I suspect I am not "normally constituted"...

Given your experience and the crop of rifles you regularly work out with, I'm surprised that you would complain about the recoil of a lil .378. I found that my .375 Ultra was far more manageable than my .416 Rigby when hot loaded, and the Rigby I shot prone, although I lost concentration if I tried to hold for more than 3. I would think that the .378 might spit the difference between the .375 Ultra and the .416. As far as that goes, touching off your .470 lets you know something just happened.

Over the years and tears Boomer I have come to the conclusion that felt recoil has a lot to do with "time of recoil" the higher the velocity, the sharper and more unpleasant the recoil. Just like muzzle energy figures, recoil increases by the square of the velocity but in direct relation to bullet weight. When one starts pounding out energy figures upwards from 7000 ft lbs the recoil is in a direct relationship to the muzzle energy, however if one does it with a 500 gn bullet @ 2550 it is a sharper recoil than if one does it with a 650 gn bullet @ 2200 fps or a 750 gn bullet at 2050 fps. This is why the 577 seems much more pleasant to shoot than the 378 or 460 Wby.........that plus the double I shot likely weighed 13 or 14 lbs while the bolt guns were probably closer to 10 lbs.
My 470 is pretty much right on design ballistics and spits it's 500 gn out at 2160 fps for just shy of 5200 ft lbs. That's the problem with doubles is once you hit regulated speed any increase in velocity and your accuracy goes out the window as far as your right/left groups go. For the uninitiated the 470 seems a little wild but really it's a big pussycat, moves ya around a little but certainly doesn't hurt. When my boy tried it he quite liked it and had never shot anything bigger than his 375 Ruger prior, it wasn't anything like he expected he said.
My 450 Ackley is still the most obnoxious recoiling rifle I've ever owned, however the most painful I've ever fired was an original Rigby light rifle in .416. It weighed about 8 lbs and had a horn buttplate about 1" wide and 3 1/2" long and WAY too much drop in the stock. Both shoulder and cheek took a while to heel after 4 rounds from that baby. (Ya I know 4 rounds, stupid and 18) The most recoil I've encountered was from a 4 bore, not painful just massive and difficult to hang onto under recoil.
 
Last edited:
I was making a joke, thus the happy face........

I think when Taylor said "normally constituted hunter " he was speaking from the context of a normally constituted professional ivory hunter. That's like saying that odd solid punch in the head shouldn't be any problem to a normally constituted professional boxer. The glass jaw and shoulder types had already been culled out or they wouldn't have made it that far.
 
Boomer - the loads I was looking at in the load chart used between 120 and 135gr of powder to push the 535gr bullet to 2400-2500fps. The 600gr loads were between 112 and 138gr charges for 2300 to +2450fps.
 
I've got a perverse desire for .577 NE, likely from reading to much Ross S. stuff somewhere along the line. I used a borrowed .450 NE VC double for one buffalo a little over a year ago and found it to be a complete pussycat. My .458 loads are in the same league as factory .458 Lott ammo and are quite manageable. Might happen yet.
 
Are muzzle brakes effective on these large bore, relatively low velocity chamberings?

Yes because its not about bullet velocity, its the expanding gases behind the bullet that are redirected, reducing the recoil. Actually giving it some further thought, the lower the4 velocity the better the brake should work, as there is more time for pressure to build, a greater volume of the powder is burned by the time the bullet exits the muzzle, so the more gas that is pushed through the brake's ports.
 
I am another one that would be leery of a Sako 85 with a wood stock in a really large caliber!! Not sure if they would hold up.
I suspect they've chosen wood, and designed the bedding, such that it'll work. We're not talking about a Cooey or something. :)

After all, trees, houses, apartment buildings, bridges, etc, are held up just fine by well-designed wood...
 
I recall reading somewhere that the German ammo that Taylor had access to had a muzzle velocity of +/- 1900 fps, hence the "light" recoil.
 
Maybe it is partially to avoid the use of fillers? The case capacity is similar to the .460 Wby.

The data I have on hand for the Jeffery with a 570 gr A-Square bullet gives the highest velocity with H-4895 and IMR 4064, 2348 and 2343 respectively. By comparison 118 grs of H-4831 only makes 2112 and 120 grs of IMR 7828 2050. This is from the A-Square manual. Although the case is large, so is the caliber, so the overbore capacity where the slow powders thrive, isn't there.
 
Last edited:
The data I have on hand for the Jeffery with a 570 gr A-Square bullet gives the highest velocity with H-4895 and IMR 4064, 2348 and 2343 respectively. By comparison 118 grs of H-4831 only makes 2112 and 120 grs of IMR 7828 2050. This is from the A-Square manual. Although the case is large, so is the caliber, so the overbore capacity where the slow powders thrive, isn't there.

Keep in mind those loads I linked to exceed the 46,000 PSI CIP limit.
 
Sako is now making the Brown Bear in .500 Jeffery. So now of course I am curious - not that I am going to get one, I'm just curious. I was doing some reading and according John Taylor:



A 10lb rifle with full power loads has about 140 ft-lbs of recoil - "pleasantly surprised by the lightness of the recoil" my foot!

Are any of you planning on getting one?

I have a problem with this number, according to my math it should have around 90 ft lbs of free recoil in a ten pound rifle...........am I doing something wrong? I calculated the free recoil of my 602 Brno at approx. 10 lbs pushing 500 gn bullets at 2550 fps to be 93 ft lbs.
 
Back
Top Bottom