Home | Ezine | Forums | Links | Contact
NitroExpress.com: New Steel vs Old steel

View recent messages : 24 hours | 48 hours | 7 days | 14 days | 30 days | 60 days | More Smilies


*** Enjoy NitroExpress.com? Participate and join in. ***
You are not logged in. [Login] Main Index · Search · Active Topics
New user · Who's Online · FAQ · Calendar

Double Rifles, Single Shots & Combinations >> Double Rifles
Previous topic Previous   View all topics Index   Next topic Next   Threaded Mode Threaded  

Pages: 1 | 2 | (show all)
Chasseur
.375 member


Reged: 18/11/03
Posts: 771
Loc: Hunting classic Indian game!
Re: New Steel vs Old steel [Re: CptCurl]
      #79319 - 24/05/07 12:27 PM

I'm thinking of a certain 280 that I know...

--------------------
In regards to action he should devote himself to hunting...
-Machiavelli



Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
400NitroExpress
.400 member


Reged: 26/11/03
Posts: 1154
Loc: Lone Star State
Re: New Steel vs Old steel [Re: bonanza]
      #79323 - 24/05/07 06:01 PM

Quote:

We have gone off topic.



Not at all. The crux of the question was "Would not the quality of todays metals allow for lighter doubles with similar or better strength?"

The question is based on the premise that nitro DR weights have somehow heretofor been governed by the strength of the steels available, which isn't true. Modern fluid steels permitted making them lighter than anyone has ever wanted them 100 years ago. Weights have been governed by other factors, as Marrakai pointed out above, which make just as much sense today as they did then.

If you want to know why they haven't been built lighter, and probably won't be in the future, then the real answer to the question is "Why would you want to?"

--------------------
"Serious rifles have two barrels, everything else just burns gunpowder."

Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
400NitroExpress
.400 member


Reged: 26/11/03
Posts: 1154
Loc: Lone Star State
Re: New Steel vs Old steel [Re: Will]
      #79324 - 24/05/07 06:15 PM

Quote:

Whew! Talk about prejudices!



Well, yeah, I always knew you were prejudiced against double rifles, Bill (I know, the double triggers DO defeat a handful of people), and I appreciate the candor, but there's really no need to observe the obvious.

Quote:

The end of the barrels on the Chapuis 9.3x74R are thin where most of the weight reduction comes from. Though I'm not up to stuff on my cylinder stress calculations, it is not far-fetched that the barrels on a 470 or whatver could be just as thin, from a strength standpoint.



Of course they can, and it isn't far fetched at all. In fact, it's been done for a loooong time. The Chapuis barrels ARE thin. I measured two at DRSS last January. Min wall went .078" and .079". A good friend's 1928 vintage Holland .465 measures .086". That rifle weighs 10 lbs, 12 oz. The owner is 75, and just got back from 25 hunting days in Bots with it, where he got a 70 pounder. Loves the rifle and was thrilled with how well it worked out for him.

Quote:

The pressure of a 470 and a 9.3x74R are no different



They're quite different, but...

Quote:

so why not have a lightweight 470 or 450/400? If one can take the recoil abuse, why not?



Look at it realistically. For makers like Heym, Merkel, Chapuis, etc., why should they shoulder the cost of setting up to build a 9 lb .470 that will appeal only to a handful of tools who want to be crash test dummies? They can't afford such nonsense and still keep their prices within their market niche. Most Heym .470s come in at 10 lbs, with the Merkels at 10.5 or so. Look at how many of those end up with a pound of mercury up their butts. The makers know that, and realize that it's a pretty good indicator that they're already pushing it as it is.

Why give a .400 the extra recoil and recovery time of a .470 by building it underweight? Likewise, why turn a .470 into a .500 in every sense except power?

Quote:

I guess everyone is different but the 410 double shotgun feel to the 7.3 lb. Chapuis 9.3x74R can hardly be compared to a 10+ pound 470.



Who made such a comparison?

Quote:

Even John Taylor several times said to the effect that doubles were obese.



Untrue. In fact, Taylor wisely pointed out that it was a mistake to build them too light.

Quote:

(this should get 400 NE going!).



Come now William, we both know that if a pound of gun weight makes that much difference to you at the end of the day, you're either too old for the activity, or you just need to get in better shape.

Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
Will
.333 member


Reged: 04/02/03
Posts: 303
Loc: Kansas
Re: New Steel vs Old steel [Re: 400NitroExpress]
      #79340 - 25/05/07 12:33 AM

400NE,

Guilty as charged. But even 20 years ago, when I took a 375 Mod. 70 on my first safari, I hated that overweight club almost as much as I do now!

I guess I want a custom lightweight 470 at the mass-produced price!

I'll keep looking, and in the meantime, risk life and limb using the 7.3 lb. Chapuis 9.3x74R.

--------------------
_________________________________________________
Bill Stewart

Once you have been amongst them, there is no such thing as too much gun.

Edited by Will (25/05/07 12:34 AM)

Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
400NitroExpress
.400 member


Reged: 26/11/03
Posts: 1154
Loc: Lone Star State
Re: New Steel vs Old steel [Re: CptCurl]
      #79342 - 25/05/07 01:11 AM

Quote:

The Brits followed one line of reasoning when it comes to weight and balance. Often we see the Continentals with another line of reasoning.



Yes, the Brits placed high value on "weight between the hands" while the Teutonic makers placed great weight on slimness above all with little regard for weight distribution and handling dynamics. Their respective formulas were fully evolved over a century ago, and are still in place today. Nobody who knows the market, then or now, would realistically want to argue that it wasn't the British formula that won the hearts and minds.

Quote:

In my opinion a 10 lb. .303 Brit. is WAY over weight, yet it is common in the British trade. As a comparison we see zillions of 7.5 to 8.0 lb. 8mm rifles out of Germany and Austria. Say what you want, but I'll prefer the light 8mm's. I think they are just perfect in their class, and the Brits never got the concept.



Neither an accurate nor a well informed comparison. Sure, you can find 10 lb .303s out there, but they're certainly not the rule. Westley has an old one for sale right now thats 9 lbs with the scope, so will be under 8 without.

The British .303s were the first full nitro doubles, and were being built at a time when almost no other smokeless rounds were being built in doubles. This was also a period (1887-1899) when a full appreciation for the strength of modern fluid steels was still evolving, so some were built heavier than needed. What isn't well known today is that a substantial majority of the .303 doubles still in circulation today are from that early period, because the manufacture of new .303 doubles slowed to a tiny trickle after the .303 was banned in India in 1899.

Quote:

I see no reason why a .450/.400 can't be handy at 9.0 lbs. It doesn't kick that much. We see many bolt guns in .375 H&H Mag that weigh 8.5 lbs. and don't take issue with them.



I do.

Quote:

In summary, the 10.0 lb and up standard of British DR's is a mystery to me.



That's because it didn't exist. There are lots of mediums and small bores that weigh substantially less.

--------------------
"Serious rifles have two barrels, everything else just burns gunpowder."

Edited by 400NitroExpress (25/05/07 01:54 AM)

Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
bonanza
.400 member


Reged: 17/05/04
Posts: 2335
Loc: South Carolina
Re: New Steel vs Old steel [Re: 400NitroExpress]
      #79347 - 25/05/07 03:26 AM

The Holland & Holland I just bought was a .303 at 8 Lbs 10 ounces. That is a tad high for the amount of recoil, bit gives the rifle a good heft. Now that it is a 35 WCF, The weight to recoil ratio is spot on for me.

Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
mehulkamdar
.416 member


Reged: 09/01/04
Posts: 3688
Loc: State of Ill-Annoy USA.
Re: New Steel vs Old steel [Re: Will]
      #79350 - 25/05/07 07:07 AM

Bill,

As someone who hates recoil, I always manage to put myself off buying anything that kicks much harder than the guns I own and my hat's off to people like you who can shoot hard recoiling guns with ease. I do think, though, that you must accept that not everyone could do this, just like not everyone could run the four minute mile.

Of course, these differences in taste are what keep discussions like this one extremely interesting especially when such a wide variety of tastes and preferences comes into play.

Good hunting, everyone!

--------------------
The Ark was made by amateurs. Experts built the Titanic.

Mehul Kamdar

Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
Will
.333 member


Reged: 04/02/03
Posts: 303
Loc: Kansas
Re: New Steel vs Old steel [Re: mehulkamdar]
      #79353 - 25/05/07 08:30 AM

Mehul,

It is not that I can tolerate recoil. I really do not like it one bit. But I limit it at the range to 5 or 6 rounds from the 8.7 lb. Lott and about the same from the 9.6 lb. 470, and that is off-hand.

But when hunting one carries them a lot more than shooting them. Who was that said recoil last a second but gravity goes on forever? And of course one doesn't perceive much recoil when shooting game. And I am either going to hit whatever I'm hunting or not, and shooting 500 rounds at the range isn't going to change that.

Different strokes I guess.

--------------------
_________________________________________________
Bill Stewart

Once you have been amongst them, there is no such thing as too much gun.

Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
hoppdoc
.400 member


Reged: 02/03/06
Posts: 1791
Loc: Southeastern USA
Re: New Steel vs Old steel [Re: 400NitroExpress]
      #79364 - 25/05/07 10:27 AM

Each to his own.

The recoil of a 9 pound 450/400 shooting a 400gr bullet at 2150 is 50 ft pounds at 18 fps(?felt more as a heavy push).With a 10 pnd gun (scope added)this falls to 40pnds.Should this be a problem for most big bore shooters at the moment of truth? My 500NE at 10.25 pnds generates 85 ft pnds at 23 ft/sec and it seems quite managable.

If a Double gun with stronger modern steels could tolerate a diet of hotter loads safely a 450/400 with a 400gr at 2250 the recoil would increase back to 50 pnds with a scoped 10 pound gun and make the gun more flexible at distance.Compare that to a 10 pound 416 Rigby bolt with a 400 @ 2400-60 ft pounds at 19fps.

The sad fact is that when we go to africa we are not going to shoot our rifles as much as earlier hunters.Again I am ignorant about Doubles but feel that a 450/400 9 pound Double that swings and points great would be a joy to hunt with.Indeed I wouldn't mind a quick pointing 8.5 pound quality rifle!!

--------------------
An armed man is a citizen of his country, an unarmed man just a subject.

Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
Pages: 1 | 2 | (show all)


Previous topic Previous   View all topics Index   Next topic Next   Threaded Mode Threaded  

Extra information
0 registered and 671 anonymous users are browsing this forum.

Moderator:  CptCurl 

Print Topic

Forum Permissions
      You cannot start new topics
      You cannot reply to topics
      HTML is disabled
      UBBCode is enabled

Rating:
Topic views: 7578

Rate this topic

Jump to

Contact Us NitroExpress.com

Powered by UBB.threads™ 6.5.5


Home | Ezine | Forums | Links | Contact


Copyright 2003 to 2011 - all rights reserved