Home Forums Hunting & Shooting Ask The Gunwriters .375 H&H and .375 Ruger

I have never had nor fired a .375 H&H, but I have a Ruger Alaskan in .375 Ruger. I have no issue at all with the recoil and frankly find it more comfortable than shooting my Winchester M-70 .30-06. A problem I have experienced is the lack of brass availability. It seems that Hornady is the only manufacturer of .375 Ruger brass and that has been unavailable for some time now. Since components seem to be more available recently, I am hoping to see some brass on the market soon.

With the FN/BACO Model 70, you get what you pay for.

The motives or reason for the purchase of anything that puts a significant dent in our finances should, I think, be clearly identified. And that will vary somewhat from person to person where many things are concerned, especially rifles. I'll not elaborate as I think that's understood by all concerned. But how close the purchase of a particular rifle (new or used) seems to fulfill the reason (s) for its purchase to begin with will determine our satisfaction and praise of it, or displeasure with it.

What others have testified, written or said would likely have had a part in the decision to buy it to begin with, but then our personal experience over time will determine whether it finds a secure place at home with us or is sent packing!

I've owned two other .375 H&H's, and for one reason or another they did not meet my expectations (won't get into that right now, but have written about it several times in my blogs). After having owned my Zastava M70 since early March, and having made and used several handloads, and one load in particular for a bear hunt, I'm very satisfied,so far, with this one. Though it weighs 10 lbs ready to hunt, I've come to really like it. No doubt that has something to do with its overall handling and ballistics. It thinks it's a .375 Wby and a match rifle at that! Since April I've written quite a bit about a growing appreciation of this .375 H&H.

If you want, you can find more on those details in some blogs since sometime in April.

Bob
www.bigbores.ca

The only reason I didn't gravitate to the 375 Ruger, was that I already had three 375 H&H's before the Ruger came along (a Whitworth express, a 70 classic stainless, and a Ruger O/U double rifle). I have too much history with these guns to replace them with something that is a ballistic twin.

My favorite part of the 375 Ruger cartridge is that is spawned the 416 Ruger......one of my current favorite rifles/cartridges....400 grains that is within 2" of the crosshairs, out to 200 yards!

Andy3

Uh oh...I might be doing this wrong then. I think I have a couple of rifles that I have no reasonable explanation for owning.

Hey Bob, thanks for the link to your blog. Out of curiosity I read your post on the 375 H&H vs the 9.3x62 and it was interesting. I'll check out the rest later.

10 pounds in a hunt ready 375HH is too much for my tastes.

I will stick with my Browning X-Bolt.

the original 375 H&H rifles weighed right around 8 1/2 pounds and were slim, powerful, lightweight and lively hunting rifles. Very few modern 375 H&H rifles compare .
the Ruger Hawkeye M77 in .375 Ruger however are both compact, light and lively and slightly better the old H&H ballistics with a shorter case designed for modern powders.

My first .375 H&H (back in the mid - '90's) was a slightly used PF M70 with a 24" barrel. It had a barrel contour similar to the M70 - .458 WM, so it was heavy, though I never weighed it. It probably went close to 10 lbs with scope and ammo. And any rifle that weighs 8 1/2 lbs out of the box, with scope and ammo added will come very close to that "dreaded" 10 number as well. Scopes with their attachments will add, on average, another 1 lb + at least (of course. some might use a .375 H&H sans scope or one with a fixed 2x). Plus ammo for a .375 ? Three Rem cases with 81 grns powder + 250gr bullets = 4.5 oz. on my scale. So, starting with a 8.5 lb rifle bare + 1 lb + .28 lb for three cartridges = 9.78 lbs ready. If we choose 300 grn cartridges, make the total wt = 9.84 lbs... close enough to call it 10 lbs. And my current .375 H&H has a 22" barrel, so depending on the Ruger chosen (20" or 23") I doubt one would notice much difference in handling - I'll concede, however, that an Alaskan guide might notice it.

Bob
www.bigbores.ca

Out of curiosity, I just weighed my 416 Ruger. 9 lb 3 oz, including the following:

20" Alaskan (pre muzzle brake, with the barrel band), 4 rounds of 400 grain ammo, 1.5-5 Leupold in Warne QR rings, and a sling. I swapped out the stock to a Ruger Hawkeye synthetic stock, with the magnum barrel inlet.

Very quick and well balanced, for what it is....my new timber rifle for elk, taking the place of a .375 H&H.

Andy3

My answer changes the intent (rules) of the question a little and may not be well accepted by some…..think of the “Kobayashi Maru” no win scenario!

With the .375 Ruger…..it pretty much “is what it is”! With the .375 H&H, a few dollars and a competent gunsmith can convert it into the AI or Weatherby version…..adding a couple hundred (maybe more) fps muzzle velocity, making it a pretty effective long range cartridge and perhaps lengthen case life a bit (which is a pretty big deal with the present component shortages)! All of that, and you can still shoot factory .375 H&H ammunition through your rifle with negligible mv losses! Example: I’m presently shooting 250 grain TTSX’s @ 3130 fps mv from my 24” .375 AI. Hope to build a load this summer with a 270 grain LRX that gives me an accurate 3000 fps mv! 😉

Just thinking out of the box a little! memtb

Don’t ya think it’s a lot about the whole package regarding success of a round. Seems Ruger produced their .375 in a package that Alaskans like, out of the box, right off the dealers shelf. No need to modify or “fix” to suit.

Sorta reminds one of the Creed. Whole package, ready to go with good ammo, etc.

The old H&H, so entrenched in time, having stood the test of time, would be hard to dethrone in areas like Africa.

So, seems to me a combo of time and place, the total package playing a pivotal role in choices.

DF

I like this! My style too! Currently, from my 22" I'm getting sub-moa from the 250gr Sierras at +3000 fps! Hopefully as well from my recent purchase of those 250gr TTSX's. And I've been thinking of a rechamber to the Wby or AI. But if a rechamber then I'd also want some mods to the current stock.

Yet, I'm almost to Wby ballistics already with 2730 fps from the 300gr TSX. All that from a 22" but largely due to "modern" powders: CFE223 and RL17, the best two from personal tests, Sierra tests and QL. (And I just started a new thread on a question re the 250gr TTSX, so memtb you might want to chime in on that - will be appreciated! Thanks.)

Bob
www.bigbores.ca

I seem to think that my M70 375 H&H is built on the same action that a 30-06 is. Could be wrong... It weighs a bit over 7 3/4 pounds with the 2-7X.

It could be Ed. It is hard to tell. The only difference is the length of the ejection port, and the bolt stop. They weigh essentially the same. Usually on the express actions, you can see the rear of the extractor, which I can’t on that rifle above. If you really wanted to know if it was built on an express or not, all you need to do is measure the ejection port length or the length of the rear bridge.

I know we have talked about that one before and you do not think so, but I really think that rifle was built by Lex at Rifles Inc.

I just don't get it. Not all that much difference between the bold throw of a 30-06 length action and one tailored for the .35 H&H. Case in point; one of the most popular rifles around is the Remington M700. The versions that come in 30-06 length cartridges have a magazine long enough to take the .375 H&H cartridge with the long bolt throw attributed to that round, yet I don't hear anyone griping about the "long bolt throw." I have three M700s, two 30-06s, a BDL and a Classic plus a Classic in .35 Whelen. All three will accept a .375 H&H round in the magazine and all three have the long bolt throw. So? Where's the beef?

I also have a Ruger M77 that sits in a Ramline stock (don't ask why) that's been rebarreled to the .375 Chatfield-Taylor. Or the .375 Taylor or .375/338 Magnum, take your choice, they're all the same cartridge. Gunsmith put .375/338 Mag. on the barrel. With a judicious choice of H4350 and either the .270 gr. Hornady SP or 300 gr. Hornady SP the rifle at 7.5 pounds with scope, sling and full magazine will get one's attention. The cartridge will duplicate the .375 H&H and a hair more but duplication was what I was after for a dark timber elk hunt in steep country. Scope is an older Weaver with post and crosshair. I almost never name a rifle but this on is called, "The Hammer" because it hammers at both ends. The rifle is sub-MOA if I can do my part. Never saw the need for the .375 Ruger as I had the Taylor and a Ruger #1H .375 H&H.

My .375 H&H is a Ruger #1H. I like it but haven't hunted with it. Guess it's just too pretty to bang up in the field.
PJ

Yeah, the rear action bridge is an easy way to tell full mag from std. mag; it will have closer scope base screw spacing.

DF

I saw the thread about the 250 TTSX in .375 H&H, but thought my input to be irrelevant, as my experience was with the AI.

I’m running RL 17, and in development I went to 3160 mv without obvious overpressure, but the groups were starting to open up. I backed off a bit for accuracy…..figuring that I’d hit th3 “pressure wall” before finding another accuracy “sweet spot”!

I didn’t want to go as light as 250 grains, and waited a long time ( many phone calls and e-mails to Barnes) waiting on a heavier TTSX. I finally gave up, bought a bunch of 250’s……soon after, Barnes brought out the 270 LRX. Which is my usual luck…..Damn you Barnes! 😁 So, I waited until I had used up some of my 250’s! Waiting on hot weather to work up a load with the 270’s. I only do development on hot days…..I don’t want a temperature related high pressure problem to sneak up on me! memtb

Maybe I missed it in the thread, but I don't recall any individual preference for the case taper on the H&H cartridge. I've not had the fortune of owning or shooting either. I enjoy reading and learning about guns. I recently found a copy of Terry Wieland's second edition "Dangerous Game Rifles." He makes specific mention of the purpose of the extra length and body taper being engineered into the H&H case to a allow space for promotion reliable powder burn in high heat, as well efficient feeding and extraction during a charge from wounded game.

I do own rifles, and hand load for them. His points in the book seem to me to be pretty good. Obviously not relevant for most circumstances on this continent, but maybe important for bears or extreme conditions?

I doubt the above are reasons for the decline of the Ruger cartridge, but sometimes there's several accumulated reasons that effect consumer preference.

Everytime I think about building a .375 Ruger what I cook up in my mind almost always ends up looking an awful lot like an off-the-shelf Ruger Alaskan (hogue notwithstanding). Makes it hard not to just buy one.

Ruger got the package right.

For lefty's, it's a pretty easy decision. There isn't much out there for lefty stainless rifles and Ruger did a good job with their Alaskan.