Home Forums Hunting & Shooting Ask The Gunwriters Are there practical reasons to own a .300 H&H?

Or is it all just nostalgia?

thanks in advance for your replies...

It’s better today than it was when it was created in my opinion. It cycles like it’s greased, gets excellent speeds that nip on the Win Mag, seems very accurate as well. I’d easy cave for the right one. Right now I’m enjoying the P64 rechambered to 300 Wby but I would have been just as happy with the H&H.

Easy. You find an old classic beauty and it's a Super .30. No flies on the ballistics either. Originally, it was designed, so I've read, to match .30/06 ballistics safely in hot climates. Needs a long action or (my preference) a nice falling block.

They feed very well and handle heavy bullets exceptionally well.

No.

It has the same capacity as a WSM, but requires a magnum-length action. WSM brass and ammo are everywhere, but H&H brass is rare. The Win Mag is even more prolific in guns and components, and outdoes the old round's ballistics. No practical reasons to select the H&H today.

Because you want one?

If one came your way free of charge with plenty of loading supplies, loaded ammo, and you didn't own any other big game rifles but you did need one, sure. Other than the above scenario playing out, not really.

The Remington Classic is a fine gun. They chambered it one year. One sold in the classifieds not long ago for around 900.00

New in the box 300 H&H Classic on GB for 1600.00

No practical reason but almost guaranteed your buddies won’t have one. 😀 I’ve got two, a Remington 721 made in the month I was born and a used Rem 40-XB

No. Not when you can get a 300 WSM that gives better velocity out of a short action than the 300 H&H gives from a full length magnum action.



There's no denying that the 300 H&H is cool and there are some beautiful rifles chambered in it. I'd be happy to own one, but if I were designing a modern hunting rifle it wouldn't be in 300 H&H.

Practicality has no bearing on what rifles float my boat. I love my 300 H&H's !

Yep, practicality is often highly overrated. Which is why I've had four .300 H&H's.

John, Is practical ever mentioned in the definition of "Rifle Loony"? Just curious.

Well I've used my pre-64 from the Alaskan Peninsula to Sonora Mexico on everything from Brown Bear to Sonoran Whitetail. Also shot a 363 Bull Elk with it among other things. I used 200 grain Partitions in Alaska and 180 grain Partitions elsewhere. Worked just fine!

I'd love on in a pre 64, just struggle at the price they bring currently.
Then again, I want a 7x57 on a mauser action whereas a 7-08 is not particularly of interest!

The .300 H & H is cool.. Mine is a #1, but have had several 721's one model 70 and one rebarreled 700.. Think I might still have that barrel some where..

I don't own a 300 Mag of any flavor, just don't feel like I need one for whitetails. The only 300 Mag that could tempt me is the H&H. Just a cool old cartridge.

As to the question about any practical reason, probably not.

The idea that when a new shape of shell comes out that the old shell suddenly stops working right is just dumb.

The 300 H&H is at least as good today as it ever was and with modern powders it's actually better.

I have made so many 300s of various types that I have lost count of them. 300 H&Hs 300 Win mags, 308 Normas, 30-338s, 300 Weatherbys, a few 300 Ultras and so on. In the field I can't tell the difference in any of them as to how well they kill. In fact the fastest ones are the ones that seem to present the most problems in loads and bullet performance if you don't pay attention tot he details.

I have paired down my 30s to a 30-30, a few 308s, a few 30-06s and one 300, which is an H&H. I sold my last 300 Win mag a few years ago. It had a 26" barrel on it. I chronographed it along side my 300 H&H and there was no practical difference at all. In fact with my 200 grain loads my H&H is actually 12 FPS faster.

Both rifles shot under MOA.

The 300 Win Mag was on an M70 Winchester and my H&H (one of 3 I have owned) is on a Mauser which I just like the looks of better.
So I kept the 300H&H.

"Practical" is not something that entered my mind because there is nothing impractical about it any more than any other 300.

If total practicality was of any concern to me at all, I would probably only own a 308 Winchester and a 30-06 and forget every other 30 cal ever made.

But "practical" is not a concern to a gun buff.

Enjoyment is the 1st concern.

steve,

Yeah, there are impracticalities about owning a .300 H&H. If you don't handload, ammo is hard to find and not very varied, and even if you do handload brass can be hard to find.

Other than that, the .300 H&H works fine, but to turn your logic in the opposite direction, it doesn't do anything the other .300's don't.

Bingo! Since when does a rifle loony need a practical reason?

Nostalgia only. But that's not a bad thing.

I agree and the pros & cons have been well discussed.

If I had a 300 H H, it would HAVE to be in a Nostalgic Rifle. I would not want to build a custom nor to have it in any NEW production rifle.

Nostalgia = Nostalgia


Jerry

I do not see the practicality.
But, the 300 H&H is one cool cartridge !!
I am not a big fan of 300's, but of course have a couple.

The 300 H&H is one that I could learn to be fond of.
A 300 H&H rifle matched to a 375 H&H rifle is an interesting idea to me.

Yes... just another brass cylinder, and a poor one at that.

Live in the time you live, where you are now. Build memories from this place, not upon the shoulders of another man long gone.

Well, the .300 H&H was a product of it's times. It was originally designed to reproduce 1920's .30-06 velocities with Cordite, which was VERY heat-sensitive, the reason the case was a lot larger than the .30-06's, and considerably tapered--which aided extraction if the case got a little sticky. Which is also the reason for the shallow shoulder angle, which was the reason for the belted case: The shoulder angle of 8.5 degrees wasn't even as much as the .375 H&H's 15 degrees, so was worthless for headspacing.

Which is why the .300 H&H is prone to case stretching and hence short case life. How long the cases last depends on how closely the belt matches the the chamber, which is a crapshoot with today's brass in any rifle. I know this (again) because I've owned and handloaded for several .300 H&H rifles, including a pre-'64 Model 70, a Ruger No. 1 and a custom-barreled Model 70 Classic.

.300 H&H brass is available, though not nearly as often as .300 WSM, .300 Winchester and .300 Weatherby, and when it is available costs more. Because of the case shape it doesn't last as long.

As far as the .300 H&H "feeding" better, I've owned several .300 WSM, .300 Winchester and .300 Weatherby rifles and they all have fed just fine--except for the very first .300 WSM, a first-year M70 Classic in .300 WSM made before the bugs got worked out.

The .300 H&H has just about exactly the same powder room as the .300 WSM, and at the same pressures is capable of the same velocities. This was proven years ago in project I suggested to Charlie Sisk, who first chambered a barrel in .300 H&H and tried several loads, with pressure-testing. Then he rechambered it to .300 WSM, keeping the throat in as close to the same place as possible. The same powder charges and bullets resulted in basically the same velocities and pressures.

The .300 H&H is a case designed for powder problems that no longer exist, so involves problems (and expenses) that are non-existent for newer .300 magnums. If somebody has a .300 H&H and plenty of brass, obviously it produces ballistics resembling most other .300 magnums, so will work well.

I've dealt with a bunch of rifles that have even more practical problems, and will again. The official motto of our little company, riflesandrecipes.com, is "Need has nothing to do with it." But for me to deal with another .300 H&H with require running across some REALLY nifty old rifle. I'll then go ahead with knowledge of the H&H's "practical" problems.

I've had very good case life with .300 H&H brass. Like most other rifle cartridges, especially belted ones, I size just enough so that a little effort is required to close the bolt. After five or six firings, a full-length sizing may be required. I would guess that full-length sizing of H&H brass everytime would result in case separation after two or three loadings.

It's discussions like this one that might make a guy realize that what appeals to him may or may not be rationally justifiable. Sometimes I like stuff---or NOT---just because. I'll bet I ain't the only one.

Practical? absolutely not but as a rifle "loon" and historical one as well. I've been fortunate the pre-war 70 I have shoots just about everything to POI with varying bullet weights, especially the 180 and 200 gr Partitions. Using the old Nosler reloading manual, I was never able to break 2900 fps with the 180s, but after I switched to RL-22, it is an honest 3000 fps rifle. I have a lifetime supply of WW brass, but this rifle doesn't really care if I shoot RP, Nosler or Hornady brass and I've even been known to use the old 220gr RN Horndays as well (and talk about a COOL looking round that is simply devastating on hogs). It's like a beautiful woman with expensive tastes, but hell, life's just too short to shoot "practical", if I wanted that, I'd have an ugly wife and shoot a 308.

lotech,

I've used that technique not only in my own .300 H&H's but a couple loaned for testing. It CAN work, but depends very much on the dimensions of the belt of the cases, and the chamber.

It's lot like "gently" resizing any of the older tapered cases that headspace on a rim or belt, instead of a substantial shoulder. It depends a lot on the fit between the rim/belt of the particular brass and the particular chamber. In a higher-pressure round like the .300 H&H this is more critical than in a low-pressure case like the .22 Hornet, but the results still vary.

Would the H&H be a prime candidate for sizing with a collet die?

I have a Zastava 300HH length action out in the shop. On a new barrel, the 300HH would not be even thought about. 300 Weatherby most likely, since I have the Die set.

That's a good enough reason for me. I've never bothered to rationalise a cartridge choice. I buy the rifle in the cartridge I want purely for interest, nostalgia or whatever you call it. All three of my .257 Roberts's are built on standard length actions (.30-06 length). Rationally, it would make more sense to turn them into .25-06s to use the wasted magazine space. But the .25-06 just doesn't grab me as the .257 Bob does. So I don't worry about it. I enjoy hunting deer with a .257 Roberts and for me, that's what it's all about.

If you want a .300H&H go get one and enjoy it.

Well now, I do have to concede that point about factory ammo. To be honest, I didn't even think of that because in center fire rifle ammo, I bet I have not bought 100 rounds of factory ammo in the last 50 years combined. I just aotomatically assume I am going to provide my own ammo.
So you point is accepted and taken.

Brass..............only a problem if you want the head stamp to read "300 H&H"

I just run a 375 H&H through the die and bingo...got it.
No problem at all.

When I was in high school, my dad approached me one day with the cutest little round I'd ever seen. It was a tiny case, with a 17 caliber bullet. He told me it was a 17 K-Hornet, and then went on to excitedly describe the particulars of the case and the gun he'd gotten. He was so excited about that little cartridge. Looking back now, I can see that he sold me that day on cases where the taper had been taken out for both capacity and case life. It was the case shape though, that stuck with me. I suppose that's partially why I've never found the 300 H&H appealing. I have no desire for one, and never did. I'd build a Win Mag long-throated for 3.6" COL today on a 700 if I was after that kind of performance in a 30. To each his own.

Now there's a motto to hang your Rifle Loony hat on.

There is a reason I load for over 40 different cartridges and practicality isn't it. In fact I have more die sets I need to get rifles for.

All .30 caliber components are readily available. Hornady makes cases and have been in constant supply for years. With the internet, finding cases is not a problem.
Loaded factory ammo is limited in comparison to other main stream calibers but not a problem to a rifle loony and hand loader.

It has a better length neck for loading the heavier bullets without losing powder capacity as in the .300 WM.
You can load it pretty stout or mild to suit your fancy. It will NATURALLY feed and extract slicker than most. No custom gunsmithing required to make it digest cartridges like others.
It is capable of extreme accuracy. In the right hands, it has unlimited potential in the field. It has been around for a few years and not withered away like some. With today's bullets/components it is deadlier than ever and keeps pace with the newer.

To me, it is a 63 split window Corvette with a 427 CI. No need to justify it if you can afford it. Sexy can be expensive.

MLF,

You suffer under a common misconception, that somehow a longer neck prevents a seated bullet from taking up powder room. This is because you (and many shooters) believe all the powder room in a bottlenecked case is below the neck.

It isn't. There's also powder capacity IN the neck. The rule of thumb is that seating bullets about one caliber deep is required to hold bullets firmly. This means that in .30 caliber cartridges, seating bullets more than .30 deep is "losing powder capacity," to the same extent as seating them into the body of the case below the neck. A bullet's shank takes up the same amount of room, wherever it ends up.

But the .300 Winchester Magnum, as Bob Hagel pointed out in the 1970's, also has plenty of room for powder AROUND the bullet's base. The .300 H&H's shallow shoulder prevents this, which is exactly why a .300 Winchester Magnum actually has more powder capacity with a 200-grain bullet seated than the .300 H&H. I know this from actually measuring the powder capacity of both rounds with a 200-grain Nosler Partition seated to the standard industry overall length--not guessing it due to a misconception fostered by many old-time gun writers.
And one of the rules of internal ballistics is that more powder space allows more velocity when cartridges are loaded to the same pressure. It's the same principle involved in internal-combustion automobile engines: There is no replacement for displacement.

In fact, with the same bullet seated to standard industry OAL, the .300 WSM has just about exactly the same powder capacity as the .300 H&H. I also know this from actually owning and measuring the capacity of both rounds, which is why they're both capable of the same velocities, when loaded to the same pressure in the same barrel length. I mentioned an pressure/velocity experiment proving this earlier, which apparently you missed--but it does result in another interesting fact that actually can help .300 H&H handloaders. There isn't much new pressure-tested loading data for the H&H these days, especially with newer powders, because the round isn't very popular anymore. But you can use .300 WSM data for newer powders when loading the .300 H&H. I know this, again, because of actually doing it, not guessing.

I might also mention that while some early .300 WSM's had feeding problems, but they disappeared shortly after the cartridge was introduced in 2001. I've owned several .300 WSM's in the past dozen years, from various manufacturers, and all fed very slickly without any "custom" work.

Yes, Hornady has made .300 brass for several years now, and it's good stuff. But it isn't nearly as available as brass for the .300 WSM or .300 Winchester, and when it is costs more. I looked at the four websites where I buy most of my handloading stuff, and only one had Hornady .300 H&H brass in stock, for $56 per 50 cases. Brass for the other two could be be easily found for $32 to $40 per 50 on all four sites.

Now obviously that cost wouldn't matter to a guy like you, who has a '63 Corvette, but it would to many other people. And this thread is about practical reasons to own a .300 H&H.

I'm glad so many people find owning one a nifty rifle-loony experience, partly because I've been among those, and may well be again in the future. But the practical reality is the .300 H&H is NOT a superior case design, because it appeared when powders were very different than they are today, and there's no practical reason to choose one over a .300 WSM or .300 Winchester Magnum.

That 300 H&H Classic is back in the classified section for 900.00 with scope

Absolutely impractical. But I love it for reasons beyond practicality. It’s a Ruger #1, has shot like a target rifle right out of the box. I’ve thought of punching it out to 300 Weatherby, but then I get cold shivers and shakes.

And the biggest reason to have it: It’s lucky!

Yeah, my No. 1 .300 H&H shot very well too. But like many rifles over the decades, somebody eventually wanted it more than I did!

Practical?? Nah. Want?? For me absolutely! So much of a want I searched & found a New Haven 1990's Win M70 Safari Express in 375H&H as a doner. So I could have a matching pair of Safari Expresses one chambered in 375H&H and one chambered in 300H&H. Both rifles are setup exactly the same, scope, mounts, Teflon coated metal, down to the same rifle sling.
Nostalgia? Yeah! Is the 300H&H as good or better than any other 30 cal magnums? Probably not. Is it more expensive to feed? Maybe. All in all I don't care about that stuff. I've always read everything I could geta my hands on about hunting Africa, which is where my love affair started for Holland & Holland cartridges.
For me they work, period. I can load both cartridges with whatever is laying on my reloading room floor, seat a good bullet on top of it, and both cartridges shoot well. Felt recoil, I think, is less than the younger cartridges using the same bullet weights. Might just be my perception?
I like'm both so well neither will be sold...but passed on to my son.
Of course I'm by no means trying to convince anybody that they need to own a 300H&H. But if you do get one or have one now, I hope you enjoy it as much as I enjoy mine.

There's a friend of mine who posts over on AR, that has THE most beautiful pair of matched custom rifles by Duane Wiebe in 300 & 375 H&H. Hunted africa with them as well.

Hmmm someone else had the same idea?!?

there is the cool factor....

for some reason, I think the cooooolest looking round I've ever seen, is a
300 H & H with a 220 grain Round Nose on it...

That, LLBean hunting boots, plaid wool coat and hunting cap...

and its 1954 all over again...

Because it is cool as [bleep]! Found a 300 H&H empty case when I was Antelope hunting at 14 and just thought it looked cool. Makes me want to go shoot my 721. It may not be the perfect choice. But it is never a bad one.

A more apt description of the other side of the pillow would be hard to find...

If you want one, get one!!

You could say that about any chambering. I like It, usually feeds smoothly , better than the moderns and puts up good numbers.

all this talk about the 6.5 Creedmoor just makes me want a 300 H&H; seems to be a logical Contrarian choice.

Practicality has beans to do with it. Of course it’s performance won’t equal my .300 Weatherby but it is way cooler if it’s in a classic rifle!

Anyone who would not love to own a .300 Holland in a classic rifle should turn in their Rifle Looney Card and maybe their Man Card while they’re at it!

Happy Trails

Interesting.

Was the 427 available in 63?

Nope. It didn't exist yet.

According to Wikipedia the 1963 engine was a 327. 109 units were built for racing with at least one with an experimental 427 driven at Riverside by Junior Johnson. The 1963 Impala could be had with a factory 427, so it did exist. But maybe not in a production Vette. Happy Trails

I think that was a W engine, not the MkIV.

That's how I recall it, I was thinking only in the Impala though. The 427 must of had some issues, since Chevy pulled back production and then released the 396 in mid-65 (not the 427 until later). I had a high performance 396 in a 65 1/2 Super Sport Impala. My brother had a high performance 396 in a 66 chevelle. The main issue with my SS396 was the Impala's aerodynamics. It started "floating" at a little over 140 mph. I had a hard time trying to keep it on a 2 lane road when attempting top end.

They were not perfect mechanically. I had to change points on it about every 5,000 miles. Plugs more often than that. The springs on mine should have beeen replaced as it "settled".

I really liked that car.

And the 396 didn't hold up very well in racing!

Only practical if you are gifted one or find one at a price you simply can't pass up.

Can't see any reason to buy or have one built as there are better practical choices on the market.

You kidding me? Heck ya, get one in a old Mod. 70 Super Grade and then go buy another in Three Seven Five H&H and look in the mirror at a happy man!

Love my Sako FN actioned 300 H&H mag. Shoots as well as any in my collection. Factory ammo is available and cost a bit, have plenty of brass and components so don't care.

I bought one 8 months ago to convert to 7mmSTW, but I have since found some better candidates.

I bought 300 H&H dies and brass... maybe I will shoot it. A friend of mine told me about a trip to Africa and all the things he shot with a 300 H&H.

Jorge - you can’t know how much I love that !!

Jerry

A fellow I knew told me that when you pick a wife think of a station wagon. None of your friends will want to drive it. It is the most practical car to own.
If you pick a sports car, you have no idea how many miles are on it and everyone wants to take it for a test drive. And it isn’t very practical.
I think he was preparing me for when I met his wife.

Jerry

I've got a semi-custom Rem 700 in .300 H&H that is quickly becoming one of my favorite rifles. I've only killed one elk and a caribou with it, but I really like it so far. It's a long round, even for a magnum so using long, high B/C bullets isn't practical at all if you want rounds in the magazine. It isn't powder efficient for the speeds it gets either.

It is, however, nostalgic. If that kind of thing is important to you than by all means go for it. It is no better or worse than any flavor of 7 or 300 mags from a practical standpoint.

Please elaborate a bit.

Mathman, I went and took a look at my reloading data, cause you made me question myself.

With Reloader 22, my H&H is using 70 grains for 2985 FPS while a friend's .30-06 I was playing with was getting 2750 FPS with 62 grains. That's only 235 extra FPS for 8 grains (or 12%) more powder. I guess it is a bit subjective as to whether or not that extra FPS is worth the extra cost in powder and possibly recoil, blast, action length, etc.

With IMR 4831, my .300 H&H uses 73 grains to reach right at 3000 FPS, where my .300 Win is (or was, since I gave the rifle to my nephew) using 74 grains to reach right around the same speed, so these two are pretty close, though both use a lot more powder than -06 or 308 sized rounds. All three of these rifles were shooting the same 180 grain bullet when I wrote all this down.

These are small sample sizes, so if you have contrasting notes, I'd like to hear your thoughts.
My H&H does have 2 more inches of barrel than the other two rifles though. I am not sure how much of a difference that makes.

My dad, the most frugal, utilitarian man on the planet once told me you didn't have to need a gun to buy one, you just had to want it. If you wanted to consider practicality or utility, fine, do so. But, those two variables didn't really matter...the only things that mattered were "want" and having enough money to buy the gun (of course).

my bother has a Winchester model 70 super grade made in 1948 in 300 H&H, nothing special but way cool! we were at are favorite gun store checking velocity on the factory boxes of factory loaded ammo and with a 180gr bullet, between the 300 win mag and the300 Winchester super silly mag and the 300 H&H is only 20 feet per second.

I think I would own a 300 H&H just because of the cool factor!

Me too.... Even though I like my 300 WSM it just doesn't have that throwback, retro, coolness factor that the .300 H & H does.

Absolutely not.....in fact, there's little to no reason to own any .30 cal larger than the .30-06....the magnums (all of them) are simply overkill designed to collect hunters dollars.

I think I’d prefer a 30 Super, myself.

I have a 700 magnum action and a 24" SS 30-06 bbl that is begging to become a 300H&H "parts gun" in an old Brown Precision stock.

It won't be pretty.

I’m thinking about getting one. See what you done!

Love my super 30's .Still have 2 sold my Ruger # 1 on this site.

I appreciate your answer. I asked you to elaborate because I wasn't sure if your comment was about the efficiency of 300 mags vs smaller rounds (which you have made clear here) or if it was the H&H vs other 300 mags. I used to gig my 257 Weatherby shooting friend about how my 250 Savage got better than 80% of the velocity with less than half the powder.

The only really practical reason to own a .300 H&H is because there just plain isn't much in this world with that kind of cool factor...


And it IS efficient. It was my favorite cartridge for elk..

When I was doing a LOT of hunting the main battery was a 7x57, a .300H&H, and a .375 H&H...can you tell I like the classics?

No problem.

Glad we're on the same page.

The larger the case the less efficient. But then there’s a minimum too. Who wants to hunt caribou with a 300 blackout?

It seems that when one wants to promote a smaller case, the word efficient is brought up.

Yes a 30-06 is more efficient than a 300 Mag, a 308 is more efficient than a 30-06, a 308 Marlin is more efficient than a 308 Win, and a 300 Savage is more efficient than any above.

If it were just for efficiency sake, there would be no more Weatherby’s or belted magnums and 3,000 fps would not be likely.

But others put more priority on velocity.

Where’s your happy medium? If you’re hunting pronghorn, efficiency may not be your highest priority. But if you’re hunting from a stand and will be shooting at 50 yards then an ultra magnum may not be your first choice.

There ya go Bugg. IMO there are too many who miss that point.
Efficiency has its place AFAIC. But efficiency is not the END ALL.

As a personal example,
I like/use the 7 RM and have no complaints BUT

IMO the 7 RUM is over the top. I’m not just referencing recoil, I also shoot/hunt the 8 RM.

Jerry

Sometimes you just have to quit worrying about efficiency, feet per second, case life, and what other folks say on the internet- and just get out and shoot.

Well "Practical" is a word that may be perceived differently by different people.
I earn my living (about 985% anyway) making flintlocks. Are they "practical"?
Yes, if the purpose is to enjoy one more then you might enjoy (as an example) an AK47 or an AR15. Having be as far behind in my work load as 8 years, apparently there are many dozens of men and women that agree.

For customers who disagree within the State of Wyoming, I also have a lot of experience making ARs and AKs too.
Some still prefer a classic Bolt action, like a 98 Mauser, a Lee "Speed" or a Mannlicher–Schönauer. I just made a classic-looking left handed bolt action for a man in 9.3X62 by re-shaping a Ruger M77 Mk2 and re-barrelling it to that caliber with a barrel I contoured to the classic 1910 shape.
Is that as practical as an FN-FAL?

Many will say yeas. Many others will say no.

gnoahhh above may be closest to the real issue here.

Who cares if it's not practical in someone else's eyes.

I have owned and used several 300s in my life. I sold them all except my 300H&H. Why? Because I like it the best. Ballistics are in the same league as most others 300s and I can't tell ANY difference in how well it kills elk than any other 300 at any range.

I just like the classic lines best.
It makes me enjoy the gun more then the other eight 300s I have owned, so to me it's the most practical of them all.

I never said efficiency is the end all. That said, I remain convinced that a lot of folks are over gunned and over scoped.

Truer words were never spoken. I can't tell you how many nimrods I see in the deer woods armed with magnums of some sort with scopes bolted on that would do a Marine sniper in Afghanistan proud. Do they entertain Walter Mitty-like dreams of mountain-to-mountain shots at sheep, or wish they were staring at a riled up brown bear? I don't get it.

Nature abhors a vacuum!

Always worked for me

I remain convinced that a lot of folks are under-skilled, ignorant, and inexperienced. I am also convinced that much of what most folks "know" is contradicted by facts.

I have had several 300 H&Hs. I think it is a really easy to get to shoot round, it feeds smoother than any of my other rifles- even ones of the same make and I just ordered brass for it- Midway or Graffs had Norma brass at about a buck a pop.

I am taking it to Africa in a couple of weeks and will probably hunt with factory 180 grain Fail safe ammo. It also really likes 150 Partition Golds so that is what I will load.

I had Redding make me a custom die. My brass last plenty long now with almost no trimming.

Yes, it requires a long action but it is a hunting rifle, not a target rifle where I am trying to pry the utmost accuracy out of it. When I bought the current one, it was to be a donor for a 375. I made the mistake of shooting it first.

My group of 4 that is headed across the pond next month are taking three 300 H&Hs. My second gun is a 458 Lott. Both are nostalgic African cartridges.

I've got absolutely nothing of value to add to this thread, but here's my .300 H&H. I really like it so far.
Both of these critters could have easily been taken with a .308 or even a .243, but that's not the point. I just really like this rifle.

szihn said, “Who cares if it’s not practical in someone else’s eyes?”

I agree and it’s great that we have choices and that we are not all alike.
It would not only be boring, but consider the difficulty in finding ammo or
components IF we only had 2 or 3 rifles and cartridges to choose ! !

I’ve had a Rem 700 8mm RM for quite a few years. I’ve hunted it and killed WT
with it..... practical ? NO. Then why, because I wanted to !

ATST what animal is too tough for a 200 gr Nosler Partition at 3100 FPS ?
I’m prepared for anything that I might hunt.

I’ve also wanted to ‘play’ with a 416 RM for a long time. I’m not buying one but
if I did, what diff is it to anyone else?

There are a few smaller cartridges that I have NO interest in owning or shooting.
Some of those are very popular among us loony’s... I don’t criticize those who adore those rounds.

Variety is good for US.

Jerry

Tinman...I thought I was the only one to take a 300 H&H to Alaska caribou hunting.....

And that sums it up pretty well. And is the reason most of us have neat rifles in odd chamberings

My ugly wife/rifle comments still stand, but I forgot to add this: My pre-war 70 shoots 180gr Partitions, TTSXs and 200gr Partitions to the SAME POI out to 200 yards. Pretty darned practical in my view.

I'm doing some serious downsizing right now. When I'm done will be down to a 257Roberts, 275Rigby, 280Remington and a 300HH for scoped big game rifles, all of which have been eclipsed by "better" more modern chamberings.

Hey Super Cub, are you just now getting ready to use some of those 300 H&H cases that went your way some time ago?

I don't have an H&H but do have a 300 WSM which is ballistically the same thing. It seems to be a nicely balanced cartridge and was easy to get shooting well.

All the best from Ontario.

Jim

I don't need one, don't have one, but would like to have one.