The .375 Ruger story Part #1

Leeper said:
The 375 Ruger comes awfully close to being a 375 Newton. Only about .012" larger in diameter at the base and slightly shorter (.025").
Click to expand...

So what???

Somebody mentioned necking it to 338. Good plan since it would almost perfectly duplicate the 338 Winchester which is a fine cartridge.
Click to expand...

It seems to me that it would out-perform(marginally) the .338 Win because it would hold more powder(it's fatter). And no pesky belt that some people love to hate.:)

The 375 Ruger is also very close to a beltless 375 Chatfield-Taylor (375/338). I think it would have made as much sense to chamber the rifle for this and the 416 Taylor rather than cooking up a new/old case.
Click to expand...

There is no 'beltless' .375 Chatfield-Taylor. Oh wait. There is. It's called the .375 Ruger.

In the end it all comes down to marketing anyway. Regards, Bill.
Click to expand...

Let's hear it for marketing!!!!:dancingbanana:

I have to admit, I am somewhat baffled by all the implied and real negativity that accompanies the introduction of new cartidges that actually live up to their advance billing. It was the same with the WSM's and, while there were a few duds, a couple of them have apparently become well established with shooters.



We should be applauding the efforts of companies like Ruger and Hornady.
 
Mauser98, you are correct--every new cartridge is introduced to howls of 'get off my lawn!' from the old warhorse brigade.

Guess what, that's the marketplace! If I were Ruger or Hornady, I'd spend a lot of time explaining why '.375 in a standard action' is a good idea and not just a new idea, get some actual pro hunters to say they'd use it, instead of the usual suspects from the gun rags. But hey, that's me :D

In the meantime I want somebody to neck it down to .338 so I can complain about _two_ cartridges that are pointless:evil:
 
There's a pretty good write up in March/April's Petersen's Rifle shooter about the 375 Ruger. Which I suspect there will be in rapid succession in all the gun rags in the next spell...

Anyways Boddington and steve Hornady did a trip to Aftica last June and the article tells about that and a fair bit of technical stuff about the cartridge. And yes, by all accounts it seems to be an H and H power wise for sure. In a smaller lighter rifle and action with the associated extra recoil. :popCorn:
 
I for one am excited about the 375 ruger,it gives us another case to play with,maybe it is not any better than the 375 H&H-so what.With that kind of mentallity we would all be shooting the 30/06,as nothing else is really needed.
the new ruger case will make a great 416 or 9.3,lots of possabilities.Embrace new cartridges thats what being a gunnut is about.these are fun times with catridge development,now if we could just fix the gun registration!!!
 
Mauser98 said:
S

I have to admit, I am somewhat baffled by all the implied and real negativity that accompanies the introduction of new cartidges that actually live up to their advance billing. It was the same with the WSM's and, while there were a few duds, a couple of them have apparently become well established with shooters.
.
Click to expand...

(Gatehouse here on todbartells computron)

I am baffled too. A new cartridge? If you like it/works for you/you htink it's cool etc -great. If you have no use for it...well..don't buy one.

If the "new* cartridge is based on a "old" design- so what? I dont' think there has been much really, really new in a looong time. Short mag style cartridges existed long ago in various forms and so di a bunch of other "new" stuff....So what if the marketers are telling us it's *NEW*? Are we offended that a company uses marketing to increase thier profits?

The new cartridges still do what they are supposed to do- fling bullets.

I think the WSM's are interesting, so I bought one. I don't think it gives an advatage ballisticlaly over the 300WM, and I never did. It just interests me.

The 375 Ruger does appear to have some advantages over the 375 H&H- mostly to the handloader, who is interested in brass life, or to a guy that wants 375 H&H performance in a 30-06 length action. It has an advantage over the 375 Taylor in that brass and factory ammo will be available, and you need not fireform/neck up etc.

If that appeals to you- then perhaps a 375 Ruger is a good option. If that does not appeal to you- then stick wiht the H&H. If you want more horsepower, there are several other options available.

I use cartridges that are 100 years old and cartridges that are less than 10 years old and everytihng in between. The one thing they all hold in common is that the ones I use are useful to me for one reason or another.

Use what you like, what works for you, and don't worry so much abotu what others find useful to them..;)
 
I wouldn't mind selling my hh, buy one of these to try it out but hell, I think I'm getting into SA revolvers. Maybe time to do both who knows?
 
I'm baffled by the rush to embrace a new cartridge which is not new. I'm also baffled by the fact that many seem offended by my pointing out of historical precedents to this "new" cartridge. A new offering, to me, should accomplish one or more goals.
It should break new ground. Here we have a 95 year old design duplicating a 90 year old established cartridge. Not a lot of new ground there.
It should do something current offerings cannot. The 375 Ruger does this in that it works in a standard length action. This would have been a big deal back in the '30's when there was a shortage of true long actions but not such a big deal now that there are so many. Nonetheless, it fits Ruger's action and I think it's a good move from that standpoint.
It should offer real advantages. Well, fitting in the proprietary company's action is a real advantage.
I'm sorry if I offend some of the kids by pointing out that;
(a) It's not new and (b) it's not ground breaking.
I always think it makes more sense to use cases which are readily available. I don't mention that the new 375 Ruger essentially duplicates a 95 year old design to condemn the idea but to point out what I consider to be a point of interest. I wonder why Ruger didn't just legitimize a wildcat like the Chatfield- Taylor just because I think it's an interesting point of discussion not because I think Ruger is stupid to bring out a different cartridge or even because I think many consumers are stupid to run bleating like a bunch of freakin' sheep to each new offering. It's just an interesting point of discussion.
In truth, I've always considered the rifle to be more important than the cartridge. I've been around enough to know that cartridges of a given size all act the same regardless of shape. A given bullet at a given speed performs the same way regardless of the headstamp on the cartridge.
Henceforth, in order that I may avoid giving offence, perhaps my fellow nutz would be kind enough to head such threads more like this:
"New Cartridge. Please don't criticize or attempt to offer any sort of historical or technical insight."
After reading such a heading I will know enough not to offer any information or opinion without being asked. Regards, Bill.
 
I would guess the reason Ruger didn't go wiht the 375/338 is because they maybe can get a wee bit more horsepower out of the slightly larger in diameter Ruger/Newton:) case, and that the belt on a case like this is redundant.

Brass availability may or may not be a concern, it's hard to tell these days- I heard alot of talk abotu stocking up on WSM brass since it woudl be discontinued wihtin the year, and that hasn't happened....Some of the WSSM brass may get scarce in the future, though.

I am sure the Ruger brass will at least be availabel for a few years wiht no problem, and many more if the 375 Ruger takes off. A guy that stocks up on 200 pieces of brass coudl probably last most people a lifetime, since even if loaded only 5X, that is 1000 shots..Most 270's don't see 1000 rounds, never mind 375s!:)

With Ruger being the only *Major* manufacturer offering CRF rifles right now, it makes sense for them to offer a 375 H&H class cartridge that will fit in thier regular action, so the average Joe can buy one if he wants, wihtout having to go to thier larger and much more expensive "Magnum" rifles.

The 375-338 would have fit that bill, but redundant belts seem to be "out" rigth now, so from a marketing standpoint, the beltless Newton style makes sense.
 
Not new??? The 375 Ruger is new enough to be interesting and useful.
A .375 in a much more affordable rifle.... with a standard length action and H&H performance out of a 20 inch barrel.
If I had a need for a .375 this would be choice #1.
 
Our fearless correspondant, Tod Bartell is in Edmonton rigth now, attending an industry gun/sporting goods trade show...

He is staying at the finest hotel Edmontn has ot offer, sampling expensive beverages and food.....

And he has promised to bring back any new news on the 375 Ruger that he may find form the Sturm Ruger representitives...:popCorn:
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom