I know many PH's that do not load their .375 H&H to its full potential for DG hunting. The traditional load with a 300 grains bullet is given at 2,530 fps. I have seen in magazines that some go as high as 2,650 fps. The PMP factory load for 300 gr Soft give 2,428 fps and their 286 gr Solid give 2,493 fps, as advertised - in the past PMP's loads were higher for the 375 H&H, but they have reduced all of them to lower pressure levels.

Here is an example of sterling bullet performance, when down-loaded to 9,3x62 velocities - i.e. 2,300 fps.



Warrior

Sounds like a good argument for a 375 Wby...loaded with 375 H&H factory. RIP is right, the 375 Wby does it all

Funny, too me it looks like slowing the bullet down a little gives it more time to impart its energy inside the animal instead of just zipping thru.

I have never shot a cape buffalo, but I would be plenty happy with the results that were obtained on these two animals.

Just exactly how is sterling performance defined?

Some load in some cartridge killed a buff?

Or, a buff was knocked on his ass in a full blown ass-whipping charge?

Kevin Robertson wrote in some detail about reducing velocity to keep bullets inside a buffalo.

FWIW I know on humans to penetrate the skin on the far side takes the same amount of energy as penetrating four inches of flesh. That's on OUR skin. Imagine how good buffalo hide is at stopping bullets.

I'm not sure I buy into this downloading the .375 makes it better argument that Doctari and others make but there are those who argue that a 45-70 is better than a .458 Lott because it is slower (which is bullshit).

I spine shot a buff with a .375 H&H which knocked him down momentarily and then put in a follow up shot as he got up, turned, and ran off. When we butchered him we found that the first shot had failed to break the spine, hit it dead on but didn't break it, the second shot is what killed him. I would like to have had MORE energy not less which is why I have went to the .375 Weatherby, although in all honesty, after that I probably will not hunt buff with a med bore ever again but will use my Lott or my .470NE instead.

quote:

Originally posted by Mike McGuire:
Sounds like a good argument for a 375 Wby...loaded with 375 H&H factory. RIP is right, the 375 Wby does it all

Yep, "Super Killer" internal and terminal ballistics, even though it looks mediocre on the external ballistics:

Fire the .375 H&H 300-grain factory ammo in the .375 Wby rifle.
This slows it down from 2500-2550 fps to 2350-2400 fps MV (24" to 26" barrel),
and it shoots accurately to zero at 100 yards.
Less recoil, easier on weak bullets, better than either .375 H&H or the .375 Wby.
Killer-Diller!

Got an elk, moose, or eland at 300 yards?
Switch back to .375 Wby ammo.

Or just use a better bullet at standard .375 H&H or .375 Wby velocity.

Really now, if you have to slow a bullet down from 2500 fps to 2300 fps at impact to make it work better,
then you need a stouter-constructed bullet!

quote:

Originally posted by RIP:

quote:

Originally posted by Mike McGuire:
Sounds like a good argument for a 375 Wby...loaded with 375 H&H factory. RIP is right, the 375 Wby does it all

Yep, "Super Killer" internal and terminal ballistics, even though it looks mediocre on the external ballistics:

Fire the .375 H&H 300-grain factory ammo in the .375 Wby rifle.
This slows it down from 2500-2550 fps to 2350-2400 fps MV (24" to 26" barrel),
and it shoots accurately to zero at 100 yards.
Less recoil, easier on weak bullets, better than either .375 H&H or the .375 Wby.
Killer-Diller!

Got an elk, moose, or eland at 300 yards?
Switch back to .375 Wby ammo.

Or just use a better bullet at standard .375 H&H or .375 Wby velocity.

Really now, if you have to slow a bullet down from 2500 fps to 2300 fps at impact to make it work better,
then you need a stouter-constructed bullet!

Yep!

A couple of observations from my shooting notes using Barnes TSX bullets in my .375 H&H and .375 Wby rifles:


.375 H&H 300gr Barnes TSX 70.0gr RL-15

-fired in .375 H&H avg velocity 2,576 fps (3 shots, 24" bbl)
-fired in .375 Wby avg velocity 2,507 fps (3 shots, 26" bbl)


.375 H&H 270gr Barnes TSX 74.0gr RL-15

-fired in .375 H&H avg velocity 2,703 fps (3 shots, 24" bbl)
-fired in .375 Wby avg velocity 2,652 fps (3 shots, 26" bbl)

Plus the H&H loads were just as accurate when fired in the Weatherby. Loading 86.0gr of H4350 Extreme and using fireformed brass and the 300gr Hornaday soft gave me a 3 shot average velocity of 2,778 fps with no pressure signs and shot into about 3/4", that's a significant performance boost over the H&H. I LOVE the .375 Weatherby.

Cane Rat,
You have a good rifle and good loads.
My 24 and 25-inchers will do the same with a grain or two more powder.
Does yours have a 26" barrel?
RL-15 in the .375 H&H and H4350 in the .375 Wby.

Sounds like an add for .376 Steyr.

quote:

Originally posted by RIP:
Cane Rat,
You have a good rifle and good loads.
My 24 and 25-inchers will do the same with a grain or two more powder.
Does yours have a 26" barrel?
RL-15 in the .375 H&H and H4350 in the .375 Wby.

RIP,

Yes, it has a 26" bbl. The H4350 Extreme load I can't take credit for though, I got it from your postings. Thanks!

2,600 (plus or minus) fps with 270 to 300 grain bullets has worked just fine for nearly 100 years.

Doctari didn't say they work better at less velocity (barring differences in how a bullet expands) but it keeps them in the animal.

I can see where one would may want to keep the bullet in the animal when hunting, for example, buffalo in herds. In just about any other situation I would think complete penetration would be preferable, big holes to let out lots of blood.

I have to agree with the majority here...a nice collection of game that was taken with the 375 at approx. 2300fps, BUT, they would have been lot deader if you had increased the velocity!

For North American hunting I like to punch through, but for African hunting I defer to others.

I think I am going to sell my 505 Gibbs and buy a good Winchester 94 in 38-55. Just think what a bit less velocity and bullet weight could accomplish.

I think you gentlemen have just proved my 9,3x74R is a better DG killer than the 375 H&H.

Rich
DRSS

quote:

Originally posted by Idaho Sharpshooter:
I think I am going to sell my 505 Gibbs and buy a good Winchester 94 in 38-55. Just think what a bit less velocity and bullet weight could accomplish.

I think you gentlemen have just proved my 9,3x74R is a better DG killer than the 375 H&H.

Rich
DRSS

Close but I'd say 375 Win. in a '94 big bore then you could carry a couple of full power loads to face down a charge.

Why take a good thing and S_ _ _ _ it up!!!!! I believe it is proven itself since 1912. I cannot understand the desire to buy a caliber and then make it do the work of a smaller or larger caliber.

In my experience the A Frame works just fine at normal velocities.

Mike,

That is right .... the Swift A-Frame works generally just fine at .... "normal velocities" in a 375 H&H. However, some people would stretch the velocity enevelope as far as possible by shooting the bullet in a much faster caliber at top velocity, and still call it "normal velocity" for that faster cartridge (the various faster .375 calibers, whatever they might be).

We do know that each make of bullet has its own threshold strength, and it must operate in its own "velocity window" to do its best work. High velocity can cause Softs to lose too much weight, or worse, to shatter on impact, and when it is of stronger construction like bonded bullets, it can over expand. Bonded bullets that are partitioned or that have a solid shank will generally arrest the expansion at some point. However, even a strong Swift A-Frame bullet can be "abused" with a too high velocity. Here is such an example where over expansion inhibited penetration:-

http://forums.accuratereloadin...141015601#9141015601

So each Soft bullet brand has a different velocity window, and a much narrower velocity band than expanding monolithics, and so the general reference to "normal velocities" becomes an arbitray reference.

Warrior

I have to agree with Warrior on this one. There are a whole lot of apples, oranges, cumquats and pickles getting all mixed up with this "simple" question.

Too often these questions are a bit vague...what is actually envisioned in the posters mind, may or may not be the desired picture that comes out of the responders fingers.

Certain bullets perform certain functions in a certain velocity range...if you want a better answer be specific about WHICH bullet, WHAT animal and WHAT shooting angle...they all do different things at different velocities.

It also brings up that murky argument about penetratiing vs non-pentrating bullets...which is totally UNANSWERABLE...it just starts more arguments.

It also begs the question of WHICH bullet to use on WHAT animal and WHERE to place the bullet for the most effective killing.

Which...again...brings in all the old arguments and "...I've killed X head of DG with X bullet and X rifle so I know....da, da, da...no flame or diss intended...it is more a statement of preference and that experience is a good, though sometimes limited, teacher.

Raking shots have different paths and more meat and bones to travel through than side on shots...a bullet that will penetrate through and through from one end to the other at a certain velocity might not do the same at a lower velocity.

A side on shot doesn't require as much velocity to penetrate and just ends up possibly killing something on the other side or end up a long distance down range wasting all that energy on the ground or in a tree.

There hasn't been a simple answer to this question...EVER...and NEVER WILL BE...!!!

If this question is more than academic, the net is full of examples...study them and make your own decision based on just how valuable your skin is to you.

Personally I want the biggest caliber, heaviest bullet and highest velocity I can get so if I need to shoot it in the azzz it will go completely through, take off the head and mount it at the same time.

Luck

Kevin Robertson's theory on buff front-on shots involves what he refers to as the trampoline effect. That is, a faster bullet tends to strecth the hide more, resulting in increased spring-back pressure whereas the same bullet at slightly less velocity tends to plow on through. I cannot speak with any authority on this, but I hunted with Kevin for two weeks (buff and PG in Moz) and found him to be exceedingly knowlegeable, esp. with his experience as a veterinarian.

I have shot 3 buff, two with my Lott, one with 375 H & H. Ammo for both calibers is loaded modestly. The buff taken with the 375 was using 300 TSX's. The front-on shot was straight through the heart and the bullet stopped near the pelvis. One of the shots with the Lott was going away, and the 500 solid Barnes went all the way through from the hip and out the off shoulder. Just anecdotal, but I am quite satisfied with Barnes bullets, weight-correct for caliber and intended game.

quote:

Posted 20 July 2010 20:22 Hide Post
Kevin Robertson's theory on buff front-on shots involves what he refers to as the trampoline effect. That is, a faster bullet tends to strecth the hide more, resulting in increased spring-back pressure whereas the same bullet at slightly less velocity tends to plow on through.

How does Kevin get the buff to always stand at the same distance and posture for this testing to me comprehensive?

Also, since we are talking optimum (slower) velocities for buff apparently, does one then carry different velocity cartridges depending on the range to most accurately 'match' the situation?

I think it's interesting we can have so many discussions about bullet performance i.e "I shot a ___ in the ___ and the bullet did___" but unless there is utter consistency in the factors involved, results are only generalizations.

In The Perfect Shot he recommended the lower velocity to not worry about the trampoline effect on frontal shots, and to not worry about pass through and hitting another buff on side shots. Also would have the advantage of lower recoil.

He later recommended moving up to 350 gr bullets for the 375 in Africa's most dangerous.

The 350gr 375 bullets work well on buff when pushed to about 2400FPS. With anything lighter, I tend to push them as fast as possible (within reason). As always, there is no substitute for proper shot placement

Yes, I agree, 350-grainers at 2550 to 2600 fps work great in the .375 Weatherby, when used on buffalo,
and so do tough 300-grainers at 2750 to 2800 fps.

There are several PH's like Ganyana and Kevin Thompson who advise slowing down 300 grain and heavier bullets to around 2400 fps for best performance on dangerous game. The 270 grain projectiles at 2700 - 2800 fps out of the H&H work very well on everything up to eland and giraffe and recoil is not too stiff to adversely affect accurate long range shooting. Boosting the velocity of the 300 grain .375 caliber projectiles turns them into heavier plains game projectiles with more recoil, affecting long range accuracy in a negative fashion. What is the advantage of this extra velocity in the 300 grain .375 caliber projectiles? I guess there's something I'm missing.

Thanks,

jfm

I never shot a 375 H&H or a 416 Rigby that had much recoil in a properly stocked rifle. But I'm not recoil sensitive like some. I also have a 450 Dakota and a 505 Gibbs, all of them in CZ American stocks.

I'm also a firm believer in maximum power and penetration.

Rich
DRSS

quote:

Originally posted by jfm:
There are several PH's like Ganyana and Kevin Thompson who advise slowing down 300 grain and heavier bullets to around 2400 fps for best performance on dangerous game. The 270 grain projectiles at 2700 - 2800 fps out of the H&H work very well on everything up to eland and giraffe and recoil is not too stiff to adversely affect accurate long range shooting. Boosting the velocity of the 300 grain .375 caliber projectiles turns them into heavier plains game projectiles with more recoil, affecting long range accuracy in a negative fashion. What is the advantage of this extra velocity in the 300 grain .375 caliber projectiles? I guess there's something I'm missing.

Thanks,

jfm

My experience: In 2003 I loaded 300gr Speer Grand Slams to 2400fps and went buffalo hunting. My first shot at a buff quartering to failed to penetrate his chest and we were off to the races. My next shot broadside was on the shoulder (per my PH's instruction) and the bullet failed to break the shoulder. Finally after much tracking got one in the boiler room and he succumbed. The post mortem showed the bullets had expanded very quickly and failed to penetrate adequately. The Grand Slams were built similar to the Swift A frame but at least at that time, the Speer GS's were very soft in the front portion. This was my one and only experience using reduced velocities and was not a good one. Maybe with a TSX it would work but I would not experiment again as I don't relish shooting buffalo with the shots having very little effect.

quote:

This was my one and only experience using reduced velocities and was not a good one

Blacktailer,

The account given underlines what I am saying, but the sentence as quoted above should actually be restated, to more accurately describe your experience .... "This was my one and only experience using frail bullets to hunt DG and was not a good one." The problem was not reduced velocity, but in fact a bullet that could not handle the the stated velocity of 2,400 fps.

I ordered 200 Grand Slam bullets in 1995 from the USA and used them in my 300 H&H and I found that they were not tough, despite the inference of the words "Grand Slam" that creates the impression that it is the ultimate - that is marketing for you at its best. A Grand Slam bullet is not nearly in the class of a Swift A-Frame.

Warrior

Bullet performance is important.

For me, bullet performance is what matters first and foremost, then calibre. Many reports of praise are coming in for the old 9.3 from people that use it on buffalo with premium bullets. One such example is Nigel Woodroffe's report in Man Magnum of August 2002, page 75, ... "9,3 x 62 Buffalo Medicine". He was using a 286 gr Woodleigh FMJ at 2,250 fps and a 286 gr Barnes-X bullets at 2,220 fps.



Here is Nigel's report by himself and I quote: -

9,3x62 Buffalo Medicine

"In April I hunted three buffalo in the Zambezi Valley with Swainsons Safaris operating the Dande North concession in the Zambezi Valley. That all three were killed with one shot each from my custom-built 9,3x62 could perhaps kill the old myth that this fine calibre is not suitable for such large and tough animals. Buffalo number one was a big cow (horns 39½") shot in the ehest from about 80 paces with a 286 gr Woodleigh solid, loaded to 2250 fps. At the shot the cow took off, but only managed about 50 paces before going down. My second buffalo was a very big bull (see photo) also shot from about 80 paces but this time with a 286gr Barnes-X loaded to 2220 fps. The bull was standing side an and I shot him an the right shoulder. He also ran off after giving the customary lurch and we found him about 30 to 40 paces away, stone dead. The bullet penetrated the shoulder, continued in a straight line through the chest cavity, over the top of the heart and was recovered under the skin of the far ribcage.

My last buffalo was a big dagga boy, which I shot whilst he was crossing a dry river bed. As he was going away from me at a slight angle, I placed the 286 gr Woodleigh solid about six-inches to the left of the tail root in the rump. He ran in a semi-circle towards us and went down in thick bush. This solid penetrated almost the fall length of the buffalo, going through his lungs and over the top of the heart as well. We recovered the bullet in the front of the chest cavity.

My hunt proved that the old 9,3x62, loaded with appropriate bullets, is still strong medicine for one of Africa's most sought-after trophies. PH Squirrel Meredith said to me that if I ever sold this rifle, he would not hunt with me again. Long live the 9,3x62!"

Nigel Woodroffe

I like lots of power too. That is if it doesn't interfere with the two most important factors. Shot placement and penetration. I've always had a thing about velocity and kinetic energy but I don't know why anymore. It seems to me that Americans are big on this while many non-Americans are not and focus on traditional dangerous game velocities of 2100 - 2400 fps. Raw power is pretty cool but not if it means having to worry about more than that first initial shot on dangerous game.

Thanks,

jfm

It looks like Warrior and RIP agree on this.
Warrior:

quote:

The problem was not reduced velocity, but in fact a bullet that could not handle the the stated velocity of 2,400 fps.

RIP:

quote:

Really now, if you have to slow a bullet down from 2500 fps to 2300 fps at impact to make it work better,
then you need a stouter-constructed bullet!

See, Warrior, you do not have to download your 375 to 9.3 performance, just use stouter bullets.

quote:

Originally posted by Warrior:

quote:

This was my one and only experience using reduced velocities and was not a good one

Blacktailer,

The account given underlines what I am saying, but the sentence as quoted above should actually be restated, to more accurately describe your experience .... "This was my one and only experience using frail bullets to hunt DG and was not a good one." The problem was not reduced velocity, but in fact a bullet that could not handle the the stated velocity of 2,400 fps.

I ordered 200 Grand Slam bullets in 1995 from the USA and used them in my 300 H&H and I found that they were not tough, despite the inference of the words "Grand Slam" that creates the impression that it is the ultimate - that is marketing for you at its best. A Grand Slam bullet is not nearly in the class of a Swift A-Frame.

Warrior

As my PH said, They would be good lion bullets. I'll stick to the Woodleighs and TSX from now on. That being said, nothing beats shot placement.

quote:

Originally posted by reddy375:
Why take a good thing and S_ _ _ _ it up!!!!! I believe it is proven itself since 1912. I cannot understand the desire to buy a caliber and then make it do the work of a smaller or larger caliber.

I'm sure someone wil happily correct me if I'm wrong. But weren't all the original cordite rounds velocity tested in 28" test barrels.

That would mean that the original load for 300gr at 2500fps actually left the rifles it was used in more in the 2400+fps area at the time...

The .375 H&H made its reputation at 2400ish velocities.

It's only in the post war era that everyone and thier chrony demands nothing less than 2500fps from thier 22-24" barrel .375 H&H rifle...


.