 2300 fps/500gr Hornady is MUCH more unpleasant to shoot than the Ruger!

Just some things to mull over. I have.

Bob

www.bigbores.ca

fourbore,

I hate to break this to you, but a 505 Gibbs WILL kick a hell of a lot harder then a 458 Lott!! This is a fact regardless of what any internet individual (expert) may tell you. By the way, as has been stated by some, a good muzzle brake WORKS (so does a good recoil pad).

Shorty4T,

I don't understand your stupid post? What .378? What .416 have you shot? Based on your post I doubt it.

.458 Only,

Ha ha ha ha, no comment but why you use the .458 name? You are ridiculous.

ScottS,

Agreed. Not sure about you.

I'm planning on shooting 535's at 2000 fps to start with my 500 Jeffery. At that speed, hopefully recoil should be about 458 Win Mag level or less in my CZ due to the extra weight of the gun. I'll wait on loading up those 600s at 2150 fps until I get used to it.



Chuck

quote:

Originally posted by Buliwyf:
.458 Only,

Ha ha ha ha, no comment but why you use the .458 name? You are ridiculous.

Bully, it appears you're trying to intimidate everyone on this thread... BUT I DON'T INTIMIDATE! Are you on something?

It's interesting to read through this thread and see that a lot of guys want to own big bores but have to either load them down, make them heavy or find a way to reduce the recoil. All three things take away the whole idea of shooting the original big bores of the day.I've owned and shot a lot of big bores and tried to tell anyone that would listen that a 500 grain bullet at 2500 fps out of a well balance, straight stocked rifle with a good recoil pad was about all the average guy would be able to handle. With some good practice and good shooting style this combination could be mastered. This combo is also a gun that wouldn't just sit in the cabinet collecting dust. My 500 A-Square with a 600 grain bullet at 2400 fps was just a little bit too much of a good thing,in a rifle that was a proper hunting rifle weight. Very interesting.
Take good care,
Dave

Hi Dave, I just tend to take things one at a time. My goal is 600g Woodleighs at 2150 fps, but I intend to work up to it. I'd rather carry an 11 lb. rifle that doesn't beat me to death when I shoot it, then carry a 9.5 lb rifle that does. I wish I hunted more than I shoot, but unfortunately that work thing keeps interfering with my life, so I shoot every other week, but only get to big game hunt maybe 10 days a year. Besides I lift so the weight doesn't really bother me, and I think if I drop 10 lbs off of my middle (I'm about 15 lbs heavier than high school weight), it will make hunting a lot easier than dropping a pound off of the rifle.

Always appreciate your advice and insights,

Chuck

The Lott shooting 500gr bullets gives you 74 Ft Lbs

Actually my wife says I'm 25 lb over my high school weight, so I need to lose 15 lbs! That's one of the many things we need them around for lol



Chuck

Hi Chuck 375,
An eleven pound rifle with a scope is a good weight for a big bore rifle.
Take care
Dave

I shoot a .500 A-Square for much of my dangerous game hunting. With my preferred loads, my .500 generates over 100 ft.-lbs. of recoil energy.

My heavy rifles, including my .500, have removable muzzle brakes. The brakes come in handy when practicing at the shooting range. But I do not, and will never, use a muzzle brake in the field.

No. 1, I have found that muzzle brakes are not necessary when I am hunting. I practice a lot, so that I become accustomed to the recoil - and in any case, I don't even feel it when shooting at game.

No. 2, muzzle brakes are too damned LOUD! I don't use them in the field because of the harm they would do to my hearing - as well as the hearing of the PH and the trackers. Hearing is too precious to risk like that. Once lost it is gone.

Every PH I have hunted with has noticed the thread protector screwed onto the end of my rifle barrel, and has gone out of his way to thank me for not using a brake while hunting.

As an aside, I have also found that on a well-designed and well-made rifle, recoil does not hurt. If your rifle hurts you, then it has been poorly conceived and executed.

Recoil can produce shock, and a flinch - but with enough practice, those effects can be overcome.

Count me among the crowd that appreciate and use muzzle breaks for protected practice but will NOT use one without plugs and muffs or hunt with one.

Twice while hunting, I've stunned myself with muzzle blast. Once with 250grainers and H4227 in a 7 1/2" .454 Casull and once with an X-Brake on my .600OK with 850grainers and IMR7828. Given a choice, I will also choose load comprised of a heavier bullet/faster powder as that too is easier on the ears. Why suffer so when there are better ways of ameliorating recoil?

To reiterate an important truth,

quote:

As an aside, I have also found that on a well-designed and well-made rifle, recoil does not hurt. If your rifle hurts you, then it has been poorly conceived and executed.

Case in point:

A very well designed 9lb .458WinMag. No cheek slap, hand remains on pistol grip, recoil directed straight back and easily controlled.




A poorly designed 10 1/2lb .505Gibbs. Getting hit in the face with the comb, hand flying off poorly designed pistol grip, recoil up and disruptive.

You guys should try my Heym .600NE. No brake, terrible stock design, poor pad etc. No more brutal recoiling rifle exists, except maybe if you used a pointy railroad tie for a stock. You think a 505 Gibbs kicks hard? Well your in for a treat!-rob

quote:

Originally posted by Robgunbuilder:
You guys should try my Heym .600NE. No brake, terrible stock design, poor pad etc. No more brutal recoiling rifle exists, except maybe if you used a pointy railroad tie for a stock.-rob

Nice supply of air dried blanks for ya Rob ...

Macifej- Those BLANKS are too good for a Heym! You should know better!-Rob

that's the dakota 'wood upgrade" pile, aint it?

No thats the Heym high grade pile!-rob

Like I said before Rob - if you wanna send that bastard rifle over to me I'll fix it up so it doesn't recoil a bit ...

It'll look reeeeeal cooool too ...

Oh please. a 458 Lott, with 500 grain bullets, at 2300 fps, compared to even a little .510 Van Horn, with 600 grain bullets at 2150 fps, is like comparing a 22lr to a 30-06.

OK: you think I exaggerate. 22lr= no recoil
150 grain 2900 fps in 9 pound 30-06=
Recoil Energy of 17 foot pounds, and Recoil Velocity of 11 fps.
The above is the difference.

458 Lott:

Top rifle458 Lott: Recoil Energy of 69 foot pounds, and Recoil Velocity of 21 fps.
Bottom rifle: .510 Van Horn 600 grains 2150 fps:
9 pound rifle:
Recoil Energy of 89 foot pounds, and Recoil Velocity of 25 fps.
Therefore, the difference is about the same as a 22lr and maybe a .300 Mag...

What I'm trying to get at is I find the .510 Van Horn as much fun as I'll ever want to have. 600 grains, at 2150, and, it should go to 2300 fps, is plenty for any situation, and perhaps too much for most. I also found it to be a full 25% more recoil then the 458 Lott.

I will never shoot this class rifle again without my Past Recoil pad on. And, yes, it is a BIG jump from 500 grains to 600 grains. Most of us would think twice before allowing George Foreman to hit us in the shoulder with a right hand, and, that's pretty close to the same result...

The 500 AR in a Ruger MK II is a damn fun and quite shootable gun in a great package... Quite similar to that Van Horn. The smaller case with less powder is better for lower recoil and shootability. Everyone should shoot it to see how fun it is.

The Gibbs on a CZ with recoil reducers and muzzle break it is not bad at all.

quote:

Originally posted by Robgunbuilder:
No thats the Heym high grade pile!-rob

Yeah, but that creosote oozing out of the checkering makes for a terrific non-slip finish, doesn't it?

quote:

To reiterate an important truth,

quote:
As an aside, I have also found that on a well-designed and well-made rifle, recoil does not hurt. If your rifle hurts you, then it has been poorly conceived and executed.



Case in point:

A very well designed 9lb .458WinMag. No cheek slap, hand remains on pistol grip, recoil directed straight back and easily controlled.

I may have missed something, but isn't the rifle in that photo, Phil Shoemaker's 458 "Ole Ugly"?