http://forums.outdoorsdirectory.com/showthread.php?t=20916

Not sure if this is true, old news, or new news. Read and decide for yourself.

Yes, It's been reported before and not much of any response.

IMO Ruger has lost it here.....shortening the .375 Ruger case for those calibers is a mistake IMO!

For the 6.5 and .257 it might have been a winner!

Here's the basic press release from Hornady:

Hornady’s New Ruger Compact Magnums are Extreme Cartridges for Extreme Hunting
(Grand Island, NE) – Based on the beltless 375 Ruger, the 300 and 338 RCM’s are engineered to offer 300 and 338 Win Mag performance, but in a more compact package. A new generation of cartridge design provides unmatched ballistic performance, less felt recoil, longer barrel life, and superior performance at all temperatures, in a package that is well suited to all hunting environments and conditions any hunter may encounter. The 300 RCM is available in 150, 165 and 180-grain SST offerings. Each 300 RCM load exceeds comparative 300 Win Mag loads from a 20" barrel. Muzzle velocities for the 300 RCM are 3,170 fps, 3,030 fps, and 2,900 fps, respectively – from a 20" factory barrel. The 338 RCM is available in the newly developed 200 gr SST, and 225 gr SST offerings. Velocities for the 338 RCMs are 2,850 fps and 2,710 fps respectively, easily out performing the 338 Win Mag at equal barrel length. Together with Ruger, Hornady has developed these cartridges to fit Ruger’s new quick-handling M77 Hawkeye. Weighing in at 6.5 pounds, the rifle features a 20-inch barrel, LC6 trigger and updated stock dimensions. This partnership between the two shooting industry leaders results in a compact and highly effective package. Headquartered in Grand Island, Nebraska, Hornady Manufacturing has been one of the world’s leading producers of bullets, ammunition and reloading equipment for more than 50 years.


Ken....

Stupid, IMHO.

We need more short magnums like we need new football bats.

I predict that these will go the way of the .480 Ruger.

What gets me is how so many people feel NO excitement when I read the forums on so many 'me too' products, and yet companies continue pushing for new 'duplicate performance' products, 'in a different package' but perhaps we are the minority?

So ... a lightweight 338RCM has no application for say elk hunting where your carrying in/out of a remote area? Personally I reckon that one may be applicable to the niche of ultralight backpacking rifles.
Otherwise ... give us the full-length cases ... make mine a 35cal
Cheers...
Con

quote:

Originally posted by Fjold:
Stupid, IMHO.

We need more short magnums like we need new football bats.

NOW THAT was some funny shit!! (and very true)

Typical American P&L driven marketing fiascos!! When was the last time an American Rifle manufacturer developed a totally new bolt action design which was not based on any previous design and was an improvement?!?! Hmmmm?

Ya know, they seem a little more sane than the Winchester WSMs and definitely the WSSMs...

They also went with a 338 bore, instead of trying to be special like Winchester with an 8mm bore in the 325 WsM..

Not for max performances, but I definitely see an interest on my end for some down load potential out of those style cases...

Also check out the new 6.5 Creedmore on their site...

Plus they are doing the Leverolution stuff in the 32 Win Special and are doing a 30 grain V max on the 22 Win Mag Rimfire.. which is kinda cool, if the cost isn't thru the roof...
hopefully keeping it at the 17 HMR prices...

quote:

Originally posted by Rx7dryver:
I predict that these will go the way of the .480 Ruger.

the what?

This was an interesting thread. Everybody seems to be of the opinion that a 300 or 338 Ruger is a silly duplication of something already available, an answer to a question nobody asked if you will. If that is true for the 300 and 338 Ruger, why isn't it equally so for the .375 Ruger?

Dave

What Dave said.

Seafire, I had not seen the press release before but just googled up the 6.5 Creedmore.

Now THIS is what needs to have been made long ago, it could have negated a need IMHO for the 243 and 260, as the 'user friendly' specs might make this round a strong competitor against the 6.5x47, something that Hornady likely intended to begin with, jumping on Lapua's lead very quickly and as the info I read says, designed for David Tubbs and DPMS panther guns, how about an AR-15 style rifle with 260 ballistics, a tad more efficient and perhaps more accurate. This round may offer an accuracy improvement I would feel over the 260.

On the pros of a 260, you can ALWAYS reform 243 or 308 brass when needed and ammo and firearms are readily available, and stocked.

This round has mild shooting characteristics with very DEER capable, etc. performance that would appeal to may guys who really don't need a WSM recoil/power in a deer rifle.

Marketing towards competitive shooters may help this ctg. thrive and survive. When I spoke to Hornady last year, it was talked about a 270 TC in the works, but I see this hit news to me first.

About time the US gets more proactive in recognizing and promoting the 6.5mm's. They are all good. Heck a good 6.5x52 or 54 modern rifle, loaded up in good brass would also do a nice job.

I am happy to see it, but not sure if I will embrace it over the 260 or 6.5x47, but I expect this round to do well, because IT makes sense, being balanced, not overbore, or excessive.

Hats off to Hornady. The big question for Hornady is will their brass equal or better Lapua? Large primer vs small in x47 version, so small differences, imagine individual gun and shooters/loads will make the difference in competition.

Awwww, a 120 amax now ! That would be a lights out deer bullet, not that the 140 isn't.

3PuJtPndR4J:accurateshooter.wordpress.com/+6.5+Creedmore&hl=en&ct=clnk&cd=1&gl=us" TARGET=_blank>http://64.233.169.104/search?q=cache3PuJtPndR4J:accur...n&ct=clnk&cd=1&gl=us

Thanks for making me notice Seafire. And yes to the 338 bore, as it my choice in a mid bore, with 35 being right there. Love metrics in 6, 6.5, and 7mm but not an 8 or 9mm fan. A 9.3, now that I could get interested in, some day.

The 6.5 Creedmore does sound interesting. Here is a BLOG from www.6mmbr.com describing the new cartridge (you have to scroll down a bit):

http://accurateshooter.wordpress.com/

- mike

With a claimed six percent more case capacity than the 375 H&H how much better is the 375 Ruger???

Will these new RCM cartridges really compete with the 300 & 338 WM?

When loaded to the same pressure with identical barrel lengths what is the real world difference???

I bet some folks would be surprised…

My guess is that they’d have to stomp the hell out of these cartridges (pressure wise) to get the performance they claim…

And I doubt that any of us can get that performance out of our rifles over our chronographs…

New cartridges can be exciting and all…

But why Ruger went the short magnum route beats the hell out of me???

Short cartridge means short brass and short action which really means short on material. Ruger is in the investment casting biz. The less they have to pour to make their gear the better the balance sheet looks.

Short guns with short bolt handles and short cartridges are cool unless you are tall or have monkey arms (me ) in which case they seem like a toy!

I don't know, I am interested by them but I am also often distracted by shiny new objects. I am a bit of a gimmick or gadget whore though.

http://www.hornady.com/story.php?s=761

well, not interested in a short one...
i want 340 webby in a standard action, not a 338win in a short one

jeffe,
Or ... a 338WinMag at lower pressures For those worried about material savings, wouldn't everything last longer if they just ran a full length case at lower pressures? 100 cases would last a longer time, barrels would last longer, rifles would hold up longer

I might be weird ... but if I had of had a choice between a 350RemMag and a 338RCM in a short actioned 22" barrelled Ruger ... I'd just about have gone for the 338RCM. The market was screaming for a 338WSM ... Ruger's given it to them.
Cheers...
Con

quote:

Originally posted by Dave Bush:
This was an interesting thread. Everybody seems to be of the opinion that a 300 or 338 Ruger is a silly duplication of something already available, an answer to a question nobody asked if you will. If that is true for the 300 and 338 Ruger, why isn't it equally so for the .375 Ruger?

Dave

I think it's because the 375 R gives more than 375H&H performance in a standard long action. It is competing against only one popular cartridge and offers it in a standard size action made by all the manufacturers.

It's a great thing for us lefties. I can pull the barrel off my 7 Rem Mag and stuff a new tube on the front and have a legitimate DG rifle.

The new short Rugers compete against two-four other 300s in the same size guns that are common as dirt.

Fjold may have said it better than I can.
But I could take any standard length action say a MK10 in 7mm Mag and put a .375 in it.(At least I think I can) To get an action for an H&H I will have to look a lot harder and spend more money.
I still want a .358 Ruger.
but that shortend case would only intrest me in say a .257...tj3006

I think the new Ruger case on a shortened 404 Jefferys case is what all of you have been crying for over the years, no belt, now you got it and still no one is happy!

It is one heck of a nice case, and should be necked up before they neck it down..I just completed a 416/375 Ruger on a nice std. length mauser action. It will duplicate or surprass the 400gr. bullet at 2400 FPS, ala the 416 Rem and 416 Rigby accepted loads.

Thomas Jones,
It is no big deal to make a 375 H&H on a std. Mauser or M-70 action, you don't need a magnum action for a 375 H&H just open up a std. in the rear on a Mauser and just change the box on a M_70 and tweek it.

How can that be bad.