Thanks in advance for suggestion / advice and possible ridicule

------------------
Gotta love that BIG MEDICINE

Kidding. Thanks very much all for your input. Will look at the rem.

Cheers

I would not discount the 404, as long as the rifle is made in Melbourne by blokes like Ross Waghorn and given it is a Mauser 98.

Although cases will be Rigby prices and there are no Hornadies but Hornadies, Speers and Sierras are thin on the ground with 416 anyway.

Also for us, Woodleighjs don't seem much dearer than big bore Hornadies.

One advantage of the 404 is the future potential when on a 98. If you have a 404 barreled action set up for 404, then that would form the basis of a much nicer custom rifle than would a 416 Remington.

Mike

------------------
Brian
The 416 Taylor WebPage!

That said, like Mike, I also prefer the 404 Jefferys to any other big bore...and its a simple conversion also...Brass and Bullets are readily available..Brass from Norma, Bell, RWS and bullets from Woodleigh, Barnes, GS, ITTD, and others.

The Mauser action is plenty big enough for the 416 Rem or the 404, the 404 being the shorter of the two....

------------------
Ray Atkinson

ray@atkinsonhunting.com
atkinsonhunting.com

You might ring Ross Waghorn on 0397622438 if he give the deal on brass and conversion to 404. The brass will be very expensive, probabaly around $250Aus for a 100 as compared to about $80Aus for belted magnum Winchester cases.

I think blokes like Waghorn or some of the other Melbourne blokes will charge about the same to do a 404 as a 416 Taylor or Remington.

But unless you are going to use the rifle in the spotlight or pigs and let cases fly all over the place, you would not need many cases.

Personally, I think real practicality in a big bore is the 375, for obvious reasons and the 458, because of all those 45/70 type bullets that are available.

As such I would look hard at the 404, especially since it is such a straight foward conversion for blokes like Waghorn and again because you are using a Mauser 98.

Mike

Canuck

Please note, that in my post above, I never even recommended the Taylor. I think it speaks for itself...

------------------
Brian
The 416 Taylor WebPage!

quote:

---

Originally posted by BW:

Please note, that in my post above, I never even recommended the Taylor. I think it speaks for itself...

---

Yep, I'd love to have a Rigby too! All of the cartridges mentioned have merit. Plus a few more we missed.

The one the interests me the least, would be the 416 Remington. Just too easy I guess. I'd have my rifle chambered in Hoffmans original version, just to spite Remington.

------------------
Brian
The 416 Taylor WebPage!

------------------
RAB

------------------
"Those who would give up essential liberty,
to purchase a little temporary safety, deserve
neither liberty nor safety."
Benjamin Franklin

Suprised at how in-expensive the whole lot will turn out to be...
The stock will be the most expensive depending on the detail I want..... not sure what path I'm going to go down here but will see how finances bear out. I want the rifle to look nice but not be a presentation piece.

One option you might want to consider is a laminate stock. They have the advantage of being tough enough to deal with the recoil, and the feel of a wood stock. They are also cheap. My gunsmith recommended I put one on mine, and I am real glad I took his advice.

Here's a pic':

It has a 23" Douglas barrel, with a 12" twist. The action is a Browning BBR.

Canuck

Canuck

Comparing apples with apples... Same bullet, same ballistics. Federal Premium Safari Centerfire Ammo Box of 20.

A quick search in Cheapshot1.com gave the following prices for 416 ammo loaded with:

Trophy Bonded Bear Claw bullets

1) 416 Remington.... $ 71.70
2) 416 Rigby........ $111.54

Rigby 56% more expensive.

Trophy Bonded Sledgehammer Solid

1) 416 Remington.... $ 74.03
2) 416 Rigby........ $111.54

Rigby 51% more expensive.

No difference?

Regards, Antonio

------------------
"Those who would give up essential liberty,
to purchase a little temporary safety, deserve
neither liberty nor safety."
Benjamin Franklin

I read elsewhere on this forum some time ago the benefits of Laminated stocks especially in the tropics (humidy induced swelling) and have been keeping it in the back of my mind... That may well be the way to go... The price seems allright too....
I think it'll be laminated or maybe even synthetic ( I hear the cries of Blasphemy! ).... As stated in the original post. It must be a usable gun for me.
I do rather the timber finish though....
Question: How do the timber stocks take the recoil of big bores. Obviously they do as they're on just about everything but do they crack over time... Does it depend on the placement of the recoil lug etc?

Thanks.......

The scope is a Leupold Vari-XII 1-4X. I love it. Picked it up dirt cheap at a gunshow a couple years back. It seems perfectly suited to the Taylor.

With regards to stock splitting, I have heard some bad stories about the Taylor with wood stocks. Mostly, I assume, because it is at the lower end of the big-bore spectrum and people aren't as careful about 2nd recoil lugs and cross-bolts, etc. Most custom big bores will have a 2nd recoil lug and one or two crossbolts.

Some on this site have posted theories about stock splitting being related to wood moisture content, which again can be related to local climate. Drier stocks would certainly be more prone to splitting.

I will leave the more in-depth discussion on stock splitting to the guys who know.

Canuck

------------------

When looking at reloads, things look even worse for the 416 Rigby, due to the much higher price of brass (4X as much...).

For comparison, I took two corresponding loads from the Barnes Manual #2 for Barnes X 400gr. XFB bullets to get the same "magic ballistics" of 2,400 f/s from the two calibers. I use the same bullets and primers.

Rigby: 99 gr. of Reloader 22
Remington: 76 gr. of Reloader 15

I took current component prices from the websites of either Midway or Graf and Sons. I did not add any sales taxes nor mailing or handling fees. The prices are:

1) 1 Lb of RL 15 or 22 powder: $17.83
2)1000 Federal 215 Magnum primers: $17.10
3) 100 416 Remington brass: $39.99
4) 100 416 Rigby (Norma) brass: $156.99
5) 50 Barnes x 400 XFB bullets: $37.16

Cost of one 416 Rigby round:

Brass: 1.57
Primer: 0.02
Powder: 0.25
Bullet: 0.74

Total: 2.58 (Box of 20: $51.60)

Cost of one 416 Remington round:

Brass: 0.40
Primer: 0.02
Powder: 0.19
Bullet: 0.74

Total: 1.35 (Box of 20: $27.00)

The Rigby reloads turn out to be 91% more expensive...

Regards, Antonio

I am suprised to find that there was that much difference. I suppose I was just going on what I paid for my componenets in Australia, I picked up some .416 rigby bertram brass at $2.00 Aus per case. I assumed that anything in Australia in the way of bigbores other than .458winmag and .375 h&h would be dear. I made an assumption that it would not be much dearer to own a Rigby. I am however prepared to cough up for that extra 200-300 fps that can be obtained out of the Rigby round.

Antonio do you reckon the popuralarity of the rigby is picking up? and if so do you think we might one day get cheaper brass for it?

Regards Paul.

------------------

Bottom line on wildcats? The only difference in men and boys, is the cost of the mens toys

------------------
Ray Atkinson

ray@atkinsonhunting.com
atkinsonhunting.com

The reloading cost of the Rigby is heavily determined by the cost of brass. In the limit, if both brass types were the same price, the cost difference would only be from 4 to 5% due to the larger powder capacity of the Rigby.

For my cost comparison I searched for Federal brass for the 2 calibers, but did not find anybody who sold them, so I took the quoted Norma and Remington products, which admittedly are of a different quality. You can infer from Federal factory load prices what the approximate markup is for their 416 Rigby and 416 Rem brass is...

Due to being a proprietary round back in the cordite days, the Rigby was never a very widespread calibre in Africa (the 404 was...), and only a few hundred, very expensive rifles, were made. It was made popular in the US by Ruark and by Taylor, but in fact it was nearly extinct until recently. Thanks to Ruger, CZ and Federal I think there must be more Rigbyites around today than during all its previous history. In my experience, the Rigby is more used in Africa, while the Remington is more widespread in the USA, particularly Alaska.

Although I own one, I am not sure about the success (or not) of Remingtons 416. Originally, people thought it could substitute the 375 in Africa, which it has not so far. It is widely despised by aficionados of the nostalgic Rigby, and many people believe it has (largely imaginary...) problems of pressure, non availability of brass, belt, Remingtons indifference towards it (it dropped its 400 gr. solid adn 350 gr. SAR loads), newness to market, and what have you... (Oddly, no-one says such nasty things about its alter-ego, the 416 Hoffman...)

However the fact is, the 416 Rem does everything the (non-weatherbysed...) Rigby does. It is better than the 375H&H for Africa if buff or elephant are considered. It is cheaper to shoot, you can fireform 375 H&H brass for it, rifles are cheaper due to needing smaller actions and are thus lighter, the pressure problem is largely inexistent, it is capable of decent accuracy, one hears that this caliber is getting more attention in Africa, etc.

It would be interesting to know which caliber is REALLY more wide-spread by looking at concrete data like sales of factory ammo, amount of custom rifles and factory rifles sold, etc. in this comparison.

As for the "nostalgic" factor, for me it would mean an ORIGINAL Rigby rifle. A new rifle in an old caliber itself does not provide enough reason to make it a decision driver. I, like Ross Seyfried, think that perhaps the 416 Dakota is the perfect round, but then it suffers from the same problem than the original Rigby, i.e. it is a proprietary, semi wildcat that has no large ammo-factory support.

In short, I think both calibers are enjoying the current rather irrational resurrection of big bores, without a clear winner among them, and rightly so...

Antonio

Rick

I don't disagree with a thing that you say, but I think I can explain SOME of the attrac-
tion of the Rigby. First and foremost is the existence of the CZ. Now, let's look at
some of the Rigby's apparent drawbacks. The higher price of cases is practically wiped
out by the facts that they are available, at least in the States, they are Norma, and
most people probably buy only a hundred, or at least only a hundred once in a long while.
The bullets and primers are the same. One needs a LITTLE more powder for the same
velocity. The Rigby requires a larger, heavier action, but many, many people need a
larger, heavier rifle, anyway, when throwing 400gr projectiles at 2400fps. My CZ wasn't
heavy enough for me without steel mounts and scope. I do NOT believe that the Rem or
Hoffman operate at unreasonable pressures,
but as one who shoots a right-handed rifle from the wrong side, I appreciate the low
pressure of the Rigby. I also know that when I load at 2300-2400fps, I don't have to
look for pressure signs that some people think will warn them of dangerous conditions.
As far as romance, I have my own good feeling for CZ separate from the cartridge.
In my opinion, Remington should have done what was done with the .257 Roberts and
stayed with the original name. What's wrong with .416 Hoffman? That's at least as
African a name as .416 Rigby.

Anyway, I guess you get my drift. All your reasoning is fine by me, but there can still be
reasons to choose a Rigby.

Now, a left-handed CZ holding 5 or 6 rounds of SAAMI-standardized factory .416 Hoffman,
with a hundred Norma cases at home, THAT'S something to argue for.

[This message has been edited by Recono (edited 12-06-2001).]

Why a Taylor? Why a Jeffery's? Why a 375 -404? Because if I'm going to have a rifle built for fun, why build it the same as something I can buy from my local shop... Wildcats are also a bit "special". It won't be a plinker.

They're my reasons Ray...
If I ever get the $$$$$ together for Africa I'll worry about headstamp issues etc then. (If I'm going to spend 20 large on a safari, I'll spend another 3 on another gun to take )

I really think there is not much to chose between the two calibers, and I would be happy with either of them.

The main reason, besides lower cost of factory ammo, that led me to buy the 416 Rem was the fact that USRAC had a plain-vanilla controlled feed Win 70 model. I bought it and went to Africa without modifying anything on the rifle, besides putting a scope on it (I dislike both the Ruger and the inverted CZ safeties), and it worked beautifully.

We just do not have in Mexico the gunsmithing infrastructure that you have in the US to fine-tune rifles at very low costs (I had to go through a lot of trouble to "import" my rifle into Mexico).

As for the Hoffman, I read in the A-Square manual that the Remington engineers decided to modify the shoulder slightly to make the process of fabrication easier from their existing 8 mm Magnum brass machines. Apparently you can fire a Remington in a Hoffman but not viceversa.

Have you ever noticed how the old-timers seldom had hair-splitting discussions about calibers, bullets, etc. and concentrated on hunting, of which there was a lot in those times? I am always fascinated to watch how the Mexican vaqueros hunt everything, including deer, bear, cougar, jaguar, etc. with their age-old .22"LR that are held together with wires and duct tape. They know the game and the terrain, they can walk or ride for days, they can track and they shoot with open sights at the right spots.

However, it is always fun to talk about calibers...

Antonio

------------------
DaggaRon
RAB

I did not know that... Someone told me Brno thought it more "intuitive" to have the safety simulating the cocking of a hammer...

So it seems that some manufacturers eventually listen to their customers needs... So my only objection now would be the stock I guess. Still too teutonic for me...

Antonio

Everyone states there an ugly stock I did not mind the look. Just did not do the job. However it's the cheapest .416 you can buy, you get a good action etc. and a rubbish set up for the stock. I am spending $945 on the stock and I will still be in front over buying a Ruger or Sako etc.

------------------