The NEW KING is taking off!

Status
Not open for further replies.
longrifle said:
the H&H has it, and the wooger wants it...

ALL HAIL THE TRUE KING!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!:dancingbanana:G:
Click to expand...

+1 on the H&H. Ruger would mess up if they tried to copy a 22 LR.
Oh, and I cant forget the dancing banana. This thread seems to require on on every post.:dancingbanana:

:nest:

I better keep my trap shut on all Rugers as I might break a 25 year promise to myself and buy a #1.
 
Ardent said:
I like it, not just another production run stamped barrel. I don't mind knowing a smith actually laid that out by hand, and built a rifle the same.
Click to expand...
Bevan King made the bbl, installed it and did the engraving. I like it a lot better then the the factory stamping we get.

Credit is also due to Guntech for bluing the action, installing the sights and fitting the stock and pad.


.
 
SuperCub said:
Says who? ........ How do you "hide a lot of pressure"?


.
Click to expand...


Think of a action that is bent way out of shape. A modest amount of pressure will still expand the case, but since the action is bent out of shape and nothing lines up properly, the action will bind.

make sure everything is lined up perfectly and even higher pressures won't lock up the bolt- Until they are crazy high.
 
Gatehouse said:
Think of a action that is bent way out of shape. A modest amount of pressure will still expand the case, but since the action is bent out of shape and nothing lines up properly, the action will bind.

make sure everything is lined up perfectly and even higher pressures won't lock up the bolt- Until they are crazy high.
Click to expand...
Maybe, but this action wasn't trued up.

.
 
SuperCub said:
Maybe, but this action wasn't trued up.

.
Click to expand...

Probably screwed on straight with a good chamber, though. It's just something I've read about , but I suppose I've experienced it too, with some custom rifles seeming to be able to deliver scorching velocities without pressure signs, even though it excess pressure was most likely evident.
 
troutseeker said:
My point exactly, except for the belittling parts. :) So why is it exactly that if the .375 H&H is soooo great, people only need them in the past? Are there not new young and fit of body and mind people willing to buy a dinosaur? Of course not! BECAUSE A NEW KING IS BORN BABY! Long live the .375 Ruger!!!:dancingbanana::dancingbanana:

Groovy Baby, super shagadelic Ruger in .375, oh yeah!
Click to expand...

It's this simple, and I'm surprised at myself for goofing in this thread this long;

-They're both great cartridges.

-They both have benefits and shortcomings:

H&H, good = tapered, lower pressure, ammo and brass availability : H&H, bad = length (expensive actions/rifles)

Ruger, good = fits in inexpensive actions/rifles easily, slight performance boost over H&H w/ light bullets : Ruger, bad = does away with extraction and feed greasing taper of H&H, ammo and brass availability

In the end, buy what you like, but calling either bad is a joke. The Ruger's a solid cartridge, designed on solid principles. The H&H has been kicking ass for a century and is considered the all round single best cartridge for worldwide hunting by a multitude of sources, a big part of that is ammo availability, ANYWHERE. I've seen it on shelves from Fort Nelson to Bulawayo Zimbabwe.

I travel, and choose the H&H, partly as well because nicer rifles, even from Ruger, come chambered in it than their own .375. I like the taper too. If I wanted a .375 for North America alone, I'd likely own an Alaskan too, love the stainless option and 20" barrel. I'm set for .375's for now though.
 
Ardent said:
That's actually a nice looking, all business rifle. Only problem is it's a Remington 700, and thus a soldered/brazed together bolt push feed designed for ease of manufacture over other merits. Barrel band swivel studs aren't silly, they're downright smart on heavy recoiling rifles. Ever taken a swivel stud to the knuckle? There's a reason they're around, and my .375 H&H wears one. They're also much stronger than a short stud threaded into fore end wood, and since the top stub carries the load on the sling, this is a good thing. I have a feeling you're the Sako/Tikka/Savage kind.
Click to expand...

No, its not a nice looking rifle, I think it looks like a stainless/matte black catapiller crawling out of a chunk of laminate log. I was refering to the silly color (again in my opion) of the barrel band, not the band itself. It would be more appealling if the barrel band matched the barrel finish and the sights were stainless, but again thats personal opinion.lol
 
bam bam said:
Sorry, but thats an ugly gun there imho. What's up with the color contrast - the wanna be ruger sights and silly barrel band?
Click to expand...

I think it turned out great... not that it matters what we think, as long as Mr. Super is happy with it.

crazy_davey said:
He said "hunting plans" SC :p. I think what he means is are you planning to go kill something with it in the future :).

Only another what, 19 or so years to wait for another moose tag :eek: :p :D
Click to expand...

Yup, hunting plans...

Though I do admit to getting a little sidetracked after that post. It was TB's fault though.:p:D
 
Ardent said:
Same here, thanks to my 4" magazine. I quickly determined I had no use for nuclear 300gr loads, and went to a solid 2500fps over H4895. None of the animals I've shot with that indicated a need for more power. :)
Click to expand...

I like it when bear carcass smokes after a close range shot.:)
 
bam bam said:
No, its not a nice looking rifle, I think it looks like a stainless/matte black catapiller crawling out of a chunk of laminate log. I was refering to the silly color (again in my opion) of the barrel band, not the band itself. It would be more appealling if the barrel band matched the barrel finish and the sights were stainless, but again thats personal opinion.lol
Click to expand...

I think the two tone looks swell. Again, looks like a good working rifle.
 
Ardent said:
It's this simple, and I'm surprised at myself for goofing in this thread this long;

-They're both great cartridges.

-They both have benefits and shortcomings:

H&H, good = tapered, lower pressure, ammo and brass availability : H&H, bad = length (expensive actions/rifles)

Ruger, good = fits in inexpensive actions/rifles easily, slight performance boost over H&H w/ light bullets : Ruger, bad = does away with extraction and feed greasing taper of H&H, ammo and brass availability

In the end, buy what you like, but calling either bad is a joke. The Ruger's a solid cartridge, designed on solid principles. The H&H has been kicking ass for a century and is considered the all round single best cartridge for worldwide hunting by a multitude of sources, a big part of that is ammo availability, ANYWHERE. I've seen it on shelves from Fort Nelson to Bulawayo Zimbabwe.

I travel, and choose the H&H, partly as well because nicer rifles, even from Ruger, come chambered in it than their own .375. I like the taper too. If I wanted a .375 for North America alone, I'd likely own an Alaskan too, love the stainless option and 20" barrel. I'm set for .375's for now though.
Click to expand...

Of course they are! Both excellent cartridges that will get big game down in a hurry. I must also say that I really like Supercub's Clitfield Taylor. A really nice looking rifle he's got there and another hammer, I'm sure!

But, I still think there is a new King... Ruger came out with a winner that will have a huge following. It is only a matter of time until African PH's realize they can have one heck of a handy package in this short canon!
 
bam bam said:
No, its not a nice looking rifle, I think it looks like a stainless/matte black catapiller crawling out of a chunk of laminate log. I was refering to the silly color (again in my opion) of the barrel band, not the band itself. It would be more appealling if the barrel band matched the barrel finish and the sights were stainless, but again thats personal opinion.lol
Click to expand...

Nothing wrong with the 'distinct" look of SC's rifle. Im not a big fan of laminates, but I gotta admit the brown ones look pretty good, way better than the grey ones imho...

I don't mind the 2-tone look at all.
 
Ardent said:
It's this simple, and I'm surprised at myself for goofing in this thread this long;

-They're both great cartridges.

-They both have benefits and shortcomings:

H&H, good = tapered, lower pressure, ammo and brass availability : H&H, bad = length (expensive actions/rifles)

Ruger, good = fits in inexpensive actions/rifles easily, slight performance boost over H&H w/ light bullets : Ruger, bad = does away with extraction and feed greasing taper of H&H, ammo and brass availability

In the end, buy what you like, but calling either bad is a joke. The Ruger's a solid cartridge, designed on solid principles. The H&H has been kicking ass for a century and is considered the all round single best cartridge for worldwide hunting by a multitude of sources, a big part of that is ammo availability, ANYWHERE. I've seen it on shelves from Fort Nelson to Bulawayo Zimbabwe.

I travel, and choose the H&H, partly as well because nicer rifles, even from Ruger, come chambered in it than their own .375. I like the taper too. If I wanted a .375 for North America alone, I'd likely own an Alaskan too, love the stainless option and 20" barrel. I'm set for .375's for now though.
Click to expand...

:agree:

Perhaps they should drop the Ruger moniker and replace it with 375 King because then, and only then, you'd be right.
 
375 Chatfield KABOOM Taylor, coming to a gun range near you :p make sure you move 3 benches to the side, because them pip squeek 375's got something to prove, trying to best the KING :dancingbanana::dancingbanana:
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom