Disappointed In My New 404 Jeffery

[krish]

He caved and abandoned Jeffrey's venerable .404 for something else.

The use of a .404J rifle is an opportunity to experience something rare in the world of hunting, but like most opportunities in life it comes dressed in overalls and looks like work.

Some folks don't want work; they want easy.

He's probably got himself a nice little .22 rimfire by now and for a couple of hours on lazy Sunday afternoons at the range he can make pretend he's shooting water buff in Zimbabwe.

Not true. He is a seasoned hunter. As a matter of fact he took two big Bucks in the last 30 days. Great guy to deal with. He is pickkey and can offord to be.
Krish

 

[Paul G]

I've said it a thousand times. A 400 gr bullet at 2350fps is a 400 grain bullet at 2350 fps. No matter what case it comes out of. All this nonsense about the 404 being some pussycat to shoot is BS. Gun weight and stock fit are infinitely more important than any slight case design differences. When the 404 came out it was loaded to 2100 fps or thereabouts. If you load any of the 416 rounds to that level you'll have an easy shooting load as well.
My Winchester 70 416 Rem Mag weighs in at 9lbs even with scope mounts only, no scope. With scope it comes in at 9lbs 14 oz. Loaded to 2350 fps it is no pussycat to shoot either. But it is shootable nonetheless. Especially since I had the stock lengthened to my correct LOP.
Did you have your 404 made to your correct LOP?

I won't mention names but I will say some of the most significant people In the large bore rifle space In the world completely disagree with you.

 

[Flewis]

2 days ago I shot my 8.5lb lott 500 grain at 2300. Then I shot my 9.5lb 500jeff 570 at I think 2300 and last but least my 505 gibbs 600grain at 2100, it weighs 11.7lbs. You would think the Jeff would be the worst by far, not even close. The gibbs had much more recoil. The Jeff had a little more than the lott but the lott had a faster recoil speed. To me it was stock fit and shape that made the difference. I’m sure I’ll be told how wrong I am. Maybe I’ll shoot my other 505 this week, it about 10.2lbs.

 

[krish]

2 days ago I shot my 8.5lb lott 500 grain at 2300. Then I shot my 9.5lb 500jeff 570 at I think 2300 and last but least my 505 gibbs 600grain at 2100, it weighs 11.7lbs. You would think the Jeff would be the worst by far, not even close. The gibbs had much more recoil. The Jeff had a little more than the lott but the lott had a faster recoil speed. To me it was stock fit and shape that made the difference. I’m sure I’ll be told how wrong I am. Maybe I’ll shoot my other 505 this week, it about 10.2lbs.

How much powder and what powder where you burning in each cartridge. Volume of the cartridge case, burn rate of powder, bullet weight, type of bullet surface in contact with the barrel, bullet material, barrel time, velocity, weight of the gun, acceleration curve, twist rate, how tight the barrel is, and stock fit, all have effect on recoil.
Krish

 

[Flewis]

How much powder and what powder where you burning in each cartridge. Volume of the cartridge case, burn rate of powder, bullet weight, type of bullet surface in contact with the barrel, bullet material, barrel time, velocity, weight of the gun, acceleration curve, twist rate, how tight the barrel is, and stock fit, all have effect on recoil.
Krish

All factory ammo, and I agree there are many factors.

 

[TOBY458]

2 days ago I shot my 8.5lb lott 500 grain at 2300. Then I shot my 9.5lb 500jeff 570 at I think 2300 and last but least my 505 gibbs 600grain at 2100, it weighs 11.7lbs. You would think the Jeff would be the worst by far, not even close. The gibbs had much more recoil. The Jeff had a little more than the lott but the lott had a faster recoil speed. To me it was stock fit and shape that made the difference. I’m sure I’ll be told how wrong I am. Maybe I’ll shoot my other 505 this week, it about 10.2lbs.

And the ones telling you you're wrong probably haven't fired any of those rounds. I agree completely Stock fit is extremely important when dealing with recoil.

 

[TOBY458]

I won't mention names but I will say some of the most significant people In the large bore rifle space In the world completely disagree with you.

Having owned two 404s, and several 416s, I'm drawing from personal experience. IME Gun/stock fit are way more important that any small variances in case design, when it comes to recoil.

 

[Tanks]

The weight of the rifle absolutely has an effect on the recoil force. The fit of the rifle along with technique is what determines felt recoil.

 

[Flewis]

The weight of the rifle absolutely has an effect on the recoil force. The fit of the rifle along with technique is what determines felt recoil.

I agree on the most part, but i have many very lite rifles and fit and but width seem to be more effective on recoil. Having said that I don’t have near the experience that you do.

 

[TOBY458]

The Sako pad on the left is a 416 Rigby. The pad on the right is a 458 Winchester. Which one do you think hurts the worst? Although the 458 WM is somewhat lighter than the Sako, the felt recoil is much less with the wider, better designed recoil pad.

 

[Rare Breed]

How much powder and what powder where you burning in each cartridge. Volume of the cartridge case, burn rate of powder, bullet weight, type of bullet surface in contact with the barrel, bullet material, barrel time, velocity, weight of the gun, acceleration curve, twist rate, how tight the barrel is, and stock fit, all have effect on recoil.
Krish

So important in my experience

 

[Paul G]

Having owned two 404s, and several 416s, I'm drawing from personal experience. IME Gun/stock fit are way more important that any small variances in case design, when it comes to recoil.

100% agree, but all things being equal the neck on the .404 vs .416 and the fact you get about 1k more ft lbs of energy and 200 fps on the .416 on factor loads should equal more recoil. If I am wrong please let me know.

 

[TOBY458]

100% agree, but all things being equal the neck on the .404 vs .416 and the fact you get about 1k more ft lbs of energy and 200 fps on the .416 on factor loads should equal more recoil. If I am wrong please let me know.

But, If you run all of the 416 and 404 cartridges with the same weight bullets, in the exact same model rifle, at the same velocity, I doubt you'll feel much difference. Maybe the 416 Rigby will have more, but that's because you're burning about 25 grains more powder to achieve the same velocity as the rest.

 

[Andrew62]

Many people have the removable break for the sighting in and practice purpose... then take it off hunting... a good idea to many.

This is exactly what I did with my Kimber Talkeetna. I had 4" of the barrel cut off, then the barrel re-tapered. With my Leupold scope this .375H&H weighs just 7lbs 11oz. For sighting in, I attach a muzzle brake and put on a Limbsaver butt pad, and it is a real pleasure to shoot, for hunting I remove both.

 

[Backyardsniper]

Having owned two 404s, and several 416s, I'm drawing from personal experience. IME Gun/stock fit are way more important that any small variances in case design, when it comes to recoil.

I have owned and shot a myriad of large bore rifles as anyone on here who has read any of my posts will know and @TOBY458 is spot on, next to weight lifting and weight loss, the shooting and handling of big bore rifles invokes more "bro science" than any other discipline I have ever encounterd. The truth is physics is physics, a gun weighing X# of lbs pushing a bullet weighing X# of grains at X# of FPS create X=amount of recoil. I have shot the all exalted 460 weatherby at 2200fps and low and behold it doesn't kick anymore than the 458 lott I had of the same weight and the 458 lott I own now in a blaser R8 with the kick ease system recoils less than that because the gun weighs more. However, the 8.5lb 416 rigby I have launching a 400 grain bullet at 2430fps will indeed get your attention, while my 470 double with a 500 grain at 2180 is rather manageable. Fat wide recoil pads also do indeed make heavy kickers much more enjoyable to shoot.

 

[Jack Stevens]

But, If you run all of the 416 and 404 cartridges with the same weight bullets, in the exact same model rifle, at the same velocity, I doubt you'll feel much difference. Maybe the 416 Rigby will have more, but that's because you're burning about 25 grains more powder to achieve the same velocity as the rest.

That's the point. ... Jeffrey's 404 was never supposed to be loaded (or hot-rodded) to the same velocities as the various 416s and 458s. It was always the most sedate cartridge among the .400-bore class. No worse than firing a .375 H&H rifle of the same weight with 300grn bullets. Depending on which sources you research for the earliest itinerations of cartridge, the .404J was sending a 400grn/.423 dia bullet @ 2050fps-2100fps. No faster, at least in factory ammo, until the early 2000s when Hornady decided to "jack up" velocity to 416 Rigby levels.

Hence, .404J rifles were the first and most popular choice for indigenous African game management departments for most of the 20th Century. Why? Because such departments were staffed with skinny, underfed, native employees and the felt-recoil of the .404 (at original velocity specs) was what they could handle and still be expected to shoot with reasonable accuracy under field conditions against large and dangerous game, especially during culling operations or "pest control" tasks. The cartridge's "stopping power" on DG, like elephants, rhino, and lions, was never in question; only the ability of the employee to place a shot accurately under pressure. Of the possible cartridge and rifle combinations for African game depts to select for this purpose, the .404 imminently satisfied.

And since our bullet-technology today is a universe better than the projectiles loaded in the .404 ammo of "Pondoro" Taylor's era, additional velocity is completely unnecessary.

With modern premium 400grn bullets, softs or solids, the .404 will still kill just as well or better in that 2050fps-2100fps range and do it in a slender .375-size rifle with a 22"-23" barrel.

 

[Jack Stevens]

Not true. He is a seasoned hunter. As a matter of fact he took two big Bucks in the last 30 days. Great guy to deal with. He is picky and can afford to be.
Krish

Sounds good.

Nothing wrong with classic Fudd deer hunting, nor spending lazy Sunday afternoons plinking away at those little metal animal-shaped silhouettes with your favorite .22 rimfire, while imaging how they're really lions and elephants and you're doing it for real in Zimbabwe.

It's a lot less expensive and is certainly less work than spending the range time to master an African big-bore rifle for that once-in-a-lifetime Buff hunt.

More importantly, it leaves one comfortable in the knowledge that he'll never walk in the footsteps of Selous, Taylor, Roosevelt, or Ernest Hemingway .... and then fail miserably at a critical moment from the dreaded "flinches."

 

[ActionBob]

Eat enough an become a man,... and there will be no recoil....

HWL

Funny comment but not true The truth is hold the rifle tight so it doesn't slap you around like a little bitch. Haha

@matt85 used to tell a story about taking his 505 Gibbs to the range and a skinny little woman of about 110 pounds shooting it

 

[cajunchefray]

The Sako pad on the left is a 416 Rigby. The pad on the right is a 458 Winchester. Which one do you think hurts the worst? Although the 458 WM is somewhat lighter than the Sako, the felt recoil is much less with the wider, better designed recoil pad.

View attachment 512054

Good example@Toby458.
I once had a Sako .375 H&H built on a Mauser 98, FN Action with a skinny 24" barrel. The stock shape (Monte Carlo), small buttstock, and LOP (about 13 inches) made it a beast to shoot, much worse than my .458 Whitworth.
6 rounds fired and I sold it.

 

[cajunchefray]

I know this is old but if I recall the rifle was a Ruger RSM. Those stocks beat me up more than anything else I have shot. My CZ 550 in 458 Lott was very comfortable compared to the RSM 416 Rigby. That one hurt after 6 shots. The 458 Lott RSM i only took 2 shots out of and sold it. I could shoot 19 fairly hot .458 loads with the CZ no problem and actually have fun shooting it.

Definitely true in my experience. Stock fit is crucial.

My first >.40 bore DG rifle was a CZ 550 .416 Rigby with the American stock. I worked up handloads to 2300 fps, shooting maybe 250 rounds.

The Ruger RSM rifles are great design except for the stock, (and possibly the ejector mechanism when worked at speed). Aesthetically, they are one of the finest rifles made in the American market.

Some rifles are like women, beautiful and eye catching, but treacherous.

So, a Ruger RSM .416 Rigby caught my eye, and I traded the CZ and too much cash for the Ruger.

While I was proficient with the CZ, that Ruger beat the piss out of me. The recoil was stunning, literally, in that after the first shot, cycling the bolt from my shoulder was difficult as my arm went numb. So, I sold it.

The RSM in 375 H&H is not too bad in recoil, as it is so heavy. A lighter, well-fitting Winchester 70 Alaskan .375 is much easier to shoot for me, even with the Monte Carlo stock, it just fits.

Whitworth Interarms Mark X are my favorite DG factory stocked rifles. They just fit me.