Reading guns and ammo the other day.
You can imajine how thrilled I was to read that Hornady is joining the short mag parade.
Using the 375 ruger case shortend to .308 length.
1st 2 offerings are a 30 cal and a .338.
Boddington reviews the .338 favorably with a 225 grain bullet from a 20 inch barrel at 2790.
Thats is more or less 100 fps slower than a .338 win from a 24 inch tube.
Whats the use ?
I sure don't get real giddy about it.
How about a .358 on the full length .375 ruger ?
Or a .257 designed expessly as a dear cartridge for the #1. Build it with a 28 inch tube and pack it with enough powder to beat the .257 weatherby.
You should get 3800 and might get 4000 with a 100 grain T-shock.
Now thats breaking new ground !
Why make a new round that does nothing new ?
...tj3006

All the mfgs are looking for the next sales gimmick. Big, little, short, fat, you name it. I really question if new calibers are what we need. I would rather them spend their R&D dollars on quality improvement of the existing firearms. Smooter actions, closer tolerences, better barrels, with bottom line toward improving accuracy. Many of the firearms produced today are nothing more than mass produced boom sticks.

The last thing they are doing is listening to the American shooting public.

Again, they're a solution to a problem that's already been successfully solved - many times. Hey, they have to spend there time doing something in order to justify their jobs - they would be more productive grabbing a broom and sweeping the floors.

The bean counters at their best. I can see no earthly reason to "shorten" the 375 Ruger..

Hey, it works for the car companies. How many jerks do you know that will spend enough to buy several new rifles for a new car cause it will unlock the door when he's so #@%!!* stupid he locks his keys inside and doesn't have a hide out somewhere?

Sometimes I suspect they do it just to be perverse....

One result I see and hate, is how it distorts/destroys the ammo suplies at the local retailers' establishments. NO local dealer can afford to stock 100+ different cartridges, each with two to ten bullet makes/weights/shapes.

The result may make the Hornadys of the world happy in the short run, when they sell those like me 400 rounds of brass the first and only time we buy any of it for a new cartridge. But that is my lifetime supply, folks. As I can't count on it being locally available, I buy enough to last me forever, once.

Okay, so whatever happened to the theory that repeat customers are what keeps a firm in business over rthe long haul?

They do it because they have to sell firearms and ammo to stay in business. Something new may just increase sales enough so the company can stay afloat. Not a whole lot of hunters out there with their 270 Win and 30-06 looking to by another of the same. Variety improves sales and sales supports jobs.

Well, perhaps they could do less of it if they quit paying the ridiculous salaries that their
"executives" and paper-pushers receive.

And maybe they could take at least a little bit of the "less is more" approach. No business can get bigger every year forever. A small business which employes the same folks for many years making a limited number of goods may actually do more for both the owners and society in general than one which constantly pulsates in size, employee numbers, and viability, dependant on international markets...

next up is a 458WM shortened to 1.75" and necked down to 17 cal.
they call it "The Tuna can".

Gentlemen, if the companys did not come out with new cartridges we would have very little to discuss on this forum as the 30-06 is a great round but with the way you guys are thinking it would be one of the few rounds that we would have to work with. And there is only so much that can be discussed that has not allready been hashed out on the 30-06.

Think about all the rounds that where developed in the 1900s a lot of them did not stick but the ones that did are what fill the pages of this forum.

In 40 years it will be interesting to look back and see what stuck and what didn't.

quote:

Think about all the rounds that where developed in the 1900s a lot of them did not stick but the ones that did are what fill the pages of this forum.

ahhh...
the 7-30 waters.
ohhhh....
the 32 SPL.
ahhhhh....
the 375 Winchester.

it will give the industry a boost...
barrels smithing dies reamers ect...
turn a weak 338 federal into a real gun.

basicly an 06 in a short action...

For those who dont want magnum performance and recoil but dont want an anemic cart...

Is it needed...no
Will it be fun? yes

I would like to see a 6.5 and a 35 and a 375 short...use the original 375 for headstamped 375 shortie

338 express?
on the new 308 marlin cart.?

it is not a short mag but an efficient 06!

Veeryy interresting! They perhaps are of the mind set that the wildcaters are falling down on the job and need a little help. Sure you bet!!! roger

quote:

Originally posted by Atkinson:
The bean counters at their best. I can see no earthly reason to "shorten" the 375 Ruger..

Quite frankly, I see no earthly reason for the 375 Ruger...

Though not valuable in themselves, these new rounds, like all new cartridges, encourage the indistrial darwinism of the hunting/gun industy. Somneone else pointed this out, and I agree to a tee... in the end, the only ones that are left are not necessarily the most functional, but the ones that sold the most. Short, fat cartridges are hot now. I'm confident/hopeful that the trend will dissipate in due time. In the mean time, it does give wildcatters more fodder for both conversation and wildcatting itself.

The new stuff brings needed attention to the industry, and honestly, theses guys are advertising to a different group of people than a majority of us on this forum. They are targeting the guy that wants to buy his first or second new rifle in the newest, hottest thing going. The guys at the Cabelas counter won't hesitate to point this stuff out to this uneducated contention of customers, as I'm sure there bosses will be pushing them to sell this new ammo because guys like us aren't buying it. Just an opinion.

All the WSM's require royalties paid to Rick Jamison. Maybe Ruger thinks they can come up with their own short mags that won't and will therefore benefit. They could therefore be sold for less.

Just a thought, even though weak. I don't know what the royalties amount to, but it is probably not enough to make Ruger's short mags successful and Winchester's not.

Let's see now.

.308 length cartride (short action) in .338.

Shoots 225 gr at 2790 with 20" barrel.

PRESTO!!!! CHANGO!!!!

A short action with 24" barrel handloaded to 2900. Instant .338 WM performance in a shorter, handier rifle. SOLD!!!!!

Make mine one of the new M70 Supergrades please.

My guess is it will have 73-75 grains capacity compared to the 68 of the 06...

It is more like an 06 and use magic hornady light mag unreleased powder.

This is not a short mag but a short 06+!

The 338 is more like a 338-06 with 5 to 7 more grains (estimated)

the 338 win mg has 86 grains...

It will split the diff but be closer to the 06 varriant.

it will be great for its intnded use...

what is needed is a 2.1" 375 version for closer to 80 grains and a more sensable 376 steyr.

I thought they should do a 300 ruger. I think it would start slow but would be a good reason to get rid of belts.

But then again getting rid of the belt is easy enough.

--------------------------

Can't believe I will admit this but I just bought a 30-06.

.338cal 225@2790-20"brl(308win length case,.532"casehead) ??
sounds optimistic, considering .338wm factory gives about same vel from 24"brl.

The 300saum case appeals in some way, but something new that is a little less dumpy, no rebated rim and that will comfortably give me 210tsx@2700+ 22-23"brl, makes me not dislike it.

quote:

Originally posted by Boxhead:

quote:

Originally posted by Atkinson:
The bean counters at their best. I can see no earthly reason to "shorten" the 375 Ruger..

Quite frankly, I see no earthly reason for the 375 Ruger...

the 376 could have been supported by industry a bit more and there wouldnt have been one.

quote:

Originally posted by Boxhead:

quote:

Originally posted by Atkinson:
The bean counters at their best. I can see no earthly reason to "shorten" the 375 Ruger..

Quite frankly, I see no earthly reason for the 375 Ruger...

You took the words right out of my mouth.
Paul B.

I am afraid i have to disagree with the those who see no use for the .375 Ruger.
While I will admit that it really gives us nothing new in terms of performance,
To get a crf action long enough for the .375 H&H is a prety expensive trick.
The exception being the CZ.
To set up an enfield or find a H&H length M-70 is rather dificult and expensive.
But If you aready have a .375 H&H then for you the Ruger has no use...tj3006

Mr. Jones you started this thread giving me the idea you where against Hornady using the 375 Ruger as the parent case for other shorter rounds by following your own line of thought you could say that the 375 Ruger is not needed as we all ready had the parent case of the 9.3x64. the 375 Ruger accomplishes very little that is not all ready covered by the 9.3x64 and the 375 H&H.

The only thing that the 375 Ruger accomplishes is being new.But we are against new cartridges if you don't believe me just read this thread.

Sounds like a bunch of you would complain if you got hung with a new rope. Maybe a trip to Australia, England or Russia might be good for you.

quote:

.. Why make a new round that does nothing new ?

yep, thats true,the 300H&H,308normaMag were doing things quite well, but then along comes the 300win....(if only they had the brains to base it on something like the 8x68s)
and with the long xhistance of 7mm bore why bother with inventing a 270win?
and I wonder how many dudes that put shit on the 375ruger also have a .300win?
The std length 375ruger is a working mans & Alaskan dream come true...and if you enjoy the fun pastime&creative art of wildcatting, then the 375ruger offers itself as some nice clay to work with.

quote:

Originally posted by Woodjack:
....and with the long xhistance of 7mm bore why bother with inventing a 270win?

Ohh, Ohh I know the answer to that one. Winchester was making military ammo for the Chinese .277 cal cartridge. As they were already tooled up to make that size of bullet, they decided to try it as a sporting slug (no sense in letting the tooling go to waste).

375 Ruger short?

Just one more thing a man with a 9.3X62 need not concern himself with.

How's that for nose in the air

Terry

quote:

Originally posted by Tailgunner:

quote:

Originally posted by Woodjack:
....and with the long xhistance of 7mm bore why bother with inventing a 270win?

Ohh, Ohh I know the answer to that one. Winchester was making military ammo for the Chinese .277 cal cartridge. As they were already tooled up to make that size of bullet, they decided to try it as a sporting slug (no sense in letting the tooling go to waste).

Awesome info...

I also read that the 270 win was to battle with the popular 256 Newton (6.5)

quote:

Originally posted by TC1:
375 Ruger short?

Just one more thing a man with a 9.3X62 need not concern himself with.

How's that for nose in the air

Terry

the 375 ruger short (2.17") will be what the 376 steyr should have been...

replicate the classic 375 h+h veocities in a smaller gun.

quote:

the 375 ruger short (2.17") will be what the 376 steyr should have been...

replicate the classic 375 h+h veocities in a smaller gun.

I'm sure it will, but at what pressure?

Funny thing is they haven't made anything that actually does anything better than anything that was made 45-50 years ago by anybody. It's all marketing. Just another answer to a problem I fortunately don't have.


Here's a suggestion for big gun companies.
I think QUALITY should the next big marketing ploy to try to trick me into buying a new rifle, not what you stuff in the barrel. that might actually work What an idea!


Terry

good one...

the 300's@ 2400 will be enough... most of the time 220's @ 2700 will do.

how often do you come accross buff and if you did would you not want a bigger gun? an all arounder and the dg in defensve situations and hunting with back up is the beauty of the 375 is it not? an all arounder in a compact handy carry weight gun is apealing to some. thus the 375 ruger but it can be downsized and still perform within its intended function.

Gee I dunno, but I always' thought the beauty of the .375 H&H was it had enough juice to take a big buff, had the trajectory of a .30-06 and did it all with a low enough pressure you didn't have to worry about shooting it on a hot day.

Maybe I'm wrong. I'm not an African hunter.

Terry

PS. don't take the 9.3 comment too seriously. That's just me acting goofy

whatever makes your boat float

After reading some of the above it's my view that what is need is a new forum for
LUDDITES.

BoomS,
Intermediate length rounds/receivers have real appeal to me. They make up into some nifty rigs like 375shortBoomcat. NOw I dont understand why you have the 375Rshort 2.17"? considering that one typically loads a proj. about .8" out of the case,that makes an oal of 2.97", typically too long for a rem700sa, under length for M70sa(3.08"box).. So what Im really asking is, why not a case around 2.3" for 3.10"oal-for true fit in an Inter mauser or Montana1999? THe 375 ruger case at 2.3 will also relieve some of those pressure concerns that TC1 is smokin' about
The true rightful champion bore/case to me is the 9.3x64B yet for some strange reason we have the shortnecked 9.3x62 at one end and magnum reciever 375hh at the other taking the popularity stakes....rest assured when my new world order comes in, those two circus sideshow freaks shall be abolished.

quote:

Originally posted by oldun:
After reading some of the above it's my view that what is need is a new forum for
LUDDITES.

Maybe so, but sometimes you just have to say the king has no cloths

I watched a product sell in the automotive industry a few years ago called wetter water. You guessed it. You pour it in the radiator

I see a lot of this as being the same.

Terry

Ron
In a Way I agree with you. But while I see a small advatage in the short mags , the short action slightly lighter rifles and all, I just think its silly to come out with a 3rd set of them.
If somebody gave me a good enough deal i would probably buy one, But I can't see why any one would spend all the R&D money to prouduce them.
As far as the .375 Ruger, If a Guy has a .375 H&H the Ruger round is a waste. However the CZ being the only excetion I can think of, the length of action required to build or buy an H&H is usually quite a lot more money to aquire.
The Ruger round does not really excite me a hole lot, but I think it is a decent idea and I rather like the Hawkey rifle.
Buy the way fubar, as far as getting hung with a new rope,
I am already hung.
Just ask your sweetie !
Kidding of course...tj3006