I have never owned a 375 H and H. I have guided with a 375 Ruger, a 45-70, and now bounce back and fourth between the 45-70 and a Husky 9.3x62.
So having said that my opinion only means so much, but I can say that since I’ve been using the 9.3, have wondered why it’s not more popular in Alaska.
The 375 Ruger was adequate for what I needed it for but was terribly loud, like permanent hearing damage loud, and the recoil was “sharp” for lack of a better word, compared to the 375 H and Hs I’d shot. I just never really clicked with it. 45-70 is proven and works well, and in the short barreled Marlin with the octagonal barrel and straight stock makes a really attractive little lever gun to tote around. But it’s limited as we all know in terms of range.
The 9.3 is a pretty neat medium bore in my opinion, seems like it’s just enough to do some heavy backing up roles and not quite overkill enough to not use on a caribou or sitka blacktail if you’re just out hunting for your self. So for that I like it, very versatile.
I bought an old husqvarna from Simpson Ltd for $450, had it rechambered from 9.3x57 to 9.3x62, cut and recrowned barrel to 21”, glass bedded it and slapped a Leupold 1-5 with the qd rings. Have a XS rear peep I can pop on if pursuing bear or whatever in thick stuff. So for about $800 have a unique and very nice rifle. It’s worked out pretty slick so far. Plus there’s the whole appeal, to me at least, of the FN 98 action, schnable forend, barrel band sling mount etc.
No hard data here, and I realize the original question was comparing the 375 H and H and the 9.3, but from my experiences with a similar bullet in the 375 Ruger, and my relatively new experience with the 9.3, I certainly wouldn’t hesitate using the 9.3 in a client backup situation that more traditionally would’ve been a 375 H and H, 45-70 and so on
Last edited by 1973cb450; 02/06/22.
