if not then what is the next step up in size from the 450? And would it be possible to have build a 450 on the larger action?

No doubt Kebco will chime in here, but I understand it only goes up in size for 577 and 600. IMHO the 450 470 and 500 are the same in action size.
I'm talking on the standard action with reinforced moustache that you and I have Adam,
Not sure on the rounded action ones?
Todd might be able to answer that one.

Cheers

Nick

PS Ken, how is my 600 coming along. Maybe you can put up some photos of the build on my behalf, as I'm off to The UK to shoot some GRouse , pheasant,partridge for the next couple of weeks

As the potential purchaser of the round action VC rifle, I would be interested in the action sizes designated for various calibres. In particular, I am curious if we could start to approximate the old British rifles(in terms of weight distribution) by building a .450 on a .500 sized action or a .500 on a .577 sized action?

Of late there is a tendency to go to a light and smaller action.
IMO, This will not necessarily reduce the weight as lead will need to be added to get the balance back anyway.
A thicker and heavier action should increase the strength, distribute the weight in the correct area and deepen the action where it meets the For-end thus helping to re create the classic splinter for-end stock.

As Nick stated, Ken will really need to be the one to give the final say, but currently, the 450 is built on the same action as the 500. And Nick is correct in that the action size goes up for the 577 and 600.

In Boddington's first edition of "Safari Rifles" he states that one of the benefits of the 450 is that it can be built on a lighter action, but currently, I don't think anyone is building them that way. I could be wrong on that.

I think this holds true for the round body actions as well but to my knowledge, VC isn't making round bodies in the 577 and 600.

Adam, I'm not in agreement with your statement about balance and light weight, at least with the round body rifle as my 500NE weighs 10.25lbs but the balance is exactly correct. No weight added to it. When I still owned the 577, it was WAY too heavy at 14 lbs. Taking the weights out of the buttstock made it muzzle heavy, but much handier at 12.5lbs, if a 577 can be called that, as it is quite a bit larger in physical dimensions than the 500. A lighter set of barrels could have corrected that easily. In fact, IIRC, Doc just had a new, lighter set of barrels made for his 600NE, allowing him to remove the weights but still have a well balanced rifle. Just something to think about concerning weight and balance with these guns.

As much as I like the VC brand, I think there were improvements needed and it seems that Ken, Jerome, and the company in general is listening to the market evidenced by them now making lighter barrel sets as well as moving toward a true splinter fore-end. Sam even had his 577 constructed with an open grip. They continue to impress me!

Todd, you are correct on the frame sizes for VCs. Now the Brit guns the cutoff to a larger frame was above the 450 and just as you mentioned, the likes of Boddington, Wright, even Taylor all recommended the 450NE because it could be built on a lighter trimmer frame with great balance.

quote:

Originally posted by ozhunter:
would it be possible to have build a 450 on the larger action?

A thicker and heavier action should increase the strength, distribute the weight in the correct area and deepen the action where it meets the For-end thus helping to re create the classic splinter for-end stock.

oz

You do know that this kind of thinking ends up costing a man money.

Good luck ;-) let us know how it ends up.

.