~

The only way that the 30-06 matches the 300 H&H is in Federal High Energy or Hornady Light Magnum offerings. Each list a 180gr load at 2880 fps. So if you are comparing factory loads I guess they are the same. Once one handloads I believe the 300 H&H has more velocity and energy than the 30-06 but comes with more recoil.

ddj

Load the 300H&H with the heavier bullets, then see it pass the 300W. Anyone found a better feeding round? Works for me. LOL

Any good tale needs a grain of truth, and as you've seen from comparing apples to oranges, they were in fact close. I also believe a lot of gun rags perpetuated said tale in order to make the old H&H appear anemic while trying to pump up sales for the 300 Win mag. Fact is anyone seriously working with the 300 H&H knows it is a ballistic twin to the much newer 300 Winchester.

Although,I HAVE NO EXPERIENCE WITH A 300H&H, I have been told by several experienced 300H&H loaders that you can actually load a H&H hotter/faster than a 300 Win.Mag. and not have any issues with sticky bolt, etc. I was told it is due to the tapered disign of the case. (like NPT threads on pipe) I was also told that the H&H will down load to less than 30-06 velocities with very good accuracy. Again due to the tapered case angle. I personally would not load the 300H&H hotter than the 300 Win.Mag. UNLESS it is in a modern M-70 or M-700 action and like barrel. For me (ONLY), real pressure signals are a sticky bolt and hard case extraction, again, in a modern (strength-known) rifle.

I think/believe the myth comes from the original British loading with Cordite. As I understand it, it was very temperature sensative. When you add in the modern propaganda machine for all of the modern 300 Mags., which are out to promote the "ultra-mags, short mags., etc. then the old H&H will take a back seat on paper.

I am planning on building a 300H&H, in the next year, on a modern M-70 CRF action.

Inside maybe 400 yards with a game rifle any speed difference of less than about 300 fps is basically no difference at all other than on a piece of paper.

quote:

Originally posted by Jim C. <><:
Inside maybe 400 yards with a game rifle any speed difference of less than about 300 fps is basically no difference at all other than on a piece of paper.

Tell that to the folks at Weatherby.

Before Win reintroduced the pre model 70 in 300H&H they made a special run for Hick's. I purchased one of those rifle and I forgot who did the write up on those rifle with loading data anyway. I loaded for that rifle using the same data and I did get 3000fps with 180gr bullet but let me tell you that rifle kicked like a mule worst than my 300Wby. I was going to buy one of Rem classic in 300H&H but decided on something else.

If you read Speer wildcat manual #4 1959 they tried to get the 30-06AI to equal Factory 300H&H loads.

I've always done better velocity wise with the holland than the 30-06. I also get as good or better velocity than the 300wm in the 200's and 220's. I don't think it is the 'weak sister' as it is portrayed. It is accurate with all weights of bullets I've tried.

quote:

Originally posted by Grenadier:
Why do I keep hearing .300 H&H gives .30-06 performance?

It wasn't true in the old loadings unless you compared British made .300 H&H ammo with USA made .30-06 ammo.

As you suggest perhaps the myth persists because it was true of the 300 H&H Super, as loaded by the British, at the time of its introduction. "The traditional British factory load drove a 180 grain bullet at a muzzle velocity (MV) of 2750 fps with muzzle energy (ME) of 3020 ft. lbs." - Chuckhawks. "The original ballistics of the .300 H&H, for instance, was about the same as the .30-06 of 1935." - Wolfe. I can't find the source but I recall reading that the longer, larger case was needed to match 30'06 performance in the tropics when loaded with cordite. With new powders things changed, perhaps as early as the late 1930s when Winchester offered the chambering in the M70. A 1947 Winchester catalogue shows the H&H clearly acting like a 300 magnum, starting a 180 @ 3000. Been thinking that were I to rebarrel my LA M700 it would be better as a 26 inch H&H than a 24 inch '06 (besides, I have another '06).

A few years ago we chrongraphed some Federal factory loads with the 180 grain Partition and the Winchester 180 grain Fail Safe 180 grain factory load. Both broke 3000 FPS

Looks like the Blaser 30R is very close to the 300 H and H.

Why does everybody act like it is some sort of a miracle to get 3000 fps. with a 180 gr. bullet??????

I am getting 3000 fps./180 gr. bullet in a 300WSM.---24" barrel.

quote:

I wish something like the old 220 grain Winchester Silvertip ammunition was still available.

I have 2 boxes of Wnchester Super X 220 grain in 300 Win, do you want them?

quote:

Originally posted by Rae59:
Why does everybody act like it is some sort of a miracle to get 3000 fps. with a 180 gr. bullet??????

I am getting 3000 fps./180 gr. bullet in a 300WSM.---24" barrel.

Comprehence is not a strong suite for some, no one is surprised at getting 3000 FPS from 180 grain bullets. The thread is about the "Myth" that the 300 H&H will not.

I own a .30-06, .300 H&H, and .300 Win in identical Sako rifles with 24.4" barrels. Using 180 grain bullets loaded to what 40 years of experience tells me is a reasonable working maximum, the .300 H&H gets 160 fps more velocity than the .30-06 and about 70 fps less than the .300 Winchester.

There isn't one single animal on Earth that I would hunt with one and not with another. The two magnums allow shooting at extended yardages with a little more confidence. The '06 gives you one more round in the magazine and a bit less muzzle blast.

If I had to do without one of them, (while it would cause me great pain ) it would be the .300 Winchester. If you need more power, in my opinion you need a larger caliber like a .338.

BTW: I also own a .300 WSM with a 24" barrel. If you load it DOWN to the pressures considered appropriate in other .300 magnums, it would come in somewhere between the .30-06 and the .300 H&H, just exactly where its case capacity puts it. I can't understand why sticky bolt lift is considered acceptable in the WSM series for the sake of attempting to match the velocities of larger cartridges.

I know that the 300 H&H can't keep up with the
300 WIN Mag but I didn't think it was slow. I mean the 30/06 can only get 180gr bullet to about 27 something.
To each his own.

]

quote:

I mean the 30/06 can only get 180gr bullet to about 27 something.

I just chronographed my 30-06 last friday with Federal facotry loaded 180 grain solid base bullet and it averaged 2870 FPS. I've seen several that got 28 something

quote:

Originally posted by jwp475:

quote:

I mean the 30/06 can only get 180gr bullet to about 27 something.

I just chronographed my 30-06 last friday with Federal facotry loaded 180 grain solid base bullet and it averaged 2870 FPS. I've seen several that got 28 something

Interesting. My two '06s have 21 and 22 inch barrels respectively and factory 180s that are supposed to make 2700 fps usually run in the 2600s. A couple batches of the older Federal High Energy 180s run in the 2900s though; pretty snappy.

quote:

I just chronographed my 30-06 last friday with Federal facotry loaded 180 grain solid base bullet and it averaged 2870 FPS. I've seen several that got 28 something

I am in no way questioning your veracity, but you might want to check out your chronograph's calibration against some known velocities. Sounds like the result of a short screen spacing.

quote:

A Persistant Myth: 300 H&H = 30-06 Performance

I once asked a dead deer what the difference was between the two and as expected the deer said.....nothing!

quote:

Originally posted by Stonecreek:



BTW: I also own a .300 WSM with a 24" barrel. If you load it DOWN to the pressures considered appropriate in other .300 magnums, it would come in somewhere between the .30-06 and the .300 H&H, just exactly where its case capacity puts it. I can't understand why sticky bolt lift is considered acceptable in the WSM series for the sake of attempting to match the velocities of larger cartridges.

I did not know that sticky bolt lift was acceptable in a WSM. Mine isn't.

Please explain.

quote:

Originally posted by Rae59:

quote:

Originally posted by Stonecreek:



BTW: I also own a .300 WSM with a 24" barrel. If you load it DOWN to the pressures considered appropriate in other .300 magnums, it would come in somewhere between the .30-06 and the .300 H&H, just exactly where its case capacity puts it. I can't understand why sticky bolt lift is considered acceptable in the WSM series for the sake of attempting to match the velocities of larger cartridges.

I did not know that sticky bolt lift was acceptable in a WSM. Mine isn't.

Please explain.

I think that he was tongue in check about the 300 WSM being loaded to higher pressure by the factories than the 300 Win

quote:

Why do I keep hearing .300 H&H gives .30-06 performance?

It wasn't true in the old loadings unless you compared British made .300 H&H ammo with USA made .30-06 ammo. But that comparison is not valid because of different standards and testing.

It is true that the British and USA manufacturers utilized different ammunition pressure testing methodology so there is not strict comparison between the authorized pressure levels for each cartridge.

However from everything that I’ve read, the ballistics standards books utilized by the USA military (and in turn USA commercial ammunition manufacturers) at the turn of the 20th century were directly drawn from the British militaries’ ballistics measurement books (also utilized by the British commercial ammunition manufacturers). So the ballistics standards utilized by British and USA cartridges manufactures for measuring velocity and computing energy would have drawn the same ballistic results.

So in 1925, when the 300 H&H Magnum was introduced, it would have been proper to do a straight ballistics comparison between the British commercial ammunition and USA commercial ammunition.

Additionally, in 1925 the standard rifle test barrel used by British and USA cartridge manufactures for ballistics performance measurement was 28.0” in length; though some cartridges were measured using barrels as long as 30.0” in length and are often so noted. Today the barrel length standard for both countries is 24.0” for ballistics measurements.

I found a listing for a 1925 Kynoch 300 H&H Magnum factory loading for 180gr bullet at 2700fps as well as a 1924 Federal 30-06 U.S.G. factory loading for a 180gr bullet at 2600fps; the H&H ballistics wins by 100fps.

Hardly unexpected given the 14gr powder capacity advantage the 300 H&H Magnum case enjoys over the 30-06 USG case.

I believe a much better comparison in 1925 for the 30 caliber performance crown would have been between the 300 H&H Magnum cartridge and the still commercially available 30 Newton cartridge. The results would have been strikingly different due to the four grains greater capacity advantage the shorter 30 Newton case enjoyed over the 300 H&H Magnum.

But then this thread would mirror the 375 H&H and 375 Ruger threads so nothing would be gained by the effort.

quote:

Originally posted by jwp475:



Comprehence is not a strong suite for some, no one is surprised at getting 3000 FPS from 180 grain bullets. The thread is about the "Myth" that the 300 H&H will not.

As you stated "comprehence is not a strong suite for some". Back at you.

My point was: if a WSM can achieve (barely) 3000 fps.w/180 gr. bullets and no sticky bolt lift, then why can't a H&H get better since it has more powder capacity. I own neither a H&H nor a Win.Mag. but I do own a WSM and a '06.

P.S. I am planning on building a 300 H&H this year.

quote:

Originally posted by Jim C. <><:
Inside maybe 400 yards with a game rifle any speed difference of less than about 300 fps is basically no difference at all other than on a piece of paper.

I disagree.

My criteria for choosing a certain caliber based on velocity gain would be 200 fps+

A modern loaded 300 H&H, 300 Win. Mag. or 300 WSM are 300 fps quicker than the 30-06. Definately a difference.

A have spoken before about the 300 Mag's giving more powder window to find the most accurate combination. If a 30-06 happens to shoot its best at 2500 fps, then a person is stuck with 2500 fps. 2800 fps is a better 1 rifle battery velocity and 3000 fps gives good assurance shooting anything.

quote:

Originally posted by Stonecreek:

quote:

I just chronographed my 30-06 last friday with Federal facotry loaded 180 grain solid base bullet and it averaged 2870 FPS. I've seen several that got 28 something

I am in no way questioning your veracity, but you might want to check out your chronograph's calibration against some known velocities. Sounds like the result of a short screen spacing.

+1

Regular Federal 180's average 2750

quote:

Originally posted by jwp475:

quote:

Originally posted by Rae59:

quote:

Originally posted by Stonecreek:



BTW: I also own a .300 WSM with a 24" barrel. If you load it DOWN to the pressures considered appropriate in other .300 magnums, it would come in somewhere between the .30-06 and the .300 H&H, just exactly where its case capacity puts it. I can't understand why sticky bolt lift is considered acceptable in the WSM series for the sake of attempting to match the velocities of larger cartridges.

I did not know that sticky bolt lift was acceptable in a WSM. Mine isn't.

Please explain.

I think that he was tongue in check about the 300 WSM being loaded to higher pressure by the factories than the 300 Win

The 300 WSM averages about 3000 PSI more pressure than the 300 Win. Mag

quote:

Originally posted by Rae59:

quote:

Originally posted by jwp475:



Comprehence is not a strong suite for some, no one is surprised at getting 3000 FPS from 180 grain bullets. The thread is about the "Myth" that the 300 H&H will not.

As you stated "comprehence is not a strong suite for some". Back at you.

My point was: if a WSM can achieve (barely) 3000 fps.w/180 gr. bullets and no sticky bolt lift, then why can't a H&H get better since it has more powder capacity. I own neither a H&H nor a Win.Mag. but I do own a WSM and a '06.

P.S. I am planning on building a 300 H&H this year.

Please forgive for smart ass coment...

quote:

The 300 WSM averages about 3000 PSI more pressure than the 300 Win. Mag

3 to 4 thousnad PSI average and that is a substantial difference that allows the smaller case to equall the 300 win

quote:

Originally posted by jwp475:

quote:

Originally posted by Rae59:

quote:

Originally posted by jwp475:



Comprehence is not a strong suite for some, no one is surprised at getting 3000 FPS from 180 grain bullets. The thread is about the "Myth" that the 300 H&H will not.

As you stated "comprehence is not a strong suite for some". Back at you.

My point was: if a WSM can achieve (barely) 3000 fps.w/180 gr. bullets and no sticky bolt lift, then why can't a H&H get better since it has more powder capacity. I own neither a H&H nor a Win.Mag. but I do own a WSM and a '06.

P.S. I am planning on building a 300 H&H this year.

Please forgive for smart ass coment...

Apology accepted, Sir.
I ment nothing harsh by my post.....I was just field testing my armor.LOL

quote:

Originally posted by jwp475:

quote:

The 300 WSM averages about 3000 PSI more pressure than the 300 Win. Mag

3 to 4 thousnad PSI average and that is a substantial difference that allows the smaller case to equall the 300 win

Yup.

My idea is to keep pressures at 60,000 psi or less for general long term shooting and hunting regardless of caliber.

The 338-06 at 60,000 psi shoots the Barnes TSX 185 gr. very well.

RE: .300 WSM pressures. Sticky bolt lift using factory ammunition is a frequent complaint by some (certainly not all) owners of .300 WSM rifles. The factories load the WSM series to, and sometimes beyond, the level of sustainability in order to wring the claimed performance from the smaller case. Yes, in many factory loads the WSM does indeed reach virtually identical velocities as the larger .300 Winchester, but it is at the expense of higher pressures.

The .300 H&H being slightly more capacious than the ..300 WSM, it is certainly capable of being loaded to higher velocities than the WSM. I accidentally loaded my .300 H&H to 3,075 fps with a 180 grain bullet (due to an errant reading of the powder scale.) Interestingly, this load fired a very tight three-shot group (before I discovered my mistake) and extraction of fired cases was effortless. I backed the load off to one that generates a more "characteristic" 2960 fps, which is all of the velocity I find need for in a .30 caliber rifle.

Case designers have stretch, squashed, radiused, beveled, and otherwise formed and deformed cases looking for the Holy Grail of higher velocity. One constant that has never changed (despite the current hype from the industry) is that nothing matters except case capacity -- the greater the capacity, the higher the velocity at the same pressure.

Stonecreek really seems to have a handle on this. It is true capacity is what will in the end give you he higher velocity.

A point I havent seen metioned here yet and really needs to be addressed when talking about the H&H case is it's sloaping case.

The .300 H&H case was desinged for easy feeding and ease of extraction. This is why the case is so tappered. The problem that arises from this is that although the pressure of the case is not excessive when loaded to lets say win mag velocity, you get excessve bolt thrust.

I don't own a short mag although I really thought I wanted one when they first came out. A friend of mine got a couple of them and togeter we experimented with loads and performance. We found that sticky cases were a problem when we tried to get anywere near win mag velocity. It cured me of my desire for a short mag at my friends expence.

I am really happy with my .300 win mags. To me they are perfection in a .30 cal magnum but in reality they are all very close in performance.

I have heard a lot of BS on the internet, and at the range, but I haven't heard this one before.

One could easily expect 200 fps over the 30-06 on the 300 H&H. The 300 Win should be about 300 FPS more. Assuming 24" bbls for all.

The WSM is an interesting case, but running at 60kPSI is, in my opinion, running at the max for most bolt guns. Weatherby cartridges run at 60 kPSI and have had an annoying habit of sticking at higher temperatures. I would expect the same for the WSMs, unless they match the freebore of the Wby rifles.

The H&H was a good cartridge, loaded at lower pressures to mitigate the temperature sensitivity of the original Cordite loadings. It could be loaded up to the 300 Win levels, but it really isn't necessary. The best way to beet 300H&H power is to go to the 338 Win.

John

quote:

Originally posted by Big Bore Boar Hunter:
I have heard a lot of BS on the internet, and at the range, but I haven't heard this one before.

One could easily expect 200 fps over the 30-06 on the 300 H&H. The 300 Win should be about 300 FPS more. Assuming 24" bbls for all.

The WSM is an interesting case, but running at 60kPSI is, in my opinion, running at the max for most bolt guns. Weatherby cartridges run at 60 kPSI and have had an annoying habit of sticking at higher temperatures. I would expect the same for the WSMs, unless they match the freebore of the Wby rifles.

The H&H was a good cartridge, loaded at lower pressures to mitigate the temperature sensitivity of the original Cordite loadings. It could be loaded up to the 300 Win levels, but it really isn't necessary. The best way to beet 300H&H power is to go to the 338 Win.

John

Big Bore, I missed something in the translation of your post. What is the BS you are referring to?


As far as the pressures of the WSM, I thought I read the pressures were even higher than 60 kpsi.(?) But maybe it was cup measure that I read. I will check my reload data when I get home.

quote:

Originally posted by Rae59:

quote:

Originally posted by Big Bore Boar Hunter:
I have heard a lot of BS on the internet, and at the range, but I haven't heard this one before.

One could easily expect 200 fps over the 30-06 on the 300 H&H. The 300 Win should be about 300 FPS more. Assuming 24" bbls for all.

The WSM is an interesting case, but running at 60kPSI is, in my opinion, running at the max for most bolt guns. Weatherby cartridges run at 60 kPSI and have had an annoying habit of sticking at higher temperatures. I would expect the same for the WSMs, unless they match the freebore of the Wby rifles.

The H&H was a good cartridge, loaded at lower pressures to mitigate the temperature sensitivity of the original Cordite loadings. It could be loaded up to the 300 Win levels, but it really isn't necessary. The best way to beet 300H&H power is to go to the 338 Win.

John

Big Bore, I missed something in the translation of your post. What is the BS you are referring to?


As far as the pressures of the WSM, I thought I read the pressures were even higher than 60 kpsi.(?) But maybe it was cup measure that I read. I will check my reload data when I get home.

BS is 300H&H=30-06 performance...

I load 180 grain 30,06s out about 2800 in 2 30,06s (one of them has a 20 inch barre).
But I bet I could handload a 300 H&H to about 3000. or mabye a little more.
It makes a little difference but prbably not that much for the avarage hunter.
If you are hunting North America , I would feel fine with either rifle unless i was hunting big brown bears , and If i were hunting them i would want a bigger bullet not a bigger powder charge...tj3006

I used to have both a .300 Winchester magnum and a .300 H&H magnum. I could always get higher velocities out of the 220 grain bullets with the H&H round. I was actually depressed for some time about this as I favored the Winchester round because it looked cooler than the H&H round. Don't ask me about that logic because I can't explain it. The H&H was also more pleasant to shoot and I think it was because of that tapered case. I don't know what else it could have been but that. Good rounds both though.

Thanks,

jfm