Hey, I pointed out at least once on this thread that I'm neutral on the matter. The .375 H&H came my way as a matter of convenience. I was in the market for either, and I had tried and found a .375 Ruger twice at my local emporrium but no dies and no brass, nor factory ammo, which were all available for the H&H, and the price I paid for the H&H was a "steal" in my view, so I wasn't bashing the Ruger! The point I was making - because it came up on this thread several times - was: Why was/is the "improved" version in the Wby and Al NOT compared with the Ruger in the matter of a better deal for safety's sake? It is quite apparent to me, at least, that is due to the "improved" versions bettering the Ruger in ballistics, which has nothing to do with the matter of "swiftness" of one over the other. Have I made the point? Is the (honest) question understood, that has NOTHING to do with preferences of style, compactness, etc?
Perhaps we all have our preferences and tastes in rifles as we do in other matters, and that's legit, but for the ordinary "joe" it has little to do with the finite improvement of swiftness in working the action. Over 60+ years of hunting I've often enough chosen a single-shot in small, medium and large calibers, just because I like 'em.
Bob
www.bigbores.ca
