Elephant Guns, ST and Rcl

[Icelander]

When using Douglas Cole's excellent spreadsheet to stat various rounds, the ST and Rcl must usually be assigned by comparsion to similar weapons already statted in one of HANS' publications. For the high-end of shoulder-fired weapons, such heavy hunting rifles as the Greener 8-bore, H&H Double Express, Rigby's Best Quality Double, Winchester 95 and H&H Best Quality Magazine are useful.

The absolute maximum in recoil is provided by the .700 NE, which is ST 15† and Rcl 9 from a 18.8 lbs. Holland and Holland double rifle. Only slightly less ferocious is the .600 NE, which is ST 14† and Rcl 7 from a 16 lbs. double from H&H.

The older 8-bore yields ST 13† and Rcl 7 from a 11.5 lbs. double made by Greener. Also at ST 13† is the A-Square Hannibal in .577 Tyrannosaurus, which has Rcl 8 from the 13.6 lbs. rifle.

Moving down to a .470 NE, we get ST 12† and Rcl 5 from a 14 lbs. H&H double rifle. The .500/450 Magnum Nitro Express gets the same numbers and it is reasonable to assume that the .450 NE and several similar cartridges would be around the same ST and Rcl.

Going down to lighter rifles and cartridges, we get ST 11† and Rcl 5 for both the .405 Win from a Winchester 95 (8 lbs.) and the .375 H&H from a Holland and Holland Best Quality Magazine Rifle (10 lbs.).

Now, however, we come to the anomaly which upsets my mental benchmarking and makes it hard to stat rounds which aren't presented in High-Tech or Pulp Guns. When we move away form H&H as a manufacturer, we find that the Rigby's Best Quality Double in .470 NE suddenly jumps up from the ST 12† it has in a H&H weapon and all the way up to ST 14†. That's quite a jump.

I'll grant that the Rigby weighs only 11 lbs., which is a whole three pounds lighter than the H&H weapons chambered for the same cartridge. It seems reasonable that this difference could affect MinST, because the lighter weapon will kick much harder. But why doesn't that affect Rcl? That remains Rcl 5, instead of going up to Rcl 6 as it should do if the lighter weight of the weapon is making it harder to control.

Also, even if going down by 3 pounds makes the weapon harder to control, should it go up to the same ST 14† as the .600 NE? The much more powerful .577 Tyrannosaurus only gives ST 13† from a 13.6 rifle.

I realise that recoil is more complicated than just calculating foot-pounds per unit of weapon weight, but it is at least instructive to naively examine the numbers before accounting for intangibles.

The 8 lbs. Winchester 95 fires a 300 grain bullet at just over 2,200 fps, which translates into 3,236 ft/lb or 404 ft/lb per pound of weapon weight. The 11 lbs. Rigby fires a 500 grain bullet at 2,150 fps, translating into 5,140 ft/lb or 467 ft/lb per pound of weapon weight. Meanwhile, the 16-lb H&H double rifle chambered in .600 NE fires a 900 grain bullet at 2050 fps, which means 513 ft/lb per pound of weapon weight. And the 13.6 lbs. Hannibal rifle in .577 Tyrannosaurus fires a 750 grain bullet at 2,380 fps, which translates into 753 ft/lb per pound of the rifle.

Obviously, the heavier bullets mean a much greater recoil than these energy figures would indicate, as recoil reflect momentum much more than energy. There exist several methods of calculating the free recoil and recoil velocity, of course.

For example, the .405 Win has 30.6 ft/lb in free recoil energy from a 8 lbs. rifle and the recoil velocity is 15.7 fps. The .470 NE from a 11-lb rifle has a recoil energy of 69.3 ft/lb and a recoil velocity of 20.1 fps. The .600 NE, meanwhile, has a recoil energy of more than 150 ft/lb and recoil velocity of 28 fps from a light 12-lb rifle.

Even correcting for an extra four pounds of weapon weight, it is still kicks significantly more than the .470 NE. As best I can determine, it would be at least 114 ft/lb of free recoil and 21.4 fps recoil velocity.

I don't know the exact recoil energy of the .577 Tyrannosaurus, but it's a lot higher than .470 NE as well. It's around 220 ft/lb, I think, and I'd guess the velocity is pretty high as well, but I'm too lazy to look up the powder charge and suchlike. Guess it's just over 30 fps. In any event, it's reputed to have the highest recoil impulse of any shoulder weapon, but is still only ST 13† from a weapon barely two and a half pounds heavier than the Rigby.

Is the higher MinST caused by any design differences between the Rigby and the Holland and Holland? If it is caused by the weight alone, ought not the Rcl rise to match? How heavy would the Rigby have to be for ST 13† to apply and at what weight does ST 12† start?

[Icelander]

So if I equip someone with a Rigby in my campaign, ought I assume that:

a) The HT: PG2 numbers are right. The Rigby has a design quirk which makes it as hard to control as a weapon weighting 45% more and chambering the .600 NE, even when it's only firing the much less energetic .470 NE. For that matter, it's harder to control than the .577 Tyrannosaurus from a weapon only slightly heavier than the Rigby. Despite this, the Rcl number is not increased, but remains the same as of the .470 NE from any other weapon.

b) There is a typo in the HT: PG2 Rcl number. As above, the Rigby is poorly designed, but in addition to affecting the ST number and making it equivalent to much heavier calibers, the Rcl number was supposed to be 6 or 7.

c) There is a typo in the HT: PG2 ST number. The ST of the Rigby in .470 NE was meant to be the same ST 12† as a Holland and Holland rifle has when chambering that round.

d) There is a typo in both the ST and Rcl numbers in HT: PG2. The shorter, lighter Rigby was meant to increase ST relative to the heavier H&H rifle when chambering the same round. It was also meant to increase Rcl. The ST is supposed to be 13† and the Rcl 6.

Which of these is it?

[johndallman]

Don't know, but I'm interested in the answer too.


I had no trouble accepting Rcl 7 for the elephant gun a character of mine uses. That started with the PG2 Mannlicher-Schönauer Grosswildbüchse, in 12.7x70mmRB Schüler. A bit of research located the W Jeffery & Sons Commercial Mauser in .500 Jeffery (same cartridge), and raising the price made Acc 5 plausible. That does 5dx2 in a 10lb rifle, which made the Rcl quite plausible.

[Icelander]

Originally Posted by johndallman

Don't know, but I'm interested in the answer too.


I had no trouble accepting Rcl 7 for the elephant gun a character of mine uses. That started with the PG2 Mannlicher-Schönauer Grosswildbüchse, in 12.7x70mmRB Schüler. A bit of research located the W Jeffery & Sons Commercial Mauser in .500 Jeffery (same cartridge), and raising the price made Acc 5 plausible. That does 5dx2 in a 10lb rifle, which made the Rcl quite plausible.

The .500 Jeffery/12.7x70mm Schuler from the 11-lb Mannlicher-Schonauer Grosswildbusche is actually a good example of how the ST 14† seems excessive for a rifle chambered in .470 NE.

Consider, the empty weight of these rifles is exactly equal, but the Mannlicher is chambering a much more powerful round. Yet the Rigby has a MinST two points higher.

Can that be justified by some quirk of the Rigby? Or is it simply a typo?

[Green-Neck]

Whilst I've been surprised at the granularity of some stated guns, there are ocasionally numbers that seem more inconsistent than granular.

It does seem to me that 14 ST for a Rigby double rifle in .475 NE is higher than expected. I would be tempted to house rule it 12, unless you hear from Hans or other forum experts.

I'm also a little suprised it does not have bulk -5, as break action rifles are usually noticably shorter and more manouverable.

[Sam Cade]

Originally Posted by Icelander

Can that be justified by some quirk of the Rigby?

No. It is a pretty standard boxlock. Actionwise it isn't any different than untold millions of double barreled shotguns.

[Icelander]

Originally Posted by Green-Neck

Whilst I've been surprised at the granularity of some stated guns, there are ocasionally numbers that seem more inconsistent than granular.

It does seem to me that 14 ST for a Rigby double rifle in .475 NE is higher than expected. I would be tempted to house rule it 12, unless you hear from Hans or other forum experts.

It might be that no house-rule is needed. It could be errata, if it's just a typo.

Originally Posted by Green-Neck

I'm also a little suprised it does not have bulk -5, as break action rifles are usually noticably shorter and more manouverable.

It's fairly short, at 24" to 26" or so, but it is also heavy and bulky. I'd expect it to be on a breakpoint.

On the other hand, the H&H is Bulk -7, so the lighter Rigby has reduced Bulk compared to it.

[Kalzazz]

I would love to see a 2 bore if you ever wind up statting such a beasty

[Icelander]

Originally Posted by Sam Cade

No. It is a pretty standard boxlock. Actionwise it isn't any different than untold millions of double barreled shotguns.

So on your opinion, it's more likely to be a typo than anything else?

[Sam Cade]

Originally Posted by Icelander

So on your opinion, it's more likely to be a typo than anything else?

I'd guess so.