First, understand that 30 years of competitive baseball has trashed my right shoulder. It is arthritic to the point my orthopedist has told me I need a full replacement sooner rather than later, and there’s not much else to be done. So, while I was never bothered by recoil as a younger man, it does bother me now. Also, many years of hunting and shooting as a young man without ear protection has done a number on my hearing, and I want to keep what little I have. So, I plan on having the barrel threaded and installing a suppressor with a brake. There are a few options for big bore calibers that will accommodate a .416.
I know many purists hate the look of a suppressor and I respect everyone’s point of view and opinions, but I have always been a function before form, substance before style, kind of guy. I’m not bothered by the look. I also find it somewhat confusing that hunters that insist that a 3-position safety and control feed action are absolute minimum requirements for dangerous game don’t give allowance for how much quicker and more accurately a hunter can administer follow up shots with a good suppressor/brake system. The .416 Taylor recoils about 10lbs less than the Rigby but is still around 50lbs of recoil. A good suppressor/brake system can reduce this by over 60%, resulting in a suppressed and braked .416 Taylor recoiling like a .308 Win. Also, much, much quieter than open muzzle.
I plan to take the barrel down from 23” to 21” and use a suppressor/brake around 8”, so 29” barrel length, but on a short action rifle, still just about 48” overall. That’s only an inch and half longer than my .300 Weatherby. Losing 2” of barrel saves about 6oz, so total weight gain with suppressor/brake is about 6oz. I think the tradeoff in greatly reduced recoil and report, as well as improved accuracy and quickness on follow ups, is worth the tradeoff in length and weight. At least for me.
OR, I could sell the .416 Taylor and buy a .416 Ruger Guide Gun with a 20” barrel which is already threaded. Doesn’t solve my scarce ammo situation, but really no worse than with the Taylor.
I know many purists hate the look of a suppressor and I respect everyone’s point of view and opinions, but I have always been a function before form, substance before style, kind of guy. I’m not bothered by the look. I also find it somewhat confusing that hunters that insist that a 3-position safety and control feed action are absolute minimum requirements for dangerous game don’t give allowance for how much quicker and more accurately a hunter can administer follow up shots with a good suppressor/brake system. The .416 Taylor recoils about 10lbs less than the Rigby but is still around 50lbs of recoil. A good suppressor/brake system can reduce this by over 60%, resulting in a suppressed and braked .416 Taylor recoiling like a .308 Win. Also, much, much quieter than open muzzle.
I plan to take the barrel down from 23” to 21” and use a suppressor/brake around 8”, so 29” barrel length, but on a short action rifle, still just about 48” overall. That’s only an inch and half longer than my .300 Weatherby. Losing 2” of barrel saves about 6oz, so total weight gain with suppressor/brake is about 6oz. I think the tradeoff in greatly reduced recoil and report, as well as improved accuracy and quickness on follow ups, is worth the tradeoff in length and weight. At least for me.
OR, I could sell the .416 Taylor and buy a .416 Ruger Guide Gun with a 20” barrel which is already threaded. Doesn’t solve my scarce ammo situation, but really no worse than with the Taylor.