JPK, I suppose we'll simply have to agree to disagree!

quote:

Originally posted by dirklawyer:
I don't mean to beat a dead horse, I know that this question has been posted before but it's not to be found in the last 36 pages for double rifles, so here goes pandora's box being opened once again.

1. Both get the job done on dangerous game, some would argue that the 400 is too light for elephant. IMO if you hunted elephant on a yearly basis or every other year I might agree, an elephant hunt a couple times in a life time I believe it will get the job done, and quite well.

2. Best over-all hunting round-400 shines.

3. Reloading components, ammo, bullets 470 shines, although in a couple of years with the Hornady ammo, brass the 400 might make some significant gaines in this catagory.

4. Weight of rifle, 400 shines

5. Recoil and coming out of recoil for second shot, 400 shines.

6. Stopping caliber 470 has significant edge, but IMO that's why there are PH's and if you put it where it counts charge is terminated.

7. If hunting in Africa at the present time and ammo does not arrive, with 470 pay up the yang and get some. With 400 your up the creek, borrow PH's spare rifle if he has one.

Open for argument and other comparisons.

I would go for the good old .450 3 1/4 N.E.

Guys, I have thoughly enjoyed the tidbits of information, laughs, and seeing the hair raise up on the necks of a few of you. I told you this was a Pandora's box but let's talk some turkey.
People like Wm. Bell and John Taylor just to name a few used the 450-400 and thought that it was quite capable of taking ALL game in ANY cover IN close encounters of the third kind. As most of us know, Bell thought the caliber was over-kill.
And let's plug into the equation that they did not have the same quality of bullets we have today. If anyone on this forum has more experience with DG than these two men let them speak up now. Walter Johnson killed hundreds of elephants, buffs, and lions with a 375. Elmer Keith said that there is no better calibre going after a wounded brown bear in thick alder bush than a 450-400 in DR.
I agree it's a borderline stopping caliber but let's be brutally honest with ourselves. Recoil is an issue with most of us macho men but we don't openly talk about it. I appreciate Rusty's honest evaluation of his recoil tolerance, it's about the same for me Rusty. I have a close friend of mine who is now in his 70's who wrote Lyman's reloading manual and has been to Africa a dozen times over to hunt and interview PH's, quess what the conclusion is on 450-470 class rifles and clients in Africa? Over 90% are flinching when they get off the plane, and the PH wishes that they would have brought a 375 or even an 30-06 that they can shoot straight. He said that most PH's agree that it is an extremely rare individual that can shoot a 470 class calibre as accurately as they can a 375.

Sure, you can shoot plinking rounds all day at the range with your 470 BUT your brain knows that a full load in a 10-10.5lb rifle is going to spank you.

Personally, I can manage a 470's recoil in an 11lb rifle, I believe most of you that posted can handle a 470's recoil but I would bet that you can shoot a 450-400 better and enjoy it alot more. I used the word manage a 470 because unless you can shoot it as well as your 30-06 and shoot it comfortably standing, sitting, squatting, and PRONE positions then you have not mastered the 470's recoil and it still possesses a small portion of your brain and you will FLINCH at the wrong time, in the wrong place, in front of the wrong animal, then things get interesting.

DL

You make some very good points. There are no flies on the 450/400 to be sure.

Take a look at what a lot of PH's carry. The 416 class seems to hold a lot of appeal to them, and this is the rifle they use "on the job". Not a whole lot of difference between a .416 and a .411 or .408.

For Taylor's views on the 450/400 - look at pages 111 to 122 - he has quite a bit to say about the round!

Not one of us would disagree that shot placement is the key. But in the field, there are more than a few variables that can impact shot placement - movement of game at the last second, wind, bullets hitting brush, etc. A heavier bullet is less effected by wind and deflection off of brush.

And certainly a bullet that pack more wallop is better when trying to derail a freight train.

I am of the school, however, that there are just some cartridges that are like bumblebees - they do things that are not possible on paper. The 416 rigby falls into this group. And it looks to me like the 450/400 does as well.

Dangerous game cartridge design 100 years ago was mostly a trial and error process. It would have been very bad for business to release a dangerous game round that did not work. And since most rifle makers also supplied ammunition at the time, live customers were preferred.

If you took all of the marketing hype to heart that accompanies a new cartridge, you would believe that in the last 100 years dangerous game has become much faster, their skin thicker and even armor plated, and their vital areas much smaller.

What worked 100 years ago works as well today - probably even better with better bullets and powders.

Most of this boils down to knowing one's own limitations. And recoil is a big one.

For the record, I do not and have never owned a 450/400. My DG double is a 470, and will add a 9.3X74 late this year. I do own and hunt with bolt rifles in 416 Rigby.

AW SH-T, I thought we were over this.

John Taylor thought so much of the 450/400 that he used a 450 No2 for the most elephants with one cartridge, another favorite and probably ranking second for elephants he killed is the 500/465...I could go on and on...Way down the list is the 450/400. Mentioned in the same breath as the 375H&H...Geez, Taylor was the Boddington of his day, greatly experienced relative to us mere mortals, but writing for an audience.

Have others used more? Or less? Sure. Take a look at Taylor's compilation of what different wardens and proffesionals used though. Not many medium bores compared to large bores...

The recoil thing gives me trouble. I'll take anyone at their word that they can't manage the recoil of a 450-470 class rifle, but I sure as heck can't understand why. Recoil is something that you can become accustomed to. It takes but a little time, patience and persistence. I will garuntee you that a 450-470 has only enough recoil to make you aware the rifle has fired, and only enough report to register its firing when there is game in front of you. If a fellow shows up in Africa, and can't shoot his rifle, he is a fool and hasn't put the effort into his hunt that it merits. I'm sure many fools show up unable to shoot their rifles, but it isn't the rifle's fault!

More wives' tales to put to bed, more myths to debunk...

JPK

quote:

Originally posted by JPK:
AW SH-T, I thought we were over this.

John Taylor thought so much of the 450/400 that he used a 450 No2 for the most elephants with one cartridge, another favorite and probably ranking second for elephants he killed is the 500/465...I could go on and on...Way down the list is the 450/400. Mentioned in the same breath as the 375H&H...Geez, Taylor was the Boddington of his day, greatly experienced relative to us mere mortals, but writing for an audience.

Have others used more? Or less? Sure. Take a look at Taylor's compilation of what different wardens and proffesionals used though. Not many medium bores compared to large bores...

The recoil thing gives me trouble. I'll take anyone at their word that they can't manage the recoil of a 450-470 class rifle, but I sure as heck can't understand why. Recoil is something that you can become accustomed to. It takes but a little time, patience and persistence. I will garuntee you that a 450-470 has only enough recoil to make you aware the rifle has fired, and only enough report to register its firing when there is game in front of you. If a fellow shows up in Africa, and can't shoot his rifle, he is a fool and hasn't put the effort into his hunt that it merits. I'm sure many fools show up unable to shoot their rifles, but it isn't the rifle's fault!

More wives' tales to put to bed, more myths to debunk...

JPK

.................AMAZING!.............




Who said a person couldn't shoot his rifle because of recoil? Nobody I know!

What was said, however, is because of an excess of 33 footpounds of recoil, with a 470NE, over the recoil of a 450/400NE in the same weight rifle, does slow recovery time between shots, no matter what you say! That is a simple fact of physics. The above doesn't mean he couldn't shoot either well, as far as hitting the target.

NOW! That is wive's tale that is put to bed, and Myth debunked!

THE REST EDITED OUT: Not worth the agravation!

......BYE

Gee, John - I never received the memo that said your word was gospel.

About the only emotional agruments I have seen posted here are frankly your own. With more than a few head scratchers:

quote:

So far as an all 'rounder, the 450/400 only comes in first if it is light. If it weighs the same as a 470, might as well shoot a 470. Trajectory isn't different enough to mean anything and a bigger hole is ALWAYS better than a smaller hole in the same spot.

But, the .458 weighs the same as a 474. So why a .458 if the .474 makes a bigger hole and a proper center of gravity?

quote:

You 450/400 afficienados take offense where none is ever intended. But you also want to pretend that the 450/400 is something it isn't. The 450/400 filled the role of the 375H&H decades ago. This is the cartridge it should be compared to, NOT the 450-470 range of rifles.

Again, see Taylor's comments. Also, I strongly disagree that the 375 is a good comparison. Using something with a .035 caliber difference is like comparing the 470 to the 500 NE. Also, comparing a bullet weight of 270 grains to one of 400 grains is simply ludicrous.

A more pat comparison would be the 416 and 404 classes.

As for your definition of "rainbow trajectory":

quote:

The 10" drop of the 450/400 I earlier alluded to is from Hornaday's site, the 470's 8.4" drop from Federal's. Both rifles sighted the same, with sights the same distance above the bore.

That is quite a rainbow.

In addition, you have fairly frequently went to the John Taylor well to back up some things yo have said. Now, when faced with something he said that is contrary to your way of thinking, you paint him with the "paid shill" brush, stating:

quote:

Geez, Taylor was the Boddington of his day, greatly experienced relative to us mere mortals, but writing for an audience.

I guess I missed the part where Taylor gave up his job as a security guard at a dog pound to receive paid endorsements and comped hunts.

Like I said, I am not an owwner of a 450/400.

And questioning someone's recoil tolerance is simply offensive the way you put it. You were more than a little over the top with that dig.

People who live in glass houses....

jpk

it's like i said, the 450/400 gang is really touchy should you do anything but be a PRAISE SINGE for the caliber.

it's almost mystical how they rise up in its defense....

i still can't figure out what causes this

but it's kinda like..... beating a dead horse

Well Tom, it is good to see there is at least one person you have not alienated.

You could, however, use a little brush up on reading comprehension. A pro and con discussion is well and good, but let's make sure the playing field is level on both sides.

Perhaps a little too much shooting with your 9 pound 577 NE? That would explain a lot.

manion, i like your comedy a lot.

Mac,

Your quotes:

"Who said a person couldn't shoot his rifle because of recoil? Nobody I know!"

"What was said, however, is because of an excess of 33 footpounds of recoil, with a 470NE, over the recoil of a 450/400NE in the same weight rifle, does slow recovery time between shots, no matter what you say! That is a simple fact of physics. The above doesn't mean he couldn't shoot either well, as far as hitting the target."

"because recovery time is greatly shorter for the 400, to get off the all important second AIMED shot"

"The only draw-back to the 450/400NE is so many are found too heavy for caliber, but that even dampens the recoil further, makeing recovery time even quicker!"

"In a ten pound 470NE you gonna get kicked, and the 450/400NE 3" is a pussycat in the same weight rifle"

My quote:

"I'll take anyone at their word that they can't manage the recoil of a 450-470 class rifle,"

You have discussed recoil repeatedly. But now its nothing, which is it? Why are you are so darned concerned about the recoil of a 450-470 class rifle? It must be a major factor, eh?

If recoil is such a factor for you, or anyone else, that it eleiminates or slows down an accurate second shot then its too much. There is no noticeable muzzle rise from a 450-470 class rifle when shooting at game. Take a look at "Death by Double Rifle" or, god forbid, Mark Sulivan movies, Buzz Charlton's DVD or "Boddington on Buffalo" - where Andrew Dawson puts 470 rounds into a buff or where the charging elephant is stopped by Andrew Dawson with a couple of missed brain shots from his 470. One common thing, the fellow shooting this class rifle, who knows his rifle, suffers no noticeable muzzle rise.

One can learn can learn to tollerate recoil. Gregor Woods' book, "African Rifles", is one place to look for learning to manage recoil.

JPK

Jim Manion,

I never claimed to speak the gospel, only to have the facts and history behind my comments.

From your post with a quote of mine:
"About the only emotional agruments I have seen posted here are frankly your own. With more than a few head scratchers:

quote:
So far as an all 'rounder, the 450/400 only comes in first if it is light. If it weighs the same as a 470, might as well shoot a 470. Trajectory isn't different enough to mean anything and a bigger hole is ALWAYS better than a smaller hole in the same spot."

Help me out and point out which part of this post is a) emotional or more significantly b) inaccurate?

From your post:
"But, the .458 weighs the same as a 474. So why a .458 if the .474 makes a bigger hole and a proper center of gravity?"

Yes, I am in full agreement. Though I am happy with the performance of a .458", 500gr bullet at 2135fps or a .458" 450gr bullet at 2190fps, performance which bests that of the 450NE, if I could have found my rifle in 470NE I would have preferred it. Even better if I had found it in 476WR or 500NE. Either way it isn't a 10lb+ rifle shooting 400grs at 2050-2150fps and that is one major point of this thread.

From your post:
quote:
You 450/400 afficienados take offense where none is ever intended. But you also want to pretend that the 450/400 is something it isn't. The 450/400 filled the role of the 375H&H decades ago. This is the cartridge it should be compared to, NOT the 450-470 range of rifles.


Again, see Taylor's comments. Also, I strongly disagree that the 375 is a good comparison. Using something with a .035 caliber difference is like comparing the 470 to the 500 NE. Also, comparing a bullet weight of 270 grains to one of 400 grains is simply ludicrous.

A more pat comparison would be the 416 and 404 classes."

Taylor discusses the 375H&H as a suitable round for elephants in all conditions. He also discusses both the 375H&H and the 450/400 as a canidate for all 'round rifle. He discusses the 404 in this same vein, to be sure. But he favors the 375H&H over the 404 and so his comparison is between the 450/400 and the 375H&H. Taylor places the 416 Rigby, and today that would include the Remington, Taylor, 500/416 and modern loadings of the 404, in a different league. And so they are with hundreds of feet per second velocity advantage and considerable enrgy advantage. But taylor did not equate the 416 with the 450's or 470. The common loading for the 375H&H for DG was the 300gr bullet so any comparison between the 270gr and 400 gr bullet weights is a red herring and just irrelevant.

The comparison between the 450/400 and the old 404 loading is a good one. But the 404 pretty well fell by the wayside until recently, except for use by native game scouts in some former British African colonies. Because it did, I do not think it makes for a replacement to the 450/400 in general use, though the comparisom remains valid.

From your post:
"As for your definition of "rainbow trajectory":

quote:
The 10" drop of the 450/400 I earlier alluded to is from Hornaday's site, the 470's 8.4" drop from Federal's. Both rifles sighted the same, with sights the same distance above the bore.

That is quite a rainbow"

From my post:
"the different velocity and trajectory numbers that prove that the 470 beats the 450/400. (hint, 8.4" drop at 200yds vs. 10"+, which do you think wins - not that that difference is material 'cause it ain't)"

which was responding to this quote:
"The 400 shoots much flatter than the 470NE, and is therefore more capable of long shots even with irons."

Help me out again, which part of my post is inaccurate?

From your post:
"In addition, you have fairly frequently went to the John Taylor well to back up some things yo have said. Now, when faced with something he said that is contrary to your way of thinking, you paint him with the "paid shill" brush, stating:

quote:
Geez, Taylor was the Boddington of his day, greatly experienced relative to us mere mortals, but writing for an audience.

I guess I missed the part where Taylor gave up his job as a security guard at a dog pound to receive paid endorsements and comped hunts."

From my post:
"John Taylor thought so much of the 450/400 that he used a 450 No2 for the most elephants with one cartridge, another favorite and probably ranking second for elephants he killed is the 500/465..."

What portion of my quote is incorrect?

"Taylor was the Boddington of his day, greatly experienced relative to us mere mortals, but writing for an audience."

Taylor wrote and spoke at sportsmans' clubs to try to make ends meet. Boddington is making his living doing what Taylor was doing to suplement his. They share in common the need to satisfy their paying customers. I'm sure that each would be equally successful if they shared a common time. I ascribe no other motives to Boddington, though obviously you do.

From your post:
"And questioning someone's recoil tolerance is simply offensive the way you put it. You were more than a little over the top with that dig."

From my post:
"The recoil thing gives me trouble. I'll take anyone at their word that they can't manage the recoil of a 450-470 class rifle, but I sure as heck can't understand why. Recoil is something that you can become accustomed to. It takes but a little time, patience and persistence. I will garuntee you that a 450-470 has only enough recoil to make you aware the rifle has fired, and only enough report to register its firing when there is game in front of you. If a fellow shows up in Africa, and can't shoot his rifle, he is a fool and hasn't put the effort into his hunt that it merits. I'm sure many fools show up unable to shoot their rifles, but it isn't the rifle's fault!"

Responding to this quote from another post:
"and has been to Africa a dozen times over to hunt and interview PH's, quess what the conclusion is on 450-470 class rifles and clients in Africa? Over 90% are flinching when they get off the plane, and the PH wishes that they would have brought a 375 or even an 30-06 that they can shoot straight. He said that most PH's agree that it is an extremely rare individual that can shoot a 470 class calibre as accurately as they can a 375."

No dig or offense intended except to those who show up flinching and have a PH who wishes they had brought a 30-06 instead. I don't think anyone on this double rifles board would show up in Africa "flinching when they get off the plane" and meet a PH who saw them shoot and "wishes they would have brought a 375 or even a 30-06 they could shoot straight." But anyone who did is certainly a fool!

I also don't think "it is an extremely rare individual that can shoot a 470 class calibre as accurately as they can a 375." But I do think it takes some work and patience and persistence to learn to be comfortable with heavy recoil from any rifle. I think nearly anyone can learn to deal with the recoil of a 450-470 class rifle if they put the time and effort into it.

JPK

quote:

The only draw-back to the 450/400NE is so many are found too heavy for caliber

Could you let me know who these people are?
No one, I know, who owns a 450/400 thinks it is too heavy.

quote:

8.4" drop at 200yds vs. 10"+,

That 1.6 inches at 200 yards? With the velocity of the the 470 2150 and the velocity of the 450/400 at 2050, right? Wonder what that would be at equal velocity at 100 yards?

Just kinda scratching my head.

quote:

Originally posted by Rusty:

quote:

The only draw-back to the 450/400NE is so many are found too heavy for caliber

Could you let me know who these people are?
No one, I know, who owns a 450/400 thinks it is too heavy.

Just kinda scratching my head.

Rusty,

Ask Mac about the quote on rifle weight, it is his quote from his earlier post. And he is right too. Again, no reason to hump a 470 and then shoot a 400.

JPK

quote:

Originally posted by Rusty:

quote:

The only draw-back to the 450/400NE is so many are found too heavy for caliber

Could you let me know who these people are?
No one, I know, who owns a 450/400 thinks it is too heavy.

Cabelas had a 450-400 for sale that was built on an 8 bore hammer gun frame. At 14 pounds, it exceeded the 8.5 pound ideal weight by a wide margin.

Here is a 450-400 that is way too heavy:

quote:

10 lbs. 14 oz. without the scope

How about this 450-400?

quote:

12 lbs. 9 oz.,

And another 450-400 that is too heavy:

quote:

10 lbs. 11 oz

Another obese 450-400:

quote:

Weight 10 lbs 15 oz

And yet another overweight 450-400:

quote:

Weight 11 lbs 4 oz

None of the above rifles even comes within 2 pounds of the ideal weight for a 450-400.

And that is a very common problem.

Wow, not within two pound?

I thought my question was anyone who owns a 400 Jeffery? I could be mistaken?

Gee, Dan my 10 lb. 450/400 3 inch is over weight?

I'll try to find A. Hollis and complain!

What was/is the correct weight for a 400 Jeffery, Dan?

Dan, while your at it, please list the correct weights for any other double rifle and caliber.

Say the 475#2 Jeffery and the 470. Perhaps a 400/360 Purdey?

Dan is right, there are lots of 450/400NE doubles that are heavy for caliber! My A&N 450/400NE 3" weighed in at 9.6 lbs, and was perfectly ballanced, and felt as lively as a shotgun.

I prefer all my rifles in the 9.5 to 10 lbs. My favorite Bolt action deer rifle weights 9.3 lbs loaded, with scope attached, and it is a Mannlicher Shoenauer MCA 243 Win. I carry that rifle while climbing rock faces in the mountains of New Mexico. I wouldn't want a 450/400NE 3" that weighed less than 9lbs, and 9.5 is better, IMO! Like Dan I don't want one that is pushing 11.0 lbs either. I'm working a trade for a 450/400NE 3 1/4" right now, but I don't yet know the weight, and that is the hook! I'll be tradeing my 470NE Merkel for the 450/400 3 1/4" double if it is in good shape!

This is a GREAT and entertaining discussion - love the banter.

Try this thought: .470 is the best overall option....can you say FEDERAL AMMO for sale just about everywhere!

Another reason - When it comes down to it, stopping power is actually a very important consideration...Been there and would have been happy to have been lugging around a 600, but, in my case the 500 gr Woodleighs (out of my .470) did the job and I'm here unscathed to tell the tale.

That's why I have always believed and always will believe this: Anybody interested in the pursuit of dangerous game had better 1) Be relatively fit, 2) know their rifle inside-out. 3) Practice shooting and reloading rapidly at close quarters over and over.

If you are worried about rifle weight, recoil, and decide to carry a lesser caliber for the aforementioned reasons - god save your butt should things go wrong - and friends, they can and will!

Any .470 up to 13 pounds in OK by me

Jeff Wemmer,

How 'bout another thread about your experience where the 470 saved your skin?

JPK

Rusty,

At 10 pounds your gun is overweight. Is it built on a frame sized for a .450 or .470?

The primary advantage of a 450-400 is that it can be built in a light, slim gun. If that advantage is lost, then I don't see the advantage at all.

JPK,

How about another thread with your experience with the 450/400?

I would be cautious about quoting John Taylor. He was in many respects trying to be all things to all people, a trait he probably picked up from his Letters to the Editor, probably not dissimilar to the internet forums of today, or Boddington's stories. You just can't make a living pissing-off everyone by calling their pet rifle/caliber a piece of crap, like I do!

The stopping power of a 450/400 may not be up to that of the 450's but someone with such limited experience cannot tell with certainty what will or not work. Data and historical facts over the last 100 years are of more authority that bigger guns are, not surprisingly, indeed, on the whole, better.

And who is to set the standard as to what a 450/400 should weigh?

My 416 Taylor at 5100 ft-lbs only weighs 7.5 lbs. Accordingly, my 470 should weigh the same and if I had a 450/400 it should weigh less than 7 lbs.!!! Of course, finding one might be a task! If someone wants or likes a 10 or 10 1/2 lb. 450/400, so what?

I know of one very experienced PH that shoots a double 450/400, but whether by choice or circumstances I do not know. I know personally that he stopped one real charge with it, and I would suspect several others over his career. As far as I know it was a "stopper." At least in his hands.

Obviously, the bigger the gun the greater margin of error in stopping a charge, but I have seen PH's in videos that can't shoot worth a crap. Maybe that is why PH's tend to use the bigger guns!

quote:

Originally posted by Will:

The stopping power of a 450/400 may not be up to that of the 450's but someone with such limited experience cannot tell with certainty what will or not work.

Can we rely on advice from the most prolific elephant sport hunter of our time? Buzz says that the 416 Rigby at 2400 fps is no stopper, and he prefers the effect of the .500 to lesser cartridges. But don't believe me - watch the video again.

quote:

Originally posted by 500grains:

quote:

Originally posted by Will:

The stopping power of a 450/400 may not be up to that of the 450's but someone with such limited experience cannot tell with certainty what will or not work.

Can we rely on advice from the most prolific elephant sport hunter of our time? Buzz says that the 416 Rigby at 2400 fps is no stopper, and he prefers the effect of the .500 to lesser cartridges. But don't believe me - watch the video again.

Ha! When did Buzz become the most prolific elephant sport hunter of our time?

One active PH I know has had way more experience than Buzz. But Buzz is not the subject and just because he can't shoot doesn't mean the 416 is not a stopper.

Watch the video!

quote:

Originally posted by Will:
I would be cautious about quoting John Taylor. He was in many respects trying to be all things to all people, a trait he probably picked up from his Letters to the Editor, probably not dissimilar to the internet forums of today, or Boddington's stories. You just can't make a living pissing-off everyone by calling their pet rifle/caliber a piece of crap, like I do!

The stopping power of a 450/400 may not be up to that of the 450's but someone with such limited experience cannot tell with certainty what will or not work. Data and historical facts over the last 100 years are of more authority that bigger guns are, not surprisingly, indeed, on the whole, better.

Obviously, the bigger the gun the greater margin of error in stopping a charge, but I have seen PH's in videos that can't shoot worth a crap. Maybe that is why PH's tend to use the bigger guns!

Will, you make all of my points, except regarding weight, better than I do.

And here is a quote of mine:
"I never claimed to speak the gospel, only to have the facts and history behind my comments."

Like I said, you make my points better than I do!

JPK

I thought Buzz carried a 416?????

quote:

Originally posted by Jim Manion:
I thought Buzz carried a 416?????

He does. And he states very clearly that it is not a stopper. If he misses the brain, the elephant keeps on coming.

So he keeps seeking the ideal double. Let him know if you hear of any good deals.

How about listening to Ian Nyschens?

He often wrote about the 450 being the one rifle for heavy bush and a stopper. Anything bigger was too awkward and heavy. He considerd the 404 Jeffery only good for Ele in an open woodland environment and not suitable as a stopper in the Jesse.

quote:

Originally posted by 500grains:
Rusty,

At 10 pounds your gun is overweight. Is it built on a frame sized for a .450 or .470?

The primary advantage of a 450-400 is that it can be built in a light, slim gun. If that advantage is lost, then I don't see the advantage at all.

Dan, I don't agree at all. Mine is 10 lbs, and I consider that ideal. The Heym doubles are usually quite trim and light for caliber, but their new .400 (which they've already sold a number of btw) probably won't come in at much under 9.5, if any at all. Even in "best" guns, the British .450s and .470s usually ran 10.75 to 12 pounds. Ten pounds is about right for a .400. Its a comfortable weight and it doesn't make sense to reduce to the point that recovery time is as slow as the heavier calibers.
-----------------------------------------------
"Serious rifles have two barrels, everything else just burns gunpowder."

JPK:

I see that you're still having reading comprehension problems with Taylor. As I've suggested to you before, if you want to know what he really thought, why not simply cut to the chase and read his summary. You know, the chapter that you insisted in another string didn't exist? In "A Summing Up", on page 300, he states that for class (c) (heavy, dangerous game at close range)

"For (c): .400 and .465"

"I should like to emphasize that I would be just as happy with a .400 as with a .465 for class (c) and have only mentioned the larger caliber to recommend it from amongst its numerous comtemporaries should something more powerful be desired."

Had you read Taylor's book closely, which doesn't appear to be the case, by the time you got to that chapter you would have known that his true meaning in that last line was: "...but I'll add a recommendation for the .465 for the nimrod who can't shoot, knows it, and needs a boost to his confidence to steady his nerves."

On page 113 he writes of the .400:

"Practical experience has shown that its a simply splendid weapon for all heavy and dangerous game ANYWHERE..."

On page 115 he writes:

"For some reason I find difficult to explain, I derived greater pleasure from using the .400 than any other caliber, and no weapon behaved more successfully in my hands." He then gives three occasions when using the .400 that sold him on the caliber, two of which were with elephant.

He makes his preference for the .400 crystal clear.

With respect to Taylor's peccadillos, there is another highly likely reason for his dalliance with the .465. Taylor's passion for double rifles in general dimmed only in comparison to his passion for Holland & Holland rifles in particular. Holland .450/.400 Nitros are very rare, I can specifically remember seeing only a few. However, the .465 would have been very easy for Taylor to find, as they are common among Hollands.

The Holland .400 I remember best was one that I passed on almost 20 years ago. It was boxlock .450/.400 3 1/4" NE that a DR dealer I knew had for sale. It was accompanied by a letter, dated in the early '50s IIRC, from Taylor to the new owner stating that it had been his personal rifle for a time, etc. If the letter was genuine, which was my impression, it would likely have been one of Taylor's last rifles.

Odd for a guy that didn't use the .400 much, as you allege, to have had three. Equally odd that he would have recommended it so highly with nothing to gain for doing so.

Moving on to another with a great deal of African experience, Ganyana writes:

"The .450/.400 may produce a little too much recoil to fit my bill for a great 'one gun battery/ all round rifle', but for dangerous game, I'd pick one over a .458 Winchester any day!"
-----------------------------------------------
"Serious rifles have two barrels, everything else just burns gunpowder."

Mark,

I disagree on the weight of a 450-400. If it weighs 10 pounds, you are carrying a .470 but getting a .400. What is the advantage of that? I could certainly carry a 10 pound .308 on a deer hunt, but I would rather carry a 7 pound rifle in that caliber.

As for Heym, aren't they using the same frame for the .500 NE, .470 NE and 450-400?

quote:

Lancaster "C" Grade .450/400 3 1/4"

Cal./Gauge: .450/400 3 1/4"

Weight: 10lbs 8oz.

quote:

Originally posted by JPK:
Mac,

My quote:

"I'll take anyone at their word that they can't manage the recoil of a 450-470 class rifle,"

You have discussed recoil repeatedly. But now its nothing, which is it? Why are you are so darned concerned about the recoil of a 450-470 class rifle? It must be a major factor, eh?

If recoil is such a factor for you, or anyone else, that it eleiminates or slows down an accurate second shot then its too much.

There is no noticeable muzzle rise from a 450-470 class rifle when shooting at game.

JPK, recoil is not a problem for me any more than for you, and you are correct that if a rifle is held properly, the muzzle rise is lessend considerably, and you are correct that what rise there is, is not NOTICEABLE, when shooting at game. I probably knew that before you were born!
A lot of things are not noticeable when shooting at game, that however doesn't mean they are not there, simply because you didn't notice them.

What you don't seem to get is, PHYSICS works the same no matter who is shooting the rifle. The more recoil, the longer it takes to get back on target, and fire an aimed shot! Regardless whether you believe it or not that includes "YOU"!

quote:

Take a look at "Death by Double Rifle" or, god forbid, Mark Sulivan movies, Buzz Charlton's DVD or "Boddington on Buffalo" - where Andrew Dawson puts 470 rounds into a buff or where the charging elephant is stopped by Andrew Dawson with a couple of missed brain shots from his 470. One common thing, the fellow shooting this class rifle, who knows his rifle, suffers no noticeable muzzle rise.

One can learn can learn to tollerate recoil. Gregor Woods' book, "African Rifles", is one place to look for learning to manage recoil.

JPK

I'd say the above advice is the extent of you experience, watching films! It is amazeing what a couple of elephant hunts, and getting in a hunting film, can do to boost one's ego as to the importance, of one's opinion, on all things,AFRICAN, and DOUBLE RIFLES!

The ownership and use of one double rifle does to make one an expert on all matters involved in hunting dangerous game, and on the rifles used for that purpose.

I would bet you have never used either the 470NE, or the 450/400NE to shoot any animal, large or small, yet you know what is best for all who go afield. There is an old saying that goes like this:

If you need to know ANYTHING about hunting in Africa, ask someone who has just returned for his first Safari. He will, inveribly, have a large volume of information for you, that can't be wrong! IN HIS OPINION!


BIG WIND COME FROM EMPTY CAVE! As the old Indian said about the white man's truth!


JPK, I respect your opinion, I simply disagree with you, on the use of sarcasm vented in your posts to anyone who disagrees with your preconcieved notions. Notions, I might add, that are not based on actual experience with the rifle/cartridge combinations you profess to know so much about.

All the so-called facts you present, are taken out of loading manuals, or films. Anyone who has been around handloading, and ballistic data long, knows even the manuals do not agree, on anything, because all data is taken from different length barrels, and different conditions. If you knew as much as you profess, you would know that in the case of Buffalo, the only thing that will make any rifle a stopper, once he is wounded, is a shot that dirrectly disrupts the CNS. All that is required is to place the bullet in the right place, and to have enough pennetration to reach the CNS. Of course a 600 NE is going to hit harder, than anything smaller, but the difference between a 500 gr bullet, and a 400 gr bullet is not going to be noticed by said buffalo, is the 500 gr is close enough to shock the CNS, the 400 gr bullet will shock it as well. If both hit the CNS, there is absolutely no difference between them, to the buffalo.

You are correct as well, that an over weight 450/400NE is just as hard to carry all day ad a normal weight 470NE, but a normal weight 470NE is not the 10 lbs you state, most are closer to 10.8 lbs, to 11.5 lbs, and even a heavy 450/400NE is 10.8 lbs MAX. however, even at the same weight, the recovery time will be faster with the 450/400. That has nothing to do with a shooters ability to withsand recoil, it is simple the law of physics.

I still think you are simply miffed because of the 458WM, or any rimless, or belted rimless cartridge in a double rifle, that I do not like, and consider a second best choice, nothing more. You don't have to agree with that take, but I don't think disagreeing with that has to translate into disagreeing with everything I write. It satnds to reason you are happy about your recent Safari, and with you 458 double's performance, but SON, you ain't the only one who's been there!

For your information (also relating to Dan's post) most of you know Ian Nynschens passed away in December 2006. Buz Charlton just picked up Ian's double in 450#2 and will be carring that rifle. You can talk to him yourself but I believe he thinks the double might be better in a jam than a bolt configuration not so much that he felt that he was under gunned with the 416.