My New (to me) CZ in .416 Rigby

[sestoppelman]

To each his own of course. I prefer the 2 position safety any day because thats what I am most used to. The trigger is fully adjustable by the owner and it can made to be very nice without much fuss like Code4 says.

If you like a shorter barrel great but I have always been suspect of this idea that an inch or two of barrel will somehow get a guy all tangled up in the thorns quicker than an inch or 2 less of barrel. But then I prefer the look and feel of at least 24 inches of barrel. Others like 20 inches. 22" is about the least I can abide on a bolt gun. Have fun Phil!

 

[Rohan]

This is the type of stock I had on the .375 no doubt, I recognised it immediately, but there is one major difference, there was no cheek-piece, no raised cheek-piece, the stock I had was exactly the same in colour and patterning etc but where the cheek-piece on your rifle is...mine was flat(no cheek-piece at all) and straight with no real drop in the comb like the 'hogback' euro designs. Had a look at the link, the stock was definitely the "Fancy Grade" type.

Anyway, its a beautiful rifle you have there, and the .416 Rigby=lots of trophies! Over the years I lost my appreciation for CZ for personal reasons but im realising more and more that they're one of the most versatile, rugged, and classy weapons around.

Enjoy the hunting!

Rohan,

Go to this link: CZ-USA -> CZ 550 American Safari Magnum

You'll see a drop down menu for calibers and stocks that you can cycle through for various calibers and stock combinations. This was something I hadn't done in awhile until I read your thread. I believe what I've got here is definitely the "Fancy Grade" stock. And I don't think the seller realized this when he sold it to me, don't ask me why.....:whistling:

 

[PHOENIX PHIL]

To each his own of course. I prefer the 2 position safety any day because thats what I am most used to. The trigger is fully adjustable by the owner and it can made to be very nice without much fuss like Code4 says.

If you like a shorter barrel great but I have always been suspect of this idea that an inch or two of barrel will somehow get a guy all tangled up in the thorns quicker than an inch or 2 less of barrel. But then I prefer the look and feel of at least 24 inches of barrel. Others like 20 inches. 22" is about the least I can abide on a bolt gun. Have fun Phil!

Yeah, 22" is about as short as I think I'd go myself. Any shorter than that and I think it might get to easy to whirl around, i.e., feel to light. Did you have a look at my last post on the first page? I put some pics in there I'd like you to take a look at.

 

[sestoppelman]

Phil,, All that steel in there is normal for a big CZ or BRNO gun. Its a good system and strong. I am a big believer in glass bedding though even with all that steel. Its no big deal, I have bedded probably two dozen rifles by now maybe more and accuracy and peace of mind always improve. You already have the stock crossbolts so thats a big plus. Its gonna be a dandy!

 

[35bore]

would leave that beauty just the way it is. I owned one in 416 Rigby as well and it shot under 1 inch groups right out of the box. I did take a friends advise (a gunsmith friend) and let him glassbed it, it was not nessesary but, as sestoppelman said if you are an accuracy nut like me, and obviously him as well, the glass bedding did make a difference. I was able to stack 3 400gr factory loaded Federal Cape Shok right on top of each other at 100 yrds. That's no BS either, center to center was 5/8", I could not believe it, neither could my business partner. As far as the barrel length, you would have to be in some pretty thick shit for that extra 2" of barrel to make a difference, in which case I think the scope, the sling and other things would be more of a hinderance.

 

[sestoppelman]

would leave that beauty just the way it is. I owned one in 416 Rigby as well and it shot under 1 inch groups right out of the box. I did take a friends advise (a gunsmith friend) and let him glassbed it, it was not nessesary but, as sestoppelman said if you are an accuracy nut like me, and obviously him as well, the glass bedding did make a difference. I was able to stack 3 400gr factory loaded Federal Cape Shok right on top of each other at 100 yrds. That's no BS either, center to center was 5/8", I could not believe it, neither could my business partner. As far as the barrel length, you would have to be in some pretty thick shit for that extra 2" of barrel to make a difference, in which case I think the scope, the sling and other things would be more of a hinderance.

Agree all the way. Your post made me laugh. When I worked in shipyards and boatyards, the standard preface for any story told by in particular, welders.. Was always "No really, this is no BS!" And I dont find it hard to believe at all as I have done similar with big bore rifles, in particular my .375. My .404 CZ will put 4 or 5 into an inch which aint too shabby. Big bores will shoot if you can handle them.

 

[PHOENIX PHIL]

would leave that beauty just the way it is. I owned one in 416 Rigby as well and it shot under 1 inch groups right out of the box. I did take a friends advise (a gunsmith friend) and let him glassbed it, it was not nessesary but, as sestoppelman said if you are an accuracy nut like me, and obviously him as well, the glass bedding did make a difference. I was able to stack 3 400gr factory loaded Federal Cape Shok right on top of each other at 100 yrds. That's no BS either, center to center was 5/8", I could not believe it, neither could my business partner. As far as the barrel length, you would have to be in some pretty thick shit for that extra 2" of barrel to make a difference, in which case I think the scope, the sling and other things would be more of a hinderance.

Oh I believe you 35bore, my .375 is the most accurate rifle I own. I wasn't very clear about why I was wanting a shorter barrel, it's not so much about getting a longer barrel hung up in the brush. It's more about being in the thick stuff with a wounded and pissed off buff who makes his intentions of stomping you when in extremely close proximity. At times like this having a rifle that you can swing around a bit quicker could be of great value.

 

[Mike70560]

Well I was planning on sending it to American Hunting Rifles to do one of their upgrades, most likely the #2. This involves replacing the trigger I believe with a Timney. But it also involves replacing the front sight. This requires cutting the barrel which I'd like to do anyway. The CZ barrel length is 25" which is longer than I care for. So I need to decide on a length to cut it to.

Phil,

You will not regret spending the money on the AHR upgrade. The trigger alone is worth it and the bedding job is excellent. He also changes the recoil lug on the barrel along with a lot of other little touches. And Wayne is a good guy to boot. 22" would be just about right for barrel length.

That is a far better looking stock than mine. Very nice rifle in a fine caliber, congratulations.

 

[Second Wind]

Phil , at last you are "well armed"

I assume you plan to hand load for your new "baby"

If you are, you now have maybe the most versatile rifle around

If you recall my "experiment" wait <shudder> the 550 action is, to say the least "robust"

if you will gently work up to about 58-60,000 psi in the chamber, not really not that much more than some standard US magnums, you can get 6,115 ft lbs at the muzzle!

Honk on that Mr. Buf!

Other than a bit of unpleasantness on the recoil end and a bit of a fireball at the muzzle, really quite compelling

enjoy

wise choice and a beautiful rifle, congrats

Jim

 

[spike.t]

i havent read all the posts, but from the heading i presume this is about the .416 rigby, so not sure why so much about the .375? i have had the pleasure (privilege) of owning 4 different rigby .416 rifles built by paul prior to him selling the company to an american. 3 had 22inch barrels with qd scopes, and 1 had a 21 inch with only iron sites. i still have the last 1 i bought (22 and qd scope, which is my favourite barrel length). i have a couple of cz rifles in smaller cals and they are very good. the .416 rigby in its original loading , along with a lot of other english calibres have worked perfectly for 100 years plus in some instances, so i cant understand this fetish that a lot of people from the US of A seem to have with wanting to hand load them to velocities far exceeding their original specs. above there is written about the recoil and fireball!!!! i really dont think they are needed, as i have found using bog standard factory loads that 1 shot is adequate for buff.

 

[PHOENIX PHIL]

Yes, I'll be handloading for my newest rifle. I was at DSC last week when my dies arrived. I'm still waiting on rings which should be here on Monday. While at DSC I picked up some 400gr Northfork soft points and some Swift A-Frames in the same weight. It's been a busy week at work but I should be in the garage tomorrow afternoon getting some loads ready.

No doubt the .416 Rigby can be loaded up to Weatherby velocities, but you won't find me doing that. I'm targeting for the most accurate round that is somewhere in the vicinity of 2400 fps. If that's 2300 or 2500, I don't care. Accuracy is more important to me.

 

[Second Wind]

well, I am relieved to learn it's a "fetish"

I think I can probably work with that!

Spike, I am afraid to ask, but will anyway, what your thoughts on something like the 416 Wby might be since ballistically, that is a little above what we are talking about here with this load.

Where is the problem my friend? 100 years ago, when the 416 Rigby was developed, the powders and bullets were substantially different that what we use today, hence the massive case volume, which we now put to good use with modern propellants.

Yeah, I know you think us Yanks at times a little off and to analogize I will use this example:

When Carroll took that tonky little AC Bristol and dumped that 427 side oiler Ford under the hood, America gave the World the best sports car ever built. When I take a fine old cartridge like the 416 Rigby and lean on the powder can, same same

Just remember this, There is always room for Jello and more power!

 

[sestoppelman]

I agree with the point that spike.t makes which is if worked fine 100 years ago, it will of course work just fine today as well. I have said the same thing myself. I feel the same about my .404 Jeffery but do like running the bullets a little faster than original specs but I have not tried to maximize the round which could make it the equal of a .416 Rigby factory load at 2400fps/400gr or even surpass it. My loads run around 2250fps which is plenty. I dont have any problem with hot-rodding just for fun however as long as its done safely. Getting the maximum safe velocity is usually the goal of handloading along with accuracy. Phil will have fun with his new best friend!

 

[spike.t]

hi second wind glad you are relieved! the car analogy is interesting, but maybe not the best. dont get me wrong i like big engines in cars. i have a merc amg clk black series with a 6.2 litre v8 and approx 540bhp to prove the point. i just dont see the point in running up velocities in calibres that are going to be used at distances of 150 yards and mostly a lot less. all that is being done is increasing the chances of bullet deflection by even the smallest obstacle, and increasing the recoil. i had a chuckle to myself about your weatherby question. sounds like you already know my answer! i have never fired a weatherby rifle let alone one of their calibres, and i have no desire at all to. i think the .300 is great for long distance mountain type shooting, but the rest i think are mostley over boosted calibres that from hearing other peoples experiences seem to be more painful for the shooter . i have been out with a friend whose client had turned up with a .340 and nothing else for a buff hunt. he let him use it and it was a one shot kill, but even that .340 looked nasty to shoot. also we have all heard how most phs really dont like it when a client opens his gun case and pulls out a weatherby! i can understand as sesstopplman says if you want to crank it up for targets and have a bit of fun to see what it will do, but i say leave it as was for hunting . the .416 rigby was and still is a very versatile cartridge as originally loaded so i dont see the point of trying to fix it if it aint broken. i know a lot of people will disagree with me , but thats what makes these chats more interesting!

 

[Second Wind]

Ok I am just going to fix this and bring this to a conclusion at last, once you get my final word there is nothing left to say:

The 416 Rgby was born 100 years ago in the era of cordite and bullets of inferior design and construction when compared with those available today, So:

With a case capacity of the Rigby and modern, premium bullets, we have some room to work;

Considering only the 400 grain projectiles we have a realistic operating range of between 2200 fps and about 2750 fps and those are the extremes

Rifle tubes are like women, all a bit different and react to variables in their own special way.

So to do it right, you start at just above one extreme and begin working toward the other and at some point you will find that certain "sweet" spot, now again, you may have to adjust some other things like brand of bullet or powder but eventually you will get there and that's the combination that you have when you hear guys talk about there "pet" 'favorite" or "best" rifle. It all has to do with the combination.

My CZ likes the A-Frame right at 2400 while the Ruger is in love with the Nosler at around 2550. So that's what they get fed and they do not share with each other.

I do not know what this is and do not really care.

And to further prove my genius, I have a 375 that will eat anything, it just doesn't care. Factory, handload it seems to care less just as long as it is sort of close to a .375 it runs the same....go figure.

Phil will find the "spot" for his new baby as well

The 416 Rigby came out of the box 100 years ago pushing a 400 grain bullet that you wouldn't use as a fishing weight today with cordite at 2400 fps and if you feel that you need to replicate that exactly my only question is "Why?" To lash yourself to history while ignoring all form of technological advancement seems , well odd.

Ask yourself then this: If the 416 RIGBY was making its original debut at the SHOT show this year, based upon current component availability, what do you think its performance parameters would be?

Okay, we can move on now

Your 'Mego

SW