quote:

Originally posted by Todd Williams:

quote:

Originally posted by Dave Bush:
[QUOTE]Originally posted by MacD37:

In any event a 500NE double rifle that weighs less than 11 pounds is IMO too light!
......................................................................

Mac:

I thought that too. I had fired several 500's and they all beat the heck out of me, especially the Heym. Todd talked me into my K-gun and while I really, really, really, hate to say this, Todd was right. My Krieghoff is just over ten pounds and it's not bad to shoot at all. K-guns must fit me right.

Your right even though the K-gun doesn't fit me as well as I'd like, I found shooting one a pleasant experience.

On Todd being right, he often is, but when he isn't it doesn't bother him much because he is convened he is still right!

quote:

Weight is secondary to fit and shape of the stock!

Todd you are right fit is primary, but weight plays a great part in not only in felt recoil, but makes the rifle easier to find a regulating load, because of retarding of muzzle flip.

The lighter a double rifle is, combined with a bullet that travels faster is much harder to find a load the regulates very well. That is why a very light double rifle's regulation is far more effected by the weight and height of a scope.

Between 10.5 and 11.5 the one pound addition is a positive, and makes little difference in the felt carry weight.

Of course this is all dependent on what one likes to carry or put up with.
....................................................................

quote:

Originally posted by MacD37:

quote:

Originally posted by Todd Williams:

quote:

Originally posted by Dave Bush:
[QUOTE]Originally posted by MacD37:

In any event a 500NE double rifle that weighs less than 11 pounds is IMO too light!
......................................................................

Mac:

I thought that too. I had fired several 500's and they all beat the heck out of me, especially the Heym. Todd talked me into my K-gun and while I really, really, really, hate to say this, Todd was right. My Krieghoff is just over ten pounds and it's not bad to shoot at all. K-guns must fit me right.

Your right even though the K-gun doesn't fit me as well as I'd like, I found shooting one a pleasant experience.

On Todd being right, he often is, but when he isn't it doesn't bother him much because he is convened he is still right!

quote:

Weight is secondary to fit and shape of the stock!

Todd you are right fit is primary, but weight plays a great part in not only in felt recoil, but makes the rifle easier to find a regulating load, because of retarding of muzzle flip.

The lighter a double rifle is, combined with a bullet that travels faster is much harder to find a load the regulates very well. That is why a very light double rifle's regulation is far more effected by the weight and height of a scope.

Between 10.5 and 11.5 the one pound addition is a positive, and makes little difference in the felt carry weight.

Of course this is all dependent on what one likes to carry or put up with.
....................................................................

I care to differ Mac. The extra pound, carried all day, in 120F+ heat, up and down the hills of Dande North adds up very quickly!

I did have an initial issue with my new VC but it wasn't related to the weight. The regulation just wasn't done correctly. Since having it reworked, even at 10.25lbs, it is now shooting every load I've put through it with great accuracy, regardless of the weight or speed of the bullet. I don't find your statement concerning light weight of the rifle and speed of the bullet affecting regulation to be accurate. Case in point, here are two sets of shots taken with my VC at 50 yards off of sticks. The first two are R on R, L on L with North Fork 570gr Solids at 2,125fps. The next two are R on R, L on L with the CEB Non-Cons (now called the Safari Raptor) 475gr at 2,415fps. Two different bullets of vastly different weights traveling at vastly different speeds in an arguably very light rifle for the 500NE at 10.25 lbs!

A few years ago I visited the US & shot Sam's & Corbins DRs. BPEs & NEs up to 600 NE.

The Chapuis 470 certainly hammered my cheek. Even the 600 NE was easier / pleasanter to shoot!

The other factor is the weight & balance / fit - Sam's Webley 450/400 is a real honey at 9 lbs - at 25 meters I was hitting clay birds on the mound. I doubt that you will find a Merkel 450/400 handling like that.

I am no expert - but if I was buying now - I'd either order a VC or pay more for a Heym.

I would not compromise on fit & handling. What is the point in owning a DR if it does not fit me, handles like leg irons and I do not enjoy shooting it?

quote:

Originally posted by Todd Williams:

Looks like you got her shooten right now, Hoss!

Todd all I was saying about regulation is, a very light rifle, or a very fast chambering is harder to find a regulating load for it, if you have no idea what the regulation load was from the maker. This is because a fast cartridge creates a very fast barrel time, and if very light it makes adjustments to be in very tiny increments so that in many cases a lot of trial and error is needed to find the sweet spot. On the other hand if the cartridge is heavy, and slower and/or the rifle is heavier it create longer barrel time and the muzzle flip is dampened.

Hell most of my bolt action big bore rifles weigh over 9 lbs with the mag full, and with open sights. add a scope and Quick detach rings and bases and they go over 10 lbs, and I've carried them just about as rough terrain in about as severe temp conditions as you will find anyplace. My 11.4 pound 470NE double has never seemed to be too much of a chore! Of course I was a lot younger 10 yrs ago when I was only 67 yrs old, You know just a kid back then!
........................................................................

You should be leaving soon for another elephant! Your loads will get-er-done Good luck!

Mac,

Probably because I've had severe issues with my lower back (5 surgeries to the L4-5 and L-5-S1), weight really gives me a hard time at the end of the day of hauling that cannon on the shoulder. So it really does make a difference to me, others, maybe not so much.

I know what you're saying about the weights and regulation as there comes a point where speeding up the bullet to close the spread can be offset by the increase in recoil due to light weight of the rifle, but I just don't know if that is any more pronounced with a lighter weight rifle than heavier. For instance, using RL-15 can accelerate the bullet quicker but also result in reduced recoil at the same time. So at least with that powder, the two forces work together instead of against each other.

Now of course, if you add a scope to the mix, all bets are off if the rifle wasn't regulated with the scope on. Case in point again would be my Chapuis 9.3. That one was a bugger to get to shoot with the scope. Again, I don't know that the light weight of the rifle was the issue there as recoil in that caliber is pretty mild.

Yep, leaving in 17 days! 500NE for Jumbo and 9.3x74R for leopard! Double double rifle safari again!

Thanks for the well wishes! I can use the luck!

Todd, nice targets! Now move back to 20 yards :-)

quote:

Originally posted by Todd Williams:
Mac,

Probably because I've had severe issues with my lower back (5 surgeries to the L4-5 and L-5-S1), weight really gives me a hard time at the end of the day of hauling that cannon on the shoulder. So it really does make a difference to me, others, maybe not so much.

I know what you're saying about the weights and regulation as there comes a point where speeding up the bullet to close the spread can be offset by the increase in recoil due to light weight of the rifle, but I just don't know if that is any more pronounced with a lighter weight rifle than heavier. For instance, using RL-15 can accelerate the bullet quicker but also result in reduced recoil at the same time. So at least with that powder, the two forces work together instead of against each other.

Now of course, if you add a scope to the mix, all bets are off if the rifle wasn't regulated with the scope on. Case in point again would be my Chapuis 9.3. That one was a bugger to get to shoot with the scope. Again, I don't know that the light weight of the rifle was the issue there as recoil in that caliber is pretty mild.

Todd:

Don't think it was the light weight of the rifle but heavy weight of your scope that tripped you up. Don't get me wrong. It's a fantastic scope but I think you would have been better off with a Leupold 2.5 Ultralight which is half the weight.

quote:

Originally posted by Dave Bush:

quote:

Originally posted by Todd Williams:
Mac,

Probably because I've had severe issues with my lower back (5 surgeries to the L4-5 and L-5-S1), weight really gives me a hard time at the end of the day of hauling that cannon on the shoulder. So it really does make a difference to me, others, maybe not so much.

I know what you're saying about the weights and regulation as there comes a point where speeding up the bullet to close the spread can be offset by the increase in recoil due to light weight of the rifle, but I just don't know if that is any more pronounced with a lighter weight rifle than heavier. For instance, using RL-15 can accelerate the bullet quicker but also result in reduced recoil at the same time. So at least with that powder, the two forces work together instead of against each other.

Now of course, if you add a scope to the mix, all bets are off if the rifle wasn't regulated with the scope on. Case in point again would be my Chapuis 9.3. That one was a bugger to get to shoot with the scope. Again, I don't know that the light weight of the rifle was the issue there as recoil in that caliber is pretty mild.

Todd:

Don't think it was the light weight of the rifle but heavy weight of your scope that tripped you up. Don't get me wrong. It's a fantastic scope but I think you would have been better off with a Leupold 2.5 Ultralight which is half the weight.

Dave,

Now why would I have been better off? I've got a scope with 1.25 to 4 (11.7 oz) range vs your fixed 2.5 (7.5 oz) suggestion, and it's got a dual illuminated reticle to boot, all without using batteries. Not to mention that I've got it shooting these groups now. What improvement would that fixed 2.5 standard reticle scope give me over this? How much better would it shoot with 4.2 ounces less, with no illumination, higher power than the low end, and lower power than the high end? Things that make you go ... Hmmmmm?

Die tweede DR ek gekoop het is 'n Merkel in .375 H H. Dit is swaar op 4.5 kg plus. Maar, dit skiet soos 'n .30-06. Merkels is solied, dit-gedoen DRs.


Eagle One