Just received my Merkel 140-2 500 NE from a member. Nice little gun. I know its not an English double but I have one and this will be an easily replaceable factory ammo regulated gun with ejectors.

First thing I noticed about it is the size difference. It is much smaller, lighter and trimmer than my Wilkinson 470, which is on a large frame. Is it the modern barrel steel or did they just go way overkill with the Krupps barrels on the 470? Way more metal around the chambers and much wider lump block.

While the recoil may be stiffer with the modern 500 it sure handles nice. Shorter tubes and at least a pound and a half less maybe more.

Anyhow just an observation. Triggers are much nicer, and the factory regulation target with 570 Norma PH is touching at 50M.

Anyhow I guess I've joined the double club officially now that I have 2........

Many of the lower end modern guns share the same action size between several calibers. A 450/400 or .450 will/can share the same action as a .500. With modern steels the actions are certainly strong enough. The issue becomes the larger bore guns will actually weigh less than the smaller bore since on the same action, and consequently felt recoil will be higher than an appropriate caliber specific frame.

Sabatti is the same. I regulated several .500’s which share the same frame as the .450, the .500’s weighed just SHY of 10lbs. Imo a .500ne should be 11-11.5lbs.

Yes recoil will be stout no doubt....

My 470 weighs 11 1/2 lbs......

I had a Merkel 500 that I shot a Cape buffalo with. 570gr. bullet at a choreographed 2150fps. Wouldn't regulate any slower. I did NOT feel the recoil when I shot that buffalo. And I actually enjoyed carrying it, much more than I would have at an extra 1-1.5 pounds.

Good to hear thanks.

Interesting that Merkel didn’t put any muzzle crowns on their barrels. My Wilkinson has some really nice ones. Must be a cost saver can’t see how it would be much if any

I had a nice 500 3 1/4” double that weighed 10lb 10 oz and was very nice to shoot. 2 oz more than my 500/450 3 1/4”.

At least Heym does offer a choice of frame size for these cartridges. I ordered my Heym 89B in 450NE with the heavier frame as I do shoot the big doubles a fair amount I and I wanted the slightly heavier weight. If it gets too heavy to carry I suspect a gun bearer could be hired for very little.

I have a couple of Merkels, one chambered for 9.3X74R,with selective ejectors and set front trigger. The other chambered for 470NE, with extractors. My 470 has taken two bull elephants and four Cape buffalo.
I have had zero problem with either of them, and the weight is perfect for all day carrying, and neither is unreasonable to shoot from a recoil perspective. The Eles, and Buffalo were taken by the previous owner of the 470NE.and about 30 wild boar by me, many with running shots, for stalking practice by me, along with a lot of other North American game with both Merkels, and put several hundred rounds through both and they shoot just as well as my Britt doubles. I believe the Merkels are fairly priced, and worth looking at for a new to double rifle buyer.

Good luck with your 500NE! The 500NE was not available when I bought my 470NE Merk, or that is the chambering I would have bought.

…………………………………………..

Thanks! If it shoots like the factory test target it will be more than adequate. My 100 year old English 470 is a bit more temperamental but shoots good but I like that modern gun they can tailor it to existing loads nuts on. And 2 touching at 50 meters is pretty good

In examining both rifles it is true the workmanship, design, engraving, feel of the Wilkinson is far superior. But I wanted a easily replaceable field rifle that has ejectors. For the money I paid I feel it will fit the bill nicely.

Just wish it had barrel crowns and bluing on the end of the barrels. Not sure why they did that

Love my Merkel 140-2 .500 NE. I shoot 510 gr CEB solids over 104 gr of R-15 going ~2225 fps is regulated. The 570 CEBs regulated at ~2150 over 96 gr of R-15.

Killed 2 ele with the 510 grainers and one with 570s. The 510 with frontal brain penetrated weigh past the cranial valt into the neck...never found it. Thus 510 is my favorite load.

This load is extremely tolerable to shoot.

quote:

Originally posted by Aaron Little:
Many of the lower end modern guns share the same action size between several calibers. A 450/400 or .450 will/can share the same action as a .500. With modern steels the actions are certainly strong enough. The issue becomes the larger bore guns will actually weigh less than the smaller bore since on the same action, and consequently felt recoil will be higher than an appropriate caliber specific frame.

Exactly.

I will add that WHERE the weight is concentrated on the rifle is as important (if not more so) than the rifle's overall weight.

An appropriately sized frame enables the maker to concentrate the weight where it should be... in the middle.

If the frame is too small, the weight of the rifle can only be increased by making the barrels heavier at the muzzle or adding weight to the butt - both of which negatively impact the handling of the rifle.

For me, a 470 should weigh 11 lbs. A 500 should be pushing 12.

I second new_guy's comments on balance. My Heym 89B 450NE balance is distinctly different than what the balance was on my Merkel 470NE. To me at least the new Heym 89B balance is superior and aids in both handling and carrying. That being said, I did not have any problems associated with the Merkel or my 370NE Heym 88B comfort when shooting that I could blame on balance.

To me the most important aspect of perceived recoil is stock fit. As I ordered my Heym 89B the stock fits perfectly. I found that the more open grip on the Heym 89B did not bark the second finger with the trigger guard as happened with both my Merkel and 470NE Heym 88B 470s. Combined with the slightly higher weight with the large frame, the balance, and no finger bruises my Heym 89B is a pleasure to shoot.

I should add, if your second finger is being bashed by the trigger guard a pad on the back of the trigger guard such as sold for double barrel shotguns solves the issue. I believe I obtained my pads from NECG.

Obviously in a perfect world this may be true. Some say they prefer a lighter gun to carry, some want a heavier gun for recoil control. My deal came across as a Merkel so I’ll live with it till I decide to spend 2-3 to 5 times the money. My 470 weighs 11 1/2 and its pretty heavy I think but shootable. Haven’t shot the 500 Merkel yet but playing with it it seems to be very handy trim and barrels I think 3” shorter so maybe not the “best” gun but I’m sure adequate for the occasional dangerous game hunt, long walks after ele and close in thick vegetation work. I am partial to shorter barrels though

I'm going to once again disagree on the weights suggested above for the 470 and 500.

I think fit and balance of the gun is much more important than total weight.

My VC Round Body was bespoke to my dimensions. It weighs 10.25 lbs. I wouldn't want it any heaver as it is a breeze to shoot, at least for me because it fits me. Someone else with a longer or shorter LOP might think differently.

There is no need for a 500 NE to weigh 12 lbs. When I owned my 577 NE, it was 13.5 lbs with the weights in the stock. With the weights removed, it was barrel heavy and weighed exactly 12 lbs. At that weight, and despite not being bespoke to my dimensions, nor properly balanced, it was still very shootable. The larger / heavier frame was definitely an issue in terms of handling the rifle, requiring more effort.

Having owned only sixty or so DR's and having only fired a only few of hundred different DR's.

It is my (perhaps only naive) opinion that the turn of the 18/19th century Anglo/Brits (Scotland, Ireland lumped in) had in general, the DR balance/weights about right--

With tapered barrels by NE caliber, appropriate frame by NE caliber, balanced ( or weighted between the hands, if you prefer) etc-

That would be:
375FL 9-10
450-400 ,9.5-10.5# )
450, 470. 475 10.5-11.5#
500, 11.5-12.5#
577, 12.5-13.5#
600, 14-15 #
many were a bit heavier-

Having also owned early production DR's of non(rear)weighted--Merkel's. Krieghoff's,Douglas's, and a few other of the "newer" (20th and 21st century) variants, which I fail to recall at the moment--

Let's just say they weren't for me, neither in recoil, but more importantly, in balance as to hunting/ shooting handling/maneuvering characteristics that the 19th century Brits/Anglos instilled into their design/finished product.
(some were quite accurate, despite of not handing well)

With IMO, the small frames, non-tapered tubular barrels being the two most prominent culprits in those firearms handling characteristics.

Each to their own, perhaps,---

I was fortunate enough to have started as a teen with access to finely pointing/handling Anglo/Brit DR's
it could be said that biased me , I prefer to say it educated me.


(As well, I have owned some nice Belgian, Austrian, other German, French , Italian, DR's that more closely approximated the 19th century Angol/Brit feel/balance)
(then, I also prefer the feel, balance, of most of the Anglo/Brit, Bolt Express Rifles of the turn of the 18/19th century. As well as the SxS shotguns of that Era)

What DB said makes sense to me.

Sure my English gun is pretty classic. Handling the Merkel which happens to fit me very well I think it’s going to work just fine. For one the triggers are much better. We shall see

I think the best weight for a 500NE is 11.25 to 11.5 lbs.

All discussed before but I have to ask what it is you guys are doing with your double rifles that requires a 500NE to weigh 12 lbs?

If you use it for hunting dangerous game, you'll be carrying it A LOT more than shooting it. For instance, on the double buffalo hunt I just returned from, we probably averaged 10 to 12 miles a day of walking, with a couple of days probably closer to 15 miles. That's up and down valleys and gullies, stooped over in the jesse, etc. Carrying an extra 1.5 lbs may not seem like a lot, but over the course of 10 or 14 days, it really adds up. All that and I shot the rifle on two occasions. Once on the first buffalo and 6 times on the second buffalo. I never felt the recoil but I damn sure did feel that rifle slung over my shoulder all those miles day after day. That is similar to the other safaris I've done previously. On my 2013 elephant bull hunt, we hunted 12 days and averaged 15 miles or more per day, as is the nature of ele bull hunting. That was in December in Zim where the temps were north of 120 degrees every day. Lots of carrying and 2 total shots on the last day to bag my bull. I could go on but you get the idea.

I used an example here on a similar discussion a couple of years back and will present it again. Say you have a buttstock that is a 2" diameter dowel rod end. Length of pull of 10 inches. Place that against your shoulder in a 500NE and how much weight do you think you'll need before it doesn't painfully knock the snot out of you? 30lbs? I'll bet that wouldn't be enough.

But take a properly shaped butt stock, long and wide enough to spread the recoil across your shoulder. LOP built to your exact body size. How much difference will an extra 1.5 lbs of rile weight in terms of felt recoil? Not much I'd propose.

If my primary use of the DR is to shoot at the range for sport, which I really enjoy as well ... yeah, maybe a little extra weight would allow shooing a few extra rounds per session before getting a little sore. But from a hunting rifle standpoint, I still say stock shape and fit are much more important than total weight.

One and a half lbs does not seem much but it makes a big difference in recoil.It is very difficult to follow through on a shot using a rifle that has a high recoil.

quote:

Originally posted by shootaway:
One and a half lbs does not seem much but it makes a big difference in recoil.It is very difficult to follow through on a shot using a rifle that has a high recoil.

Going to disagree with that as well George.

Remember this video I posted a few years back?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?...EN8&feature=youtu.be

This was my 10.25 lb VC in 500NE described above. I have to problem following through and getting back on target with that rifle due to excessive recoil.

Again, the rifle fits me so it's not a factor.

That is what I thought about my shooting years ago but having amassed a lot more shooting experience since then, there is no doubt in my mind about it.Sure you are going to hit things but you are going to miss A LOT too.I don't mean follow up I mean follow through-not disturbing the sight picture while anticipating the recoil.

Agree with the shot little carried a lot theory. I will be maximizing it on my sheep hunt. You would be amazed what recoil a 5 3/4 lb (6.5 with scope) 300 wm has. But oh what a joy to carry. Same goes with my elephant guns. Have a decent fit and train with it will be no problem. In any case it won’t be as bad as my 505 Gibbs. That thing really kicks

quote:

Originally posted by Todd Williams:

quote:

Originally posted by shootaway:
One and a half lbs does not seem much but it makes a big difference in recoil.It is very difficult to follow through on a shot using a rifle that has a high recoil.

Going to disagree with that as well George.

Remember this video I posted a few years back?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?...EN8&feature=youtu.be

This was my 10.25 lb VC in 500NE described above. I have to problem following through and getting back on target with that rifle due to excessive recoil.

Again, the rifle fits me so it's not a factor.

And there’s the rub

If a rifle doesn’t fit you it won’t be nice, especially one with higher recoil, no matter the weight.

I have found this even with the 375H&H.

The one dimension from older rifles and guns (s s doubles) that I love that seems to have been eclipsed is how thin/small/svelte, whatever the correct description is they are through the head and wrist/hand of the stock.

I guess this is because I have small hands for a modern man. But my two 12 bores are simply petite through the head and wrist/hand.

I remember comparing Mjines Holland and Holland, 470 or 500/450 I think, to the 89B 450/400. The 89B is a beautiful rifle with scaled action and barrels. However, it was noticeably larger in this area. This is not a critic. It is a simple observation. I find all new rifles and guns have this increased dimension.

Another area of scale that I think gets over looked on some new, more entry makers is the shape or surface area of the butt. V.C., Heym, or a Searcy stocked to you should not have this problem. The butt of my Heym is one of its more graceful, pleasing (visually and in use) features in my eye. However, I may be projecting at this point.

quote:

Originally posted by Rockdoc:

quote:

Originally posted by Todd Williams:

quote:

Originally posted by shootaway:
One and a half lbs does not seem much but it makes a big difference in recoil.It is very difficult to follow through on a shot using a rifle that has a high recoil.

Going to disagree with that as well George.

Remember this video I posted a few years back?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?...EN8&feature=youtu.be

This was my 10.25 lb VC in 500NE described above. I have to problem following through and getting back on target with that rifle due to excessive recoil.

Again, the rifle fits me so it's not a factor.

And there’s the rub

If a rifle doesn’t fit you it won’t be nice, especially one with higher recoil, no matter the weight.

I have found this even with the 375H&H.

It seems like you don't understand.

No one is talking about rifles that don't fit you.

Lotts, 500NE and 505 Gibbs at max load etc.. you are dealing with cannons.

quote:

All discussed before but I have to ask what it is you guys are doing with your double rifles that requires a 500NE to weigh 12 lbs?

Well, not as much as I used to.

In fact the 577's and 500's are all sold.
Though in my younger days, quite a bit,starting in the late 60's and on through the 90's.
However, having years ago, met and been instructed by Ed Scherer with respect to reducing total recoil sustained in one's lifetime, I began to moderate recoil as possible in each circumstance.

Many competitive shooters have sustained neck, shoulder and other repetitive trauma injuries from recoil.
Scherer, a smallish man, at least compared to my nearly 6ft, 200 +# frame, had been competitive shooter and instructor for many years (and was a P-47 pilot in WWII)
Ed developed a recoil reducing stock after the war, though it was not popular for until years afterward.

In short, as earlier stated, each to their own, perhaps--

Besides cumulative musculoskeletal and neurological sequela to recoil, we are seeing an increase in retinal detachments with the trend toward ever lighter firearms.
This is related to lighter (by bore) shotguns, carbon fiber rifles, DR’s etc.
John Taffin has relented from the big bore handguns due to wrist trauma from his repetitive activities.

This is not a chicken-little post. Rather a precautionary narrative.

Again,as to perhaps " what HAVE you done with your double rifles-
In years past- more than several sessions of over 100 rds in a day;
no, not all 500 and up,
but at least on a few occasions more than 50rds of 500 and up. As well as more than a few 1000 round days of trap and skeet and 2000 round Argentinian days of 12 bore.

Our circa WWII generation and subsequent ones are in most counties larger, heavier, etc, than the previous generations.
Bigger and stronger does not necessarily translate into less recoil trauma --cumulatively.

All that said--We are all going to do what we are going to do-

However, in the same loading,
a heavier DR, properly fitted, properly designed in stock geometry and weight balance between the hands
WILL transmit less recoil both in ft#' and recoil velocity than
a lighter DR, properly fitted, properly designed in stock geometry and weight balance between the hands.

Therefore, in almost all trained hands be faster to recover for a second round to be fired.
As well as in general a long-term smarter choice.

Moreover, in all but a perhaps very few exceptional technicians;
EITHER DR will be faster than an ill fitted, improperly balanced lighter rifle in the same loading.

I did not say-- Merkel's, Krieghoff's, Douglas's etc-
at their price point they are not serviceable weapons.

I said they weren't for me.

quote:

Originally posted by DuggaBoye:


Therefore, in almost all trained hands be faster to recover for a second round to be fired.

Did you watch the video I reposted above?

How much faster would I be with an extra 1.75 lb rifle than in that video?

I had one round that flew a bit high and right as you can see when I zoomed in at the end. That was the third round, right after the reload. Not caused by recoil. I rushed it hearing Eric shoot, thinking he was ahead and and about to fire his 4th shot when in fact, he was about to fire his third. My third shot actually beat his third by a fraction, although I pushed it a little high and right.

That's a 10.25 lbs 500 NE.

Here is another video of me shooting 4 rounds from a double. This time a 9.3X74R. This from an event Chris "New Guy" was hosting at the Flying B Ranch in Idaho where I just happened to be in camp doing a black bear hunt a few years back.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OEyGap7WaEU

When I watch the time counter from the first shot to the last shot on both videos, I get 6 seconds for the light weight 500NE and 6.5 seconds for the 9.3. Seems the amount of recoil doesn't really matter as much as practiced technique. If amount of recoil really determined the ability to get back onto target for the follow up shot that much, I should have been able to beat the 500NE time with the 9.3 and would have used it for the speed competition against the bolt rifle.

One hears the "quicker to recover from recoil for a second shot" comment all the time. My experience shows that comment to be more theoretical than practical.

DB, you did answer the question however and I suspected as much. If you are using the 500NE for range time primarily, yeah, a heavier gun might be the ticket. But if you are using it for field time primarily, I stand by my statement that a 500NE doesn't need to weigh 12 lbs.

After all, getting back to the "faster for the second shot" statement, I ask again, how much faster than the demo in the video? And more importantly, how much faster on the second shot would one be with a 1.75 lbs heavier gun hunting elephant bulls on day 12 of 15 miles per day + in 100+ degree heat?

quote:

Originally posted by Todd Williams:

quote:

Originally posted by shootaway:
One and a half lbs does not seem much but it makes a big difference in recoil.It is very difficult to follow through on a shot using a rifle that has a high recoil.

Going to disagree with that as well George.

Remember this video I posted a few years back?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?...EN8&feature=youtu.be

This was my 10.25 lb VC in 500NE described above. I have to problem following through and getting back on target with that rifle due to excessive recoil.

Again, the rifle fits me so it's not a factor.

Wow, first time I watched that - you smoked it Todd.

Todd,
You are obviously happy with your DR and proficient with it.
I am happy for you.

Yes, I have seen your video. (not the point)
Yes, in my younger days I was as fast or faster, as you demonstrated. (not the point)

It is also not the point that either of us are accomplished DR shooters.
Non-theoretically,I and other experienced DR shooters were/are faster with 500NE DR's that are heavier (ie 12 to 12+ #) properly fitted, properly designed in stock geometry and weight balance between the hands, than those that were 10 or 11 #'s.
(i can no longer say i am)
.
Yes, I have hunted with and carried a DR many days each year for many years over the past almost 50 years . (not the point)
Yes, I fired many (thousands of) DR rounds over the years .(not the point)
I have in-fact run more than 40 rounds through one of the first production Merkel 500NE's in one day. (i have also fired under 10# 500 NE's)
Again --not the point ---(that point would be more bravado and human adaptation ability to adverse conditions.)
etc

You have your position, I (and others) would disagree-

C'est la vie.

Great shooting Todd!

What were all the issues with the various bolt rifles, or is that a topic for a different thread?

quote:

Originally posted by Rockdoc:
Great shooting Todd!

What were all the issues with the various bolt rifles, or is that a topic for a different thread?

Eric's rifle was a custom rig built by a well respected rifle maker and properly sorted. Mine had been sent to Wayne at AHR and properly sorted as well. Neither should have had a jam issue.

You know, we surmised that the issue was the pressure of a little competition in that it makes you want to go at it with full vigor. What Eric had to do eventually was back off and relax just a little which smoothed out his operation of the bolts. I think kind of the way a sprinter learns to run a little faster when just the slightest relaxed instead of completely tensed and going full out.

On the second video where I was shooting at the Flying B Ranch, I filmed two guys on the safari course that Chris was running that did exactly the same thing with their bolt guns. There was a little competition for going through the course the fastest. It was a bit of an eye opener for me to see that. I think anyone doing a DG hunt with a bolt big bore should add a little practice agains the clock just to simulate a little pressure and be aware of staying smooth with cycling the action. Couldn't hurt.

Possibly the combination of a magnum length bolt with a little slop the way Mauser type actions usually have, is enough to induce it when you slam away at the action. I don't know for sure. RIP wanted to shoot with me using his 404 that he's completely sorted out and is sure he's got all of those potential kinks worked out. If he ever gets down to DSC with his rifle, I'll practice up to proficiency again and we'll have a go. It's a fun little competition and frankly surprised the hell out of both Eric and me.

Thanks Todd.

Nothing like practicing for real world situations to sort the gear (and people) out!

One negative point about using a heavier rifle is that it requires more muscle and strength to deal with the extra weight.

I have to agree totally with Todd. I have bought and since traded now several rifles heavier for comparison. For hunting ele and buff...I will stick with my 10.25 lb .500 NE.

Recoil was not too bad. Much less than my 505

quote:

Originally posted by gunslinger55:
Recoil was not too bad. Much less than my 505

I know, right?

No need for 12 lbs in a 500NE, especially if it's a hunting rifle and not a range queen.

And no, that statement isn't about bravado as some would have us believe.

quote:

And no, that statement isn't about bravado as some would have us believe.

out of context

try a bit of re-reading to gain comprehension -

"I have in-fact run more than 40 rounds through one of the first production Merkel 500NE's in one day. (i have also fired under 10# 500 NE's)

Again --not the point ---(that point would be more bravado and human adaptation ability to adverse conditions.)
--------------
the reference was to me , not you,
and not a couple of rounds

it was referring the number of rounds in a single day out of a far too light for caliber early Merkel 500

quote:

Originally posted by DuggaBoye:

quote:

And no, that statement isn't about bravado as some would have us believe.

out of context

try a bit of re-reading to gain comprehension -

"I have in-fact run more than 40 rounds through one of the first production Merkel 500NE's in one day. (i have also fired under 10# 500 NE's)

Again --not the point ---(that point would be more bravado and human adaptation ability to adverse conditions.)
--------------
the reference was to me , not you,
and not a couple of rounds

it was referring the number of rounds in a single day out of a far too light for caliber early Merkel 500

Sure were a lot of Points made that were "not the point".



Bottom line is I responded to your comment that in the hands of someone trained to handle a double rifle (paraphrasing), those trained will be faster on the second shot with the heavier gun.

To which I asked a practical question, based on the video I posted. Not taking into the account the reload time between shots 2 and 3, as that was "not the point", but looking solely at the time between shots 1 / 2, then 3 / 4, I asked how much faster would those intervals be with 1.75 lbs more rifle?

To my eye, those shots came pretty fast. Less than a second each. Especially shot 4 after shot 3. So IF, a heavier rifle would have indeed reduced the time to get back onto target and therefore reduced the time between those shots, how practical would shortening that time be beyond what it already is?

That's the supposition of my statement that the comment is more theoretical than practical. From a practical standpoint, if shot 2 and shot 4 come less than a second after shots 1 and 3, what is the actual benefit, from a hunting stand point? I'd suggest not much.

I think the "excessive follow through time" and "excessive time to get back on target from recoil" statements probably come from demonstrations like Boddington performed in his Safari Rifles book where he showed himself holding the DR at a near 90 degree angle after shooting a 600NE. The thought process being that the heavier the rifle, the shallower that recoil angle would be, and therefore the shorter time it would take to get back onto the target.

In fact, you'll notice from my video, and others shooting larger caliber doubles, that the recoil impulse, when properly managed by the shooter, is really only a fraction of a second with the muzzles rising a mere couple of inches before the rifle is pulled back onto the target. Unless we are talking extremes, I don't think weight of the rifle makes that much of a difference, and certainly not as much as proper fit.

I too have fired several boxes in a day's range time with the 500NE. Did it with the 577NE as well a few times. One thing I noticed is that with the Merkel, with it's pronounced drop at the heel, even though it weighed just a little more than my VC, I found I reached my tolerance level sooner than with the lighter VC. And that is due to the fit of the VC.

All that said, we should just agree to disagree on the matter as we aren't going to change each other's minds and there is nothing wrong with that.

quote:

Originally posted by Todd Williams:
... Possibly the combination of a magnum length bolt with a little slop the way Mauser type actions usually have, is enough to induce it when you slam away at the action. I don't know for sure. RIP wanted to shoot with me using his 404 that he's completely sorted out and is sure he's got all of those potential kinks worked out. If he ever gets down to DSC with his rifle, I'll practice up to proficiency again and we'll have a go. It's a fun little competition and frankly surprised the hell out of both Eric and me.

Yep, Todd is quite the accomplished blaster with the VC .500 NE.
I vaguely remember seeing that before, but not the challenge for me to race him.

OK. Where will we be shooting at DSC?
Of course I might want to use a .458 WIN instead of the 404 Jeffery.
Both will have to be M70 Classics with 3.6" box length so I do not get discombobbulated.
I might have to go for round two if I lose with one bolt action, try the other.
Then if it comes down to best two out of three,
may I be allowed to use a 6.5-pound Remington/Baikal "Spartan" re-chambered from .45-70 Govt to .45-100 SWT?
Loser pays for beer & BBQ.

Rip ...