Home Forums Hunting & Shooting Africa 375 Ruger or 9.3x64 Brenneke? Pros/cons

The 375 Ruger!

More power, is extremely accurate, is flatter shooting and you have the luxury, if you ever choose to, to shorten the barrel down a little from your 23" down to 20" (more handier), while still equaling and surpassing 375 H&H ballistics from its longer barrel.

Since its intro, no other cartridge in recent history has grown in popularity so quickly as the 375 Ruger. And with more time, that trend will continue world wide along with more factory ammo becoming available in Africa.

From Gatehouse`s 375 Ruger Alaskan w/20" tube posted over in the "ask the gunwriters" section, his load of RL17 gave him 2700+ fps using a 300 grain Nosler. I`ll have to try RL17 myself in my own 375 Ruger Alaskan. The 250s and 260s will either close in on the 3000 fps mark or attain it. Excellent flat shooting at the longer ranges for African plains game ahould that need to to pass.

If you keep your barrel at 23", then the 375 Ruger will definately be an awesome cartridge, just about equaling the 375 Wby and approaching the more powerful 375 RUM.

The 9.3 is a very good round, but it isn`t a 375 Ruger.

We had a bear (brown) shot with a .375 Ruger and finished off with a 9,3x64 Brenneke -

Proof positive of the inherent, absolute, quantifyable and indisputable superiority of the 9,3x64 Brenneke.

The fact that the .375 was placed about liverish and the 9,3x64 into the head had nothing to do with the bears reaction to the shots.

Neither had bullet selection...

In fact, with a 9,3x64 Brenneke you just aim yonder, by that brush... and a 10 footer will drop.

Take a 9,3x64 to the city limits of Flaggstaff and point it about north and it will net you a moose...

For given reasons -

this post up to here was very much tongue in cheek

Turning serious, from a practical POV I can think of few closer



comparisons.

As for cases - get a campfire collective order deal going and I will do the negotiations with RWS.

[color:#FF0000][/color]

A 300 gr. bullet at 2700 FPS, a 260 or 270 at 3000FPS is pushing the string beyond belief IMO, or their chronograph is heywire or they have an over actitive imagination. I also expect their days of living on this side of the dirt are severaly limited! Yes, I know some folks that claim to load the 375 H&H to such velocities also.. I betcha brass doesn't last long. I would never load my .375 to those spects, to start with it means absolutly nothing in the field, so whats the point.

To say that one of these cartridges (9.3x62, 9.3x64, 375 H&H, 375 Ruger) is better than the other in the killing field or in trajectory is ridiculas and shows a lack of experience, they are all so close to equal that no-one could tell one iota of difference but I'm only baseing that on having used all but the .375 Ruger on DG at one time or the other. I have however built several .375 Rugers, done the load testing on them, and found it to be a wonderful cartridge but it is not the equivelent of the second coming as portrayed in some of these posts.

Good common sense stuff......free of the hyperbole and "alternate reality delusion" that often afflicts rifle loonies overwhelmed by a 75-100 fps increase in muzzle velocity,from one cartridge to another......differences between the 375H&H and Ruger?...........yawn

.............Then go read Gatehouse`s post in the other section (ask the gunwriters), and then tell him that he`s nuts or his chrony is all screwed up. Another 375 Ruger owner posted there, that he also came very close to the 2700 fps figure using the RL17 and a 300 gr bullet.

Perhaps there are a few under-estimations about the RL17/375 Ruger combo? Why is 2700-2725 fps using a 300 gr bullet so unbelievable from a 20" barrel?

300 gr Hornady factory ammo from a 20" Alaskan barrel as I`ve seen written, averages around 2570 fps. My personal results have averaged 2592 fps over my own chrony. #1) Tack on a little faster bore in any given particular Ruger Alaskan rifle. #2) A brand change of 300 gr bullet namely to the Nosler AB, which btw, will have less bearing surface against the bore than does a 300 gr round nosed Hornady. #3) And then for the final pee-azza-resist-aance, let`s add some RL17 into that mix as well.

Perhaps the RL17 can do for the 375 Ruger, what we already know that it does for the 300 WSM.

Don`t think 2700 fps can be achieved? You might want to think that one through again!

375 because you can get ammo easier

Bigsqueeze,

I am sorry. Obviously my post was not tongue in check enough.

Hard to believe, but there it is...

Bottomline - the.375 Ruger and 9,3x64 are for all ballistic practicallity equals.

That is my point and I am sticking to it.

...........Yeah, I knew your post was a little tongue in cheek! But, I thought I`d state "bullcrap" anyway!!! LOL!

In the field, the game won`t know the difference between the Ruger and the 9.3...However, the 9.3x64 could use a little more catching up.

You gotta admit though, the 375 Ruger from a 20" barrel is quite the powerhouse!

Glad we cleared that up.

As to the differences, I will save myself some time and borough from BOBINH



The achievement of both the 9,3x64 and the .375 Ruger is putting .375 H&Hish performance into a standard length action.

That was Wilhelm brennekes intend in the 1920s and he succeeded.

Same for Ruger and Hornady in 2006.

Kudos.

I think - I will take my 9,3 out for a stroll tonight.

It will probably overpenetrate a deer or pig.

Stayed tuned.

............The next time I go on a stroll hog hunting, I`ll take "mighty mouse" as usual. Use my 30 cal VLDs which btw don`t over-penetrate. They just blow their vitals all to heck.........Nyuk! Nyuk! Nyuk!

You`re right! 75-100 fps less velocity, makes no difference in the field. Though it is fun to experiment to get all we can because that`s part of human nature. Additional speed, doesn`t just end with cars, boats, planes or anything else that moves or that is propelled.

No, I don't need to read anybodys post on 2700 FPS out of a 20 inch barrel with 300 gr. bullets in a 375 Ruger, nor do I need to rethink it...I have a chronograph and I have done the tests, I know where the pressure indications are with that caliber and barrel length..I also know that you can do it, but I know its excessive any way you cut it..I can get 2800 out of a 375 H&H but its simply too hot a load. If you or anyone wants to load at that pressure thats your business but I refuse to do it, nor will I recommend it to someone else..

...........All well and good. But RL17 does have lower pressure curves. If the casings don`t show any of the usual pressure signs and the bolt lift is ok too, then more velocity is an option under those circumstances. Each individual rifle has its own tolerance for max loadings.

Even though you wish not to test or "re-think" other components (bullet and powder) that you "have not" previously tried, such as Gatehouse`s 375 Ruger Alaskan RL17 loadings using the 300 gr Nosler, it is nevertheless a fact, that when components are changed, there can also be velocity upswings.

Is there any real practical need for that small an increase in the field? Nope, not in the least!

But nevertheless, it can still be done.

I owned a .375 H&H in a Classic Stainless. Loved it...sold it.
I wanted a .375 Ruger African until my friend, who was a Game Management Officer in S Africa for 17 years shared some issues with the Ruger African in the field.

I finally chose what I should have gotten in the beginning...a CZ 550 American 9.3x62. It is my dream rifle. 9.4lbs loaded with a Burris 2x7x35, it is just perfect as an all-around gun. 2 crossbolts from the factory, very accurate, etc. The rough action became like butter after using a bit of Rig grease and cycling it a few hundred times during a movie I was watching.
I cannot emphasize enough just how much I like this gun and caliber!

And I apologize, I realize you were comparing the .375 Ruger with the 9.3x74, not the 9.3x62. Consider it info only, please!

The 9.3's in 62 or 64 are both noted classics and have very fine reputations throughout Africa. I have used a 62 for a while here and much preferred it to the .375

The 64's were never very common here in Zambia.

I am not familiar with the .375 Ruger but the 62 never failed me on dangerous game and it was a pleasure to shoot. Like I say a classic.

For what it's worth - I know one Zambian PH who argued with the same problem a couple years ago. After his gunsmith toyed with the the 9.x64 (on his pre-64 M-70) and could not reliably get better performance with it than the 9.3x62 they decided to go with the 375 Ruger. He loves it and I'll bet that shortly in the future the 375 Ruger will be a lot easier to find in most African countries than the 9.3x64.

I have a 9.3x62 and love it. I built it specifically to be an irons-only classic rifle to swat Moose, Bear or Kudu should I be lucky enough to stalk in nice and close. I'm also hoping to wangle a tag for Wood Bison this year and the 9.3 will figure highly on the list of rifles to take along. My current load is 62 grains of RL15 with 286gr Norma RNs that run just around 2400 fps. Phil also has a beauty little 9.3x62 that runs 7lbs ready to hunt so you could certainly step down in weight with very similar performance.

I also used a 375 Ruger this year in Zimbabwe and, despite some feeding issues, the cartridge worked very nicely, dropping a nice buffalo bull at a hair over 100 yards with a single shot through the shoulder. I also took other sundry trophies with it and it performed quite nicely. Though I doubt I would have noticed a difference were I using the Old Man's 375 H&H, which we planned to take with us. Now, with regard to Gatehouse, I happen to know him and would believe the numbers he's telling us. That said, I believe his 375 Ruger has been "Improved" which could be adding a few grains more powder. He certainly is a disciple of "The New King", McSwirley and all but I'm not convinced it's anything but a H&H on a diet.

All things being equal I prefer the 416s over the 375s. Woudl have used ag not only a 416 Remington but a M700 to boot!

Interesting. is the 9.3x64 still more available in African countries than the 375 Ruger?

I am debating the same question and I am leaning more towards the 9.3x64 or even the 9.3x62 but don't have the experience.

The 9,3X64 Brenneke is a great old round, no arguing that. But...it's not all that common; try to find loaded ammo in a hurry or a pinch; brass is extremely expensive and not always readily available.

It's a great plains game round that can take medium-heavy game like buffalo and lion. With 250's it shoots fast and flat.

Along came one of the best designed rounds now available, the 375 Ruger. It does everything the 9,3X64 does and is growing in popularity due to it's own merits and the fact that relatively inexpensive very nice rifles in 375 Ruger have been offered. The Hawkeye African is about a perfect combination of trim, fast handling, properly sight equipped, and hard hitting attributes ever mass produced. It doesn't cost a month's salary, either.

All this makes the 375 Ruger round the better choice, since it has a bright future, well earned. Both do the same thing, but the Ruger round is a commercial success, while the 9,3X64 Brenneke is obsolescent and inordinately expensive. I've owned and used both and can't tell two beans worth of practical difference in performance.

All that being said I like my Hawkeye African 9,3X62 better. None of these rounds, 9,3X62, 9,3X64, and 375 Ruger, are stoppers by any stretch. It comes down to picking your personal poison and going out and kill with it.

It is probably a safe bet that there are already a lot more 375 Rugers in the world than there are 9.3x64's.
And as my daughter so thoughtfully pointed out to her moose hunter this past season - the 9.3x64 is "cute, sort of like a little sister to the .375 Ruger"