Home Forums Hunting & Shooting Express Rifles and Big Bores Only M70 .416 RM

So I hear everyone complaining about the 'portly' barrel contour of Winchester's .375 H&H offerings, is the hole in the barrel enough bigger in the .416s to make them balance better, and give them a weight more in line with what a DGR rifle should weigh?

I can't call the 416RM anything but heavy in a factory Model 70. I've lightened mine a bit (McMillan, new bottom metal, barrel is 21") but it still weighs right at 9 pounds with scope. Losing another half pound would make it much better.........

The classic weight for a .416 Rigby was 9 1/4 lbs and that is what mine (.416 Ruger custom) hits with scope and empty. To me the .40's and above were not designed to be timberline sheep rifles.

Of course the classic Rigby was primarily carried by a gunbearer not a hunter. I've no issue with someone carrying all the gunweight they want, I'd much rather have my rifle at 8 pounds than 9, but I think 8 is going to be a bit tough to manage with my Model 70.

KDK,
My M70 Safari Express (Classic) in .416 Rem. balances and feels very good to me. Much better than the CZ, Ruger Express, and others. I'm not sure exactly what it weighs, but I believe it is just shy of 10lbs with scope. I've carried it at 11,000 ft. elevation elk hunting, and while it does seem to be a bit heavy at the end of the day after climbing up and down, it was never that big of a deal to me. Walking miles in the sand while tracking buff in Africa, I never seemed to notice the weight. It just feels right to me and I shoot it very accurately. I've got the same rifle in .375 H&H, as well as a stainless/synthetic M70 in .375 H&H. They all feel very similar to me, although I will say that the stainless/synthetic is a touch lighter and doesn't seem to balance as nicely, but I think that is mainly due to the stock design. I do understand some people saying they think the barrel on the .375 could be a bit smaller and it makes good sense. However, I think they are, in general, making more of it than they should be. Again, like most gun talk, people can get so wrapped up in the minute details, that it makes others think there is something terribly wrong if you actually have to hunt with a factory contour barrel in .375! Oh my, what will I do?! As long as you don't let it paralyze you, you'll probably go out, shoot it, and find that it works just fine. Those few oz. of weight you might save and the change in balance of 1/4" if you used a lighter barrel contour probably wouldn't be noticed by most people.
Just my 2 cents!

I'll not argue with your premise as I'd be a successful hunter if limited to sharp sticks. However that doesn't mean that I need to capitulate to using sharp sticks just because they would work in my case. In a .416 RM, I can do anything with an eight pound rifle I can do with a ten pounder and be a lot more comfortable and efficient in the process. In a rifle with heavy recoil a little extra weight makes some sense in my experience, but I'd not consider the 416 RM a heavy recoiler. To each his own........

406,
I had no intention of argueing, just giving my own thoughts. If building a custom rifle or putting a new barrel on a factory rifle, then I also would think much harder on what contour barrel to use to reduce weight and make the rifle into something I'd be happier with (weight and balance). However, if debating on whether or not to buy a standard factory rifle with maybe a larger than ideal barrel, I wouldn't get too hung up on it. My point being, it's really not that bad. Could it be better? Sure. Is it something that needs to be "fixed" before using it? For most people, probably not IMO. If you're debating on whether to buy a 375 H&H or a .416 Rem. and you're wondering if the .416 balances better than the .375 in factory form, well, I'd probably have to say the .416 does balance ever so slightly better, but I'd sure be hard pressed to "prove" it, other than to show I could shoot one better than the other. And if I did that, I'd really be picking nits since there are probably a dozen other things besides that that would affect my accuracy, one rifle against the other. Again, no arguement, JMHO.

Last year I built a second 416Rem off a NH M70 to improve upon and replace my older 416. My older "Shoemaker light rifle" M70 416 weighed around 8 1/2 pounds with mounts less scope. My newer version is better balanced, better fit, and weighs approx 7 3/4 pounds with mounts less scope. The scope weighs 6 1/2 ounces and the ammo weighs 6 ounces which brings my new rifle to just over 8 1/2 pounds ready to roll. The difference between my old and new rifle is around 3/4 pounds and that difference is night and day. I like my old rifle, but my newer version is markedly improved and unmistakably better in my hands. It carries like a well balanced sporter 30-06.

In lieu of barrel flutes, I used a 375 contour barrel with a 416 bore, cut it to 22-inches and used a deep protected crown. This gave me built-in weight savings over a 375H&H chambering similar to how the 416Ruger is lighter than the 375Ruger. In addition, some excess metal was removed from the receiver along with the 1-pc steel Williams bottom metal was replaced with a CNC machined 7075-T6 duplicate. Along with a light weight stock, the entire package was brought down to approximately 7 3/4 pounds with NECG barrel sights and QD mounts less scope. I had enough room with the modifications to fine tune for best overall balance.

I tested this new rifle with the fixed NECG sights. Used my sighting board to regulate, placed one fouling sighter at 15yards over the chrono, and then posted at 100yards for a 3-shot group. I'd been pleased to shoot a group this good with the scope, but with fixed sights on a light weight big bore, I don't see how I could ask for more.

By far, a Ruger rifle in the Ruger 375 or 416 chambering is a better route for an out the box rifle if one is looking to be practical. But if one is willing to take the extra steps, the M70 in a traditional chambering can be made equally as light without too much fuss. You could take the 375 Classic and turn the barrel down to minimal specs, remove some excess metal, go to 7075-T6 bottom metal, and use a lightweight stock to end up with a fairly light rifle for the chambering. But again, it would probably be far more practical to go other routes to reach those results if that were a goal.

Best


[/quote]

Docbill, would you mind giving some specs/description on your custom 416 Ruger? I'm about to start just such a project myself. TIA, Jim...................

It is a Rem. 700 action with mag bolt face and a wide drop box by Sunnyhill in steel. It holds 5 down and 1 in the tube. The barrel is a 24" Pac-Nor #3 (about 3 lbs.) with Warne QD rings and the levers have been replaced with 6-32 round head cap screws (I hate the damned levers). All the metal is cerra coated. Scope is at this point a Nikon 1-4 African but if it dies then the backup is a K 2.5x steel tube Weaver. Stock is an MPI fiberglass Dakota 76 bedded to fit the Rem. action. This stock has NO cheek piece and a very open grip. I worked with weighting the stock to get the balance point just under the back edge of the front receiver ring empty and empty it weighs between 9.25 and 9.50 lbs. The front sling swivel is mounted on the very end of the stock rather than on the barrel.

I have shot it some off the bench but haven't really worked with it. My target is about 2,350 with 400 grs. I don't have any need for speed with this thing unless I go to 350 gr. Barnes TSX's or similar. I have thought about that load but haven't taken the time to do any work.

I swear, I'm 63 with a heart condition, weigh 181 lbs. soaking wet and took my 12 lb (with scope and sling not counting ammo) 500 Jeffery Elk hunting last year at 10,500 feet. If I was sheep hunting or mountain goat hunting I could understand the need for a lighter rifle, yes and 12 lbs is extreme, but it's always been my belief that if I keep in shape, and don't add pounds around the belt line, that a couple of extra pounds on the rifle really doesn't matter. I would've taken it on my brown bear hunt, but you folks gave me great advice and told me not to bring a pretty walnut/blued rifle to Alaska. And yes I got an elk, just a cow for meat, but that's what we tend to hunt for since the wife won't let me mount any antlers lol ...



Chuck

Thanks, Gary. Just the kind of info I was looking for.

I have no rifle with a plastic or fiberglass stock. They are ugly, and seen one, seen 'em all. Wood is what gives personality to the arm.

I agree on your choice of elk rifle. If you can do it, why not?

People these days and their fads; all interested in superlight painted (why anyone would use PAINT), firearms. Prolly all could do well with a diet and exercise, and a tablespoon of castor oil a few days before they go out.

Yeah, I'm sure diet and exercise, not to mention cod liver oil, will help a rifle balance better.

KDK, I ran across one of these as well in my area....I was thinking about buying it but the $1,200.00 price tag seems a little high. Is this a high price for one of these rifles. I think it is a super express model with a m8 leupold......Very nice rifle but I don't know anything about the 416....BobinNH keeps telling me I need a 375 H&H but this is the closest thing I can find.....as far as balance and feel was concerned, it felt great to me but I'm used to heavy azzed rifles.....It wasn't too bad though....

I seem to recall that Keith's could get a .375 for just a little less than that, but without a scope, obviously. I would think a .416 would be the same price, but maybe not. I think I would have a hard time spending new money on a used gun with a scope I wouldn't really want. I guess if you could get $200 or so out of the scope it might not be a bad deal.

Thanks KDK.....

You have a point there.

My balance, on the other hand, would undoubtedly improve with diet and exercise...

So is the 416 rem worth thinking about???? I'd think it would kick like a damn mule.....