375 H&H vs. 416 Rigby?

Status
Not open for further replies.

rexelbion

Member
Joined
Mar 2, 2004
Messages
41
Location
Fort Lauderdale, FL.
Looking for some insight on these calibers for a double rifle. I currently have a bolt action .375 and it would be nice to take the same ammo over to Africa, however, the extra knockdown power of the .416 Rigby would be nice in a double rifle. Since most stuff shot with a double would be relatively close, I wouldn't need the accuracy of the .375.

I've never shot the .416 round so any feedback on either of these rounds in a double rifle would be greatly appreciated.

Thanks :confused:
 
If I only had those two choices, it would be the .416 Rigby hands down. They are not that bad to shoot in a 10lb double rifle. If I was doing it I would have a .470 Nitro in a double. To go through all the bother of getting one, make it a good one.
 
I wouldn't have either in a double rifle. For reliable extraction you need a rimmed cartridge. As Kudu said get a .470 nitro.
 
If I were to spend the $$$ on a double rifle, it would be for a rimmed cartridge like the .470 NE. Components and loaded ammo are a bit more available for the .470 than they are for most other NE cartridges, but you're still unlikely to find fodder down at Bubba's Beer, Bait, and Ammo Emporium.

IIRC the .416 Rigby developed a great reputation largely because Rigby provided ammo with good bullets. The Rigby's very large rimless case inspired Weatherby's larger rounds . . . it's a good cartridge for a big bolt action, but rimless cartridges need a more complex extraction mechanism in a double. I'd avoid both the .375 and Rigby in a double.

I've used my .375 on lion, hippo, and a couple of Cape buffalo and have been very happy with the results. Many PH's - men who get FAR more experience in one year than I'll EVER get - like the .375 too.

But if I decided I needed a bigger gun, I'd think real hard about moving up to a .458 Lott bolt action. A 500 grain .458 bullet at around 2300 is nothing to sneeze at. And with the option to use common .458 Win Mag ammo in a pinch, you won't necessarily be in such bad shape if the airlines manage to separate your rifle and ammo in transit.
 
Thanks guys for all the input.

I think we will go with the 470 n.e. now. It seems to make more sense.

BTW, Hank, I definitely agree with you regarding the 458 lott. I recently picked up a CZ 550 in 458 lott and am now a huge proponent of the round.

300 - 600 grain bullets with that kind of muzzle energy puts a huge smile on my face. I had a muzzle brake installed which made the recoil more than managible. :D


Thanks again to everyone.
 
I think the .416 Rigby is a truly superb African round - in a bolt gun. In a double, I agree that a rimmed round has some significant advantages. I agree with the .470 NE, or perhaps even better, a .470 Capstick (which does to the .470 NE what the .458 Lott does to the .458 Win Mag).
 
I agree with the .470 NE, or perhaps even better, a .470 Capstick (which does to the .470 NE what the .458 Lott does to the .458 Win Mag).

Preacherman,

:confused:

The .470 Capstick is a rimless high pressure round. A very poor choice for a double. Same problem as the .416 Rigby.

Oh and just by the way a double does not mean it's inaccurate. My Searcy in .470 is a true 2 to 3" gun at 100 yards.
 
H&H, thanks for the heads-up. The only .470 Capstick I ever saw was one of the test rounds that Peter Capstick himself had made up, way back when. At the time (probably early in the development cycle) he was using a rimmed case, hence my confusion. I didn't discuss further development with him, and so lost track of it. I agree - if it ended up as an unrimmed case, it's not what I'd want in a double.
 
The .470 Capstick was the creation of Art Alphin of the A-Square rifle company, named in honor of his friend Peter Capstick. This was basically a belted H&H case necked up just about as far as possible. Though Capstick used the cartridge on at least one hunt, he had little or nothing to do with its development. It is very different from the .470 NE.

And for the record, despite Art Alphin's claims to have "invented" this cartridge, anyone who takes a look in P.O.Ackley's books will see that necking the H&H up to .470/.475 was done long before, by more than one person. So the guy essentially took credit for others' work.

But of course Art Alphin was no stranger to ethical problems, having been suspended from Safari Club International for ripping off customers. I believe his A-Square company - which specialized in converting 1917 Enfields to pricey large caliber rifles shooting proprietary cartridges - is defunct, too.
 
Just wanted to take a second to qualify my original thread.

When I stated that Accuracy wasn't needed, my original intent wasn't that double rifles were inacurate or that bigger calibers do not need to be as accurate. As a hunter, I am fully aware that bullet placement and accuracy are paramount beyond all other factors. However, if a certain caliber is accurate beyond the specified use of a particular rifle ie. a double at 100 yards, wouldn't it be better to have a bigger caliber that is just as accurate at that same 100 yards?

That is all I meant by my original statement. :p
 
Last edited:
Hank, Peter Capstick did, indeed, try his hand at "improving" the .470 NE, and made up a number of prototype rounds for testing. He was doing this at his home in Cape Town, South Africa, ably assisted in his experimentation (IIRC) by folks like Denis Earp (who is famous for hunting everything, from springbok to elephant, with the same .458 Win Mag rifle! :D ). I don't know anything about A-Square's involvement, but PC was definitely playing around himself - and this was always my understanding of where the name of the round came from. However, I could be wrong.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top