While the rest of the hunting and shooting commune is heading towards the new CompactWhizBangUltra calibers, I am reverting back to some of the time tried and proven cartridges like the 7x57mm, 270Win., 30-06, 338WM, 375H&H, and now the classic 300 H&H. I am planning on having a 300H&H built on a post 64 CRF M-70 Mag. action.

I have read on several occasions that when handloaded the 300 H&H can meet and in some instances, even exceed the 300 Win.Mag. with 180gr.- 200gr. bullets. Also read it can be downloaded to 30-06 or less if desired without any snags. Has anyone experienced this to be the case? Your comments on the performance of this classic round, please.

Please enter your "View" please..

http://forums.accuratereloadin...63/showpollresults/Y

Its a good thread about the .300 H&H.. Pro & Cons

I've loaded for several 300Wmags but only one H&H. At the time of the H&H I had no Chrono thus no actual velocity data to compare.

I show the 300Wmag to have a 1.5-2gr of water advantage in gross capacity. Loaded to factory STd the net capacity becomes to close to call. The pressure limits are 64,000 for the wmag and 62350 for the H&H. Loaded to the same pressures I would say they are pretty much equal. Chamber and barrel would tell the winner.

Take a wmag case in a longer than 3.4"mag box increase the throat if needed seat the bullet out and it will come out ahead.

Bottomline shoot the one you want. Nothing will ever tell the difference. Except you can find 300wmag ammo everywhere.

My .300 H&H is a 80's vintage Model 70 with a 24" bbl., and is my favorite rifle hands down.

As with most vintage rounds the H&H is a handloader's cartridge. To realize its full potential handloading is a must. There are some factory loads available in 180 grain flavors, but how accurate they are in your rifle is a toss-up. Plus factory loads, at least the ones I have chronographed are a bit under powered for a strong action with this cartridge, IMO.

I've tuned my rifle for 150, 165, 180, 200 and 220 grain bullets for every hunting possibility except for extreme long range, 600+ yards.
I personally consider 2000 fps the slowest terminal velocity I intend to hit an animal. This is so the bullet can do its job well when it gets there.
I even have a 30/30 Win duplication load using AA5744 with 170gr 30/30 bullets. This load has a muzzle velocity of 2300 fps. Perfect for sitting on a trail waiting for game at 50 yards or so.

So, as for whether a .300 H&H can outdo a .300 Winni..? No, if pressures are equal.
The H&H only has so much powder capacity. The Winni has more, period. Having said that, the Winni beats the H&H by only about 100 fps with 180-220 grain bullets. The 150's are pretty close as you can push 150's fast in the H&H, but accuracy falls off dramatically.

My rifle did best with;
150 gr. 3150 fps
165 gr. 2950-3050 fps
180 gr. 2950 fps
200 gr. 2850 fps
220 gr. 2700 fps

All these loads are minute of angle at 200 yards and this is the result of LOTS of time at the range.
Good luck with yours.

Hello RDub. Thanks for the great reply! I am anxious to get the ball rolling on my new project.

Rae, I'm having a MK X 375 H&H re-barreled to 300 H&H (I already have a MK X in 375 H&H), I think it will really shine with heaver bullets

The 300 Win has some advantages. It has a shoulder to headspace off of, and a slight bit more capacity. Brass is easier to find and cheaper. Ammo is easily obtained, just in case.

That being said, the 300 H&H case feeds like a snail on buttered ice. It has plenty of usable velocity and a classic lineage.

RL22 has been the best powder I have tried for 270 win, 300 Win, 338 Win, and 340 Wby, it would be a good start for the 300 H&H.

John

Undoubtedly a handloader's cartridge, the 300 H&H might be old, but it ain't slow. I haven't chronographed the load yet, but IMR 7828 and Nosler's 200 grain accubond have proven to be accurate and powerful in my model 70. Some folks claim only flat based 180 grain bullets work best in 300 H&H, but I've found each rifle is an individual and will show you what it likes best.

I just bought a nearly mint P-64 Mod. 70 in .300H&H and this is the fourth one of these I have owned. My previous ones shot superbly well with both 200 NPs and 200 Speer FBs over 65 and 66 grs. of IMR-4350, Win. brass and CCI-250s. This one, which is 96% metal and 94% wood should do about the same with my current H-4350 and I have a matching .375H&H and Rimrock stocks for both.

The old .300H&H is among my favourite rounds and one I find very easy to shoot well in field situations. I have loaded for and shot most of the other 300 maggies and prefer the original H&H version, but, I like 1958 Willy's pickups, same vintage Landrovers, Buddy Holly and Roy Orbison, so.........

I went with the 300H&H because it feeds so smooth and extracts so easily, and I don't care all that much about a few fps with 200 grain loads.

I handload for ALL of my hunting rifles, so having to handload the 300 H&H with 200gr A frames is no big deal.

Good luck.

I have worked with a finite number of each caliber, perhaps three rifles in each, so my experience certainly isn't statistacally conclusive.

I've generally found it a little easier to achieve good accuracy in the H&H version. The H&H seems to give up only about 50-75 fps to the Win at similar pressures. I've found IMR 7828 to provide outstanding accuracy and velocity (.75 moa with a 180gr @ 2960 fps) in the H&H. My current .300 Win is hard pressed to beat this velocity by 50 fps and does so with less accuracy. This isn't to say that one cartridge is superior to the other, only that the old H&H is a very viable design.

BTW, I agree that a .300 Win Mag without a "full length" (3.6") magazine is very handicapped, ie., it needs the same magazine as the H&H.

BBTW: While working up loads in my current H&H I inadvertantly set the scale poise at 5 grains more than the intended load (and about 3.5 grains above the load I ultimately settled on). The result was a three shot group inside the same .75 moa but with chronographed velocities about 50 fps FASTER than my .300 Win Mag, pushing 3,100 fps (the two happen to be identical makes of rifle with the same length barrel). As soon as I saw the chronograph readings I realized my mistake, but the extraction exhibited no stickiness and belt expansion was surprisingly low. I did discard those three cases out of caution, but this ocassion does highlight that (1) the case design lends itself to easy extraction, and (2) its velocity potential is very close to the Winchester version.

I really like the 300 H&H and currently have three. I also have two 300WSM shortmags.

I personaly don't load any bullets in any of my 300 mags that weigh less than 180 grains and really prefer the 200 grain bullets. I just shot a TX whitetail this weekend with a 200 grain Nosler Accurbond from my 300H&H that seemed to work fine (bang flop). All three of my 300H&H's are accurate <MOA and they feed like hot butter.

I grew up in the 300 Win Mag generation, but have never owned one. There has always been something about it's short neck that has bothered me......just my hang-up, as there are no flies on it either.

You won't go wrong by choosing the 300 H&H.

quote:

Originally posted by Stonecreek:

I've generally found it a little easier to achieve good accuracy in the H&H version. The H&H seems to give up only about 50-75 fps to the Win at similar pressures. I've found IMR 7828 to provide outstanding accuracy and velocity (.75 moa with a 180gr @ 2960 fps) in the H&H. My current .300 Win is hard pressed to beat this velocity by 50 fps and does so with less accuracy. This isn't to say that one cartridge is superior to the other, only that the old H&H is a very viable design.

BTW, I agree that a .300 Win Mag without a "full length" (3.6") magazine is very handicapped, ie., it needs the same magazine as the H&H.

BBTW: While working up loads in my current H&H I inadvertantly set the scale poise at 5 grains more than the intended load (and about 3.5 grains above the load I ultimately settled on). The result was a three shot group inside the same .75 moa but with chronographed velocities about 50 fps FASTER than my .300 Win Mag, pushing 3,100 fps (the two happen to be identical makes of rifle with the same length barrel). As soon as I saw the chronograph readings I realized my mistake, but the extraction exhibited no stickiness and belt expansion was surprisingly low. I did discard those three cases out of caution, but this ocassion does highlight that (1) the case design lends itself to easy extraction, and (2) its velocity potential is very close to the Winchester version.

S-creek, I have heard that same scenario many times.

I personally, watch for sticky bolts and ejector marks on brass being fired from a rifle in August here in Texas. ie. 100 degree temps. That is MY pressure indicator. No "sticky bolt/ re-impressioning of the brass - no problems with the charge weight...... 'cept for the accuracy end of it.