Home Forums Hunting & Shooting Express Rifles and Big Bores Only 416 Rigby vs. 416 Ruger: Competition or Coexistence

I've got a 450/400 and have become enamored with what Craig Boddington calls "the lower 40s." I also have a pair of McMillan CZ 550 Magnum stocks sitting next to my safe awaiting barreled actions. I am also a big fan of Ruger Model 77's and, having a 9.3x62 I feel no need for a 375 Ruger, but the 416 Ruger looks very interesting. How to reconcile these things?

My question is this: Do the 416 Rigby (in the CZ550) and 416 Ruger (in the Ruger Alaskan) perform their tasks differently enough to justify, with the minimum level of practicality required by rifle loonies, owning both? If so why? If not, why not?

The Rigby is classic, so I think there will always be a market for it. I could see a justification for both--the Rigby in a nice wood stock and the Ruger in a McMillan beater.

Well...I think you should own rifles chambered in both cartridges, because both are cool in their own right.

But a .416 diameter bullet weighing 400 grains leaving one muzzle at 2400 fps would be pretty indistinguishable from the same bullet leaving the other muzzle at the same speed .

Which is absolutely not a reason to build only one...

Dennis

What is the magazine capacity of the CZ 550 in 416 Rigby? Does it hold four or five down?

My .404 Jeffery holds four in the magazine, so I would guess the same is true of the Rigby. My CZ 550 Safari Magnum .404 Jeffery also weighs almost three pounds more than my .375 Ruger African, so that is a consideration too.

Dennis

Thanks Dennis, those kinds of specs make them different enough to justify owning both. The 416 Ruger for packing day in day out, and the 416 Rigby specifically for hunting; for example, if I ever line up the Bison hunt I want, having five shots on tap rather than four would be nice.

All the Ruger brings to the table is the ability to be housed in a smaller, trimmer action. Conversely, the shorter case makes it tough on long for caliber bullets like the 400gr TSX. There's an article in this months American Hunter about it. The 400gr TSX is unusable in the Ruger. SO I'm sure it will coexist but as far as competing, I'm not seeing it. jorge

I'll have to check that article out; so the 416 Ruger might be the niche cartridge (all the power in a small rifle) while the Rigby will continue to be the standard choice, particularly for handloading? I've seen some data for the Rigby that approaches the 416 Weatherby in velocity.

The Wby is just a Rigby case with a belt added.

What information do you base that statement on? I can't imagine that 2400 fps isn't easily achievable in the Ruger case, and that's standard for the Rigby round.

Dennis

Since there is no realistic difference between the two as big game stoppers and if I were considering either 416, then I would go after the better handling, easier to carry and the lighter rifle for better field use. As a current 375 Ruger Alaskan owner, like the Hogue stock or not, the .416 Ruger Alaskan would get my vote. Its stock can always be changed.

But since you already have CZ stocks in your safe, that is another consideration favoring the 416 Rigby.

Jorge, I haven't found any basis so far for the statement quoted, in my initial reloading for the Ruger African in 404/375 Ruger. I haven't fired the rifle yet, -although my GS has with the .423" 400 gn TSX- but loads with .423" Barnes 400 TSXs, 400 Banded solids and Woodleigh 450 grain solids all cycle through the unaltered magazine without problems. The OALL of the 416 Ruger and the 404/375 wildcat equal the 375 Ruger OALL. BTW, starting loads of 80 grains H4350 under the 400 TSX at std OALL leave room for several more grains of powder.

So, I'm not sure what experience the writer of the cited article has to base his assertion. If a loony needs a reason to justify owning both a 416 Rigby and a 416 Ruger - though I can't imagine needing any reasonable justification to own another rifle - more power to him. But, OALL problems with specific bullets isn't one IME.

Mine held three in the magazine stock. I'm currently getting it refitted to hold four.

Can't say for sure but if they had been making the 416 Ruger when I was looking I may have gone that way. Although I think the Rigby has more range WRT to reloading up.

Definitely true, as Wby showed with their belted version of the Rigby - 2700 fps with the 400 grain bullet, IIRC. But when is a dead buff dead enough? Is it after he's killed with a 400 grain bullet leaving the muzzle at 2400 fps, 2700 fps or ... how fast?

If recoil weren't a factor, maybe common sense and results from the field might define the upper limit of MV for DG cartridges. Just my .02.

The Cape buffalo I shot with a 400 gr solid at 2300 fps went nowhere. The second shot, purely for insurance, passed through the shoulders and spine from side to side and buried itself in the Moz swamp.

I don't think an extra 400 fps would have added any lethality... .

Dennis

I agree with muledeer. You could hotrod the Rigby but as is it is deadly. I have not shot a 416 Ruger but would think the choice between the two would be a personal one based on the rifle and its handiness and fit and your interest in nostalgia. Game is not going to be able to tell the difference when well hit by a 416 whether Ruger,Rigby,Rem,Taylor,Weatherby.I chose the 416 Rigby.

With the 416 Rigby, 416 Rem Mag, and 404 Jeffery already well established, it seems that the niche the 416 Ruger fits into is a cartridge/rifle combination that is both sound and affordable. Also it seems like it would work in a 98 Mauser Action without too much work. Both niche's seem to make it reasonable cartridge.

Regards,
Chuck

Has anyone seen the 416 Ruger in a store for sell yet? The 375 Ruger's are a little over a year out into stores. It'll be interesting when the new cartridge aura wears off to see how it fairs in the market place.

..........As a matter of fact? Yes! In my conversation with the owner, my dealer here in So Cal between both stores has 3 416 Ruger Alaskans in the racks! He `s already ordered several for his customers and thought it would be a pretty good idea to have some on hand in inventory.

Based on his sales #`s so far, the 375 Ruger has outsold all other 375`s combined since its intro and since the more recent advent of the 416 Ruger, it has outsold all other 416`s combined.

Can`t say about the future "aura" wearing off, but at present, the sales #`s are what they are.

It's funny that all the folks who think a 416 Rigby built on a standard M-98 are the epitome of light/powerful rifles - while virtually every gunbuilder ( including Rigby) will tell them why it shouldn't be done - think that the new 416 Ruger - that is designed to fit in a standard M-98 and gives identical performance - will never be as good.

bigsqueeze

Excuse the pun, but I'm a bit "gun shy" over most new products. I prefer to see the feedback on how they work out for people in the field. And if a cartridge will be popular enough so ammo for it can be bought without much difficulty or extra cost.

If you want to get the Ruger AND handload it, maybe wait a while and ask around if guys can crimp their bullets and still manage to shove them into the breech. I'm just thinking that the 416 may possibly do what the 375 does - crimp a perfectly good looking round that does not want to chamber.
That would be humbug if hunting DG.

I like my Rigby and wouldn't think of parting with it. At the same time, I'm interested in the Ruger. Just for a "what the hell". Mostly because I've aquired a liking for the bigger rifles. But I'll probably forego the 416 Riger to build a 450 of some flavor. Just not sure which it's gonna be yet. Really leaning toward a 458 Lott M77 RSM rechambered to 450 Rigby.

........Nothing wrong with being gun shy!! Per my conversations with both Hornady and Ruger, you can bet that when Ruger and Hornady get together to develop a new product, it is well tested in the lab, tested from the bench, proven in the field, and will include field use in Africa prior to any introduction. The 375 Ruger went through its paces before its intro and so did the 416 Ruger.

BTW! Along with the 416 Alaskan rifles, I also saw a few boxes of 416 Ruger factory ammo the other day while at my gun dealer. Like the 375 Ruger, the 416 Ruger is a sweet looking round.

I jumped on owning a 375 Ruger 14 months ago. I had faith that this new round would only be going one way in popularity and that everything needed for reloading would be easily available. I wasn`t disappointed. The 416 Ruger is doing and no doubt will do the same.

Personally I have never been intriqued by the 416 Rigby although I realize its a grand old cartridge..If I am going to use that big action then I want more power such as a 505 Gibbs, therefore I would opt of the smaller lighter 416 Ruger that has identical balistics as the Ruger. I realize the 416 Rigby can be handloaded beyond the 416 Ruger or Rem, but I don't know anyone that does that. The Rigby is simply the 416 Wby case sans the belt..

I think the 416 Ruger case is one of the best designed cases we have ever seen, and it gets you exactly what you want in a more compact rifle..Hard to beat this new guy on the block IMO.

All that said, my nostalgic side, and the gun I have used more than anything else in Africa is the wonderful 404 Jefferys, most of them on Mauser 98 actions. My next wildcat will be the 404 Ruger.

What kind of case life are people reporting for the 375 and 416 Ruger? I have been surprised at the longevity of cases with normal loads in my 416 Rigby.

I couldn't say for sure as I didn't get to shoot mine enough before ai sold it..but I did load and shoot one case 10 times with 3 trims in a test with a max load of RL-15 and it was still good. Based on that alone it seems like case life is good.

"The Rigby is simply the 416 Wby case sans the belt.."

Actually, the 416 Wby is simply the 416 Rigby with the belt added, but we're splitting hairs here aren't we. LOL. Couldn't help myself Ray. Good to see you here so much and miss you over at AR.

This Rigby is capable of much more than the others, exception being the Roy. But there's really no reason to take it there. It's been doing a phenomenal job for over 100 years with 400 at 2400. If it ain't broke, don't fix it.

That said, any of the common 416's would work for me. The Ruger RSM, IMHO, is one hell of a bargain and it comes in 416 Rigby. Seems they should replace the 458 Lott in the RSM line with the 450 Rigby since they are using that big old action. Not needed for a Lott or 375 H&H for that matter.

Pick the 416 that suits you and go kill Schit. That's all you really need to know.

David

If you walk into a gun shop tomorrow it's anyone's guess what powders will be available. Nice to know the Rigby will rumble along at 2400fps or better if fed anything reasonable to burn. The way the world is going reloading shortages could continue and a workhorse will be easier to feed than a thoroughbred.

When it gets to that point, Using my scoped rifle I will just shoot the first person I see packing a M-16,..steal or buy myself about 20,000 rounds of ammo and fly a big flag with a finger on it over my house until they drop a bomb on me!

I'm just too old to give up my God given rights and have some liberal waffle footed honyak with a pony tail distroy the constitution, and hell I'm not even a raical, but betcha I have some help.

At least thats the plan, but you really never know until it happens..:)

Amen!

The latest issue of the NRA's American Hunter. It even had pictures. jorge

Seems like there should be plenty of room for another 416 if you take a look at all the cartridges around .280 that exist (270 Win, 270 WSSM, 270 Wby, 7x57mm, 284 Win, 280 Rem, 7mm Rem Mag, 7mm Wby Mag, 7mm RUM) and I'm sure I missed at least 5 lol

Regards,

Chuck

You guys have to have them already...they're already in stores up here!

What you have to remember is that what the 416 Ruger does at a flat out run, the 416 Rigby does at a jog. This isn't as close an item for debate as the 375 Ruger vs 375 H&H back-and-forth. If you so desire you can flatly whip the arse off the 416 Ruger by loading the 416 Rigby to it's full potential. Whether or not you want to or need to is for you to decide. It's kinda like playing basketball with your 8 year old kid. You don't play to your potential to keep his feelings from getting hurt.

................The 416 Ruger and the 416 Rigby may be joggin a little closer together than you may think!

From my `08 Hodgdon manual, I read a max velocity of 2470 fps for the 416 Rigby out of a 24" bbl with a 400 gr bullet.

From my Lyman Handbook (49th Edition), I read a max velocity of 2434 fps for the 416 Rigby out of a 24" bbl with a 400 gr bullet.

From the Nosler site (reloading section), I read a 2479 fps velocity. Although not listed, Nosler usually uses a 24" bbl for testing in most cases.

Average between the three is 2461 fps.

Although I have yet to read actual chrony results, the 416 Ruger from the shorter 20" barreled Alaskan according to Hornady and Ruger is between 2325 fps to 2400 fps. IF so and after an additional 4" of barrel length, the Ruger would come closer to within 50-75 fps?

A more accurate comparison between cartridges should be given to equal barrel lengths. But the Alaskan`s 20" barrel, is what it is, giving a wider edge to the Rigby.

Not quite squeeze. Those "max book loads" are based on 42K psi where the original Rigbys were designed to work. The case isn't even getting started at those pressures. Weatherby just adds a belt to it and loads it to 2700 fps. You can do the same with the Rigby case. I have loaded mine to 2550 fps with no problems with a 400gr bullet. No way the Ruger can even come close. jorge

Does it need to? No. Lets discuss non issues.

.......You`re probably right!.....I`m just going by what`s published in the books as max loadings. So let`s add another 4" to the 416 Ruger`s barrel length.

Ok! Let`s say the 400 gr can be loaded up to max and give 2600 fps from the 24" Rigby. Depending on the rifle, IF the 416 Ruger can get 2400 fps max from a 20" er, then with a 24" er it should increase the velocity up to about 2480 to maybe 2500 fps depending on the individual rifle, the bore, etc.

Given the same barrel lengths and depending on the rifles, I`d say it`s possible the Ruger COULD come to within 125 fps of the Rigby, assuming 2600 fps is the most that can be achieved with a Rigby?

I`ll look for other sources to see if there are other 24" bbl`d Rigby loadings that exceed 2600 fps with the 400 grainer loaded at the higher pressures.

I like the 416 Rigby cartridge as it`s almost on par with the 416 Wby Mag. Even though some velocity is sacrificed, I prefer the shorter, lighter and handier rifles offered in the Alaskans.

Those two with 24" bbls would make for an interesting day behind a chrony.

I am sold on the 375 and .416 Rugers..It is a well designed case and I have loaded and tested the 416 Ruger quite a bit..I found it worked well with all bullets including the 400 gr. BXs with which I got 2344 FPS out of my short 20 inch tube and a gob of RL-15...

I would run out and sell my good .375 H&H or my 416 Rigby or Rem just to own a Ruger but if I were looking to buy one then I would give the new Rugers a serious look, they are just what the doctor ordered in a Mauser action IMO...

If I sell my big Mauser actioned 404 Jefferys, then I will build either another .416 Ruger or perhaps a 404 Ruger. I'll hang on to my old English .375 H&H, at least for a while or until someone bribes me out of it..

I am still a gun whore and can't help selling the damn things!! Its a sickness and I keep selling my best rifles! something wrong with this picture? you bet, I always end up hunting with some piece of put together quickly crappy rifle!

If I had every dollar back I spent on rifles and ctgs I thought would be better than what was easy to come by, and I did not hear my minds eye tell me over and over again, "don't fix what ain't broke". I might be some what happier, but I sure as hell wouldn't have had all the fun.

cmg, agree with your thinking. Haven't heard anyone on this thread claim yet that a 400 grain .416" bullet traveling at 2400 fps is insufficient to kill a buff, time after time. BTW, that's the 100 year old load that made the Rigby's reputation and also happens to be the factory ballistics for the 416 Ruger. So, I'll call the question - how dead does a dead buff need to be before the 'we need more speed in the 416s' aficionados think they've hit the magic number? About 2400 fps with a 400 grain .416" or .423" bullet is just fine in my book.

Ray: The 416 Ruger CAN'T HANDLE a 400gr TSX. The latest issue of American Hunter had a good writeup on it. The bullet is too long and it severely lowers case capacity.

Squeeze: the 416 Weatherby IS a Rigby with a belt. You can use Wby data to load the 416 to the same velocities. jorge

Jorge, have you confirmed this finding with this load combination yourself?

I have not, but others have and the data is published: 416 Rigby load data I quit at 2550 fps with zero pressure problems. When the Rigby is loaded to the gills to approximate 416 Weatherby velocities there are no pressure problems. The caveat being Weatherbys have a 26" barrel for their testng while Rigbys do it with 24" or less. My Rigby has a 24" barrel. jorge

...........Well if that is the case, then I wonder why there aren`t more loads published for the 416 Rigby that use the the higher load potentials which nearly equals the 416 Wby? Liability reasons? Rifle reasons? Other problems? Is there fine print which says the Rigby can be loaded as a 416 Wby? I see nothing in Hodgdon, Nosler, or Lyman which indicates that.

Hodgdon, Nosler and Lyman all use the lower pressured 42-43k psi loading data. There is no 416 Rigby data in my Sierra manual, so Sierra is out. I don`t have a Hornady edition. Does Hornady have any stronger loads?

I`m just curious as to why. If a cartridge has more potential which are safe loadings, then why aren`t more sources showing them?

See my above post to a link. The Weatherby case IS a 416 case with a belt. They have the exact case capacity. I suspect the reason for the load data is a litigious one, with the possibility that older rifles could not handle modern loadings(50-60k psi). There have also been numerous articles published on same. Maybe Muledeer can chime in and vector you to the specific data. jorge

jorge, I didn't make my question clear. I believe you're implying that the Ruger lacks the case capacity to load the 400 grain TSX to a MV of 2400 within the magazine's OALL constraints. My experience based on loading the 404 Ruger wildcat with the 400 grain .423" bullets is that this is not correct. I have not yet done the firing tests, but know from my own experience that the case has enough volume to use at least 84 grains of IMR 4350, which will result in 2400 fps. I don't disagree that the Rigby and Wby variants will yield higher MVs, but to what end?

Wildcatter,

ending with a good rethorical. As you said above, .416 or .423 400gr @ 2400 fps made the light heavys famous.
The Ruger cases give us that with ease, in a standart length action. Case closed. Goal achieved. I wish you well for load developement on the .404 Ruger with the TSX. Do keep us posted.
Mozambique is just a few short month away for you to reproof 400gr. @2400 fps of TSX on Buff. They will suffice, of course.
All the good to Jorge and his Rigby Modern, with 400gr. @ 2550 fps from a 24" barrel that would, with a decent bullet, of course also suffice.

We are back in the loony bin after the question: "Will animals notice the difference of 150 fps?"

Hey guys, I never said that I load to those velocities as a norm. I load mine to 2400-2450 tops for hunting. What I tried to point out to you is that according to the article in the NRA magazine, you CANNOT achieve 2400 fps with the 400gr TSX ONLY because the bullet's length takes up too much case capacity NOT magazine constraints. *I* didn't say it the NRA magazine did.

But folks that have used these cartridges like Layne Simpson for instance definitively say that there is a difference between how a buffalo reacts to a 400gr bullet at 2350 and one at 2600 plus. jorge

Squeeze: Jorg is right about the 416 Weatherby and Rigby comparison. You may know this,but for a long time, a guy could not get 416 Rigby brass. Jack O,Connor's solution for his Rigby was to turn the belts off 460 Weatherby brass and form them to 416 Rigby.The two cases are that close,and Weatherby used the basic Rigby case in designing the 378 and the 460; the 416,of course,came later.IIRC O'Connor cranked the Rigby case right up there to about 2500 with the 400 gr bullet.

I've never owned a Rigby,but do know that some of Bill Steigers clients loaded the Rigby chambered in Ruger rifles up to pretty high velocity (2700 or so)with 335 Bitterroots,and took the combo's to Africa for Cape buffalo; as the stories are told,the buff got dumped on their noses pretty quick.

Here and there I have read accounts of fellows very safely taking the Rigby case up over the factory standard 2350 with 400 gr bullet with no ill effects. It's a pretty big case.

Jorge,

its is folks like Layne Simpsons job to say thing like this - keeps the industry going. Also, we are talking a difference of 250 + fps (I only mentioned 150 fps) now. L.S. most definitly should have further mentioned that not only the animal but also the shooter notices a difference between 400 gr.@2350 and 2600 + .

Such rifle would either have to be a hog to carry or a mule to shoot. Academic discussion aside, I would stick to the 400 @2400 as being ample and shootable. As a guide (not in Africa, granted) I prefer such cartridges for my hunters. Tend to be shot better.

I akknowledge your discussion of strictly case /cartridge potential, which wildcatter and myself took into the field so to speak. Sorry for that. All good from my side.

Why do I suspect the reason being has to do with ambient temperature the ctgs will be used at? I have vary little doubt the temperature you and I see here in Alaska are just a tad different than what the boys in Africa use these ctgs in.

My vote is for the bigger case capacity, it just makes a whole lot more sense in a hot climate. Where heat is as much of a factor as the big snot-ties that abound.

............Thanks for that info!.....I was aware of the Rigby case size, but was not aware of its full load potential. Nothing in my manuals showing the greater loads.

The 416 Ruger cannot equal its Rigby and Weatherby counterparts.
But after all is said and done, a 400 grainer moving from the muzzle at 2350 to 2400 fps from the 20" barreled, 40.5" OAL Ruger Alaskan, makes for a very sweet, fast handling, easier carrying and very potent rig, suitable for anything on the planet and all at a very good price too.

Squeeze: Like the 375,I'm sure the 416 Ruger will be a great cartridge.

It is interesting to speculate how -if Holland and Rigby had introduced the 375 & 416 Ruger rounds in the early 1900's - and Ruger was now introducing a long, tapered belted case that required a magnum length action, plus an even larger 416, would they achieve the same reception as the ultra-mags? And would the folks now bashing the Ruger rounds be defending them due to their being "classics"?

Phil, suspect you're probably right - "The more things change, the more they stay the same" esp in rifle loony world. Every 'new' cartridge development takes us forward to the past.

However, just found the 416 Ruger dies as a new product on the Redding site, getting ready to order. With a .420" expander plug in the neck die it should be perfect to load the 404 Ruger. See, a 'new' wildcat that takes us forward, back to the old world of the 404s!

Someone will no doubt trim the rim down and neck it up to 425 and make a "new" and "improved" 425WR

Except for the rebated rim, I think that's what the 404 will be - .423 caliber in the Ruger case. But you're right it won't be 'loony perfect' - maybe that rebated rim idea is beginning to sound ... interesting?! Just kidding, too far out even for me. Think we should let a sleeping WR lie.

Can you be even more specific? A buddy of mine takes American Hunter, and offered to FAX the article to me. Except he can't find the article in either March or April editions...

So...Where is it, and who wrote it?

Dennis

If it please the court; Ooops. It's the latest SCI magazine, March-April 2009. pp. 86-87. "If loaded to the 416 Ruger factory ammo length the base of this bullet (400gr TSX) is 1/3" below the case shoulder, and the 400 TSX is so long as to be unusable in my opinion." He goes on to say that in a longer action such as one from Empire rifles it would not be a problem, but the Ruger's 3.4" mag length would be unworkable. John R. Sundra. jorge

I guess I threw the SCI magazine out without even reading Sundra's article on the .416 Ruger . Oops...

I guess I would have to stick a few bullets in the case with various suitable powders in suitable amounts and give it a try, because I don't think a gunny even as experienced as Jon R. Sundra can make that judgement without trying it out. If one used powder like, say H414, the bullet sticking 1/3" below the case would not prevent more than enough powder from being poured into the case. At least...that's my opinion. And given that Mr. Sundra does not appear to have actually tried handloading the TSX in the cartridge -- opinions are all we have to deal with at the moment.

Thanks for the followup. I was amused to note, in my mad searching through American Hunter's Internet presence, that they persist in referring to the .375 Ruger and .416 Ruger as the .375 RCM and .416 RCM...which they most assuredly are not.

This is making me almost obsessed enough to buy a .416 just to prove I can drive a 400-gr TSX over 2400 fps... .

Dennis

Betcha can't...jorge

No need Dennis, you can get 2400 FPS from a .416 Ruger with a 400 gr. TSX and almost 2400 FPS with a 450 gr. Woodleigh RN, I did in my short tubed 416 Ruger Mauser..However I see little need for a 400 gr. TSX and prefer the 350 gr. monolithics in all the various 416s and the 404 Jefferys, and I assure you it has more than ample penetration, better expansion, and shoots a bit flatter if that means anything in a 40 caliber big bore...

BUT, you can get considerably more velocity than 2400 FPS with a 416 Rigby ( probably 2600 or more FPS) and perhaps a tad more than 2400 FPS with a 416 Remington, I get 2440 FPS with my Rem., all of which is proud flesh and makes absolutly no difference in killing power on the game these rounds were designed for. 2300 to 2400 FPS is ample under all conditions that I can think of.

I have seen some spectacular kills on Buffalo with the 350 gr. 40 caliber BXs including lengthwise penetration and beautiful expansion, and I have seen the 400 gr. perform pretty poorly "sometimes" with zero expansion?? I also believe that you can get a bullet too long and it tends to tip on contact and it has more yaw up close and personal..

Oh, I know. I was just intrigued by Jorge's discussion of a magazine article wherein that author claimed to "know" something without having tried it.

I'm fairly confident that 2300 fps is plenty for 400 gr bullets, at any sane range that dangerous game would be shot at.

In truth, I would much rather build a .404 Ruger than buy a .416 Ruger . And it's not like I "need" either one... .

Dennis

I know Sundra to be experienced and therefore know whereof he speaks but I thought this anti- the-bullet-seats-below-the-neck bias to be mostly gone thanks to the 300 Win and the .284 win. In the later I can load the very long (1.36") 140-gr TTSX .37" below the neck to get a cartridge OAL of 2.92 and still hit 3k fps.

I would think in a DG cartridge 416 caliber it - seating below the neck - would be even less a consideration as long as you can get in the EVR (effective vel range) of 2150 to 2400 fps.

Seems to me you all are arguing/debating a non-existant issue. They'll co-exist without a doubt. Wasn't the 416 Remington to be the end all of the 416's. Not to mention all the wonderful wildcats that have come about in the last 100 or so years, since the Rigby was birthed. The Rigby is here to stay and, I think, so is the Ruger. They both have a market and both appear to be sound cartridges, well the Rigby is proven and the Ruger soon will be.

For a guy building a 416 with AAA Fancy English Walnut and all the trimmings, it'll most likely be a Rigby, but not necessarily. For the guy building a no-nonsense, composite stocked warrior, it'll likely be a Ruger, but not necessarily. Individuals have their druthers and that's the end of that. To each his own, as always. Arguing as to which is better is an endless, pointless discussion as each has it's own set of virtues to the man writing the check. And that, my friends, is all that really matters.

Ya'll have a good weekend and don't have a coronary over this 416 thing.

David

x2mosq,
You forgot to take in one consideration and that is the cost of a big Mauser or to open up an Enfild action for the 416 Rigby and that alone will run costs up to as much as $4500 extra if you put all the math to it...If you buy one of the custom actions built by a few USA gunsmiths then your looking at $5500 for the action alone in some cases...Howeve one could just buy a Ruger 77 or No. 1 and be good to go...That is quite a buy when you think about it!

All the 416s are excellent choices, its up to each individual to pick and choose, its still America, at least for now!! That seems to be changing daily with our man in Washington..

Maybe the economics of the whole thing is the reason some people become so exercised over the .375 and .416 Rugers -- they are somehow viscerally connected to the idea that rifles in DG cartridges must cost $XXXX amount, and the idea of Ruger producing really viable, functional, and attractive DGR's for under $1000 street price offends their exclusive sensitivities.

Stranger things go on in the hearts of men... .

Dennis

You guys are missing the point apparently, but I see you now have "reviewed down" to 2300 fps.

The author said you CAN get 2400 fps out of a 416 Ruger IN A MAUSER TYPE ACTION because you can seat the bullet out further but NOT in a 416 RUGER ACTION as it's limited to the short mag length. Tell you what I'll do, I have a couple of boxes of 400gr 416 TSXs, if you can get 2400 fps out of it IN A RUGER AFRICAN action, I'll GIVE THEM TO YOU. jorge

Sundra made it pretty clear in the article that he never actually tried it -- he was just "sure" that it wouldn't work. That is my point. He might be right, though I actually doubt it. If I go to that length, I'll build a .404 Ruger, and shoot 400 gr bullets in it. Since the .404 Ruger bullets will be .007" larger in diameter than the .416 ruger, maybe those 400 gr bullets will be short enough to work out just right.

My point on 2300 fps was not to "review it down", but simply that the whole controversy over 2400 fps is functionally irrelevant. Even though I believe I can get there with the Ruger case.

But this argumentation has gone way out of kilter, based on a rather questionable comment by an author who actually contributes here occasionally. Maybe he'll find this thread and add his comments. I would love to hear from his mouth whether he actually handloaded for the .416 Ruger in a Ruger rifle.

But none of it is worth arguing seriously over.

Dennis

Now gentlemen, the longer this discussion goes on the curiouser it gets.

Jorge, if I understand this argument correctly, if the 416 Ruger is loaded in a "Mauser type action" - designed for the 8x57 Mauser, max OAL = 3.290" - it can be loaded to a longer OAL than it can in a "short mag length" Ruger African - designed for the 375 Ruger max OAL = 3.340". Now that would be a mathematical miracle of the first water.

Those of us who've actually reloaded for the 375 Ruger - a few of whom are actually taking part in this discussion from the perspective of experience rather than conjecture - will tell you that actual OAL achievable in the "short mag length" Ruger African is about 3.425". BTW, the same miracle is also possible in the other "short mag length" Ruger, the Alaskan.

Don't know where Mr. JS acquired the opinion that the Ruger 416 can't be loaded up to spec OAL, but it must have been in fanciful gazing through the looking glass, certainly not in the fact based world of the reloading bench. Oh, well it does make for interesting after dinner reparte.

Well all I can tell you is I saw the pictures of the 400TSX and a Ruger case and to get it to fit in the Ruger box it would have to be seated longer than the magazine cantake.(again according to the picture in the article). Regarding the standard Mauser action, everyone knows that you can get them to work with longer cartridges, just like the Ruger I imagine, but what JS was trying to say was that in a factory Ruger 416 African the 400 TSX has to be seated in to deep in order to fir the factory box, hence maybe not enough powder to reach 2400. Regardless, my offer still stands (as I have no intentions of ever owning either Ruger offering) if you have one and need the bullets for the experiment, I'll gladly send them to you. Lastly, in my experience there is a difference between a 400gr slug at 2300 and one at 2600. I load my 416 Rigby with 400gr A Frames and Hornady steel solids to 2450. jorge

Well, splitting the difference between the Rigby & Wby seems to make sense, as the Rigby has certainly been shown to be 'enough gun' for most sensible applications.

Can't comment from experience on game about the .423" bullet's performance at any speed, but will bring you back a 'field report on buff' (how do you like that for gun rag slang?) in a few months.

Meanwhile, I think I'll finally get the reloading equipment unpacked today and load up some 404-375s with successively larger charges of 4350 and we'll see how much we can pack under a 400 grain TSX. I know for sure 80 grains fit in the case, the cartridge fits in the short African magazine, and I have some capacity to spare - done that!

Experience always trumps conjecture, so it seems . I'm looking forward to seeing your results.

Dennis

Whenever you get around to testing the 416 Ruger, in a Ruger African with 400gr TSxs, let me know and I'll send you the bullets to test. jorge

Ray,

The only reference that I was making to money was the fact that the man writing the check is the bottom line on cartridge choice. If he wants the Rigby, he does have the obstacle of action choice. That is fairly simple to overcome as the CZ actions are available as far as I know and are plenty big enough for a Rigby. Of course there are others available for a lot more money, but I doubt seriously that they are any better, meaning actual quality. The CZ may need to be "slicked" up a little and I'd want to put a M70 style safety on it, but otherwise it is, by all accounts, a good quality action.

With that said, the Ruger would probably be more economical to build, and is certainly less expensive in factory rifles. However, when you compare apples to apples in the Ruger rifle line, what you get in a RSM as compared to the Ruger African or Alaskan, may acutally me a better deal if you're looking at it on a feature-by-feature basis. Considering the significan upgrade in wood, the quarter rib milled into the barrel, etc... you're looking at a small price to pay for the included upgrades. The downside of course is the weight of the RSM versus the African and maybe the feel of the rifle. The RSM is a BIG rifle, any way you slice it. But that's the way it was designed. It's designed for BIG cartridges.

Back on topic, the bottom line, again, is what the guy writing the check wants. Not everybody has to squeeze every last bit of velocity out of any given cartridge they use. Not everyone shoots Barnes bullets. To each his own. They both have a niche and I feel they'll both be around for quite a while. I did also read an article in Rifle magazine, May/June 2008.

In this article, Sundra was using a rifle he had built by Empire Rifles with a reamer that he supplied and custom dies made by Redding. The only reference to the 400gr. TSX in this writing was a caption under a picture of the 400 TSX, 400gr. Hornady RN, a round each loaded with the Hornday and a 350 TSX, and then a 350gr. TSX bullet. The caption reads as follows: "he two bullets Sundra's experimented with so far are the 400-grain Hornady roundnose and the 350-grain Barnes' Triple Shock. At far left is the 400-grain Barnes, which he decided was too long." So Sundra, according and at the time of this article, never tested the 400 TSX. He did say that he got 2405 with what he thought to be a starting load, using the 400gr. Hornady out of the 22" barrel on this rifle, but he does not mention the COL that he loaded to. It appears that he crimped the load pictured on the cannelure of the Hornady bullet and the 350 TSX is loaded slightly longer.

Xmos,
Point taken, and I was just adding another varible to the equasion of why the Ruger might be a better 40 caliber, or something like that!

Jorge,
Since my 416 Ruger was a Mauser and my magazine and throat was opened a tad, it could make a difference I suppose, but my barrel was also 20 inches, so I still belive I could safely get at least 2400 FPS, but if not, I would settle for 2300 or even 2200 and go about my business...I suppose the thing to do is let someone try and see what they can get..

Bottom line for me is I have never felt the 400 gr. 40 caliber monolithic a viable choice for DG..It is simply too long, has two much yaw at close range and it might tend to tilt on impact??
I do know that it would be hard to improve on the 350 gr. Monolithic as they perform so well on Buffalo and other dangerous animals, and they have more than enough penetration and better expansion than a heavier monolithic.

Concur with your second observation Ray. I know of two hunters who had "misdirection" with 400gr 416 cal TSXs and mono solids. Randy Brooks prefers the 350 TSX for his 416, a bit more velocity, great penetration and in the case of the shorter 416s, no case capacity issues. As to the 416 Ruger in a Ruger African shooting 400gr TSXs or monos for that matter, I'll have to wait and see until someone shoots it and reports. jorge

416 Rigby vs. the 416 Ruger is the same argument as the 375 H&H vs. the 375 Ruger. Two snot nosed kids vs. two veterans. It just depends what you want. Both the new cartridges will perform on par with their venerable counterparts, it's they don't do it with class or tradition, which is important to me. Lou

The basic difference in the 416 Rigby and the 416 Ruger is simple in that you can get an easy 2700 FPS in the 416 Rigby with 400 gr. bullets, and I even know some hearty lads that get 2900 FPS..I read their chronograph and I know they been using those loads for years!!!

The 416 Ruger will get 400 gr. TSXs to 2412 FPS average of 5 shots, I just shot them in the .416 Ruger that I sold to a local client, I shot the 400 gr. Barnes X in the rifle..It has a 20 inch tube, a long magazine and throat however..the loads were max but safe. I don't know if you could do it in the Ruger..the load was certainly compacted and not something I would care to take to Africa but no more so than most 458 Win loads, but again I much prefer the 350 gr. monolithic in any 40 caliber magnum...

I have had no problem at all getting 2400 FPS plus with 400 gr. Woodleighs, 380 gr. GS Customs flat nose and HPs, 380 gr. North Fork flat nose & cup points, Noslers, and Swifts..I accuracy tested all of these bullets prior to selling the gun. Most of my testing was done with RL-15...

When you are dealing with dangerous game - class and tradition are only words and not worth a bucket of warm spit - I'll take performance anytime.
Especially when equal performance is now availabe in a shorter, quicker package.

Plus, my experience is that 100 fps doesn't make a heck of a lot of difference with a 400-grain .416 bullet. In fact the original loading of the .416 Rigby was around 2300, not 2400 as has been repeated so many times. Despite that "handicap" it did quite well for itself. I have also shot a few animals with a 400 at 2300 from a Rigby, because that is the load that "regulates" with the fixed open sights on my CZ, and it does quite well on big animals.

So what if a 400-grain TSX can't be loaded to 2400 in the .416 Ruger? It will still work quite well. My guess is that it can be loaded to 2400, with the right powder. But so what if it can't?

Personally, since I started this thread, I'm going to buy and own and shoot and enjoy both.

My "justification" such as it is, will be that the Ruger will be scoped and the CZ 416 Rigby (or a Rigby on an Enfield action if I ever find one) will be iron sights only, set for 400gr at 2300fps.

Can't much counter what MD & Phil have said and I don't think anybody here was "arguing" the efficacy of either cartridge to kill. jorge

Thats the IDEAL solution to any " which gun should I buy?" problem.
Ingwe

That may be the ideal, but since I already have a .416 Rigby and a .416 Remington, one with a classic walnut stock and the other a stainless-barreled synthetic rifle, I think I'll pass on the Ruger. I'm too old to be an idealist anymore!

I have neither, but am old school. The heavier rifle would be an asset to me, not a liability. The lower pressure 416 Rigby appeals for reliability, and extraction. Confidence is as important as any other factor, and really debating effacacy of the two rounds is splitting hairs. Remember that the Rigby was rejected as some new wonderkinde when John and Company first chambered it.

I shoot my 338win at starting loads and in all the game it has downed, only one bullet has been recovered. I agree that 2400 ft/sec is only theoretically better than 2300 ft/sec, indeed Kevin Robertson unequivically states a sectional density nearing .300 traveling no more than 2300 ft/sec will be the most disruptive to organ tissue resulting in massive systemic shutdown and stopping effect. He defends the 2150 ft/sec of the old African cartridges as being better for penetration and thus stopping efficiency. He has shot over 600 cape buffalo, I have shot zero. I'll take his word.

Dang! That means I will have to find someone else to buy a used one from when they get tired of it .

That does it...I'm going to buy another .375 African and have it rebored to .404 Ruger instead... !

Dennis

Mule Deer PM'd me asking for references, and in so doing, I discovered I had misread the Barnes #3 manual online. It states in reference to the 9.3x62,

"In fact, my
current rifle in this caliber, a BRNO ZG 47, now has well in excess
of 600 Cape buffalo to its credit, the majority of which were taken
with solids."

At no time was it stated Mr. Robertson had shot 600 cape buffalo, only that his rifle did. I was not trying to deceive, just not reading clearly enough. My apologies, and thank you Mule Deer

Randy

Dennis, great minds think alike! Welcome to the 404 Ruger band of loonies - stuck in the glories of the past but fascinated by the promise of the future.