I'll probably meet all my large game hunting requirements with my M70 in 375 H&H but the 400 H&H appears to be designed as a barrel swap sort of upgrade. There are fewer .411 diameter bullets to choose from, but one can use 405 Winchester bullets (including a 300 gr Barnes X)for hunting Stateside and 41 magnum bullets for plinking. Has anyone here seen, bought, built, shot, or hunted with one? Are the case dimensions similar enough that a barrel change is all that is needed?

A barrel change should be all that is required. Not many have been made, and it does not seem to become very popular. Minor work is required to make the .416 RemingtonMag work, and that is sooo much cheaper.


.375, .400, and .465 H&H

As one can see, the .400 has less case capasity than the .375, thus much less than the .416 RemMag.
How they reach 2375 f/s with MUCH lower preassure, with a smaller diameter bullet at the same weight, than 2400 f/s in the RemMag is a mystery to me.

Yeah I would imagine That the .416 Rem would be a wiser choice from an economic standpoint.........

I looked hard at the 400 H&H before I built my 404 Jeffery.

I kept asking.... why?.....and never found an answer. The mystery is not confined to Norway.

If you want one just screw on a new barrel and get sights attached and a bluing job. I doubt seriously that you'll have something better than the present .375 H&H however.

The .400 H&H is a ridiculous marketing ploy....of course, not many new cartridges offered in the last 20 years (including the .416 Rem) offer THAT much more than their predecessors.

JMHO,

John

.

Alf,

It is PURE marketing because it offers nothing beyond what is currently available either functionally or ballistically...only a few precious words on the headstamp. If these clients you describe are SO selective as to be choosing calibre on the basis of pedigree then the .400 H&H is no more attractive than the .416 Rem. Neither evokes mental images of six month treks through the jungle that's for sure!

The .400 H&H has only a vulgar appeal to the nouveau riche who can be deceived en masse into believing that, just because the round says "H&H", it must be superior to a cartridge offering nearly identical or superior ballistic performance.

JMHO,

John

I think a 400 H&H would be a nice companion to a 450/400 double. And I would imagine that H&H's clientel can afford doubles.

Just a thought...

quote:

Originally posted by Tex21:
I think a 400 H&H would be a nice companion to a 450/400 double..

Because the guy who buys a pair of H&H rifles is really looking to save a few bucks by being able to swap out reloading components!



Best,

John

quote:

Originally posted by ALF:

Fact is H&H designed this cartridge for their clients and are achieving exactly what they set out to do, Bespoke guns for a selective clientielle......

What is wrong with that or are we to apply the rules of liberal socialsitic doctrine to our choice of guns and calibers as well? ie. Mediocrity in mass the appease the lowest common denominators in society !
No ! if you follow the notion of free enterprise then we should applaude H&H for their efforts !

Alf,
I heartely agree with you, but what I think people question, is H&H's claim to;
In a case with lesser capasity than the RemMag, with a smaller diameter bullet at the same weight and Vo, achieve less preasure than the .416 RemMag.

That a 400 grs .408 bullet at 2375 f/s is a deadly combination, is not what people question.

Smaller bore, less capacity there's no way less pressure. That said the Rem Mag can go faster than 2400 fps.

quote:

The .400 H&H has only a vulgar appeal to the nouveau riche who can be deceived en masse into believing that, just because the round says "H&H", it must be superior to a cartridge offering nearly identical or superior ballistic performance.

JTG:

Really, Vulgar appeal ? Do you really believe that this has been the historical perspective of arguably one of the worlds most famous and renowned gun houses. Nor have they to my knowledge held appeal to the "new rich".

This really sounds like a bad case of envy to me.

It is amazing that one of your dearest and beloved Presidents had one gifted to him by some of the most imminent hunters in the world, hardly a gift and act that can be seen as Vulgar or anything else.

I will be as bold as to say that if it were in my financial means that it would be a huge personal honour to actually own a genuine H&H rifle or gun. Even better if I had the means to actually go to the shooting field at H&H to have one personally fitted. Even if its in a new "vulgar" caliber!

When they came out with the idea I had some communication with Russel Wilken at H&H and he was gracious enough to fill me in on the research they did to come up with these two new cartridges.

It was no simple matter or excercise of whim; they did their homework in the ballsitics labs. Romey apparently did the load development for them and the pressure values and velocities attained even bettered their calulated expectation. The goals that they set for both cartridges were met and they were more than satisfied as such.

Now it may not appeal to the power and velocity hungry American gun public as a whole, so be it. It serves a purpose in the same class as the original 404 and 416 no more no less........ if you want to hot rod rifles go buy yourself a Weatherby !

Should someone decide to chamber to the 400 H&H ....well then go for it. It's their money and I could care less what they do with it.

However should that person ask my opinion I'm going to give it the way I see it and that opinion is that there's better rounds out there.

Should that person then go ahead and get/build a 400 H&H..... fine. I'm going to ask if I can fondle it and shoot it the same as if it was a 416 anything.

Once I've given my opinion the issue is over with and it's his money.......

Of course all of you conservatives realize that you must build and hunt with rifles in 400 H&H now that it's been branded as nothing but a vulgar appeal to the nouveau riche by a far left, liberal university economics professor.

Kinda like a Hummer or a Ford Expedition being demonized by the Sierra Club, you all know you want one just to piss them off.

Both Pac-Nor and Krieger make barrels for the 400 H&H, so get busy and support wanton excess.

I have been following the .400 H&H (and .465 H&H) since Holland announced the cartridges.Russell Wilkin was kind enough to provide details, and I wrote it up for African Hunter. I also check in with Mr. Wilkin at SCI each year, and he has a few success stories from field shooting each year.

Holland's desire was to have cartridges for their bolt rifles that were equivalent to their .400 and .465 double rifle cartridges, and which followed the house style set by the .375 H&H. In fact Romey loads the same Woodleigh bullets in the .400 and .465 H&H as are used for the doubles. I talked to Mr. Romey about the pressure testing, and he verifies the data. He uses a surplus military powder that works well in the cases.

It is interesting that Remington can introduce a .416 without crediting the gentleman who developed it, and the Holland critics here don't blast them. Of course there is a bit of difference is list price, about $20,000 or so.

I have a .375 H&H that I want to rebarrel to .400, maybe I will have it bored.

jim

JTG, I have the reamer and intend to build one for reasons that have nothing to do with the ownership of an H&H product. Your contempt for people you never met and don't know says a lot more about you than what you have to say about the motives of H&H buyers. At least pick a fight with someone who already has one and can defend their decision.

quote:

Originally posted by tiggertate:
...says a lot more about you...

Yes, it speaks to my pragmatic nature while the fawning defense of a redundant cartridge speaks to the elitism of others.

Best,

John

Does anyone here know the case capacity for the 400? It looks to me at a glance that it may have even less capacity than the .416 Rem -- or do my eyes deceive me?

What is the purpose of the very long neck and shoulder in the middle of the cartridge? Why didn't they just open up the 375 H&H to 400 and leave the shoulder in the same spot. I don't know how it performs but it reminds of some of the old blackpowder buffalo cartridges from the late 1800s.

Feeding. They wanted a profile that fed like an H&H. If you look closely it approximates the 300 H&H more than the 375. The 375 was a Cordite round which dictated case shape to some extent. With today's powders they aren't tied to that limitation.

Also, by moving the shoulder back they can have a slimmer magazine box and therefore a more svelt rifle overall. It's part of a system or philosophy rather than a cartridge for a cartridge's sake.

I figured it was based on feeding more than anything. The 375 H&H with it's shoulder more forward has the proven reputation of feeding slicker than owl shit so it seems odd that H&H would attempt to improve upon that further. My pre-64 375 also has a very slim mag box and holds 4 down and 1 in the pipe.

I have to say, the new 400 and the 465 are very attractive cartridges. I did not know that H&H had developed a new cartridge(s), so thank you all for this discussion and the info.

quote:

Originally posted by ALF:

When they came out with the idea I had some communication with Russel Wilken at H&H and he was gracious enough to fill me in on the research they did to come up with these two new cartridges.

It was no simple matter or excercise of whim; they did their homework in the ballsitics labs. Romey apparently did the load development for them and the pressure values and velocities attained even bettered their calulated expectation. The goals that they set for both cartridges were met and they were more than satisfied as such.

If anyone has heard of H&H rifles the obvious thing with them is they know their smithing! Alf do you know if they used the modern powders, used by Hornady & Federal, or something similar?
I gotta be honest, long neck and all it looks like a real slick feeding cartridge for a DGR!

Bent Fossdal
Is the .465 based on the 378-460 CASE? (SURE LOOKS LIKE IT)

quote:

Originally posted by .366torque:

Bent Fossdal
Is the .465 based on the 378-460 CASE? (SURE LOOKS LIKE IT)

Yes, that is correct.

This is a very interesting topic.
There is a lot of feelings involved, a legend, and pure enginering.

Holland & Holland have a long and proud history. That does not mean that everything stamped H&H is top of the shelf, and the minute we let them think so, the quality dropped. I have seen boltrifles from H&H, so butt fugly, that they would never be worth more than 500 $, but with the stamp of H&H, the prize-tag read 3000 $. Yes, I have also seen very good H&H boltrifles, but nothing that defends the prize, compared to custom boltrifles made in the USA.

Their glory have always been the double rifle, and that is still fact. Still, their engravings have the people at Purdey snickering in the corners.

For the boltrifles, I have seen enough not to bee to impressed. I'd pick a Westley Richards any day, but the very best boltrifles are made in the USA, IMO. Were, also, a lot of crap is made, but that is another story.

That a slimmer magazine box makes a more all over "svelt" rifle, is kind of a puzzle to me. I have made M98's in chalibers from 22-250, to .458 WinMag, and I can not see how the mag.box influenses the design of the stock.
Yet, I have come to respsct Tiggertate for his opinions, so I'll take his word, but would be happy for further explaining. Are you saying that the exterior of a rifle would show off which rifle was made in either .400H&H, or .416Remington?

Maybe I overstated the case a bit (pardon the pun). The box should be able to taper more at the nose however, I shouldn't assume H&H will take full advantage of that possibility in stocking or will even use a custom sized box.

D'Arcy Echols is quoted as saying the difference between a good looking stock and a great looking stock is about 30 thousandths. I agree completely if only because I can never find that last thirty thou!

quote:

Originally posted by tiggertate:
Maybe I overstated the case a bit (pardon the pun). The box should be able to taper more at the nose however, I shouldn't assume H&H will take full advantage of that possibility in stocking or will even use a custom sized box.

D'Arcy Echols is quoted as saying the difference between a good looking stock and a great looking stock is about 30 thousandths. I agree completely if only because I can never find that last thirty thou!

Thanks, Tigger, I think D'arcy's got a good point, and I know those thousands are hard to find!

Actually, I think D'arcy could tell some tales to the gents at H&H. If they would listen, which I doubt.

Ironically, I doubt they could afford D'Arcy.

366 torque:

I have an e-mail from Russel Wilken stating they use Norma brass ( 375 for the 400 and 378 for the 465 ) as brass.

As to powder, I'm willing to wager if Romey is doing the loading we are likely seeing Rottweil powders used.

Now Wilken stated the following in terms of their goal.

" Dear Dr S

In a nutshell: We thought we needed two more 'bolt-rifle' cartridges to
cover off every wish and eventuality.
I decided on a '400' cal because
of the fantastic performance of a long.400 x 400grn bullet on game. In
truth the cal .465 was chosen because we already have the 500/465 and with
a 480 grain bullet it can muster enough oomph for anybody.

The cartridges - being intended for bolt-rifles - are designed for use at
practical hunting distances - not on the horizon. A buff at 100 yards
being a fairly long shot. I attach a summary of what we sought to
achieve.

Case capacity is used for less energetic propellants to give us the
velocity at lowish pressures. Low pressures are good news in hot climates.
The CIP tables you have show the max service pressures as 4400 and 4300 bar
respectively. Our 'factory' ammo actually runs to 3750 and 3850 bar for
the 465 FMJ bullet. Both cartridges generate the velocity as claimed.
(Not always the case!)

Unsolicited and unknown to us, John Ricks, an American riflemaker, has
experimented with the .400H&H Belted and came up with CCI 250 primer, 80
grains of Hodgdon H414, 2375 ft/sec @ 48,400 psi.

Russell Wilkin "

And then the following goals:

" The new designs evolved from the 375 H&H (with its 300 grain bullet developing 4100 ft.lbs.)
For some the wish was for up to 6000 ft.lbs. – but for others this was simply too large an increase. Therefore we decided to create a logical ‘stepping-stone’ of around 5000 ft.lbs. Thus the timeless 375 H&H with a 25% increase in muzzle energy becomes the new 400 H&H with 5000 ft.lbs.
Similarly the 400 H&H when up-rated 20% then becomes the new 465 H&H with 6000 ft.lbs.
Thus the mighty 465 H&H effectively offers the hunter 50% more ‘power’ than the 375 H&H."

"The subtle relationship and the ballistics of our expanded family of cartridges is based on pragmatic bullet velocities at typical hunting distances – cut-off @ 200 yds. (Remember, the majority of big-game is better hunted at well under half of this distance, with the ‘extra’ range potential being mostly ‘what-if’, ‘how-far’ and academic theory.) The cartridges do not require special bullets to withstand very high velocities, relying instead on bullet speeds that are achievable in typical length barrels and at ‘moderate’ chamber pressure ensuring easy extraction for rapid reloading and avoiding spiteful recoil and the need for porting or for ear-splitting noisy muzzle-brakes."

Now as to quality of rifles built:

There is no doubt in my mind that there are finer rifles built in the USA and elsewhere in terms of customs and many times have I heard custom makers berating the work of H&H. That may be true BUT and it is a very big BUT, there is at this point no custom maker that has the name, reputation and intrinsic value that causes their rifles to actually appreciate in value as does a H&H. The point in this is a modern custom rifle no matter how costly to the person who orders it is valuable to that person only, if they should sell it or put it out to auction the value is lost. Not so for the rifles and guns of the old classic gun houses.

Having an interest in rifles of all kinds I have seen on many an occasion some well known custom on offer for sale, either in estate sales or just at the end of an owners time for looking after these pieces, yes ! we do not own guns we just get to keep them and look after them for a while to then pass them on ! Often you hear that the rifle was a " So and so" built for this and that for a price of so much and then at sale? someone picks up a bargain or reserve is simply not met.

I have number of old rifles with English stamps on them, actually they are "English Mausers" they are actually nothing special, certainly do not even rate when compared to American guild rifles and yet they command huge resale value?

All this talk has me stirred up. I guess it's sooner rather than later...

quote:

Originally posted by ALF:
The point in this is a modern custom rifle no matter how costly to the person who orders it is valuable to that person only, if they should sell it or put it out to auction the value is lost. Not so for the rifles and guns of the old classic gun houses.

Having an interest in rifles of all kinds I have seen on many an occasion some well known custom on offer for sale, either in estate sales or just at the end of an owners time for looking after these pieces, yes ! we do not own guns we just get to keep them and look after them for a while to then pass them on ! Often you hear that the rifle was a " So and so" built for this and that for a price of so much and then at sale? someone picks up a bargain or reserve is simply not met.

I have number of old rifles with English stamps on them, actually they are "English Mausers" they are actually nothing special, certainly do not even rate when compared to American guild rifles and yet they command huge resale value?

You are absolutely right ALF!

As one can read in Purdey's catalouge;
"-When we finish a Purdey, our aim is to make it beautiful, and to make it work beautifully...
for a hundred years and beyond".

Husky

I think the general negative attitude surrounding the 400 H&H is a result of the press it recieved at the time of it's introduction. If you check back, you will find that one of the primary features for which the new round was touted was its ability to duplicate the ballistics of the 416 Rem without the "high pressure problem" associated with the case. This was called bull pucky at the time on this board and other places (by me and many others). All the ballistic "research" in the world won't change the simple relationship of case volume, sectional density and expansion ratio. Nowhere in this thread does this claim appear. Now we read of the feeding benefits, the trim rifles and the success in meeting the goal (which the 416 Rem exceeds). I think this is what set off the negative bias for the round in the beginning.

If this drivel hadn't been passed around and repeated in the beginning, the round would likely have been accepted for what it is, a medium bore, expensive as to cases, similar but slightly inferior to the Rigby and the Remington in ballistics, and quirky enough to draw customers in a manner similar to the 425 WR etc.

There's nothing wrong with the round, but I think it drew a lot of heat due to ridiculous intitial claims.

.

quote:

Originally posted by ALF:

The 400 H&H was not concieved to compete with any cartridge it was done to duplicate the 400 Rimmed. It uses the same caliber bullet as does the 465 and its now belted version..... take it at that !

To echo what Dr. Alf writes, the .400 H&H and .465 H&H not only are the same caliber as their respective rimmed double-rifle cartridges, Holland has Wolfgang Romey load them with the same Woodleigh bullets. Here is some additional background I assembled for African Hunter.

http://www.african-hunter.com/new_h&h_cartridges.htm

jim

Which British best gun/rifle maker would compare their products with a Remington product?

My friend Kevin "Doctari" Robertson has this to say about the .416 Remington:

"-The .416 Rem Mag produces too much chamber pressure. (Some Remington factory loads with 400 grn Swift A-Frames recently chronographed out at 2500 fps ! Heaven only knows what chamber pressure they produce while doing so.)
Each October, at the end of the hunting season, the Zimbabwe Professional Hunters & Guides Association holds a training course for ‘learner’ PH’s and Guides, in the Rifa Safari Area of the Zambezi Valley. October is ‘Suicide Month’ here in Zimbabwe, and it gets mighty hot down in the ‘valley’ at that time. Practical, rapid fire shooting tests are an important part of the learner’s course, and they always prove to be informative in many ways. Under such conditions, I’ve witnessed on more than a few occasions, ‘frozen-solid’ bolts frantically being kicked and hammered open, once with half a brick ! Somewhat alarmingly, the .416 Rem Mag has more often than not, been the culprit. As an instructor on the course, this worries me, especially as some of the rifles chambered for this cartridge have only small, ‘finger-nail’ type extractors. From a PH’s or any dangerous game hunting situation, this is an invitation for a premature obituary."

quote:

Originally posted by husky:
Which British best gun/rifle maker would compare their products with a Remington product?

They wouldn't, yet this is exactly what consumers SHOULD do given that the .416 Rem accomplished exactly what the .400 H&H is capable of but some two decades earlier. If one wants to load down the .416 rem to .450/400 velocities, this is certainly possible...and in a rifle package equally compact relative to any 400 H&H. Therefore, there is absolutely no PRACTICAL point to the latter round except its ability to satisfy the snooty H&H buyer who wishes to have "H&H" engraved on the side of his/her weapon. A silly invidious distinction.

JMHO,

John

.

Many of you seem to be assuming that the buyer of these rifles are hard core gun cranks knowledgeable about all of the available options. More likely their customers will be people with experience with other H&H products, especially their shotguns who wish to buy a rifle and want it from someone in whom they have confidence. I generally prefer to buy American, but many Brits no doubt don't want to be seen with anything but an English made gun. And I don't see anything wrong in catering to that market.

quote:

Originally posted by JohnTheGreek:

quote:

Originally posted by husky:
Which British best gun/rifle maker would compare their products with a Remington product?

They wouldn't, yet this is exactly what consumers SHOULD do given that the .416 Rem accomplished exactly what the .400 H&H is capable of but some two decades earlier. If one wants to load down the .416 rem to .450/400 velocities, this is certainly possible...and in a rifle package equally compact relative to any 400 H&H. Therefore, there is absolutely no PRACTICAL point to the latter round except its ability to satisfy the snooty H&H buyer who wishes to have "H&H" engraved on the side of his/her weapon. A silly invidious distinction.

JMHO,

John

JTG,
You are comparing a Cadillac with a Bentley Continental Flying Spur!

quote:

Originally posted by ALF:
JTG

I do not understand why a H&H customer is seen as " Snooty" ?

Do you infer that a shooter in the USA who invests in a Echols is snooty or someone who asks a top builder who belongs to the guild to build him / her a rifle to be " snooty" as well?

Does having the means or the taste to acquire fine things in life put one in a position where they call you " snooty" ?

Or do I detect the ramblings of liberal socialism here, everyone equal and equality boiling down to the lowest common denominator of mediocrity.

I thought that you espouse the principles of freedom and the freedom of choice even if that means that you choose to shoot something exclusive or own something made just for you.

You nailed it, Alf. JTG is one of the more famous lefties from the Political Forum. Go back to his original post and you'll see he deleted some of the commie buzz words like "bourgeois".

John, this is hypocritical crap coming from someone who recently posted perhaps the epitomie of impractical bourgeois firearms when you showed us the new rifle your wife bought you as a wedding present. Practice what you preach and trade that pig (the gun, not your lovely gun-buying wife) in for a good socialst-built Bakial.

quote:

Originally posted by ALF:
Does having the means or the taste to acquire fine things in life put one in a position where they call you " snooty".

ABSOLUTELY NOT...but your assertion that there is something more "tasteful" about the 400H&H is just ridiculous. It is a cartridge completely lacking the heritage with which H&H is trying so desperately to endow it. Further, I fail to see how the .416 Rem exemplifies "mediocrity" when the .400 H&H is a LESS capable round. Frankly, buying a rifle chambered in .400 H&H is like buying a Versace T-shirt. It works and looks exactly like any other T-shirt but it's gonna cost you 100x as much. This is what Veblen called "honorific costliness" and it's JUST PLAIN SILLY!

husky,

You auto example is lacking foundation. There is a huge difference between H&H rifles and Remington rifles and no one could deny this. HOWEVER, I challenge anyone to illustrate the ballistic or functional superiority of the .400 H&H to the Rem mag. If one is a Rolls, then they both must be as far as the buffalo are concerned. As an aside, RR are now pieces of Teutonic crap. Anyone with any "taste" at all would know this.

Best,

John