Just looking at the .375 Ruger MAXimum brass specs (that we are not supposed to know yet), and the interest of "Max" AKA "prof242," makes this a natural name for the .395/.375 Ruger: .395 RUGER MAX.

We have no idea what the .375 Ruger Hawkeye throat specs are.

.375 Ruger maximum brass neck diameter is .405".
.395 Ruger MAX maximum brass spec should be .425" less the thinning caused by necking up, surely no more than -.001, so .395 Ruger MAX maximum brass spec might be said to be .424".

.004" seems to be the slop built into the chamber neck for neck expansion and bullet release for a DGR/general purpose hunting rifle, maybe less than that slop would be used for a 6mmPPC.

I am proposing a neck and throat for the .395 Ruger MAX chamber reamer:

.428" neck diameter
45-degree step down to freebore
.3966" freebore diameter (what Gerard the bullet maker chose for the .395 GSC, so I'll buy that)
.2000" to .3000" freebore length
1.5 degree leade

A little extra freebore allows the .395 Ruger MAX to be loaded longer than the 3.340" COL of the .375 Ruger. Should make it suitable for standard as well as H&H length actions and bring the .395 Ruger MAX up to the maximum efficiency of .395 GSC cartridge, without a (shudder) belt on the .395 Ruger MAX.

What do the experts think? (That means anyone but boom stick, please.)

Will the .3000" freebore length (plus leade) be good to seal the bore with those long GSC .395 caliber bullets and minimize gas cutting?

Yes, the .395 Ruger MAX loaded to 3.600" gets MAX thermodynamic efficiency with the GSC bullets. Another good reason to call it the .395 Ruger MAX.

A totally new rifle cartridge case (.375 Ruger) combined with a totally new jacketed/monometal bullet for rifles, gives this MAXimum efficiency and MAXimum utility, on all accounts, for a general purpose big game and dangerous game all-arounder.

Maximum novelty too.

Eh, Max?

.395 Ruger Max
.395 GSC
.395 Tatanka

That'll do.

Heh, heh, bedazzled!

COL's for some .395's loaded with the .395/340-gr GSC Trio bullets, seated deep, to the first band:

.395 Ruger Max, 2.580" brass:
HV: 3.367"
FN: 3.186"
SP: 3.718"
(works in the 3.4" box, SP's can be single loaded, like Gerard can do with the .395 GSC in a 3.6" box)

.395 Tatanka, 2.900" brass:
HV: 3.687"
FN: 3.506"
SP: 3.965"
(works in the 3.8" box, with SP's single loaded)

398 Lapua, 2.724" brass:
HV: 3.511"
FN: 3.330"
SP: 3.789"
(entire Trio can work through the 3.8" magazine box)

The .395 Ruger Max with 340-grainer in a 10# rifle:

2600 fps: TKO 49.9, recoil 49.0-ftlbs/17.8-fps
2500 fps: TKO 48.0, recoil 44.8-ftlbs/17.0-fps
2400 fps: TKO 46.0, recoil 40.9-ftlbs/16.2-fps

That 2400 fps load will probably satisfy even the pressure limitation of the .400 Tembo "mumbo jumbo" and certainly the TKO and recoil requirements, PLUS: standard length action fit.

Gee, what a swell cartridge.

And then there are higher levels of performance with the bigger .395's, for 340-grainers from a 10 pound rifle:

2700 fps: TKO 51.8, recoil 53.3-ftlbs/18.5-fps
2800 fps: TKO 53.7, recoil 57.9-ftlbs/19.3-fps
and so on.

WOW!! I'm touched(although some would say 'tetched'). I was only kidding when I mentioned calling it the .395 Ruger Max. Now my name will go down in History.


Ron, guess I'll have to bring the LARGE bottle of Wild Turkey to the Dallas show.

max sounds better than b.s.

RIP, I like your's and Gerard's thinking on the dimensions of the chamber. With the info already on the web on how to get slightly more length out of the Ruger MKII magazine, the longer seating makes sense.
As far as recoil, when I'm hunting deer, I like as little as possible. When something might bite or stomp me, I'll go up to what I can tolerate. Have fired the .416 Rem and that is fine. Have fired a .378 Wea and .460 Wea; uh, I might not want quite that much.

Not that it would make any difference to you big bore wildcatters, but where is the MAX efficiency? It uses no powder?

Hey, it's in your subject line.

Bill, I've never been accused of being efficient, yet they named me MAX. And besides, who ever actually heard of truth in advertising?

OK Guys, I have only been following the .395 stuff with only half of my attention. Not trying to be a wise ass, but I really must have missed something important.

Why in the world would we want yet another bullet diameter? I would think the various incarnations of the .416 and .423 bullet based chamberings offer more than enough variety in cartridge length, capacity and energy that yet another diameter bullet isn't necessary.

If you're willing to go long ... there is the .416 Rigby and the .404. If you want to go shorter there are the .416 Remington, .416 AR, and the .416 Taylor.

What is the desirable attribute being sought? Or are we doing it just because we can?

the 395 is to big bores what the 338 is to medium bores 308-358 is to big a gap and what the 243 is to small bores between the 223 and 6.5

quote:

Originally posted by Will:
Not that it would make any difference to you big bore wildcatters, but where is the MAX efficiency? It uses no powder?

Hey, it's in your subject line.

Will,
I know you are late to the party, haven't been following too closely, etc. That is understandable.

Anywho, it refers to the 39% to 40% thermodynamic efficiency that both the .395 Ruger Max and .395 GSC are capable of with the proper load, i.e., percentage of the total energy of the powder burn that is converted to kinetic energy of the bullet, as you know. I am not getting into specifics here, but the larger cased .395 Tatanka with larger charges of slower powders only does around 30% efficiency, as do most modern centerfire rifle cartridges. I am using AccuLoad3 calculations.

quote:

Originally posted by mstarling:

Why in the world would we want yet another bullet diameter? ...

What is the desirable attribute being sought? Or are we doing it just because we can?

mstarling,
O.K., partly it is because it is just something new, and I am tired of going where someone else has gone before.

However, it is really the right gap filler for the rifle caliber lineup. It out-Tembo's the .400 Tembo.

It out-KISS-es the .375-whatever.

The 3 bullets of the .395/340-gr TRIO (HV, FN, SP) will allow any task to be accomplished with outstanding efficiency:
SD = .311
and BC's of
.155 (FN solid @2500 fps) for DG
.560 (HV soft @2500 fps) for DG and PG
.722 (SP VLD @2800 fps) for varmints and 1000 yard targets

Cast bullets for squirrels.

Just the right all-arounder for more Whomp on target than any .375, and less Whump on the shoulder than anything bigger, yet retaining a perfect caliber/weight combination for anything.

We have a TRIO of cartridges getting ready to go now.

The .395 Ruger Max will push 340-grainers at 2400 fps to 2700 fps, depending on rifle and load specifics. For example, 2600 fps at 60,000 psi from a 24" barrel, with less than 3.4" COL/box. That is 5095 ft-lbs of KE. Or, 2465 fps at 49,600 psi, and 4580 ft-lbs. It satisfies the anemic .400 Tembo standards, in a smaller action.

SD much greater than .311 is wasted with monometal FN solid bullets. A little more velocity than 2300 fps is not so bad. This is where the .400 Tembo eats the dust of the .395 Ruger Max.

The .395 Tatanka with a 24" barrel will do 2700 fps with 340-grainers at about 50,000 psi, and about 5500 ft-lbs ... and that is just one of the "starting loads" according to AccuLoad3.

The .395 GSC will be like .395 Ruger Max loaded to 3.6" COL insted of 3.4". Very efficient.

boom stick,
It was premature to declare the .395-06 AMERICAN to be the efficiency champ. It is not, though it will still be a better killer than a 375 H&H, good recommendation for a 30-06 based cartridge.

I looked a bit further into the .395 Cats on AccuLoadIII, regarding thermodynamic efficiency (most KE per grain of powder burned):

For favorable comparison purposes, all use the stubby 1.340" long .395/340-grain FN bullet, 26" barrels, and 62,500 PSI pressure max.

Fire-formed water capacity assumed:
.395-06 AMERICAN = 77.0 grains H2O gross
.395 Ruger = 102.0 grains (Hornady brass necked up adds 1.0 grain from .375 to .395, verified)
.395 GSC = 110.0 grains (using WW or Hornady basic brass)
398 Lapua = 120.0 grains
.395 Tatanka = 130.0 grains

"Grown To" Brass Length and COL's assumed:
.395-06 AMERICAN = 2.500"/3.400"
.395 Ruger = 2.581"/3.400"
.395 GSC = 2.850"/3.600"
398 Lapua = 2.724"/3.600"
.395 Tatanka = 2.907"/3.800"

Calculated Velocity/Efficiency of selected loads:
.395-06 AMERICAN: 2375 fps/37.2%
.395 Ruger: 2625 fps/37.3% and 2580 fps/38.8%
.395 GSC: 2725 fps/39.5%
398 Lapua: 2830 fps/34.8%
.395 Tatanka: 2925 fps/34.6%

Efficiency Champ is the .395 GSC by this approximation.

________________________________________________


hey riperoonie...

with the improved 64 case having approx 90 grains capacity...how will that do in efficiency???

its the whole one more down thing even though it is an unusual bolt face.

i name thee the 395 boomaxrip or bmr fer short

although i like the 400 version idea of this one the same advantages go with the 395.

will the 395x64 imp or unimproved be a winning combo?

RIP,

Don't have the calculator or the internal energy of powders but the 9.3x62 must be a very efficient round also.

In a previous wildcat development, it is curious that 416 = (375+458)/2

Oh no, (416+375)/2 = 395.

Say it ain't so, RIP.

Eureka! I think we have a name better than 395Max, the "(375+458)/2 RIP".

Brett

the 416 taylor capacity 91 grains
375 ruger 101.5 grains
64 brass improved 90 grains (estimate)

the 64 improved brass would be almost 90% of the ruger but gain an extra down. there are trade offs fer shure.

rip...could you check the thermodynamic efficiency.

the rugers extra capacity and ease makes it a better cart but this is interesting...it splits the diff between the 06 and the ruger.

(.375 + .416)/2 = .3955
(.375 + .458)/2 = .4165
(.416 + .458)/2 = .4370

boom stick,
You need to get your mind off the .395, since you are going nowhere with it.
How about developing a .437-caliber rifle?

The .437 is fully .002" bigger than .425 Westley Richards. Since the .425 WR was such an undeserved flop, surely there is room for a new ".437 BS" cartridge.

Run with it boomie. (Go sit in the corner of that round room.)