quote:

Originally posted by ozhunter:

quote:

Originally posted by MJines:

quote:

Originally posted by ozhunter:

So, why is this the case when everyone (including top Double Smiths) consider the 500NE has less felt recoil?

. . . because they weigh more than the typical .470 NE? Is this a Mr. Chicken, please meet Mr. Egg scenario? Or are you saying that in two guns of equal weight, a .470 and .500, the .500 will have less felt recoil?

Equal weight. Apparently this is due to the 500s straight case (no bottle neck).

Could be . . . and the fact that case is 1/4" longer.

It is true that some rifles of the same weight and chambering will not recoil the same.I think it has to do with the stock and weight distribution.I think Krieghoffs are very good in this department.I could be wrong but this is just my opinion.I also think that doubles need to weigh more than bolt rifles because the recoil is a little off to one side on doubles.It is a confusing topic.Some say Heyms kick like crazy but they look a lot like Krieghoffs,IMO.It is good to use a stiff recoil pad too and avoid a soft one that will reduce LOP on recoil.

quote:

Originally posted by ozhunter:
So, it appears the 470NE at 10+lbs and the 500NE at 11+lbs is the most recommended weights.
So, why is this the case when everyone (including top Double Smiths) consider the 500NE has less felt recoil? Should that not conclude that the 500NE could easily weigh less than the 470NE?

There is no way that the 470 has less felt recoil than the 500.The 470 is like a 458wm and the 500 is like a Lott.

Shootaway, the 470 has a larger diameter to the 458Win, bottleneck case and different powder.
The 500NE is a larger diameter to the 458Lott and with Less Velocity as a standard so I would not consider this a good example.

quote:

Originally posted by ozhunter:
Shootaway, the 470 has a larger diameter to the 458Win, bottleneck case and different powder.
The 500NE is a larger diameter to the 458Lott and with Less Velocity as a standard so I would not consider this a good example.

Yes but in the end one pushes a 480gr bullet at 2150fps and the other a 570gr bullet at 2150fps.There is a big difference in energy.

Don't forget the back pressure in the bottle neck.

quote:

Originally posted by ozhunter:
Don't forget the back pressure in the bottle neck.

What's that?

Well i'm going to buck the trend of popular opinion here.
I got VC to make my .500 as light as they possibly could as I don't like carrying heavy guns.
It came in close to 11 lbs from the factory.
When I got it home I removed the lead ballast from the butt-stock which dropped it down to slightly under 10 lbs.

With my hunting load utilizing the 475gn CEB Safari Raptors at 2400fps it was certainly "lively" but manageable and decisively effective on buffalo.

quote:

Originally posted by MJines:

quote:

Originally posted by ozhunter:

quote:

Originally posted by MJines:

quote:

Originally posted by ozhunter:

So, why is this the case when everyone (including top Double Smiths) consider the 500NE has less felt recoil?

. . . because they weigh more than the typical .470 NE? Is this a Mr. Chicken, please meet Mr. Egg scenario? Or are you saying that in two guns of equal weight, a .470 and .500, the .500 will have less felt recoil?

Equal weight. Apparently this is due to the 500s straight case (no bottle neck).

Could be . . . and the fact that case is 1/4" longer.

Always thought they were the same length. Learn something new all the time. That and the 470s bottle neck case leads me to believe both the 470 and 500 weighing between 10.5 & 11lbs should suffice.

Or have a 500 3 1/4"

Which seemed to fall out of favour, but chambered by the likes of H&H early last century.

quote:

Originally posted by new_guy:
This is a bit surprising to me:

1) traditional weights of English guns were heavier than most of the replies here
2) when a rifle is build on the lighter side, shooters complain about recoil

quote:

Originally posted by Todd Williams:

What were the traditional weights Chris?

On a related issue, why are most off the shelf doubles made with 14.5 LOP. I'm 6'1" and use 15.5". I know there are a lot of 6 foot hunters out there that need more than 14.5. It's much easier to shorten the LOP if necessary than it is to lengthen it.

quote:

NewGuy
I would say 11 pounds on a 470 and 12 pounds on a 500 were the norm.

LOP is not as easy as cutting the stock when you consider starting off with a 15.5" LOP.

Here's why:

The surface area of the recoil pad should be of a certain size (length and width).

If you build the stock correctly for a 15.5" LOP and cut an inch or so off, the surface are of the recoil pad will not be correct.

Secondly, you obviously change the DAH when you cut one off.

Make sense?

The reason most classic double rifles from the UK, and Germany have short LOP is the people in those areas in the days when the classics were built were small compared to folks today, Americans are far larger folks than when I was born some 80 years ago. When I was growing up, I rarely saw a man that was over six feet tall, and most were in the 5.7 high!

That means if a maker uses a classic to set his standard for his “Off the shelf” doubles they tend to be short for guys like Todd, and will need additional wood at the butt.

On the weight issue the “off the shelf” doubles tend to use the same barrel taper for the 500NE as they do the 470NE, (Merkel does) so the 500NE Merkel and many other brands make 500NE double that weigh less than the 470NE.

The key, IMO , if you want something made to fit buy it that way and leave the off the shelf doubles to guys like me at 5’9.

These are simply cost cutters leaving the new buyer to do a little customizing to get the best fit for himself.
……………………………………………………………………….