just got assembled a ruger #1 in 500-3" NE and fired it for the first time. the gun has a 25" bbl as large in dia as the f/e hanger will allow and a black walnut stock of the densest, heaviest stuff possible (came from great american and whatever anybody else says abt him, the wood is perfect for this application). but still the gun only finished up at 9.5#. recoil was completely unmanageable to me. muzzle was well beyond 60degrees and while i wasn't knocked out of the seat or anything spectacular i was shoved backward quite a distance. i will say i got everything right as i didn't get so much as a bruised shoulder and there's no damage to the stock.

i've got a 500 jeffrey that weighs 11# even and while recoil is heavy, i can run 8rds thru it off a bench before fatigue really sets in. but it's nothing compared to the rapidity at which this #1 recoils and i assume the weight is just too low (being abt where i'd want a 458).

the question is, do the recoil reducers actually accomplish enough to justify their cost or will adding an equivalent amount of lead do just as well for a lot less money? i can get 1.5# in the butt (and actually improve balance) and another 5-6 oz in a block added to the barrel which i'd also use as an additional f/e screw, since this one after 5 shots seemed to show an inclination that the original ruger screw escutcheon was trying to pull thru the meager wood underneath it anyway.

and those with 500NE double rifles, what weight do those typically run?

thanks
roger

Try the lead first and get the balance of your gun perfect then look into a Pachmayr F990 recoil pad.
Here is a link http://www.lymanproducts.com/pachmayr/
This pad will make a real difference in the shootability of your rifle. You can always go to the recoil reducer after if your not happy with the results.
Take good care,
Dave

I had a 13 oz mercury tube in a 458 Lott that SIGNIFICANTLY reduced felt vibration as well as recoil. I don't believe lead has that ability. You may want to put mercury in the butt and lead in the forearm chanel to balance.

quote:

Originally posted by 470 Mbogo:
Try the lead first and get the balance of your gun perfect then look into a Pachmayr F990 recoil pad.
Here is a link http://www.lymanproducts.com/pachmayr/
This pad will make a real difference in the shootability of your rifle. You can always go to the recoil reducer after if your not happy with the results.
Take good care,
Dave

I second the motion. I installed a 990 on my rifle and the difference is night and day. Granted I am not shooting something not quite as big, but I can now shoot my rifle at the bench all day.

Will:

I'm convinced that there is no "magic" to mercury reducers and that they reduce recoil by virtue of added weight alone. I certainly can't tell the difference. Personally, I can't abide the sloshing of mercury reducers anyway.

The British .500 Nitro doubles were usually 11.25 to 12 lbs.
-----------------------------------------------
"Serious rifles have two barrels, everything else just burns gunpowder."

thanks anyway but that recoil pad just ain't gonna cut it. right now it has a red/orange silvers pad and looks like a proper British express rifle. comfort isn't the real issue as there was no bruising or anything. what i need is something to slow the gun down. the velocity of the recoiling rifle calculates out to >26fps and i need to get that number down below 21fps. a pad isn't going to slow it down or reduce muzzle climb. that takes weight.

i had wondered if you could actually feel the reducers moving. things like that tend to distract me. i can easily get this up to about 11.75# and maintain good balance. that should get recoil down to 80ftlbs and velocity to 21 which would put it about where my jeffery is now.

I am not a physicist but I have one in a couple of guns and it significantly readuced recoil. You must install them parallel with the barrell or the line of the gun. Not in line with the barrel but on the same plane. If not, it will not work effectively.

I have read that Mercury will reduce the recoil because of its properties. But I think it has to be installed correctly.

The recoil I felt was not because I added 12 ounces to the gun.

Willmckee,

I built a No.1 in 450NE, I added the merc. tube to the buttstock, it improved balance and reduced recoil. I went with the 7/8" x 5",16 oz "Mercury Recoil Suppressors" brand. With scope and tube the rifle weighs 10.7 lbs. Not bad to shoot with full house 500 grain loads pushing 2400 fps. But I agree it is mainly the additional mass that dampens the recoil. I do have a mercury recoil reducer that goes on my compound bow. It has an internal piston, like a car shock, I have dropped this from shoulder height on to a hard floor. It lands on end and does not bounce remaining upright. So this type of system seems to have some merit. Most tubes for guns though do not have any piston mechanism, that I am aware of.
Hope this helps
nitro450exp

a lead bar in the through hole will weigh more, and probably improve balance

a merc tube IS effective

replace the pad with a limbsaver grind to fit or a f990

It always works well when you add 40 lbs to your stock!

I would opt for a muzzle brake and invest in a pair of ear plugs...big bores are damn loud to start with so a little more doesn't seem to change much, but hey I am already deaf!!

I addressed this question back while I was still at university, with the benefit of being right in the middle of the physics course. The answer is a one (1) pound lead weight, and a one (1) pound total weight Hg reducer will reduce recoil equally due to added mass. BUT the real benefit of the Hg reducer is it spreads the reduction over time, so the felt, or perceived recoil is much reduced.

It is all in the mind. As for sloshing, I could nver feel it.

I never noticed and sloshing either.

quote:

BUT the real benefit of the Hg reducer is it spreads the reduction over time

that's what i was wondering if wouldn't be the greatest benefit, just slowing everything down, as mathematically i couldn't see how the net theoretical reduction would be any different from an equivalent amount of lead.

that does make (mathematical) sense that max benefit occurs if the reducer and bore are colinear. what i may do is add 1# of lead and stick one reducer in the drawbolt hole, plus a steel block to the barrel for additional f/e attachment as well as mass.

a muzzle break is out of the question for the same reason as that f990 pad. this rifle's going to stay looking "right". and the comfort of the pad isn't a question; the one on it does that job fine. i agree a break would reduce muzzle climb but i couldn't stand the guns aesthetics.

have not posted photos before so don't know if i got this right. but adding some abomination of a pad or muzzle device is just out of the question. this rifle is going to stay looking as close to something out of London 100yrs ago as i can get it. i'll load it down and shoot it like a .50-3.25" sharps first.

I've used either lead or a 16oz MRS in the same rifle, the MRS does a better job of reducing the felt recoil. Best price I've found on the C&H MRS is at MPC. I use a standard ¼"-28 cap screw to install and remove it, no need for the wrench. Never noticed any sloshing either!

http://www.mpcsports.com/index.asp?PageAction=VIEWCATS&Category=841

that was the other thing i wondered about - removal. i assumed they'd have to be installed firm enough to be stationary or they'd not work but didn't know how you got them out if you ever needed to.

Long, boring but truthful rant:

What Nitrman said! Mount the reducer parallel to the line from the back of the grip to the toe, not the bore. Otherwise the mercury will run to the front of the reducer when you aim at game standing up (most game shots are with the barrel level to slightly down). This negates the effect of the reducer somewhat. If the shot is downhill, you're plain SOL.




In addition to the added weight, gravity keeps the mercury against the aft of the tube (in a vacuum) until recoil begins. In full recoil, the mercury slams into the front of the tube and this how the perceive recoil is reduced through "spreading" over time. The longer the tube, the longer the travel and the time interval (to a point). If the mercury is already at the front, this benefit goes away and you are left with only the added weight. I belive a lot of mercury reducers that are mounted parallel to the bore never get a fair evaluation because of this.

Likewise, the mechanical reducers must be installed as per the arrow on the tube because they utilize a weight and spring (or compressed gas) to accomplish the same effect. The weight must be at the back of the rifle just like the mercury. The benefit of a mechanical reducer is that the orientation of the tube is less critical due to the spring retention of the weight.

you have likely seen the photo of me shooting my 550 Gibbs at the Hoot-n-Shoot. It has a Breako recoil reducer (13oz) in the butt stock. It generates 134ft/lbs of recoil at 29fps. It was unshootable before I added the mercury, and I had a pound of lead in the butt initially. My rifle weighs about 10lbs, 6oz. I intend to add the 6oz small diameter Breako in the forend, just behind the integral recoil lug. Some of the pictures show the rifle recoiling away from either my right or left hand, and everybody had a good laugh on me. For the seven or eight others shooters who touched off a round that afternoon, the rifle showed the need for another pound or so of weight and checkering to help one hang onto the rifle. Another possibility is member TMC's recoil management system. I put twelve rounds down range that afternoon with no tenderness, swelling, or discomfort. The picture of me and the fireball demonstrates the lack of muzzle rise using the system. That is most likely your "esthetics first" solution.

Rich
DRSS
Knowledge not shared is knowledge lost...

quote:

Originally posted by willmckee:
that was the other thing i wondered about - removal. i assumed they'd have to be installed firm enough to be stationary or they'd not work but didn't know how you got them out if you ever needed to.

Most reducers are designed with a 1/4-20 threaded female socket to pull them out. I secured mine by drilling the hole 1/2 deeper than the reducer and plug it with a hardwood dowel sanded flush(no glue). Then cap it all with the recoil pad and you're good to go.

I've got 3 mercury reducers in my T-Rex and am thankfull for them. I have never heard them 'slosh' around but am thankfull they are doing their job.

BMG

I kinda think the mercury recoil reducers are a little bit more effective than lead and epoxy alone. I've used both in my .600Ok and am still ambivalent about which is better. we had three in the stock at one time and pulled them out and substituted lead rods the MRC seemed just a little better. I will totally state that making a stock with as wide a butt as possible and fitting a F990 pad probably makes just as much of an improvement. The combo really works well particularily if you use a good muzzel brake.-Rob

I added a 16 ounce C&S Research Mercury Recoil Suppressor in the but stock of my Ruger # 1 Tropical, as well as a Limbsaver recoil pad. This particular rifle is chambered in .416 Rigby which is a fairly heavily recoiling cartridge. (400 grainers at 2400 FPS +). I would honestly say that the felt recoil with this combination has been reduced to that of around that of a 300 Win Mag.
They definitely reduce felt recoil.

Wel, no one has mentioned this yet, but I think that the real culprit is the stock on the #1. I have one in 45/70 and with heavy bullets (400 grains) it is brutal. With the regular 300 grain max loads, it is getting up there but manageable. There is something about the design of the stock that causes but I don't know what it is. BTW I shoot a CZ 416 Rigby, and a 500/416 double as well as a 450 x 3 1/4 double, without anything like the discomfort of the 45/70 400 grain loads. Just FWIW.
Peter.

i agree the ruger factory #1 stock doesn't handle recoil particularly well for anything above 375 H&H. mine tho has a way better fitting stock than the factory one. (see pics). like i've said, there was no genuine discomfort, no bruises, no physical damage and wasn't until the 5th shot that whiplash was starting to set in. only criticism of the stock is i think it needs less pitch by abt 1/4" at the heel.

i've never had a #1 in 45-70 but handling them they always struck me as too light and needing another 2-4" of a larger barrel. a buddy had a #3 tho and from what he's said, your #1 is probably positively luxurious in recoil by comparison.

willmckee,

You can always have the F990 pad wrapped in leather, so no one would notice the vents.

George

Good idea George, the vents on the F990 IMO are ugly on a big bore bolt or a double rifle.

Years ago, I had one installed in a Rem 700 Classic in 375 H&H, together with a Decelerator pad. Yes, when I roll the rifle around, I can hear the mercury gurgle in the tube (for years, I've called it my "gurgle tube").

In total, F=Ma. What will happen is that F (due to bullet + gas) doesn't depend on the presence of the mercury (Hg). At start, the Hg sitting in the tube has not been accelerated by the rifle, so the rearward acceleration of the rifle is not damped by the mercury. However, as the end of the bottle constrains the Hg, the total mass will be picked up. In total, the integral over time of the acceleration will be the final velocity of both rifle and mercury. The total momentum is going to be the sum of the momentum of rifle + Hg, which will hit your body together with the same velocity -- so total momentum will be same as the bullet + muzzle gas, and with same FINAL 'v', even though the rifle starts with higher 'a' with Hg than it would with lead.

Dan

Roger
You have a lot of drop in that stock. You may be able to flatten out the comb ,that will help with how it feels. Sand a little recoil relief into the stock. How is the balance of the rifle, if you make it butt heavy it will want to rise more at the barrel!. I would put a thin brake-o in the fore arm and add weight to the butt and get it to balance with just a little shift towards the front hand.

JD

Mercury recoil reducers reduce recoil by much more than mere added weight. When the rifle is fired, the mercury, which is most of the weight of the tube, remains stationary while the gun begins to accelerate rearward under recoil. Eventuallly (0.2 seconds?), the front wall of the tube slams against the stationary recoil, and the mercury acts as an inertia dampener, slowing the rifle's rearward motion.

Physics 101.

JD, yeah, probably has a little more drop than would be ideal but i've also got way too much pitch in it.

i shot my 500 jeffery this a.m. and it as before recoiled but wasn't that big a deal. it's got a mild monte carlo (near duplicate of the post 64 m70 africans in dimensions except more LOP), a very straight comb and virtualy zero pitch. muzzle rise was maybe a foot, altho i'd say i was shoved backward a similar distance from the bench. no physical side effects at all but i only shot it 6 times. and it also weighs 11#.

i checked taping some weights to the butt and i can stand 1.5# in the rear easy and actually improve balance a little. another .5# in the f/e and take a lot of that pitch out and there's no reason it won't be as comfortable as the jeffery.

Willmckee,
I agree looks should be what you want...I handled that by threading under the barrel band front sight and then installing a muzzle break that I could unscrew and then made a cap that covered the threads and the cap also screwed under the barrel band front sight..the over all effect was that it had no muzzle brake..I used the brake for working up loads and accuracy testing only...It was a life savor IMO...Anyway for what its worth..I couldn't stand the lead in the butt and forend, balance never was right IMO...but thats a personal thing.

I'm highly skeptical that the Hg does any more than Pb-- the manufacturers could easily prove it with an accelerometer and an oscilloscope, but I've never seen such a graph.

That said-- I suppose everyone knows that carrying mercury on an airplane is a no-no, right? I can't find the source regulations, but since it eats aluminum, the liability is huge even if the release risk is small.

It would be a bunch of money just to justify the laws of physics. A whole lot like NASA would have to spend money to prove the earth is round.

And unless you are a tort lawyer, I find it awful hard to connect the dots on the airline/mercury issue. Are baby thermometers banned? Just asking, for all I know they are.

See this previous post

Proper angle for installation of a mercury recoil supressor?

I opted for a mercury recoil reducer in my 375 firstly cause I'm a wuss, secondly because I planned to rebarrel my CZ 550 to a 470 Capstick from the beginning. I can't say if its more effective than just weight, but the fact that competitive trap shooters use them is convincing to me.

Chuck

quote:

Mercury recoil reducers reduce recoil by much more than mere added weight. When the rifle is fired, the mercury, which is most of the weight of the tube, remains stationary while the gun begins to accelerate rearward under recoil. Eventuallly (0.2 seconds?), the front wall of the tube slams against the stationary recoil, and the mercury acts as an inertia dampener, slowing the rifle's rearward motion.

Physics 101.

What 500grains said +1

The same is true of the mechanical reducers, only instead of mercury in the front of the tube there is a cylinder of heavy metal in front of a spring inside the tube. Principal is the same as the mercury ones.

I've had mercury reducers in my competition skeet and trap guns for years. I also put a mechanical reducer in my .375 Ultra mag. I can't tell the difference between the mercury and the mechanical, and they both reduce felt recoil. Mine don't make any kind of sloshing or springing noise.

A friend of mine put those merk reducers in his stock and it really cut the recoil down. For me the 416 doesn't recoil that bad.

With all this talk about mercury reducers, I am curious why big bore shooters don't use the "counter coil" reducer used by many skeet and trap shooters. (perhaps this the the "mechanical reducer" referred to above). It does affect the LOP of the stock, in fact it has to be reduced in order to fit the coil, but basically it is a butt plate on a spring.
Peter.

Because we're a bunch of elitist snobs, basically. We don't want any technology newer than 1898! It looks like crap, even if it works. And while one can slide by with various pussy pads without a great deal of comment, showing up with that would cause one to lose face amongst the peer group.

That's the short answer. The Knoxx Comp stock is a perfect solution in that regard and I understand they are really effective. I've been wanting to try one but so far they don't make one for the really big actions.

Knoxx