That was Rugers point though. People wanted the performance similar to the H&H , not above it (375 RUM) or below it (376 Steyr) They gave the people what they wanted!
375 Ruger here to stay?
- Thread starter Buster95
- Start date
That was Rugers point though. People wanted the performance similar to the H&H , not above it (375 RUM) or below it (376 Steyr) They gave the people what they wanted!
Gatehouse, I think you and I are the only ones having fun with this. I think I'll buy one just so I can berate it as an owner, instead of a conscientious objector.
ALL HAIL THE TRUE KING..........375 H&H
And Thumper1 don't be messing with my posts, they're perfect the way they are Thank You very much.
ALL HAIL THE TRUE KING..........375 H&H
And Thumper1 don't be messing with my posts, they're perfect the way they are Thank You very much.
Lol right
gatehouse, i think you and i are the only ones having fun with this. I think i'll buy one just so i can berate it as an owner, instead of a conscientious objector.
all hail the true king..........375 h&h
and thumper1 don't be messing with my posts, they're perfect the way they are thank you very much.
That stock is probably the ugliest thing i've ever seen
Yeah, a simple pepper laminated stock would have looked fine.
6 gunmakers including North American powerhouses like Ruger and Savage are chambering it. The NEW KING isn't going anywhere except to the TOP!
6 gunmakers including North American powerhouses like Ruger and Savage are chambering it. The NEW KING isn't going anywhere except to the TOP!
If you think Ruger and Savage are North American powerhouses, well.........................................let's just say the "TRUE KING" has very little to worry about.
As far as the other offerings, it's pretty easy to advertise that you offer some caliber, all it means is you own the reamer. Where's the inventory? Has anyone ACTUALLY purchased a rifle in 375 Ruger other than a Ruger? We'll see how many of these so called powerhouses still offer it in 5 years.
ALL HAIL THE "TRUE KING"
bearkilr
CGN Ultra frequent flyer
- Location
- Nowhere, ......just past the middle
The New King needs to have his portrait shown every few pages, in case some of us forgot why he's wearing the crown.
I wonder if Ruger sells the recoil pad separate, that's a must have item for all my guns. And while we're at it, may as well get the flash suppressor (sorry, muzzle brake) too. Could this be Ruger's new Zombie defense gun? We can only hope.
I like the position of that barrel band too.
Looks like it places the muzzle brake directly beside your ear while still retaining the stock mounted hand ripping swivel stud.
Might be designed for shooting prone and the stock swivel stud is for attaching the bi-pod?
I've really got nothing against Ruger or the .375 Ruger but compared to the discontinued Express rifles that thing is just wrong.
Looks like it places the muzzle brake directly beside your ear while still retaining the stock mounted hand ripping swivel stud.
Might be designed for shooting prone and the stock swivel stud is for attaching the bi-pod?
I've really got nothing against Ruger or the .375 Ruger but compared to the discontinued Express rifles that thing is just wrong.
I don't think you are getting it. I don't care if someone wants cartridge X or cartridge Y. They should shoot whatever makes them happy....But, ultimately, this is just the internet, and I'm but one guy who is having fun talking about a favorite cartridge.
Wow, Gatehouse...are you feeling okay? You sound like Darth Vader when he started to finally mellow out at the end of the movie.
6 gunmakers including North American powerhouses like Ruger and Savage are chambering it. The NEW KING isn't going anywhere except to the TOP!
How many gunmakers are offering models chambered in 375 H&H????
I think I'll have to kneel before, and pay homage to c-bfmi's True King!!
And yet another astute rifleman!!
ALL HAIL THE "TRUE KING"...........LONG LIVE THE KING!!
Gatehouse;
Too bad you weren't an independantly wealthy gunwriter of renknown, I think you could actually make the 3/8" Ruger offering a household name, given your fervor and devotion. Then possibly this debate could still be going on in 80 yrs ala the 270/30-06 saga. O'Connor did it with an equally redundant cartridge, why not you?
Too bad you weren't an independantly wealthy gunwriter of renknown, I think you could actually make the 3/8" Ruger offering a household name, given your fervor and devotion. Then possibly this debate could still be going on in 80 yrs ala the 270/30-06 saga. O'Connor did it with an equally redundant cartridge, why not you?
Johnn Peterson
CGN Ultra frequent flyer
- Location
- Chemainus B.C.
No argument there -- there are no shortage of non-belted cases that feed reliably. That's not the point I was trying to make. There`s 100% reliability, and then there`s 110%. Ask anyone who builds custom dangerous game rifles which case design feeds better -- the H&H or the Ruger. I`m not saying that the Ruger has a problem, because it doesn`t. But between the two, the H&H has a less likely chance of exhibiting a feeding problem, however small that chance may be. On the range, or when hunting just about anything in North America, this is an entirely meaningless criterion. But when you`re looking at 400 lbs. of angry lion or 1800 lbs. of glaring buffalo charging into handshaking range, you want every single possible odd stacked in your favour. This is one of the principal reasons the H&H earned the reputation that it did -- it was the absolute top of the heap when it came to reliable feeding under all imaginable conditions.
Belts aren't required for headspacing if you don't have a long tapered cartridge. At least 90% of the belted cartridges out there don't need the belt for headspace purposes!
Again, no argument. Belts are certainly not needed for headspacing if you don`t have a long tapered cartridge. But if you don`t have a long tapered cartridge, you have a relatively straight one that requires tighter tolerances with respect to the ammo that now needs to headspace on the shoulder. Which, of course, is mostly what we shoot these days, and for all sorts of valid, accuracy enhancing reasons. But increased reliability isn`t one of them. If you headspace off the belt, you can afford a bit more tolerance in the rest of the chamber -- which doesn`t help accuracy at all, but it makes it even less likely that you`ll have a feeding problem if dust, sand or mud gets into that rifle, or if you find yourself hurriedly stuffing some dirty ammo or even someone elses ammo into that rifle in a goddamn hurry when there`s no time to do anything else.
Another very meaningful benefit to that tapered design is that it extracts more easily and reliably than a straighter cartridge does. This is often underappreciated by many -- but in a dangerous game context, it`s very relevant. Again, no, I`m not saying that the Ruger design has an extraction problem. But what I am saying is that the H&H is less likely to exhibit one at precisely the wrong moment.
Yes, you`re quite right -- the industry specs are the same. But there are no free lunches in ballistics -- and it`s not just me saying this. Terry Wieland wrote on this point specifically after speaking to Hornady about the Ruger, its actual velocity and its pressures. If you want H&H velocities from a shorter barrel, you do it with higher pressure, all things being equal -- and Hornady engineers apparently admitted this to him. I`m not saying that Hornady exceeds SAAMI specs. But if you shoot the same bullet from the Ruger cartridge in a 20 inch barrel, and you shoot the same bullet from the H&H in a 24 inch barrel, and YOU GET THE SAME VELOCITY, the H&H will be running at a bit lower pressure. It has to -- something called physics... This is exactly the same reason why the .458 Lott is a much better design than the .458 Win Mag -- you can back off the Lott a bit and load it to the same revered 2150 fps that`s been the dangerous game standard for over a century, but at lower pressure than the Win Mag. Again, this difference is purely academic at the range. But not when your life hangs in the balance.
You could even get the same velocity with lower pressure in the Ruger since there is a modest increase in case capacity with the NEW KING.
Yes... if barrel lengths were the same. But that`s not the way this generally works out, since the entire concept for the Ruger is to bundle it into a smaller, more compact package -- and it invariably appears in rifles sporting shorter barrels, which puts the Ruger at a velocity deficit that can only be overcome by launching the bullet a little slower or running the pressures a little higher. Again, that nasty physics thing...
Now, having said all of this, I`ll also willingly admit very few of those who own and shoot .375`s in North America will actually hunt dangerous game. And even among those who do, truly dangerous episodes involving head-on charges are exceedingly rare. But, here`s the thing: the H&H is the better design when that rare moment actually happens. In the final analysis, we`re still talking about a dangerous game rifle -- and a dangerous game rifle, properly defined, isn`t just a rifle you use to shoot dangerous game -- it`s a rifle you bet your life on when absolutely everything has just gone to hell and is going to get resolved one way or another in the next 3 seconds.
Of course, now, if you like you can unravel all this by asking me if I think the .375 as a calibre is truly for the big stuff based on my experience with it, and then we can start talking about proper calibres sporting more bullet weight
No argument there -- there are no shortage of non-belted cases that feed reliably. That's not the point I was trying to make. There`s 100% reliability, and then there`s 110%. Ask anyone who builds custom dangerous game rifles which case design feeds better -- the H&H or the Ruger. I`m not saying that the Ruger has a problem, because it doesn`t. But between the two, the H&H has a less likely chance of exhibiting a feeding problem, however small that chance may be. On the range, or when hunting just about anything in North America, this is an entirely meaningless criterion. But when you`re looking at 400 lbs. of angry lion or 1800 lbs. of glaring buffalo charging into handshaking range, you want every single possible odd stacked in your favour. This is one of the principal reasons the H&H earned the reputation that it did -- it was the absolute top of the heap when it came to reliable feeding under all imaginable conditions.
Again, no argument. Belts are certainly not needed for headspacing if you don`t have a long tapered cartridge. But if you don`t have a long tapered cartridge, you have a relatively straight one that requires tighter tolerances with respect to the ammo that now needs to headspace on the shoulder. Which, of course, is mostly what we shoot these days, and for all sorts of valid, accuracy enhancing reasons. But increased reliability isn`t one of them. If you headspace off the belt, you can afford a bit more tolerance in the rest of the chamber -- which doesn`t help accuracy at all, but it makes it even less likely that you`ll have a feeding problem if dust, sand or mud gets into that rifle, or if you find yourself hurriedly stuffing some dirty ammo or even someone elses ammo into that rifle in a goddamn hurry when there`s no time to do anything else.
Another very meaningful benefit to that tapered design is that it extracts more easily and reliably than a straighter cartridge does. This is often underappreciated by many -- but in a dangerous game context, it`s very relevant. Again, no, I`m not saying that the Ruger design has an extraction problem. But what I am saying is that the H&H is less likely to exhibit one at precisely the wrong moment.
Yes, you`re quite right -- the industry specs are the same. But there are no free lunches in ballistics -- and it`s not just me saying this. Terry Wieland wrote on this point specifically after speaking to Hornady about the Ruger, its actual velocity and its pressures. If you want H&H velocities from a shorter barrel, you do it with higher pressure, all things being equal -- and Hornady engineers apparently admitted this to him. I`m not saying that Hornady exceeds SAAMI specs. But if you shoot the same bullet from the Ruger cartridge in a 20 inch barrel, and you shoot the same bullet from the H&H in a 24 inch barrel, and YOU GET THE SAME VELOCITY, the H&H will be running at a bit lower pressure. It has to -- something called physics... This is exactly the same reason why the .458 Lott is a much better design than the .458 Win Mag -- you can back off the Lott a bit and load it to the same revered 2150 fps that`s been the dangerous game standard for over a century, but at lower pressure than the Win Mag. Again, this difference is purely academic at the range. But not when your life hangs in the balance.
Yes... if barrel lengths were the same. But that`s not the way this generally works out, since the entire concept for the Ruger is to bundle it into a smaller, more compact package -- and it invariably appears in rifles sporting shorter barrels, which puts the Ruger at a velocity deficit that can only be overcome by launching the bullet a little slower or running the pressures a little higher. Again, that nasty physics thing...
Now, having said all of this, I`ll also willingly admit very few of those who own and shoot .375`s in North America will actually hunt dangerous game. And even among those who do, truly dangerous episodes involving head-on charges are exceedingly rare. But, here`s the thing: the H&H is the better design when that rare moment actually happens. In the final analysis, we`re still talking about a dangerous game rifle -- and a dangerous game rifle, properly defined, isn`t just a rifle you use to shoot dangerous game -- it`s a rifle you bet your life on when absolutely everything has just gone to hell and is going to get resolved one way or another in the next 3 seconds.
Of course, now, if you like you can unravel all this by asking me if I think the .375 as a calibre is truly for the big stuff based on my experience with it, and then we can start talking about proper calibres sporting more bullet weight
Neo, you have the same old arguments and they may have been true 100 years ago, but they certainly are not now. Look at military cartridges like the 5.56 or 7.62 NATO. No belt. No pronounced taper. And they get used against foes that are far more formidable than any buffalo or lion. Look at established dangerous game cartridges like the 416 Rigby. No belt, almost square shoulder! By some standards it shouldn't even chamber!
I can't imagine a rifle getting any more dirty than my Alaskan last fall when hunting moose. The thing was absolutely CAKED with dust, mud and grime after a few days of traveling in a ATV. But when it came down to business time, everything worked just fine. And I don't think my experience was an exception, either. Every year thousands of Canadian hunters get their rifles dirty and shoot dirty ammo just fine, even though they aren't using a long tapered cartridge! Even WSM rifles get dirty and feed and extract, despite assurances from many on the internet!
No, the smart guys that build rifles figured out long ago how to feed, chamber and extract cartridges without tapers or belts.
I didn't read what Wieland wrote about pressure, but ballistics 101 tell us when you use a bigger case and put more powder in it, you can achieve higher velocities. So when you use a bigger case and put more powder in it, you can lop off a few inches of barrel and still achieve the velocity of the smaller case with a 24" barrel, but still have the same pressure. This shouldn't come as a surprise to anyone. Bigger case= more powder= more velocity at same pressure. You know- physics.
These arguments come up again and again, but if they were valid, nobody would be using anything but cartridges like the 300H&H and 375 H&H!!
I guess someone should have told Harry Selby his 416 Rigby was no good because it lacked a belt and didn't have enough body taper.
Last edited:
Oh no,
NEVER, the point being more about his devotion to this cartridge..........reread the final line, there-in lies my estimation of the cartridge. Even if you did get my H&H, I got 2 more in the wings, not to worry.
thats some interesting stuff there neo.
I really like the look of the ruger on paper and the shorter action is attractive, but hearing your perspective on the H&H for critical circumstances, it makes me rethink the ruger for being the better of the two.
Though, Im not sure Im on board with your thoughts on the ruger having less velocity as its usually equipped with a shorter barrel, in the same rifle with the same length barrel otherwise were looking at apples to oranges. Either way the difference in velocity is still small, enough for us to BS on the internet for hours and hours, but functionally it doesnt seem all that much wither way.
I really like the look of the ruger on paper and the shorter action is attractive, but hearing your perspective on the H&H for critical circumstances, it makes me rethink the ruger for being the better of the two.
Though, Im not sure Im on board with your thoughts on the ruger having less velocity as its usually equipped with a shorter barrel, in the same rifle with the same length barrel otherwise were looking at apples to oranges. Either way the difference in velocity is still small, enough for us to BS on the internet for hours and hours, but functionally it doesnt seem all that much wither way.
