Ok, now I'm not saying this would be a good idea or that I want to do this.
Just purely a huh, I wonder why type of question.Just for conversation purposes.

If a Mauser is chambered in .416 Rigby the front of the action needs to be cut away to much.

Why not use two actions and weld them together and make a magnum length action?
Would it be any different than taking two actions and making one short and one long?

Just make the long one long enough for the Rigby.

Would that not work? It would be like having a custom made Magnum Action.

Allen

quote:

Why not use two actions and weld them together and make a magnum length action?
Would it be any different than taking two actions and making one short and one long?

Read Jerry Kuhnhausen's (sp) book. In there he shows how it is done. You certainly can make a magnum and "Kurtz" out of two as long as your capable of the fine welding, machining and attention to detail. It would be the best of both worlds, unless you can afford to Stuart Satterlee make you one of each to the tune of 7G's.

This has been done. Starting probably some time in the 1920's. I have even seen two P17 Enfields that were made into a .416 Rigby and a 250 Savage by swapping receiver ends.....

Allen;

It can be done. I have considered doing it myself only in 375 or 300 H&H and 250 Savage. It would be a lot easier to build a 416 Rigby on a P14 Enfield, been there, done that, three times, rather than using a Mauser. That said, it would be a interesting project using Mauser actions.

Go for it.

First, I think there are much better actions to make a 416 Rigby on, but that being said, and here comes the "flame on" statement, if you are set on a 98, use a good standard length and open it up.
(Now putting my flame retardent suit on)...there was a maker, and I think, REPEAT, I THINK, his name is J. Wilkes, who sold several 98 customs in 404 Jeff and 416 Rigby. I saw and handled on at a Cabelas. I think it was very nice work. I don't think he would put his livelihood on the line by producing an unsafe gun.
Also, and I know this has been brought up before, do a search on Harry Selby. He used a standard length 98, 416 Rigby, made by Rigby. As far as durability, he had to have it rebarreled once because of the number of rounds through it. How many shooters ever shoot out a barrel, especially in a large bore caliber?
I am sure he used factory loaded, or factory load level ammunition, so it was moderate pressure. If you want to try and push a 400gr to around 2600, then it might not hold up, but again, it might.
So to reiterate, I THINK THERE ARE MUCH BETTER CHOICES FOR ACTION, but I know it can be done on a standard action.
Okay, now time to duck and hide!

you are correct. selby had a standard 98 in 416 rigby.i believe at one time either handloader or rifle ran an article on the gun. if i remember correctly it was actually built by rigby.

"Big Bore Rifles" by Jack Lott shows PLENTY of 416 Rigby's on standard 98's...been done at least hundreds of times...completely reasonable and safe....Want to use an Enfield...why not?, but to make a nice job requires LOTS of work and modifing lots of parts and pieces. The last one I did on an Enfield left me "winded" and asking "why no just use a Mauser"

Duane, you mean that can actually be done safely?

Do you mean on a stock length M98 or on a lengthened M98?

I have only read that it could be done on a standard M98, but it was about one step short of suicide.

I'm not looking to do this. I was just thinking and wonder "what if" or "I wonder if you could".

Could you elaborate more on any details? Though I'm not looking to do this I do find it an interesting subject.

Allen

Allen:

It can, and has, been done on a standard length action, and as for the "one step short of suicide", consider this.
Harry Selby was a professional hunter for, I think, around 40 years. He used his standard length Rigby built 98 Mauser sporter in .416 for several years. He probably shot more dangerous game than a lot of us have ever seen. On his multitude of hunts, at one time or another, he most likely protected his own life with that rifle, his clients, and their family members, his family members, gunbearers, trackers and probably some I have forgot to mention. He shot it enough to have to have the barrel replaced.
Not to sound sarcastic, but that doesn't sound like someone who would be prone to use a rifle that was "one step short of suicide" in its reliability or safety.
I have owned a Ruger RSM and have a CZ550 now, both .416. If I could afford a properly done custom rifle in .416 Rigby built on a 98 Mauser action, I would not hesitate a second, nor give it another thought...I would be too busy out at the range seeing how many rounds a year I could shoot!!

Congomike is right!..the 416 Rigby does not require any more magazine length than a 375 H&H and let's not forget that the Rigby is not a particularily high pressure cartridge, The proper magazine/bottom metal can be purchased from Sunny Hills and Blackburn....the statement about "suicidal" reminds me to try and finish a book I started years ago...called B...S...in the gun business...will probably give up since it would be too heavy to ship

...called B...S...in the gun business...will probably give up since it would be too heavy to ship[/QUOTE]

Never handeled one of theese babies. Can anyone that has, tell me about the slack in the bolt? What I have heard is that because of the shortening of the rear bridge, it will give less support, and by so require more work for the bolt to feed well - meaning it would be easier to jam becuse of the sloppy controll sideways. I do not feel that I express myself good on this matter, please bear over with my english on a saturday night.

Anyway, as for safety, I would rather have a m98 in .416 Rigby, than a m98 with a claw mount slotted into the reciever...............any day!
Both have been made by the hundreds........

quote:

Originally posted by Bent Fossdal:
Never handeled one of theese babies. Can anyone that has, tell me about the slack in the bolt? What I have heard is that because of the shortening of the rear bridge, it will give less support, and by so require more work for the bolt to feed well - meaning it would be easier to jam becuse of the sloppy controll sideways. I do not feel that I express myself good on this matter, please bear over with my english on a saturday night.

Anyway, as for safety, I would rather have a m98 in .416 Rigby, than a m98 with a claw mount slotted into the reciever...............any day!
Both have been made by the hundreds........

I get your point, but what about all the front claw mounts slotted into the barrel shank instead? I would much rather see it in the front ring!

A .416 Rigby would be a fun gun to have built just because so many people think it's wrong or shouldn't be done.

Actually it would be pretty neat to have one just because, it would be neat to have!

Here's a quote from the September 04 Rifle magazine by John Barsness talking about Harry Selby's 416R on a M98 "the Selby .416 is built on a standard Mauser 98 action, something not recommended by today's gunsmiths". This is not the first time I've similar comments.

Duane, thanks for commenting on this. At least it clears up one bit of gunsmithing BS. Any other old wives tails you care to clear up for us uneducated but interested in learning what's correct folks?

After reading Duane's comments, I guess those who say it shouldn't be done figure today's gunsmiths aren't good or smart enough to build one a M98.

Wouldn't a .416 Rigby on a M98 look nice with one of Sunny Hill's Rigby style floor plate magazines? It holds 5 .375s down. That would make 4 Rigby's down?

Allen

Selby's Rigby held three down. Is there a box and bottom metal available that closely resembles that on Selby's rifle? Selby's rifle had a stradle floor plate.

ColoradoMatt, there are pictures of the bottom metal I was saying would look so nice in the thread about Sunny Hill's new Rigby style drop box.

It holds 5 .375H&H rounds down. I don't know how many .416 Rigby rounds it would hold.

Allen