404 jeffery vs 416 Rigby

[IvW]

the 350gr .416" TSX will pass threw the buffalo from almost any any angle... so will the 400gr, which will make the buffalo more dead? as far as im concerned there is no reason the 400gr .416" TSX or the 300gr .375" TSX should even exist. i can verify this from personal experience on game as well as from talking with Barnes engineers. since you brought up speed, in the case of mono metal bullets the faster you push the bullet, the more reliable it will be. also, when it comes to penetration the faster you push a mono metal bullet the more penetration you will get. you are free to contact Barnes and ask them about this and they will tell you the same thing.

Barnes rep at the DSC show:


i have personally used a 300gr Barnes TSX in my 416 RM to do serious damage to a number of animals and in most cases the bullet passes clean threw. the only time ive recovered a 300gr .416" Barnes was from a chest shot on a blue wildebeest and the bullet was recovered near the tail. i also use a 210gr Barnes TTSX in my 338 WM for long range PG (was very effective in Namibia). the only time the 210gr bullets didnt completely pass threw animals were on two zebra chest shots.

now im not a Barnes fanboy and actually do not recommend them for buffalo. even the 300gr .416" Barnes will likely pass threw on a broad side shot which means there is a risk of hitting a second animal (not many people can afford two buffalo). i much prefer a lead bullet such as the Swift A-frame or the Woodleigh RNSP for buffalo because it will typically be caught by the skin on the off side of the animal. when it comes to standard lead bullets i will always recommend you go with a heavy bullet with a .300+ SD for optimum penetration.

-Matt

Would be interesting to know how many Buffalo this rep has hunted and also how many he has stopped in a charge situation. My guess is 0.

The 400 gr will make the buffalo more dead. It is not only about penetration. If penetration is all that is needed then we would all use monometal solids instead of expanding bullets. You mention your own experience on game, not sure what game you are referring to and how many Cape buffalo are included in that observation.

A heavier bullet in the same caliber will expand more, penetrate better and do more damage on hard tough dangerous game than a lighter one.

The reason people tend to use lighter bullets in the Barnes design, is because they are monometal design and made from only copper, the result is that the bullets are longer than conventional bullets in the same weight and caliber. No where on there website can you find anything about what the rep told you at the show. Especially when it comes to DG.

All I could find is:
When I use TSX Bullets, should I choose a lighter bullet than I’d normally use?
Because Triple-Shock X Bullets retain nearly 100 percent of their original weight and penetrate so deeply, many shooters select a lighter-weight X-Bullet or TSX in place of a heavier conventional bullet. The lighter TSX Bullet delivers higher velocities and a flatter trajectory, and outperforms heavier bullets of conventional design. It also produces less recoil.

Not sure what the "outperforms" pertains to but if it is velocity and flatter trajectory as they state, then this is most certainly true. However what is also true is that both these factors are irrelevant when hunting buffalo with a 416 Rigby and premium grade conventional bullets in the standard 400gr weight even as heavy as 450 gr!

As for your statement regarding "when it comes to penetration the faster you push a mono metal bullet the more penetration you will get"
This is unfortunately not true, it is not even true for monolithic solid bullets never mind expanding ones.

The higher the impact velocity, the greater the resistance. This occurs simply because the tissue of the animal, cannot move away from the bullet fast enough. So as velocity is increased, rapid expansion and wound channels increase in diameter, however penetration may not necessarily be deeper due to increased resistance. Expanding bullets sometimes show less penetration at higher velocity because they encounter more resistance from the body tissue of the animal and due to the altering of their shape as they expand.

Now this makes sense if you think of it logically, more velocity, more expansion, more frontal surface area, more transfer of trauma to the target, therefore less penetration.

After all this, you also mention you would not recommend it for buffalo-well that was the question, so after all we are in agreement then-the 350gr TSX Barnes is not a good idea for Buffalo hunting.

There is another simple safe rule for a dangerous game cartridge which one can apply, use a .400 upwards diameter bullet with a sectional density of minimum .310 at a muzzle velocity of 2200-2400 fps of premium design. That's what I would use anyway.

Thanks for the interesting discussion, it is always interesting to see different points of view on topics.

Good hunting to all.

 

[375 Ruger Fan]

/

Thanks Paul. I agree that they can't be compared on standard loads, but we are not talking about standard loads here. The comparison here is what each cartridge can achieve and handle. If we load them to their full capabilities, and I don't say you should, then it paints a different story. I recently saw that Dzombo is busy designing a 600gr bullet for the .450Rigby. What stops them from developing a 500gr for the .416Rigby? What will the paper values say then? The Rigby certainly has the case capacity to deal with the 500gr, quite comfortably. ( Literally the .450Rigby)
I'm currently in the market for a .470 or .500NE , so that should tell you that I agree that bigger is better.
But by you looking down at the .416Rigby, you stabbing me in the heart man. Even my new pup is called Rigby...
Thanks for your comments Paul!

Marius,

Two years has passed since the quoted post above, was wondering if you ended up with the 470 or 500 NE?

Dave

 

[KMG Hunting Safaris]

Personally, I have witnessed the differnce in effect on Cape Buffalo from a light projectile doing very high velocity. All hunters we have guided on Buffalo, using big bore rifles at conventional velocities, have had their Buff typiclly run 50-70yds before they topple over. In contrary, the Buff would get 10-15 yards with the light, 200gr projectile, running 3200fps. The same result, has been achieved numerous times, so certainly not a one off sample. I believe this is due to the massive hydrostatic shock and temporary wound channel, caused the very high velocity.
I'm not sure that going from, lets say a 400gr to a 350gr in .416 will have the same effect. I think this result is from 3200fps of mono metal expanding bullet, causing absolute devastation on the vital organs. So, its basically a cause of either going all the way on the light weight bullet, or not.
The big boys certainly don't like the high velocity.

 

[KMG Hunting Safaris]

/

Marius,

Two years has passed since the quoted post above, was wondering if you ended up with the 470 or 500 NE?

Dave

Dave, I ended up going with the 500NE, and very pleased that I did. It was a long process in making the decision, but I have zero regrets and absolutely in love with my double rifle.

Always tell my wife that when I slide those two cigars into the 'ole two pipe, it feels like I'm going on a first date again.

 

[colorado]

I'd say next step up is a 450 Rigby. A lovely round as is the 404

 

[enysse]

As for your statement regarding "when it comes to penetration the faster you push a mono metal bullet the more penetration you will get"
This is unfortunately not true, it is not even true for monolithic solid bullets never mind expanding ones.

I beg to differ, if I take my Barnes SOLIDS and run them at high velocity, I'm going to have greater penetration every time. Running them at a lower velocity is not going to get me greater penetration

The only way to over come resistance is with heavy bullet that don't expand too much or change direction on bone or body structure.

The way I understand TSX Barnes bullets is too run them fast!!! You are not going to over expand them, faster is better as long as the grouping is tight.

I own those original Barnes X - bullets and if you run them fast, you get super penetration and deer drop like they were hit with the hammer of Thor!

 

[Rule 303]

IvW,

I will disagree with your comments about mono metals and velocity. Not talking about the expanding Mono's. Take the Woodleigh Hydro's or a flat nosed solid. They both generate a pressure area in front of them. The faster they go- talking bullet velocities not hyper sonic speeds, the greater the pressure area. This pressure area is what actually starts the opening/cutting of the skin. This area then parts the flesh, to a degree and reduces the amount of flesh and skin the bullet actually cuts through.

 

[IvW]

IvW,

I will disagree with your comments about mono metals and velocity. Not talking about the expanding Mono's. Take the Woodleigh Hydro's or a flat nosed solid. They both generate a pressure area in front of them. The faster they go- talking bullet velocities not hyper sonic speeds, the greater the pressure area. This pressure area is what actually starts the opening/cutting of the skin. This area then parts the flesh, to a degree and reduces the amount of flesh and skin the bullet actually cuts through.

I also was under the impression the faster you can shoot a solid the better, however this is not the case.

You are right with your explanation but only to a point. This is called "super cavitation".

Super cavitation is the use of cavitation effects to create a large bubble of gas inside a liquid, allowing an object to travel at great speed through the liquid by being wholly enveloped by the bubble. The cavity (i.e., the bubble) reduces the drag on the object and precisely this makes super cavitation an attractive technology. In super cavitation, the small gas bubbles produced by cavitation expand and combine to form one large, stable, and predictable bubble around the supercavitating object. The bubble is longer than the object, so only the leading edge of the object actually contacts the aqueous medium. The rest of the object is surrounded by low-pressure water vapor. A supercavitating body has extremely low drag, because its skin friction almost disappears. Instead of being encased in water, it is surrounded by the water vapor in the super cavity, which has much lower viscosity and density. A super cavity can also be formed around a specially designed projectile. The key is creating a zone of low pressure around the entire object by carefully shaping the nose and firing the projectile at a sufficiently high velocity. At high velocity, water flows off the edge of the nose with a speed and angle that prevent it from wrapping around the surface of the projectile, producing a low-pressure bubble around the object. With an appropriate nose shape, the entire projectile may reside in a vapor cavity.

However, once you exceed a certain velocity(depending on caliber). For DG cartridges this velocity is about 2400fps, after that they penetrate less. Without getting too technical, the bullet basically starts overtaking the Cavity it creates and penetration is greatly reduced. Lots of info on net.

Let me just say if you have a heavy for caliber bullet(or call it normal for caliber if you like), 400gr for 404 Jeff, 410gr for 416 Rigby, 570gr for 500 Jeff and you are using either a premium bonded bullet or a Meplat monolithic solid you will have all the penetration you need for all the animals you could hunt in Africa.

If the heavy bullet gives you the optimum performance why would we need to change?

Sure you get the lighter bullet higher velocity bullet followers and then you get my type, the old school heavy for caliber at the optimum velocity followers. I will stick to heavy for caliber bullets at 2300FPS in my DG rifles as they have never let me down.

 

[8x68]

I'd say next step up is a 450 Rigby. A lovely round as is the 404

I totally concur as I have both.

 

[1dirthawker]

i think if you hand load there is almost no difference between the two, 404 and 416 rem/rigby.
i am not a traditional sort of guy, but i have to believe that if they have killed hundreds of thousands of dangerous game with bullets traveling between 2050 and 2400, mono or bonded or regular jacketed bullets (depending on application) then i have to believe, they will all work well at said velocities, if applied in the correct spot on the animal.

we gun freaks worry waaaaaay to much about 100 fps, or bullet construction. (assuming good bullets) and maybe forget that shot placement is ultimately the determining factor in a successful outcome.

 

[TTundra]

I think the debate may have been more true many years ago, but today's technology is the great equalizer. New bullets, better powders, better barrels, actions, triggers, etc have made many of these cartridges that are in nearly the 'same' realm, all but equal in performance in most hunting applications.

I went with the 416 Rigby because I like to play with powders and it left me quite a bit of room to experiment both that and bullet availability. I'd gladly take either into the field.

 

[Paul Homsy]

sestoppelman, yer links aren't working.

Paw Print, are you sure about those numbers? I only ask because its hard to believe an extra 25 fps would generate an additional 105 ft/lb of energy and 7.6 ft/lb of recoil using a bullet of equal weight. the Jeffery's bullet is only 0.007 inches wider then the Rigby so I don't see that making a huge difference.

-matt

In calculating recoil with rifles of equal weight. Raw recoil that doesn't include bore diameter nor recoil impulse which isn't as crucial as raw values and can incorporate subjective elements.

The equation I use as a guideline in determining recoil incorporates the following values.

Weight of powder (not its burning rate)
Weight of bullet
Speed of bullet
Weight of firearm.

I am not doing the calculation on this post but I do it regularly on all my firearms, powder weight is very important in determining recoil and is an eye opener to understand why some cartridges achieve the same speed as others in the same caliber using the same projectiles in identical weight firearms but with less recoil. The more powder, the more recoil. For example 300 Win.Mag VS 300 Weatherby. While the Weatherby can achieve higher speeds than the Win. Mag, at equal speeds it has more recoil because it requires on average 10 more grains of powder.

I also verified out of curiosity the Taylor knockout values offered for the 404 and 416 in this thread and they are exact to the decimal. The reason the 404 is showing a value very slightly above the Rigby while going at a slightly slower speed is bore diameter which is integral in calculating TKO values. The larger the bore the higher the value.

The Rigby utilizes on average somewhere in the area of 100 grains of powder while the Jeffery requires an average of 75 to 78 grains of powder to achieve the same speed or similar speeds. It is that difference in powder weight that shows a significant recoil difference.

 

[Rick Hill]

In calculating recoil with rifles of equal weight. Raw recoil that doesn't include bore diameter nor recoil impulse which isn't as crucial as raw values and can incorporate subjective elements.

The equation I use as a guideline in determining recoil incorporates the following values.

Weight of powder (not its burning rate)
Weight of bullet
Speed of bullet
Weight of firearm.

I am not doing the calculation on this post but I do it regularly on all my firearms, powder weight is very important in determining recoil and is an eye opener to understand why some cartridges achieve the same speed as others in the same caliber using the same projectiles in identical weight firearms but with less recoil. The more powder, the more recoil. For example 300 Win.Mag VS 300 Weatherby. While the Weatherby can achieve higher speeds than the Win. Mag, at equal speeds it has more recoil because it requires on average 10 more grains of powder.

I also verified out of curiosity the Taylor knockout values offered for the 404 and 416 in this thread and they are exact to the decimal. The reason the 404 is showing a value very slightly above the Rigby while going at a slightly slower speed is bore diameter which is integral in calculating TKO values. The larger the bore the higher the value.

The Rigby utilizes on average somewhere in the area of 100 grains of powder while the Jeffery requires an average of 75 to 78 grains of powder to achieve the same speed or similar speeds. It is that difference in powder weight that shows a significant recoil difference.

Correct - some one called this the jet effect. But basically the more stuff you throw out in front the more the rifle moves back. I have both the 404J and the 416R in equal weighted rifles with the same stock design and you had better be paying attention when you are shooting the Rigby. The Jeff at 2300 fps is very pleasant to shoot.

Rick

 

[Paul Homsy]

Rick,

Exactly my point. Thank you for your input.

Paul

 

[spike.t]

In calculating recoil with rifles of equal weight. Raw recoil that doesn't include bore diameter nor recoil impulse which isn't as crucial as raw values and can incorporate subjective elements.

The equation I use as a guideline in determining recoil incorporates the following values.

Weight of powder (not its burning rate)
Weight of bullet
Speed of bullet
Weight of firearm.

I am not doing the calculation on this post but I do it regularly on all my firearms, powder weight is very important in determining recoil and is an eye opener to understand why some cartridges achieve the same speed as others in the same caliber using the same projectiles in identical weight firearms but with less recoil. The more powder, the more recoil. For example 300 Win.Mag VS 300 Weatherby. While the Weatherby can achieve higher speeds than the Win. Mag, at equal speeds it has more recoil because it requires on average 10 more grains of powder.

I also verified out of curiosity the Taylor knockout values offered for the 404 and 416 in this thread and they are exact to the decimal. The reason the 404 is showing a value very slightly above the Rigby while going at a slightly slower speed is bore diameter which is integral in calculating TKO values. The larger the bore the higher the value.

The Rigby utilizes on average somewhere in the area of 100 grains of powder while the Jeffery requires an average of 75 to 78 grains of powder to achieve the same speed or similar speeds. It is that difference in powder weight that shows a significant recoil difference.

.....sorry you totally lost me in the first two and a half lines.......

 

[spike.t]

Correct - some one called this the jet effect. But basically the more stuff you throw out in front the more the rifle moves back. I have both the 404J and the 416R in equal weighted rifles with the same stock design and you had better be paying attention when you are shooting the Rigby. The Jeff at 2300 fps is very pleasant to shoot.

Rick

never noticed any real difference between my .404 and @PeteG .416........

 

[Paul Homsy]

To calculate recoil there are elements that are fixed or known such as the four I use. There are a couple of elements which are variables such as the way a particular rifle stock and recoil pad absorb it which I cannot calculate. The bore diameter also gets into play to an extent. The larger bores produce more recoil.

I use a simple formula that strictly includes known values, such as weight of powder, weight of bullet, speed of bullet and weight of firearm. It is accurate but you can obtain a more complete result by going there: http://nucem.se/html/nucem1e.html

The differences between the simplified method I use and the one offered on that page are minor. In the order of 2 to 3 or 4%. The idea is to have a frame of reference, since in general recoil is absorbed differently by each individual.

All elements are included on the page of that link.

 

[Paul Homsy]

Please use the complete link including "calculator.html"

 

[spike.t]

To calculate recoil there are elements that are fixed or known such as the four I use. There are a couple of elements which are variables such as the way a particular rifle stock and recoil pad absorb it which I cannot calculate. The bore diameter also gets into play to an extent. The larger bores produce more recoil.

I use a simple formula that strictly includes known values, such as weight of powder, weight of bullet, speed of bullet and weight of firearm. It is accurate but you can obtain a more complete result by going there: http://nucem.se/html/CTG Calculator.html

The differences between the simplified method I use and the one offered on that page are minor. In the order of 2 to 3 or 4%. The idea is to have a frame of reference, since in general recoil is absorbed differently by each individual.

All elements are included on the page of that link.

hi paul i am not being rude i promise in any of this post , but was sort of taking the mickey (not sure if thats used in usa?..) but all this theory and calculus etc about recoil i really dont get......you can either shoot these calibres or you cant, and sorry but no mathematical jargon is going to help in the slightest.....so just try them if you can, and if you are good with that calibre then go for it...and if not and wanting to hunt DG then go for the .375 thing

 

[Velo Dog]

.....sorry you totally lost me in the first two and a half lines.......

Yeah me too so, I'm planning to sober up one of these days and read it again.