475/416 Rigby

It's not much of a trick to gunsmith a Model 70 into a 416. OAL of the 416 is 3.720 inches, OAL of the 375 is 3.600


The most famous .416 Rigby ever built by Rigby, was built on a standard Mauser 98 action, not a #20 square bridge magnum action. Professional Hunter Harry Selby carried the rifle in Africa for 50 years. Even had it rebarrelled by Rigby when he wore the first barrel out!

Ted
 
Ted,

Have you personally done this sort of work?
If so I'd love to see some pictures of your work.

I understood getting a big case like this to feed (perfectly) can be one of the most difficult things in the gunsmithing trade?
 
Hi X-Fan
I have a 470 Mbogo built on a 602 that feeds like butter. If you start with a CZ 550 - 416 Rigby action it is a piece of cake to get it to feed smoothly. I think they have more problems with the 500 Jeffery and the 505 Gibbs. My buddy has a 505 Gibbs built by CZ and it has lots of feed problems. Open the bolt and the next shell ejects or stands on end. You would think they could get the feed rails correct before they would start to sell them.
Take good care,
Dave
 
475/416

Interesting guys-Was wondering if you had ever seen a mod-70 done up for such a big cartridge? I've been playing with guns for over 40 years and have never seen one-I'm anxious to see pictures of this rifle-very interesting subject.
 
I talked to the gunsmith who made this custom and he says its a 475 akley mag. The case is based on the 416 rem. mag. not the 416 rigby. My fault gents ,I bought the rifle over the phone and when I picked it up, the box of loads said norma special on the head of the case. Some 600 gr. and some 500 grain rounds. Just in case I get an elaphant in my sweet peas.
 
X-fan said:
Ted,

Have you personally done this sort of work?
If so I'd love to see some pictures of your work.

I understood getting a big case like this to feed (perfectly) can be one of the most difficult things in the gunsmithing trade?
Click to expand...

Not myself, but I have had this kind of work done. I have done the feeding on a number of them, but it is a lot of work by hand, and never turns out as well as when done in a milling machine.

Ted
 
Hi Logger
You could look in the A-Square reloading book called "Any Shot You Want" The cartridge that you have is basically the 470 Capstick. You can form brass from either 416 Remington or from 375 H&H brass.
Take care
Dave
 
470 Mbogo said:
I'm still shooting big bores and there is quite a bit of interest in the cartridge. There has been a few magazine article on the 470 Mbogo one is in a German magazine called Calibre so I'm still looking for a translation on that one. There are quite a few rifles that have been chambered for the 470 also. Two have been to Africa and a third one is going this coming year. Besides the ones that have been built in the States there is one fellow in Australia that is building a real beauty. I keep the site up because of all the big bore information and the number of people that visit it. Take good care,
Dave
Click to expand...

Hey Dave, do you have a copy of the German magazine? I have a German gal that works for me, fluent in English and German could probbaly translate for you. She is tall, blond and hot, too...:)
 
Dave, I read the information on your web page and watched the penetration video with great interest. I wonder, when it comes to penetration with solids if you adhere to the super cavitation theory? I've thought for quite some time now that bullets, solids of softs points, are best tested in an aqueous medium. This would allow them to perform as they might on game, yet provide a more uniform testing platform than is provided by shootin game animals that vary in weight and temperment. If there is anything to super cavitation, then the penetration tests on the buffalo were much more practical than the tests on the plywood or sand; unless of course the sole purpose of the test is to attempt to make the bullet fail. I conducted some bullet tests with wet drill mud, which is horrible slimy stuff, but when mixed to the correct consistency, the wound channel holds its shape and can be measured.

It seems that the .470 Mbogo with the Swift A Frame penetrates similarly to the 570 gr X bullet I fired from a .500 Nitro, with the bullet making a lump in the skin on the off side of the buffalo. The buffalo in your video looks heavier than mine, but mine was shot from 50 yards, so the impact velocity could have been down to 2000 fps. If penetration was about equal, it tends to support my contention that penetration is a function of momentum, and that velocity and bullet weight can be played off against each other without affecting the outcome.
 
470 Mbogo

First off thank you Mr Mbogo for making the web sight for your 470 fun and interesting reading. I have been shooting a 416 Rigby for 12 years and .458 win mag for 5 and they are about as big as i want to go. I would shoot the bigger ones but not own them.Keep having fun with your canons . Dan
 
Boomer said:
Dave, I read the information on your web page and watched the penetration video with great interest. I wonder, when it comes to penetration with solids if you adhere to the super cavitation theory? I've thought for quite some time now that bullets, solids of softs points, are best tested in an aqueous medium. This would allow them to perform as they might on game, yet provide a more uniform testing platform than is provided by shootin game animals that vary in weight and temperment. If there is anything to super cavitation, then the penetration tests on the buffalo were much more practical than the tests on the plywood or sand; unless of course the sole purpose of the test is to attempt to make the bullet fail. I conducted some bullet tests with wet drill mud, which is horrible slimy stuff, but when mixed to the correct consistency, the wound channel holds its shape and can be measured.

Hi Boomer
Please keep in mind when I did all the testing for my website. There wasn't the selection of flat nosed solids available as they are now. I've talked with Norbert about his supercavitation bullets and theories but keep in mind that there is no supercavitation bullets available to the public. So it is pretty much a moot point. The new flat nose solids are about as good as it gets. The test on the Buffalo are what they are. The shot Chris took at the buffalo with the Swift A-Frame also smashed the Buffalo spine which which made the total penetration come up shy. The shot from the front of the Buffalo with the Bridger solid took out about 16 inches of spine and was found two inches from exiting the rear of the Buffalo. I shot a Buffalo straight on in the chest with a 500 grain Swift A-Frame and recovered it from between the hind quarters only six inches from exiting and mushroomed out to .875 of an inch. So animal penetration is not anything that is easily duplicated.

It seems that the .470 Mbogo with the Swift A Frame penetrates similarly to the 570 gr X bullet I fired from a .500 Nitro, with the bullet making a lump in the skin on the off side of the buffalo. The buffalo in your video looks heavier than mine, but mine was shot from 50 yards, so the impact velocity could have been down to 2000 fps. If penetration was about equal, it tends to support my contention that penetration is a function of momentum, and that velocity and bullet weight can be played off against each other without affecting the outcome.
Click to expand...

This isn't really a good comparison and I think you will find if you could boost the velocity of the 500 it would penetrate further. This is the Buffalo mentioned above where the shot smashed a big chunk of spine and came to rest under the skin on the off side so unless the 500 did the same thing it isn't really a comparison. With a 500 grain X bullet loaded to 2400 fps in my 470 Mbogo my buddy shot an Eland and the bullet penetrated from the hind quarter to the off side front quarter coming to rest under the hide on the front shoulder. The large rear leg bone was pretty much powder from the hit and he shot it from 175 yards. I think with the modern bullets available like the Barnes X and the GS Custom Bullets the faster you drive them the better they work. The good thing about the 500 Nitro is that they kept the bullet sectional density up compared to the 500 Jeffery and the 505 Gibbs. If you combine good sectional density with good velocity it is hard to beat. If you drop one or the other you will loose in the penetration part of the equation. I'm talking about bullet weights of 500 grains and velocities of 2400 to 2500 fps with sectional densities above .300.
Take good care,
Dave
 
470 Mbogo said:
This isn't really a good comparison and I think you will find if you could boost the velocity of the 500 it would penetrate further. This is the Buffalo mentioned above where the shot smashed a big chunk of spine and came to rest under the skin on the off side so unless the 500 did the same thing it isn't really a comparison. With a 500 grain X bullet loaded to 2400 fps in my 470 Mbogo my buddy shot an Eland and the bullet penetrated from the hind quarter to the off side front quarter coming to rest under the hide on the front shoulder. The large rear leg bone was pretty much powder from the hit and he shot it from 175 yards. I think with the modern bullets available like the Barnes X and the GS Custom Bullets the faster you drive them the better they work. The good thing about the 500 Nitro is that they kept the bullet sectional density up compared to the 500 Jeffery and the 505 Gibbs. If you combine good sectional density with good velocity it is hard to beat. If you drop one or the other you will loose in the penetration part of the equation. I'm talking about bullet weights of 500 grains and velocities of 2400 to 2500 fps with sectional densities above .300.
Take good care,
Dave
Click to expand...

Norbert's bullet may very well maximize the potential of the phenomenon, but I do not believe that a recessed disk on the nose of the bullet is necessary for super-cavitation to occur, if to a lesser degree. Consider the penetration one sees with WFN cast bullets even at handgun velocities, consider also the straight line penetration from flat-nosed parallel sided solids compared to what is often erratic penetration from traditional Kynoch style solids. I believe super-cavitation also occurs to some degree with the super-sonic passage of an expanded soft point through tissue.

I am of the opinion that optimum terminal ballistics, regardless of caliber, occur at 2400-2500 fps and this is especially true of traditional copper cup and lead core bullets. Having said that however, I don't believe that either the Barnes X or the GS Custom HV mono bullets, as good as they are, are the best solution, although I admit they do handle the velocities from modern loadings very well. I see that GS Custom is now following up with a .22 bullet caliber big game bullet with impact velocities approaching 4500 fps. I have been able to make .375 270 and 300 gr X bullets fail at impact velocities as low as 2600, but the heavy weight 380 gr bullet from Rhino with a muzzle velocity of 2300 has performed perfectly in each of my tests, as did the 570 gr X that impacted my buffalo at 2000 fps. These observations indicate pretty well what the impact velocity limits are of the modern expanding mono-bullet. I see no reason why a .458, .470, or .510 expanding mono-bullet impacting over 2600 fps would not also fail, but having said that, the idea of a heavy big bore bullet at 2400 intrigues the hell out of me.
 
Hi Boomer
Just out of curiosity what are you considering a failure with the 270 and 300 grain X bullets. Loosing petals is pretty common and shouldn't be considered a failure. From that point on it is doing the work of a solid with a little over caliber front. I really like the X bullet but some guns just don't like them. They are an eat up to the bullet hole kind of bullet. The 500 grain bullet that was found under the hide on the eland was in perfect condition with all petals intact. What was the medium that you had your failures with?
Take good care,
Dave
 
470 Mbogo said:
Hi Boomer
Just out of curiosity what are you considering a failure with the 270 and 300 grain X bullets. Loosing petals is pretty common and shouldn't be considered a failure. From that point on it is doing the work of a solid with a little over caliber front. I really like the X bullet but some guns just don't like them. They are an eat up to the bullet hole kind of bullet. The 500 grain bullet that was found under the hide on the eland was in perfect condition with all petals intact. What was the medium that you had your failures with?
Take good care,
Dave
Click to expand...

While loosing petals is a common occurance with the X bullet family, here's why I consider it a failure. Anytime a bullet looses mass, that results in a loss of momentum and a loss of momentum results in less penetration. If the shot is a broadside shot, that is of no significance, the animal is dead. But if the shot is quartering away or from dead astern, then it matters. Now comparing that performance to the performance of a good solid does not measure up. The solid has enough mass and velocity to penetrate a buffalo full length, and it doesn't matter if the bullet weighs 300 grs, 286 grs, or 270 grs. When loaded to the same pressure, provided the structure and profile are the same, all of those bullets will exibit very similar depths of penetration, although the shortest bullet has the greatest potential for straight line penetration. An X bullet that is loaded to it's velocity potential for weight, but looses 30% of it's mass cannot penetrate to the depth that would of been realized with the bullet in tact. My rifle is a .375 Ultra with a 20" barrel, so velocities are consistant with the .375 H&H.

A 270 gr and 300 gr X with the 380 gr Rhino
DSC_0008.jpg


The 270 gr X with the 570 gr X
DSC_0064.jpg
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom