404 jeffery vs 416 Rigby

[grand veneur]

A Mauser action must not be operated hesitantly and gentle. You have to pull the bolt back quickly and with force until it hits the limit, in order to eject the fired cartridge and to ensure a smooth feeding of the next one. My father and grandfather learned this in the German army and passed it on.

 

[Jack Stevens]

404 was born in 1905 (possibly earlier). 375 H&H and 416 Rigby were not developed until after 1910. Therefore 404 Jeffery was not designed to emulate 375 in a standard length action ... because 375 did not exist when 404J was developed. Rigby had proprietary access to the first magnum length Mauser actions from about 1899 until 1912. Rigby exclusively had access to an early Mauser design with longer bolt throw and sloping magazine to handle a popular rimmed double rifle cartridge. Rigby then introduced 416 in 1910 when presumably the sloping magazine was abandoned for conventional. This new magnum action was made available by Mauser to the other London gunmakers (Jeffery and H&H) in 1912. So 404 was designed for standard action Mauser because that's all Jeffery had to work with. Though the magnum length action was eventually available to Jeffery after 1912, the company would be inclined to continue to still use standard action (but not exclusively) for this caliber because it worked well in a standard action and standard actions were more accessible and cheaper. Cheaper production was especially important for govt orders to supply African colonial game control officers.

I'm 100% certain you missed the gist of my post entirely.

 

[Ontario Hunter]

Okay ... I just took my 404 Czech 98 Mauser and Springfield 03A3 out of the closet to test cycle them with dummy rounds and empty cases. Three scenarios: 1) empty case snapped over in chamber is ejected; 2) empty case ejected with following cartridges in magazine [both rails tested]; 3) fully loaded with four dummy rounds and all cycled out. Both rifles cycled so effortlessly that I could not achieve failed ejection or loading no matter how slowly I cycled the bolt. Even the super heavy 404 cartridges still kicked out (but not far). Empty cases went flying. I don't rack either of these guns with terrible force. It's never been neçcessary. Granted, I haven't shot the 404 that much (though I have "dry" cycled dummy rounds thousands of times) but I've been hunting with 03A3 for sixty years. It has only failed to feed once and that was last safari. Still don't know what happened. I carry the gun empty in Africa (don't like the safety and not hunting alone). The gemsbuck bull I was after the day before suddenly appeared unexpectedly. The gun jammed when I tried to rack a round. Clearly not a short stroke as chamber was empty to start the cycle. I drew the bolt back and in the corner of my eye I saw a cartridge eject. Next one loaded fine and I shot the running bull in the neck. I forgot to look for the ejected cartridge. I have tested the gun hundreds of times since and unable to duplicate the failure.

Perhaps some of you shoot calibers and rifles that just don't cycle as smoothly. Perhaps sharp shouldered magnums don't cycle as smoothly? Looking at Weatherby cartridges it is not hard to imagine they would cycle rough. I suspect relative roughness in cycling is more of a cartridge specific issue than a specific rifle make/model issue.

 

[Ontario Hunter]

Okay ... I just took my 404 Czech 98 Mauser and Springfield 03A3 out of the closet to test cycle them with dummy rounds and empty cases. Three scenarios: 1) empty case snapped over in chamber is ejected; 2) empty case ejected with following cartridges in magazine [both rails tested]; 3) fully loaded with four dummy rounds and all cycled out. Both rifles cycled so effortlessly that I could not achieve failed ejection or loading no matter how slowly I cycled the bolt. Even the super heavy 404 cartridges still kicked out (but not far). Empty cases went flying. I don't rack either of these guns with terrible force. It's never been neçcessary. Granted, I haven't shot the 404 that much (though I have "dry" cycled dummy rounds thousands of times) but I've been hunting with 03A3 for sixty years. It has only failed to feed once and that was last safari. Still don't know what happened. I carry the gun with empty chamber in Africa (don't like the safety and not hunting alone). The gemsbuck bull I was after the day before suddenly appeared unexpectedly. The gun jammed when I tried to rack a round. Clearly not a short stroke as chamber was empty to start the cycle. I drew the bolt back and in the corner of my eye I saw a cartridge eject. Next one loaded fine and I shot the running bull in the neck. I forgot to look for the ejected cartridge. I have tested the gun hundreds of times since and unable to duplicate the failure.

Perhaps some of you shoot calibers and rifles that just don't cycle as smoothly. Perhaps sharp shouldered magnums don't cycle as smoothly? Looking at Weatherby cartridges it is not hard to imagine they would cycle rough. I suspect relative roughness in cycling is more of a cartridge specific issue than a specific rifle make/model issue.

 

[Grumpy gumpy]

Grumps, I do not know what they are. Not being smart I am just ignorant to this.

The "c"ring , or "h"ring is the reinforcing ring at the front of the raceway, that the barrel screws against, just in front of the locking lugs, and the cut is where the milling cutter enters to cut the lugs, the original receiver’s had one cut but later ones have two as it makes it easier to get in to cut both sides ready to broach the raceways, the cut on the right is the one that the extractor claw slides in to the back of the barrel to hold and extract the case, it’s really what makes it a controlled round feed.
Gumpy

 

[oscar1975]

I would love a 416 Rigby to complement the 458 Lott and the 375 Holland

Óscar

 

[Ontario Hunter]

The "c"ring , or "h"ring is the reinforcing ring at the front of the raceway, that the barrel screws against, just in front of the locking lugs, and the cut is where the milling cutter enters to cut the lugs, the original receiver’s had one cut but later ones have two as it makes it easier to get in to cut both sides ready to broach the raceways, the cut on the right is the one that the extractor claw slides in to the back of the barrel to hold and extract the case, it’s really what makes it a controlled round feed.
Gumpy

By anything I've been able to find, there's no significant difference. Newer Mausers have H ring simply because it's easier to machine ( = cheaper).

 

[MHYOUNG 375]

416Tanzan said it best. The 416 Rigby can be loaded to equal the 416 WBY. Thus we have a hammer and a rifle that will reach way out there. Recoil will be more than stout though. I reached 2525 fps with my 416 Rigby and a 400 SAF. That was all the recoil I wanted. To me it recoiled more than my 458 WM.

Mark

 

[Grumpy gumpy]

By anything I've been able to find, there's no significant difference. Newer Mausers have H ring simply because it's easier to machine ( = cheaper).

Did you actually read what I posted
Gumpy

 

[Ontario Hunter]

Did you actually read what I posted
Gumpy

Yes. And ...?

 

[Grumpy gumpy]

Yes. And ...?

You basically repeated what I posted without actually knowing what you were saying
I’m starting to understand why people think you are a fool and put you on ignore
Gumpy

 

[Ontario Hunter]

You basically repeated what I posted without actually knowing what you were saying
I’m starting to understand why people think you are a fool and put you on ignore
Gumpy

Not "basically repeated". You implied some importance in identifying the C from H ring. There is no significance and you have never acknowledged it. In fact, I cannot think of a less significant difference in the many design changes of the Mauser rifle during its long history.

Generally, I have found those who use the "ignore" function lacking in maturity. So help yourself. The shoe fits. Obviously.

 

[Grumpy gumpy]

If you were the expert you think you are and actually absorbed the information provided you would know that the “c/h” ring is reinforcing and the barrel screws up against it and that was mentioned in one of my posts, and this importance, which should be obvious is the metal quality from older to new actions, which is, regardless of what you think, rather important
If you weren’t such a self important puerile fool people wouldn’t be annoyed by you constant repeating of how you did things ad nauseam.
And the ignore function is there to help stop people from getting annoyed by diatribe from some, therefore showing restraint from those that who are fed up with it
Gumpy

 

[Ontario Hunter]

Where did you find a source indicating later manufactured Mauser actions with H ring are made of different "quality metal" than C ring actions? Or did you just make that up? Here's the only difference that I have been able to find:

"H-Ring: Introduced around 1950 by manufacturers like FN (Fabrique Nationale) to simplify and speed up production. The ring features two cuts instead of one, creating an "H" shape. This slightly reduced manufacturing costs and time, though it results in a marginally reduced gas-sealing surface area."

"While a full C-ring is historically preferred by custom builders and purists for its supreme strength and gas-handling safety, H-ring actions are highly robust and widely used in factory sporting rifles without issue."

Please provide a source confirming the "metal quality" of H ring actions is inferior to C ring actions. Since you're such a superior expert, this should not be too difficult.

The H design ring "marginally reduces" potential for catastrophic gas escapement which in such an event would be directed mostly into the magazine via the gas ports in the bolt which, I believe, are features of both C and H ring rifles.

Carry on.

 

[Striger]

404 Jeffery for me. Used for 100 years on cape buffalo, it's a short range game stopper. I'd go with that.

 

[Jack Stevens]

404 Jeffery for me. Used for 100 years on cape buffalo, it's a short-range game stopper. I'd go with that.

That's really the key to the .404's field utility.

My Jeff has a very light and compact Leupold fixed 2.5x mounted for now, but arguable even that optic is overkill given the size of the dangerous beasts Jeffrey intended his cartridge to slay. Elephant, rhino, hippo, and buff. ..... Unless you're cursed with the eyesight of Mr. Magoo, inside 75-yds it's iron sights all day on those critters, and you'd have to work pretty hard to miss.

A 400grn/423" slug launching at very moderate velocity from a .375-size rifle .... "Moderate," anyway, as compared with other .400-class DGR calibers.

 

[Ontario Hunter]

That's really the key to the .404's field utility.

My Jeff has a very light and compact Leupold fixed 2.5x mounted for now, but arguable even that optic is overkill given the size of the dangerous beasts Jeffrey intended his cartridge to slay. Elephant, rhino, hippo, and buff. ..... Unless you're cursed with the eyesight of Mr. Magoo, inside 75-yds it's iron sights all day on those critters, and you'd have to work pretty hard to miss.
View attachment 776550
A 400grn/423" slug launching at very moderate velocity from a .375-size rifle .... "Moderate," anyway, as compared with other .400-class DGR calibers.

Nice. What make rifle are we looking at? Hard to tell from the photo.

 

[Dublinpiper90]

That's really the key to the .404's field utility.

My Jeff has a very light and compact Leupold fixed 2.5x mounted for now, but arguable even that optic is overkill given the size of the dangerous beasts Jeffrey intended his cartridge to slay. Elephant, rhino, hippo, and buff. ..... Unless you're cursed with the eyesight of Mr. Magoo, inside 75-yds it's iron sights all day on those critters, and you'd have to work pretty hard to miss.
View attachment 776550
A 400grn/423" slug launching at very moderate velocity from a .375-size rifle .... "Moderate," anyway, as compared with other .400-class DGR calibers.

Nice set up, what is it he make and weight of the rifle?

 

[Jack Stevens]

Nice. What make rifle are we looking at? Hard to tell from the photo.

Nice set up, what is it he make and weight of the rifle?

It's a classic AHR .404 that Wayne Jacobs built on a blue-printed CZ 550 Magnum action about 2011. As shown above with optic, sling, and stock pack, weight is 10.2lbs as I recall. (I'll have to check on that).

Older pics sans the optic and stock pack:

 

[Clodo Ferreira]

Hi Jack,

An ideal 404 J set up!