What would you consider the optimum weight for a double in 450 NE, 470 NE and 500 NE? I have double rifle fever bad and I'm just getting a feel for things.
Regards,
Eterry

Somewhere between 9-11.5 pounds depending on whose double it is. Optimum is pretty subjective in that sense. My 470 is on the heftier side of that range. You know the drill ... all being equal, heavier=less recoil; and lighter=easier to carry.

It depends on whether you want to shoot it or carry it. Example; I have a Krieg 450-400; damn thing weighs over 11 pounds with scope; BUT; there is no recoil and I can shoot it all day. I don't like to carry it and would like at least 2 pounds lighter. For the heavier calibers, it would be a more advantageous weight to shoot but still the same to carry.

450NE ~ 10 lbs

470NE ~ 11.5 lbs

500NE ~ 12 lbs

These are averages according to chambering, but more important is the weight distribution and fit to the shooter. A double rifle can reduce felt recoil quite a bit by simply being properly balanced and fitted properly to it’s owner.

When fitted properly 1/3rd of it’s total weight is properly placed between the hands with the rifle mounted by the shooter. If this is the case the felt recoil is far less punishing, and makes repeat shots faster and the rifle can be made lighter so it carries a lot easier!

Most of my bolt rifles weigh around 10 lbs loaded and scoped. My 470NE weighs 11.3 lbs loaded, my 458 RCBS double weighs 10 .6 lbs, my 500/450 weighs 10.8 lbs, my S/S 9.3X74R weighs 8.3 lbs, my O/U 9.3X74R weighs 8.0 lbs, my 58 percussion ML weighs 11.5 lbs, and none of them are punishing to carry or shoot. The heaviest double I’ve ever owned weighed 14.2 lbs and was a 577NE with 26 inch barrels. That one wasn't all that bad in the recoil department, but was bitch to carry all day, and the ammo belt certainly didn’t make the load any lighter! My all time favorite double to both shoot and carry was a Army & Navy 450/400NE 3 inch, that weighed in at 9 lbs even!
............................................................................

Where's Will with his vote of 7 lbs :-)

As Mac said re weights and other things.


Also, a gun can feel heavy in the hands or light,
depending on balance. I have had 500 Nitro's that feel like railway sleepers but others that are like a feather, even though they weighed the same.


dpcd
If it's too heavy, don't buy it, buy a lighter gun / calibre combo.

For a 500/.416, 450, 470, or a 500, I think 10.5 pounds is just about ideal.

Balance Balance means a lot to how heavy a gun feels. I like light weight guns but if they are built right and the weight is where it is supposed to be then you can go with a heavier gun. I have a 14 lb lead bar I carry around on my walks before a hunt. It sure makes a 10.5 to 12 lb gun feel light.

Sam

10.5 lbs for both the 450 - 470 class guns as well as the 500NE. Assuming proper stock fit, those guns will be easy to shoot as well as carry all day.

My 577NE was pleasant to shoot at 12.5 lbs but the extra 2 pounds rifle weight in addition to the added weight of the ammo made carrying it burdensome, especially in the late season heat of Zim.

quote:

Originally posted by Todd Williams:
10.5 lbs for both the 450 - 470 class guns

Since there's not enough difference in these two I'd agree but I'd want about 1 more pound for a 500.

Whatever your weight preference is for a DR,I like mine a little light for caliber,don't forget the added weight for accessories,scope,stock ammo carrier etc,plus like mentioned already the two rounds in the chamber,the rifle should weigh where you want it loaded up & ready to go.

quote:

Originally posted by Mike Brooks:

quote:

Originally posted by Todd Williams:
10.5 lbs for both the 450 - 470 class guns

Since there's not enough difference in these two I'd agree but I'd want about 1 more pound for a 500.

Next time you come to Texas, look me up. I'll change your mind with about 30 minutes at the range with my 500NE. This is an honest offer, no BS intended.

What are you saying Todd? That there's difference between the 470 and 450 or that they should be lighter than a 500?

No Mike. I'm saying that there isn't much, in any, noticeable difference between the 450 - 470s and the 500NE in terms of felt recoil. Some of the recoil calculators show an 18% increase while others show something more on the order of a 5% increase. But in terms of perceived recoil difference, those numbers just don't hold up to scrutiny. There is really no need for a 500NE to be heavier than a 470 and 10.5 lbs is plenty, if not a 1/2 pound too heavy. If a 10.5 lbs 500NE's recoil is punishing, you don't need more weight but rather a better fitting stock.

If you come down to DSC next year, or anytime for that matter, I'll pick you up and we'll go to the range. I'll bring all my guns you might be interested in shooting and we'll have some fun for the day. I think you'll be pleasantly surprised by the 500NE, assuming my stock fits you, which we won't know until you shoulder it.

Again, I'm not being a smart ass to you. This is an honest offer to go shooting if you make it down here. I've been through this conversation with several guys now. Dave Bush is a good example. He routinely stated that he couldn't handle a 500NE because they were too heavy to carry and beat him up. Then he found a 10.5 lbs K-Gun in that caliber. He called me to speak about it as well as CCMDoc and a couple of other guys since he was extremely concerned about the weight and subsequent recoil level. We convinced him to give it a try. From all accounts here, he was pleasantly surprised and is now a convert from the 470NE. He posted above but maybe Dave will chime in again specifically comparing the 470 to the 500 in terms of recoil.

9 to 9.5lbs for 375&400 calibur
10 to 10.5 for 450 & 470.
11 to 11.5 for 500.

Adam, what weight would you say is appropriate for a 505 Gibbs?

quote:

Originally posted by Todd Williams:
No Mike. I'm saying that there isn't much, in any, noticeable difference between the 450 - 470s and the 500NE in terms of felt recoil. Some of the recoil calculators show an 18% increase while others show something more on the order of a 5% increase. But in terms of perceived recoil difference, those numbers just don't hold up to scrutiny. There is really no need for a 500NE to be heavier than a 470 and 10.5 lbs is plenty, if not a 1/2 pound too heavy. If a 10.5 lbs 500NE's recoil is punishing, you don't need more weight but rather a better fitting stock.

If you come down to DSC next year, or anytime for that matter, I'll pick you up and we'll go to the range. I'll bring all my guns you might be interested in shooting and we'll have some fun for the day. I think you'll be pleasantly surprised by the 500NE, assuming my stock fits you, which we won't know until you shoulder it.

Again, I'm not being a smart ass to you. This is an honest offer to go shooting if you make it down here. I've been through this conversation with several guys now. Dave Bush is a good example. He routinely stated that he couldn't handle a 500NE because they were too heavy to carry and beat him up. Then he found a 10.5 lbs K-Gun in that caliber. He called me to speak about it as well as CCMDoc and a couple of other guys since he was extremely concerned about the weight and subsequent recoil level. We convinced him to give it a try. From all accounts here, he was pleasantly surprised and is now a convert from the 470NE. He posted above but maybe Dave will chime in again specifically comparing the 470 to the 500 in terms of recoil.

Mike:

Todd is right. I found a nice lightly used K-gun in 500 NE. It weighed less than 10.5 pounds. I was afraid the recoil would be too much so I called Todd and talked to him about it. He said I would be surprised at the lightness of the recoil and I was. A lot has to do with gun fit and the K-guns must fit me. Anyway, it's a joy to carry and to be honest, I think the felt recoil is less than my 470 which was a pound heavier. Todd told me that the recoil is not sharp, more like a big push and he was right. Whatever 500 you get, just make sure the gun fits. I need to add a bit to the LOP of my K-gun. When I pull the front trigger, unless I am really careful, it bits into my third finger. I think the rifle fit is, to some extent, more important than the weight. I shoot RL 15 and it seems to work really well.

I recall shooting a Heym 500. Again, probably cause of gun fit, I thought the recoil of the Heym was really stout.

This is just my opinion and I'll stick to it. I've handled the recoil of a full load 600 in a 10# rifle. I didn't care for it either.
I'll stick to a heavier gun with larger calibers. Simple!

quote:

Originally posted by Todd Williams:
Adam, what weight would you say is appropriate for a 505 Gibbs?

Given that my 458 and 470 are around 10lbs I would consider closer to 11lbs (1/5 to 1lbs more).

The post question will be dictated by if you use the rifle mainly for shooting at the range or totting the bush after game.

Shot a 375F and 470NE yesterday and boyo the 375 is a pleasant rifle to use. The 10.1/4lbs 470 has stout recoil but It comfortably places bullets into 4" from out at 60m off hand which I'm quite pleased with.

quote:

Originally posted by Dave Bush:

quote:

Originally posted by Todd Williams:
No Mike. I'm saying that there isn't much, in any, noticeable difference between the 450 - 470s and the 500NE in terms of felt recoil. Some of the recoil calculators show an 18% increase while others show something more on the order of a 5% increase. But in terms of perceived recoil difference, those numbers just don't hold up to scrutiny. There is really no need for a 500NE to be heavier than a 470 and 10.5 lbs is plenty, if not a 1/2 pound too heavy. If a 10.5 lbs 500NE's recoil is punishing, you don't need more weight but rather a better fitting stock.

If you come down to DSC next year, or anytime for that matter, I'll pick you up and we'll go to the range. I'll bring all my guns you might be interested in shooting and we'll have some fun for the day. I think you'll be pleasantly surprised by the 500NE, assuming my stock fits you, which we won't know until you shoulder it.

Again, I'm not being a smart ass to you. This is an honest offer to go shooting if you make it down here. I've been through this conversation with several guys now. Dave Bush is a good example. He routinely stated that he couldn't handle a 500NE because they were too heavy to carry and beat him up. Then he found a 10.5 lbs K-Gun in that caliber. He called me to speak about it as well as CCMDoc and a couple of other guys since he was extremely concerned about the weight and subsequent recoil level. We convinced him to give it a try. From all accounts here, he was pleasantly surprised and is now a convert from the 470NE. He posted above but maybe Dave will chime in again specifically comparing the 470 to the 500 in terms of recoil.

Mike:

Todd is right. I found a nice lightly used K-gun in 500 NE. It weighed less than 10.5 pounds. I was afraid the recoil would be too much so I called Todd and talked to him about it. He said I would be surprised at the lightness of the recoil and I was. A lot has to do with gun fit and the K-guns must fit me. Anyway, it's a joy to carry and to be honest, I think the felt recoil is less than my 470 which was a pound heavier. Todd told me that the recoil is not sharp, more like a big push and he was right. Whatever 500 you get, just make sure the gun fits. I need to add a bit to the LOP of my K-gun. When I pull the front trigger, unless I am really careful, it bits into my third finger. I think the rifle fit is, to some extent, more important than the weight. I shoot RL 15 and it seems to work really well.

I recall shooting a Heym 500. Again, probably cause of gun fit, I thought the recoil of the Heym was really stout.

Dave,I think the thing that is biting into your finger is the trigger guard more precisely a large trigger guard.I never had the trigger guard bite into my finger when shooting my Ruger magazine rifle because it has a small trigger guard with rounded or smooth edges..I had it happen with my CZ and just slightly with my custom rifle.A large trigger guard with sharp edges like the CZ will be hard on your finger.

Most people consider Holland &Holland to be the experts when talking about double rifles. I have a list from their web site with their recommended weights and a couple of “built” rifles. I think a couple of the built guns are a little heavy. When visiting with H&H I asked about why so heavy in cretin calibers? The answer was they used a standard couture barrel and could make them liter at the buyer’s request. All at a price.
Holland & Holland weight guide.
.300 H&H 8lb 10oz
.375 H&H 9lb 6oz
.500/465 H&H 10lb 2oz

Built guns on their web site
.470 10lb 11oz
.375 Flanged 10lb 2oz
.300 11lb
.300 9lb 14 oz
577 15 lb
Bill

I do not believe in this knowledge past down bullshit.IMO,there was once a time when there was a fellow by the name of Holland who knew what he was doing.Today it is just a name and a whole lot of pretending and trying to catch clients like you catch fish.

quote:

Originally posted by ozhunter:

quote:

Originally posted by Todd Williams:
Adam, what weight would you say is appropriate for a 505 Gibbs?

Given that my 458 and 470 are around 10lbs I would consider closer to 11lbs (1/5 to 1lbs more).

The post question will be dictated by if you use the rifle mainly for shooting at the range or totting the bush after game.

Shot a 375F and 470NE yesterday and boyo the 375 is a pleasant rifle to use. The 10.1/4lbs 470 has stout recoil but It comfortably places bullets into 4" from out at 60m off hand which I'm quite pleased with.

Adam, the reason I ask is that according to Pierre van der Walt's book, "African Dangerous Game Cartridges", he lists the recoil energy of the 505 Gibbs in an 11 lbs rifle to be 93.9 ft/lbs with the 570gr bullet (used as the example to be comparable to the 570gr bullet of the 500NE) and 93.2 ft/lbs in the more traditional 525 gr bullet.

Van der Walt also lists the recoil energy of the 500NE in an 11 lbs rifle as 77.2 ft/lbs; significantly less than the 505G in the same weight rifle. Additionally, the 470NE in an 11 lbs rifle at 70.2 ft/lbs. Those numbers very closely match the recoil figures given by Chuck Hawks as well. Additionally, from a perceived recoil perspective, I'd say relative to each other, those figures match my experience at the range. I realize some recoil calculators give different numbers showing the 500NE to be a bit higher compared to the 470NE but the references I've cited here seem much more realistic to me, especially from my perception at the range with the different calibers.

That being said, I stand by my comment that a 500NE does not need to be heavier than a 470NE and certainly doesn't need to be 11 lbs to be comfortable to shoot, assuming proper stock fit. Of course, no reasonable amount of weight are going to make the big NE rounds an all day at the range proposition and they will all be carried much more than shot.

Mike,

A ten pound 600NE! Yeah, I bet that one was quite stout!! Still, look me up if you're down this way and we'll go shoot.

Dave,

I've heard more than one guy state the 500 was too much in the older style Heym stock. I think Jines had the same comment before receiving his new Heym. I never shot one so I can't comment further on why that would be. But I think it has much to do with some people's opinion of the 500NE being too much to handle as Heym is a very popular make. From what I hear, the newer Heym stock does a much better job of taming the beast.

Bill,

I think much of those numbers posted as "proper" by H&H were derived in a day long gone where the hunter had a dedicated gun bearer in the field for the heavy rifle. Some don't seem to be too far off the mark such as the 375 H&H at 9lb 6oz as one would expect to carry his own gun in that caliber, but 15lbs for a 577NE is simply not necessary inorder to be comfortable to shoot. Mine originally weighed 14 lbs from VC with 1 & 1/2 lbs of weight in the butt stock. Taking those out brought the weight to 12.5 lbs which made it much more lively in the hands, not too bad to carry, and certainly manageable in terms of recoil. Matter of fact, I didn't find the difference in having the weights installed or out to have much effect on the guns perceived recoil. The stock fit me for the most part (comb was a bit too high) and therefore the weight of the gun just didn't have that much to do with the way it felt to shoot it.

Todd there's a chance I'll wander down one of these days for the DRSS shoot out and pig hunt.

Sounds good my friend. We'll get together and have a good time.

quote:

Originally posted by Eterry:
What would you consider the optimum weight for a double in 450 NE, 470 NE and 500 NE? I have double rifle fever bad and I'm just getting a feel for things.
Regards,
Eterry

As most here have stated, fit is far more important than weight. I regularly shoot 600s in the 12 and 13 pound range without any difficulty - but they fit me well. I had an 11 pound 500NE that was enough after 20 rounds and a 10 pound 450NE I had to put down after the second shot but another 10 pound 500NE I could shoot all day.

Fit is everything.

If at all possible I'd suggest getting to one of the DRSS, Vintagers, Big Bore Hoot-n-Shoot, etc. get togethers and asking to try as many DRs in as many calibers by as many manufacturers as possible.

Rusty, MacD37 and Retreever here know when and where most of these events take place and all three are a wealth of information and experience.

Good luck

I agree with the statement "fit is more important than weight". The worst kicking
double rifle I ever shot was a 9.3x74R. It was a German made double, very
light with a bit more drop at comb than my other doubles. It frankly, was
terrible to shoot, very accurate but unpleasant.
I traded it in at Champlins for another/larger double.

I've shot three different 500's, none recoiled (perceived) as bad as
that 9.3. However, I thought they all had significantly more recoil than
my 500/465 & 450/400!
Because of that, I guess my recoil tolerance is at the 500/465 or 470 caliber
range?

My 500/465 weighs 10lbs 10 oz & the 450/400 weighs 10lbs even.
I've shot elephant & buff with both & haven't noticed a big difference
in their effect on game (480gr vs 400gr)?
Both are vintage English guns (H&H, Lancaster).

quote:

Originally posted by Todd Williams:
10.5 lbs for both the 450 - 470 class guns as well as the 500NE. Assuming proper stock fit, those guns will be easy to shoot as well as carry all day.

My 577NE was pleasant to shoot at 12.5 lbs but the extra 2 pounds rifle weight in addition to the added weight of the ammo made carrying it burdensome, especially in the late season heat of Zim.

This. I've fired all three rounds quite a bit in four different rifles, VC (500 & 450) Searcy (470 & 450) Sabbati (450) and Blaser 470 with the Blaser the heaviest and the Sabbati the lightest (by about a pound). Not a dime's worth of difference, but felt recoil was better in those rifles that approximated by fitted measurements (my own 450 and a friend's 500, we're almost exact fit) and that makes sense. That said, I wouldn't want any of them over 10.5

I agree fit makes alot of difference. The more I play around with doubles the more my tastes have changed.

As far as weight goes: This is what I say (being equal good fit):

375 flanged 450/400 8.5 to 9lbs

450ish-470ish 10lbs

500N-- 10.5 to lllbs

577N-- 11.5-12lbs on the dot

600N 14lbs

Gents:
It seems to me folks look to weight as 1) easy to carry or 2) absorb recoil. .450-.500-.577-.600 will all have recoil that feels the same if the stock is the same style/shape and the weight is adjusted. CCM is correct in that stock fit is paramount. That is why the .405 Winchester M-95 was noted for horrible recoil with rather a light cartridge--the stock sucked. With a good-fitting stock, light weight is much easier to deal with. And I'd rather have that than a average to poor stock fit needing weight to control the kick.
There is a downside to vintage rifles--the rifle one loves may not fit as it should.
Cheers,
Cal

quote:

Originally posted by shootaway:
I do not believe in this knowledge past down bullshit.
IMO,there was once a time when there was a fellow
by the name of Holland who knew what he was doing.
Today it is just a name and a whole lot of pretending
and trying to catch clients like you catch fish.

You might darn well be right. I think the fashion company
CHANEL, (as in COCO CHANEL) owns H&H now...

(See paragraph 5: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Holland_%26_Holland )
("In 1989, all remaining shares in H&H were bought by the French cosmetics group Chanel.")

More recoil needs more weight in my mind.

See Newton's Third Law.

quote:

Originally posted by shootaway:
I do not believe in this knowledge past down bullshit.

And this is based on your vast knowedge and wide experiences with how many DR's that you've owned and or shot?

1. None

2. 1

3. 2

My vote would be for #1 for you.

quote:

Originally posted by Mike Brooks:

quote:

Originally posted by shootaway:
I do not believe in this knowledge past down bullshit.

And this is based on your vast knowedge and wide experiences with how many DR's that you've owned and or shot?

1. None

2. 1

3. 2

My vote would be for #1 for you.

I guess you where one of the fish.

quote:

I do not believe in this knowledge past down bullshit.

Shootaway


How come you don't believe in this BS ?

The sales Director of H&H, do you think he has
no knowledge ????

He started on the bench, has done action filing, barrels, fitting, stocks, the whole
box and dice, all of which was passed down to him from others as he worked. He of course passed it down to others and so the process goes on.

You are as usual full of BS yourself.

quote:

Originally posted by shootaway:

quote:

Originally posted by Mike Brooks:

quote:

Originally posted by shootaway:
I do not believe in this knowledge past down bullshit.

And this is based on your vast knowedge and wide experiences with how many DR's that you've owned and or shot?

1. None

2. 1

3. 2

My vote would be for #1 for you.

I guess you where one of the fish.

Answer the question dummy.

Despite your misguided convictions about many things H&H is still one of or maybe THE most sought after makers in the whole world. But of course as always the entire world is wrong and you're right.


Back to the origional question if you dare.

quote:

Originally posted by cal pappas:
Gents:
It seems to me folks look to weight as 1) easy to carry or 2) absorb recoil. .450-.500-.577-.600 will all have recoil that feels the same if the stock is the same style/shape and the weight is adjusted. CCM is correct in that stock fit is paramount. That is why the .405 Winchester M-95 was noted for horrible recoil with rather a light cartridge--the stock sucked. With a good-fitting stock, light weight is much easier to deal with. And I'd rather have that than a average to poor stock fit needing weight to control the kick.
There is a downside to vintage rifles--the rifle one loves may not fit as it should.
Cheers,
Cal

That's why the original poster would do well to try a few different makes in a few different calibers. What's great for one might not be as good for another.

Plus it's a lot of fun to try different doubles!

Hope you're recovering well and quickly!

Doc,
You're probably pretty used to seeing stuff like Cal's been thru but that pan of bones is pretty amazing. It's different when they used to belong to a critter!

Thanks one and all for the replies; i'm just kicking tires on doubles. I doubt I'll ever own a "Bespoke" rifle, but a used continental or american might be something I can afford...someday.
Regards,
Eterry

quote:

Originally posted by new_guy:
More recoil needs more weight in my mind.

See Newton's Third Law.

Without a properly fitted and shaped stock, this will simply result in a heavy gun that kicks the snot out of you! With proper stock fit, more recoil can easily be tolerated in a lighter weight gun.

Newton's Third Law certainly applies in terms of free recoil energy, but it does nothing to address how that energy is transferred to the shoulder of the shooter, thereby affecting perceived recoil. A perfect example of this is Cal's reference to the original .405 Winchester M-95!

Another example proving the point that stock fit and shape are more important than weight would be to take 2 rifles, same caliber, say 500NE, same weight, with the same load. One a Kreighoff with straight stock, the other a Merkel with exaggerated drop at the heel. Again, exact same weight. Anyone think these two guns will "kick" the same in terms of what the shooter feels?