Home Forums Hunting & Shooting Africa .416 and .450 Rigby(CZ)

I see CZ has added the .450 Rigby to it's lineup,as well as a .505 Gibbs.I've been wanting a 550 in .416,and prefer the classic Rigby over the belted Remington.I have no info on the .450.How do they compare in bullet weight,velocity and recoi? Also,what is the general opinion of the CZ Safari rifle?Is the european style stock better for recoil control and quick shooting,or simply a matter of taste?Lastly,how does the .416 Rigby compare in recoil to,say, a .375H&H or a .404 Jeffrey.Ballistics seem quite adequate,with a 300gr for plains game and 400's for the heavies.Seems like a decent 1 gun battery,in a rifle affordable to those of use "finacially challanged".

IMO, weight of the rifle plays a major role in recoil. A straight stock keeps the 'push' going in the best direction to manage the effects of the explosion. By necessity the heavy weights use slow burning powder which creats the 'push' rather than the violence created by faster burning powder. High velocities are married to light weight bullets and most often light weight rifles. I've shot some light weight 458s that are terrible and others that are tolerable. My 500-450 double barrel rifle is horrible sitting down at the bench but standing up with a bipod is OK. The CZ Safari rifle gives you what your money buys, nothing more and nothing less. A Ruger is finished better and costs more so you have to decide what and how much you want to pay for the added quality. In the end for me, I've never shot an animal with a big bore and complained about recoil. Most barely hear the gun go off, including myself. Just my overall impression but I hope this helps. Bullet placement with accurate shooting really is more important than splitting hairs with recoil and velocity of different calibers.

I have a Ruger in 416 Ruger and it's an accurate, well-built but heavy rifle that I used in AFrica with great results. I did however had to do some minor tuning to it to get it DGR ready in my book. Nothing more than a pachmayer recoil pad to replace to rubber-hard stock Ruger, and I had the action polished and stoned as it tended to stick towards the end of the stroke. Total cost was less than 200 bucks but It was well worth it to ensure reliability. The CZs I've handled and shot are way rougher than the Rugers, needing in my view significant polishing of the action and feed rails. I also find the 25" barrel way too long for a large bore rifle.

As to the efficacy of both calibers, the 416 Rigby is more versatile and for you and me (read:client) there is anything out there that you can't handle, even angry, cahrging elephants and if that 250 yard shot at a kudu comes along, the Rigby's up to the task. The down side it that it does require a magnum length action and some feel that if a long action is required, might as well use a BIG bullet, like a 450 Rigby, 460 Weatherby, Dakota, etc. The 450 is most definetly a step up in recoil! And one more likely to be used by a professional to sort things out up close.

You mentioned the 416 Remington. Definetly a much more practical round for us hunters. It can be built in a lighter, trimmer action with the same punch of a Rigby. Don't believe the hysteria about high pressures and the Rem BTW, it operates at the same pressure as say, a 375 H&H. On the stock, I really don't care for the CZs traditional stock and prefer the American version better. BTW, almost ALL big bore CZ require significant bedding and added crossbolts to keep the stocks from splitting. If you buy one, be preapred to spend the money to get it "battle ready."

Since this is a forum of opinions I'll offer mine: IF you want a THUMPER, get the Ruger in 458 Lott. It's the equal of the 450 Rigby and ammo is WAY CHEAPER. SPend about 200 bucks on it and you have a real rifle. BUT if I had to do it all over again, I'd buy a Model 70 in 416 Rem and have it reworked by a competent smith who knows DGR. jorge

xxclaro,

Of the two cartridges you have mentioned (416 Rigby & 450 Rigby) I would opt for the 450 Rigby. Unlike what some have said it is just as practical as the smaller 416, afterall both cartridges have the same muzzle velocities and BC for all practical purposes so obtainable range is identical. The 450 Rigby is definitely a step up in "killing power" over the 416, which is actually little better than the 375 H&H, which is very little better than a 300 Winnie. The recoil differential between the 416 and 450 also will be hardly noticable.

Just some insight from someone who has used both calibers in the field (my experience with these calibers is with the 416 Rigby (not an impressive killer by any means), 458 Winnie, and 460 Weatherby). Believe me when I say that there was/is a very good reason that very few 416 Rigby rifles were ever produced before the Ruger M77 RSM in the late 80's (there are much better options for roughly equivalent recoil).

Having said all that, if I were going to buy a new CZ550, I would get the 505 Gibbs, which is vastly superior (in "killing power") to either of the cartridges you have selected to discuss.

AC

[quote]xxclaro,

over the 416, which is actually little better than the 375 H&H, which is very little better than a 300 Winnie. The recoil differential between the 416 and 450 also will be hardly noticable.

(my experience with these calibers is with the 416 Rigby (not an impressive killer by any means),

Well I guess I couldn't disagree more with the statements above. To say there is little difference in killing power between the 416 and 375 is just not true, and in spades fro the 375 /300 comparison. Same goes for the difference in recoil between the two. The 416 earned and continues to enjoy an excellent reputation in africa as a DGR caliber. But don't take my word for it, pick up just about any book on the subject by notable authors like Sanchez-Arino, Boddington, Ruark, Broom, the list is endless and they all have nothing but the highest praise for the 416 and the 375. It's posts like the preceeding one that often makes me wonder why I even bother. jorge

I have a CZ in 416 Rigby & love the caliber & rifle. Mine required some tuneing, but most rifles do. My PH has a great deal of confidence in the CZ & the 416. Refer to the articles in Rifle Mag. by John Barness on his CZ. If its good enough for John its good enough for me. The buffalo I shot with mine was dead on his feet with the first shot but, I put the second in for insurance. Topped with a 1.5x4 Swarovski what more could I want. Good Hunting.

jorge,

The big difference between you and me is that I base my comments off of FIRST HAND EXPERIENCE IN THE FIELD WITH THESE CARTRIDGES while you sit in your arm chair and read books.

I strongly recommend that we leave this discussion at this point.

AC

New and Obnoxious, what a treat for all of us. Just a hint AC of Whatever, this isn't a forum where your "strong suggestion" is going to get you very far. Sheesh.

My 416 is significantly more gun than my 300 Weatherby in the fields I walk through.

As far as the original question goes, the two Rigbys differ by 100 grains of bullet weight and .042 in bullet diameter. Recoil increases in a linear fashion because velocities are similar.

The best information available seems to point to the conclusion that 416's are the best modern choice unless you simply want the added power of a good 45 and can tolarate the recoil. The 45's will put the largest game down with more authority, and big hippos and rhinos need often need the extra persuassion but Elephants and Nyati really dont.

The 416 caliber has the Nosler partition available which has the highest (note: not BEST) B.C. of any .458 or .416 caliber bullet. Thus with that bullet 416's shoot flatter.

The 416 safely can be loaded with data approaching the 416 Weatherby, because the case capacity is the same and the Weatherby pressures are not all that hot, the 416 Rigby is loaded to around 40,000 CUP, but there is no data for hot rodding the 450.

Brass is expensive for the Rigby's, but you only need about a hundred of them for the amount of shooting you will do. Again 417 brass is available from more sources, but you only need to find one anyway.

The CZ is a perfectly acceptable rifle. The Ruger is a perfectly acceptable rifle. The Remington is a perfectly acceptable rifle.

Those trim 416 Remingtons weight less, so they kick more. The CZ is a good gun for shooting a lot, because it has mass to dampen the recoil forces and because it makes an expensive hobby activity less expensive. The Ruger looks twice as nice and costs twice as much.

Put a few hundred rounds through your rifle before you have any work done on it. Familiarity and use make any rifle better, and any work done relevent to your gun and its relationship to you.

I have a ball with my CZ 416. People love shooting it, my kids love talking about our "Elephant" rifle, I like getting familiar with the power and recoil of this class of rifle, you will too.

I personally consider my CZ 416Rigby to be one of the finest all around Africa and Alaska rifles around. Mine is off at the gunsmiths shop being fitted for a model 70 style safety and a non 'set' trigger that is simple and rugged, but I use mine a lot more than most people and abuse it more as well. I have found it to absolutely thump the biggest of the big with quite impressive authority. When I get a bit more computer literate I will post footage from 2004 of me putting a bull elephant on the ground 'right now' with a shoulder shot from my .416 Rigby. I like the Big Rugers, but feel that the safety, when at its rearmost position, is too hard to feel and flip quickly. With a safety that stuck out a bit more it would be pretty close to ideal. My CZ 416 started out in life and went hunting quite a bit with the original euro or lux style stock. When CZ came out with the straight or american style stock I ordered one from them and I personally find it more comfortable and a darned sight more attractive than the original stock. (available to anyone who wants it!) The bolt is nice and smooth on mine, but I have used it a lot including in dusty conditions which I am sure smoothed it out naturally. I have not found the 25 inch barrel to be unweildy. Even in the Alder Thickets of Alaska. I consider it a plus, but that is just me.

I recently watched a video named "Death by the Double Barrel". At close range a cape buffalo took 5, yes 5 shots before going down for good. Both rifles were double 470. After the cape took 5000 # of energy from the first shot in the chest, he casually turned the other direction and got hammered again from the PWH. Still standing on his fee he took three more shots, one hitting him on the nose and going deep into his chest, the other two shots I don't know where they went. He had 15 K# of energy delivered to his body and finally down he went. He was still alive so another shot was put into his spine between the shoulders. With all this punishmehnt the buffalo had traveled half the distance to get to his killers.

On the other hand I shot two capes one right after another and they ran off into the tall grass. My PWh dropped two cows for the natives to feast on and he dropped the cape bullalos in their tracks with a neck shot using a bolt action 416. We left some natives over night to build a fire and protect the visible cape buffallos . In the morning we found the two I had shot through the lungs 50 yards away in tall grass. I had shot from about 50 yards away and upon examination the bullets had not made two holes. The 300 grain Winchester silvertips went to pieces and we never found them.

The term "significant experience" is a subjective one. Since I can only feel comfortable saying that I possess that only in my profession, I'll not dare to comment on my "modest" hunting experience. On the reading book issue I just offer this;

When I first learned to read and write, I learned from: books
When I first started to hunt I learned from: books
When I went to flight school in the Navy I first learned from: books

Books and reading are the foundation by which most of us anyway first gain ineterest on a subject and a modicum of knowledge. Then as we gain profficiency, we build on experience. Saying that books have no value is like, well saying the 416 Rigby has little advantage over the 300 Magnum and in my modest experience that is simply not the case. jorge

Well, I guess I should say I am sorry to all of you who I upset by saying that your little 416 isn't all that impressive. Frankly gentlemen it isn't. If you were trained in forensics you would have noticed that the trauma generated by the 416 is only about 25% to 50% greater than that generated by a 300 and there is no statistically significant difference between the 416 and the 375 (although I would think that there is a little bit).

Regarding the comments "animals hitting the ground now" when shot with the 416 and not other cartridges. I have seen white tails with a double lung shot shrug off a 416 Rigby, loaded to Weatherby levels. The bullet simply pencilled through, a 30-30 was more effective.

I put all of you who have attacked my comments (lets be men now and not a bunch of politically correct wimps, shall we, you have attacked my comments) into the same category of the gentleman I am about to talk about.

This gentleman I know sees an elk shot 4 times through the lungs with a 30-06. Later the same trip he shoots his elk with a 300 WSM and spines it. His elk drops at the shot (Central Nervous System hits have that effect, strange no?). Well he gets back from Colorado and imforms everyone of how much better an elk cartridge the 300 WSM is than the 30-06 based off of what he saw on that trip. Most of the coworkers (like you gentlemen seem to be) agreed with this gentleman that the 300 WSM was better. Another old gentleman that I know exceedingly well, took his elk with one shot at 160 yards with a 308 Win (my rifle I loaned him) he too spine shot the elk as has been his practice for 45 years. Actually this old geezer thought my 308 loaner was a bit too much gun, afterall he usually used a Hoyt recurve, but if he wanted a rifle he used a M94 30-30.

So now the first gentleman upon hearing this had to decide if the 300 WSM was really better than the 3006 or not. He decided, along with many others I might add, that since military snipers use the 308 and the 300 Win mag (remember the 300 WSM is the ballistics equivalent of the 300 Win mag) that the 308 and the 300 WSM are equal till 800 yards when the 300 WSM takes the lead. Both cartridges are better than the 30-06, ballistically, and that is why the military stopped using the 3006. He and his supporters have provided substantial evidence (something like 7 or 8 books about military snipers) proving this point. I find this entire episode pathetic. Very much like the comments directed against me on this thread.

So jorge, books definitely are instruments of learning, but just because it is written in a book doesn't mean that it is. You should never question the reality of what has actually happened in the field over what someone wrote in a romantic fairy tell anyway (which is what many of the Africa hunting books are if you honestly appraise them).

I haven't been obnoxious either, believe me when I say that. I spoke from first hand experience with the calibers in question. I do not hunt any longer with these calibers as I hunt with 50 caliber or larger now. Size does matter if you want to believe that or not.

Having said all that perhaps I am not welcome at this site (seeing how bent some of you have gotten over nothing some of you have even attacked me, then talked in a circle and came back to the same recommendation I did, sad) and should cease posting here.

AC

[quote]Well, I guess I should say I am sorry to all of you who I upset by saying that your little 416 isn't all that impressive. Frankly gentlemen it isn't. If you were trained in forensics you would have noticed that the trauma generated by the 416 is only about 25% to 50% greater than that generated by a 300 and there is no statistically significant difference between the 416 and the 375 (although I would think that there is a little bit).

Trauma? What is your source for that data? 25 to 50% difference is statistically HUGE and frankly incredible. How about penetration which is central to hunting dangerous game? As to your politicallly correct commentary and "wimps" issue, correctness has nothing to do with it. It's called being polite to a new poster and like all new posters, it takes a while for your credibility (or lack thereof) to build. Since we are not being politically correct here, your comments so far indicate quite the opposite of experience, as ANY hunter with any kind of practical african experience would seriously question your statement of comparing a 300 to a 416 or even a 375. jorge

If my memory is correct, the 450 Rigby is a 416 Rigby case necked up to 458 caliber and can launch a 500 grain bullet at 2400+fps. Standard loading for the 416 Rigby is 400 grain bullet at 2400 fps. Obviously, if you reload you have more flexibility in terms of bullet weight and velocity. If I were to pick either one of these cartridges I would reload!

Recoil of 416, at standard velocity and bullet wt. (400 gr. bullet at 2400fps), will be (my opinion) significantly less than a 500 grain bullet at 2300+/- fps, if you load a 450 Rigby to 2400 fps you will feel it even more...A 375 H&H is "moderate" recoil, a 416 starts to get my attention and loading 400 grain bullets to say 2500 fps or 500 grain bullets at 2150+ fps, will get my attention.

As to the CZ rifles, well since I have them in 375 H&H, 416 Rigby, and 458 Lott I must like them. Mine are American stocked versions. As noted to make them DG ready you should have them worked on...and with the 416 and 458's cross bolt and bed them...If I were you I would check out the CZ (both stocked versions), the Ruger, Winchester, etc and see what works/fits you the best and go from there.

If you want a rifle/caliber combination that will work for Plains Game and some DG, if it were me, I would go with either the 375 H&H, 416 Rigby or Remington...pick one bullet weight/loading and shoot until you are very proficient with it....any of those three should work well at standard velocity loading with well constructed bullets.

To me the 458's and above, 500+grain bullets at 2150+fps, are specialized "stopping rifles". They have there place and my preference for DG is the 458 Lott or my 470 Nitro...but I always take a backup DG/Plains Game rifle with me and it is most likely going to be a 375H&H or a 416. I see someone suggested a 505 Gibbs, for your application PG/DG rifle, thats not a very logical choice at all!

I think I read here that someone suggested/stated a 300 mag was comparable, in some way, to a 375 H&H on game...could well be so on thin skinned game...but to suggest the same against DG is just plain silly!

I have never shot or handled a 450 Rigby but would consider it a hammer! on both ends, if you are looking for a hammer I would look hard a the 458 Lott a bit more pratical in terms of factory ammo and brass for reloading....I load to a nominal 2300 fps and works just fine on Buff!

Good luck on your choice!

my friend took a 505 after moose in Montana for the heck of it. what does logic have to do with anything? <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/grin.gif" alt="" />

i would say the 416 is as big as your going to need and find the rifle that fits you best/feels most natural going to you shoulder and go from there.

JJS,



Why is this not logical? I dare say it is the most sensible and practical choice of all. The 505 Gibbs is more than adequate for any game from field mice to elephant!! Having hunted with one I know.

AC

why is it not logical? most cant handle its recoil thats why. will it work for everything from mice to elephant but so will the 375's 416's and 458's and a host of others. what it comes down to is what can the individual shoot accuratly and not flinch with.

I have found that the 416 Rem. Mag. hammers stuff significantly harder than does the 375 H&H, and I haven't exactly been sitting around dreaming up theories or jumping to conclusions after gleaning info out of hunting mags or comic books, either, and just about every PH I've ever visited with over the years is in agreement that the 416s offer demonstrably more punch that the 375 H&H.

There's no question that the big .450s and .500s are bigger hammers than the various .416s, but lots of guys, self-included simply can't shoot those cartridges as well as the .416s, not to mention the fact that many of those rounds are housed in bigger, heavier, more ungainly rifles that not only slow me down, but are a pain in the rectum to carry all day long in the bush.

Like everything else, rifle-selection involves a series of trade-offs.............

AD

I shoot prairie dogs with a .375 H&H. Not logical either but a whole lot of fun. <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/grin.gif" alt="" /> <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/grin.gif" alt="" />

AC,
Please don't take this as a personal attack because it is not in any way. I have been around these forums for a while and have seen jorge has the experience and horse power to back up what he says. He does not get his experience just from books.

Best Wishes