Cumbrian 1
Well-Known Member
Has anybody had much experience with this round? How did it perform, what was the recoil like?
.425 Westley Richards
- Thread starter Cumbrian 1
- Start date
Heym SR20
Well-Known Member
No I haven't, but according to "safari rifles" its shooting a 410 gn bullet at 2,350 for an energy of 5,010 ft lbs. About the same as the 416 Rigby which shoots a 410 gn bullet at 2,370 fps for 5,115 ft lbs of energy. I have shot a 416 Rigby by Rigby and it gave a healthy shove but not painful. To be honest probably no worse than a reasonably light shotgun with a magnum cartridge. A lot will depend on a) weight of the rifle and b) stock fit, but imagine given identical rifles you would struggle to tell the difference. Also shot the the 375 H&H, both Sako and BRNO and from memory, yes its a step up in terms of recoil, but not that much of a step up.
The .425 WR is an on odd looking cartridge. When it was introduced 100 odd years ago, Rigby had an exclusive right to the Magnum mauser. WR wanted a cartridge of the same sort of volume as the 416 Rigby and other big bores that would fit into a standard length Mauser action and that would fit the standard .467 bolt face as per 30-06, 7mm Mauser and more modern 243, 270 etc. The result was a fat case of the same sort of size as the 416 Rigby but with a rebated face to fit the standard bolt.
Kynoch Ammunition still make this round - Kynoch .425 Westley Richards - so getting ammo should n't be to much of an issue.
The .425 WR is an on odd looking cartridge. When it was introduced 100 odd years ago, Rigby had an exclusive right to the Magnum mauser. WR wanted a cartridge of the same sort of volume as the 416 Rigby and other big bores that would fit into a standard length Mauser action and that would fit the standard .467 bolt face as per 30-06, 7mm Mauser and more modern 243, 270 etc. The result was a fat case of the same sort of size as the 416 Rigby but with a rebated face to fit the standard bolt.
Kynoch Ammunition still make this round - Kynoch .425 Westley Richards - so getting ammo should n't be to much of an issue.
I worked for WR ( 12 years ), the .425 is a good round. I only built two rifles in this calibre. For the cartridge to feed effectively in the mauser 98 action, two spring loaded side clips are used to stop the cartridges being pushed out of the mag box by the follower etc. When the bolt is pushed forwards, the clips are pushed outwards allowing the bolt face to feed the round off the follower and into the chamber. It took a lot of time to alter the receiver walls and do the feedwork for this calibre than any other I have ever built. That aside, recoil was moderate. Modern rifle stocks are designed with higher cheek pieces and combs. The old rifles that came into the factory that I fired always kicked like mules because of their old stock measurements. Many of the old rifles had very long barrels - 24/26'', and the muzzle flash was always impressive in low light conditions.
bewsher500
Well-Known Member
Cumbrian 1
Well-Known Member
Thanks Gunny Jim, I am aware of the side clips, but I can't decide whether to purchase a new Westley Richards, a second hand Westley Richards and have it restocked/restored or most likely to purchase a CZ and have it restocked to fit. My only concern about the CZ is the feeding of the round as I can not find enough infromation on whether they have installed the side clips or have resolved any potential feeding issues via another method.
My concern with purchasing a new WR is it will cost about £20K with the optional extras and it will get damaged or potentially lost in transit, also if I can get a CZ stocked to my own requirement, and the whole project costs me 5K then that saves me a lot of money that can otherwise be spent on hunting.
My concern with purchasing a new WR is it will cost about £20K with the optional extras and it will get damaged or potentially lost in transit, also if I can get a CZ stocked to my own requirement, and the whole project costs me 5K then that saves me a lot of money that can otherwise be spent on hunting.
Yes, a ''new'' WR rifle is quite an expensive choice indeed. I am not aware of anyone ( CZ or others ) offering this chambering, and realistically another more ''popular'' calibre would perhaps be a better choice ie one that you can be certain of sourcing ammunition for both at home and abroad, and also the obvious resale value of the rifle in the future. There is realistically not much between the .425 and the .416 Rigby and you would have a much wider choice of manufacturers and ammunition suppliers to choose from with this calibre. That said, a heck of a lot of .425's ended up in Africa equipping game wardens etc and secondhand rifles do pop up. As I said in my previous post, I was there ( WR ) for 12 years ( 10 of which I was the actioner responsible for building the magazine rifles, and I aso fitted leverwork and lockwork in the double guns aswell, during my last 7 years there) and I only ever built TWO rifles in this calibre out of the 120 bolt rifles or so I reckon I must have made. If you are plumbing for a big calibre, I would personally go .416 or .500 Jeffery.
Oooooo
I bet you have seen some quality wood and metalwork!
Yes, a lot of fantastic wood !!! Being privileged enough to have worked there though kind of makes you a bit of a snob when it comes to exhibition grade walnut and superlative engraving too!!! Lots of beautiful guns, and a lot of fond memories.
Hornet
Well-Known Member
505 Gibbs and be done with it.
I would be very surprised if the CZ rifle had the feeding sorted in this calibre. They dont have the WR style of clips. I have a CZ in 500Jeff and the feeding was not sorted on this rifle when delivered. Also the weakness with the CZ and other similar production rifles is the magazine box. Because of the movement of the rounds under recoil in the mag they a, dent the front of the mag box which makes the sides bow in blocking the follower and b, pushing the bullet heads back into the cartridges. If you want to get a cheaper rifle get a calibre that is simpler to get to feed. What about the .404 Jeffrey? Or as said above the 416.Rigby. If you are set on a .425 WR then I would try to find a second hand one and get it reconditioned by Westley Richards.
Cumbrian 1
Well-Known Member
BWH - I have already started thinking about the .404 Jeffrey, as it has similar performance and none of the associated problems and is making a bit of a comeback, with a wider choice of heads etc
See the classic article by Zimbabwe expert Charlie Haley (SA Magnum magazine Jan 2000) that shatters a few dogmatic myths about so called problems with the .425 Westley Richards. There can be few experts, if any, who have examined so many of the 425 rifles that performed for years at the real sharp-end. Most significantly, many of these would have been relied on by tsetse control hunters in that most dangerous of closed habitats - the Commiphora-Combetrum thickets - actually a low deciduous forest - infamously known as Jesse [derived from the vernacular Majese] that extends across the Zambezi valley on deep sandy soils. These thickets were once a favoured hangout for black rhino, and equally of buffalo and elephants. To get back to rifles.
Only a relatively few rifles gave the 425 a bad reputation. The truth was expanded on more recently by Pierre van der Walt in his excellent encyclopedic 'African Dangerous Game Cartridges'. He reiterates (indeed expands on) the lessons taught us by Charlie with respect to rebated rims. His assessments of the mythology and propoganda under the rebated rim issue also make for interesting reading in his detailed profiles of the .375 Rem UMag, 500 Jeffery and 11.2 x 72 Schuler.
In any case, the rim of the 425 WR is only rebated 0.072" [1.83 mm]. The real cause of feeding malfunctions in BA rifles was confined to cheaper weapons [including some Colonial models] that used the wrong follower-plate in the magazine and/or the latter's poor fitting. Similarly the 500J requires careful work to cope with the massive cartridge. As Pierre concludes "Once a gunsmith knows how to achieve reliable feeding with the .500 Jeffery, he can build very reliable rifles. This should make the intelligent sit up and think."
No one I have read so far has noted the obvious, given how the legendary Leslie Taylor designed the 425 WR for both doubles and bolt actions. The unmistakable shape of the 425 WR shell was not only to facilitate cordite loading (this being 1909) but the long sloping shoulder and long neck are especially handy, in fact critical, to rapid reloading of a double rifle, especially if one's eyes are fixed on more mobile pachydermic entities while fingers fumble and grapple. These features that aid mating bullet to breech save lives in close encounters demanding rapid reloading. Thus, the 425 delivered for the first time - in 1909 - large bore bolt-action performance in a double. It far surpassed the superb .404 Jeffery [which as we all know is actually a .424 bullet in a .412 bore, which has something to do with why the .404 Jeffery outperforms the .416 Rigby in close encounters in thick jesse. Read Pierre's book on the survival statistics from Zim National Parks records].
It is also common knowledge that Rigby caught up with Westley Richards with its .416 in 1911 but Rigby never built a double .416 rifle until very recently. Although the .375 Flanged also appeared a few years after the .425 , it is no match in sectional density, bullet weight nor its Taylor (Pondoro) Knock Out Value. We had to wait for the .500/.416 NE Krieghoff, released in 1991. This is the only large bore in the "lower-400s" category actually designed for a double, which would eventually come close to performance of the .416 Rigby and .425 WR in a bolt action. Yet, the 425 has been built in bespoke doubles since 1909! makes one think....
The .425 WR marginally outperforms the .416 Rigby, and it is far superior - especially in its reliability - than the controversial .458 Winchester Magnum. Its milder recoil is yet another added advantage over all the .416s and the .458, and especially lighter than recoil in the plethora of "Improved" .450 bolt action cartridges throwing .458 bullets at decent velocities with corresponding kick.
Over a century after its invention, it is interesting to acknowledge where modern propellants powering 5th and 6th generation bullets are going to propel the full potential of the .425 Westley Richards.
best to all for 2014
Chambeshi
Only a relatively few rifles gave the 425 a bad reputation. The truth was expanded on more recently by Pierre van der Walt in his excellent encyclopedic 'African Dangerous Game Cartridges'. He reiterates (indeed expands on) the lessons taught us by Charlie with respect to rebated rims. His assessments of the mythology and propoganda under the rebated rim issue also make for interesting reading in his detailed profiles of the .375 Rem UMag, 500 Jeffery and 11.2 x 72 Schuler.
In any case, the rim of the 425 WR is only rebated 0.072" [1.83 mm]. The real cause of feeding malfunctions in BA rifles was confined to cheaper weapons [including some Colonial models] that used the wrong follower-plate in the magazine and/or the latter's poor fitting. Similarly the 500J requires careful work to cope with the massive cartridge. As Pierre concludes "Once a gunsmith knows how to achieve reliable feeding with the .500 Jeffery, he can build very reliable rifles. This should make the intelligent sit up and think."
No one I have read so far has noted the obvious, given how the legendary Leslie Taylor designed the 425 WR for both doubles and bolt actions. The unmistakable shape of the 425 WR shell was not only to facilitate cordite loading (this being 1909) but the long sloping shoulder and long neck are especially handy, in fact critical, to rapid reloading of a double rifle, especially if one's eyes are fixed on more mobile pachydermic entities while fingers fumble and grapple. These features that aid mating bullet to breech save lives in close encounters demanding rapid reloading. Thus, the 425 delivered for the first time - in 1909 - large bore bolt-action performance in a double. It far surpassed the superb .404 Jeffery [which as we all know is actually a .424 bullet in a .412 bore, which has something to do with why the .404 Jeffery outperforms the .416 Rigby in close encounters in thick jesse. Read Pierre's book on the survival statistics from Zim National Parks records].
It is also common knowledge that Rigby caught up with Westley Richards with its .416 in 1911 but Rigby never built a double .416 rifle until very recently. Although the .375 Flanged also appeared a few years after the .425 , it is no match in sectional density, bullet weight nor its Taylor (Pondoro) Knock Out Value. We had to wait for the .500/.416 NE Krieghoff, released in 1991. This is the only large bore in the "lower-400s" category actually designed for a double, which would eventually come close to performance of the .416 Rigby and .425 WR in a bolt action. Yet, the 425 has been built in bespoke doubles since 1909! makes one think....
The .425 WR marginally outperforms the .416 Rigby, and it is far superior - especially in its reliability - than the controversial .458 Winchester Magnum. Its milder recoil is yet another added advantage over all the .416s and the .458, and especially lighter than recoil in the plethora of "Improved" .450 bolt action cartridges throwing .458 bullets at decent velocities with corresponding kick.
Over a century after its invention, it is interesting to acknowledge where modern propellants powering 5th and 6th generation bullets are going to propel the full potential of the .425 Westley Richards.
best to all for 2014
Chambeshi
Last edited:
along with a more recent essaythere is an article on the 425 WR by Derek Stimpson titled "A Classic Revisited" which you can read on Fieldsports Magazine.
Also check out the Nitroexpress forum
Also check out the Nitroexpress forum
Last edited:
Similar threads
