quote:

Originally posted by capoward:
Otherwise why bring personal issues into the thread?

I was asked to:

quote:

quote:
Originally posted by drewhenrytnt:
attention ONEFUNZR2 tried to send you a PM but was rejected. You might be interested in what I propose. Unless you are a friend of a certain administrator on another board and are recieving (sic) one side of a story and believing it to be God's truth.

Well - since all the name calling and tom-foolery seems to have disappeared - can we have an update on where this project is at ?

The barrel and brass for my Ruger .375 arrived the other day and this thread is all pretty relevant to my project - although I dont need the shit slinging and bovine excrement production aspect of it .

Got anything to report Jeffeoso?

Let's see if i can get the rifles togther over the next week ... then start the shooting ,,,

. . . . . ? Results. . . . ?

its current 89 degrees in H ... and i spent the last week in the Olympic Penn ... tromping up and down the mountains ...

might be a couple weeks more .. looking for 70s to shoot

I loved the Olympic penninsula! Pretty NA rainforest.
How was it? Did you see the elk?

Did the following
Big 4 Ice Caves
Hurricane Ridge
MerryMere Falls
Lake Cresent
Sequim Beach
Several things in port angeles and port townsend
Hoh Rain Forrest
drove through forks TWICE -- got a nice oilskin hat
Cape Flattery and the end of the CONUS
Hurricane Ridge and Obstruction Point Road (this has to be experienced to believe) and Hiked to the top of Elk mountain
lots of beach combing
stayed in a great cabin outside port Angeles/Joyce

Saw elk, sitka/blacktail, grouse, wildturkey, hare, chipmonk, seahawk, and eagles flying and kiting ...

and i've seen fire in the sky

hi Jeff Luv that area Too! my son lives in Squim and works on one for the larger organic farms. was out there this spring was on the top of Hurricane Ridge and the snow still had most of the trails closed. the beach west of Forks was very cool too.Clint

Yes, loved the rugged coast, Hoh rainforest, hurricaine ridge and obstruction. Glad u had a good time. Such a lovely place in the lower 48 that has a feel of Alaska to it. So few people in such a vast gorgeous area.

Ya, I got nothin', just didn't want to have to dig for this thread. . . .

Glad you had fun, now get back to this heat and humidity!

If it makes anyone feel better, its bugging me that I don't have this done -- but, seriously, it can be 20deg difference in 1.5 hours these days
i am hoping it cools off soon -- it won't, but I am hoping.

Jeffe,

You could always send components to Walter and let him do the test in the shooting tunnel. How bad could Walter possibly screw it up?

Have read along with nothing much to say but am very curios about the results when both get down to 20 inches and under--not so much which nis faster but I love the idea of really short handy rifles. Tried a Ruger Alaskan and it just didnt turn me on. So maybe a tweaked mod 70 in H&H?? Just dreaming.

I didnt read page 2-6 in this thread so this might be suggested earlier. But.

To save one barrel I suggest the following test:

Develop one load giving 2660 and one 2500 fps, both in 375 Ruger. Make the measurement of barrelength from the casemouth to simulate the 375 H&H, and start cutting. That way we save the 375H&H. It doesnt take much science to figure the results if you dont feel like cutting at all.

That would not take into consideration case design. Does the Ruger case design make it more efficient?

quote:

Originally posted by 900 SS:
375 Ruger. Make the measurement of barrelength from the casemouth

barrels, unless measure by rocky gibbs, are measured from the bolt fact/breach to the muzzle - so, sorry, no.

one doesn't "lop off" 1/2 an inch to compare a 308 vs a 300 win mag .. that's just silliness, and ONLY done that way by rocky gibbs .. which is why his "26" inch barrel is actually 26" of bullet travel, and can't be matched in what normal people call a 26" barrel .. his where nearly 29.5" long as a "26"

Its not silliness if the point is to simulate the 375H&H from a 375 Ruger, since the 375H&H will have a bit less bullet travel than the 375 Ruger with similar true barrellength. The difference in efficiency is probably not sigificant enough to overcome the 160 fps difference.

True silliness is to discuss this to begin with, "Will a larger capacity case (with longer bullet travel) hold its advantage over the smaller one even in shorter barrels?"

To make sure its not barrel quality but case design and volume I suggest the test should also be done with a 300WSM vs a 30-40Krag.

And this: "show that you can accomplish whatever a 3.65" case does in a 3.35 length case, if you engineer the solution."
It is safe to assume that the opposite will be easier and that with similar case diameter and so on its even untrue.

900
here's a question --
if you order a 30-06 with a 24" barrel, and a 308 with a 24" barrel, would ANY reasonable person expect them to be different?

didn't think so

Just an errant thought, dredged up from 20 years ago. A friend, Boy Mace; had Dan Lilja fit and chamber two of his 6mm barrels for the 6-284 and it them to the same 700 action. Switch barrel, if you will. Same 27" length and taper, same twist. He had over 100fps difference with the same loads in the two barrels. Those two barrels went back, but Dan could never find any measurable differences in dimensions.

When pinned down regarding velocities that nobody else could match on his 300 Wbee, Roy finally said "Did I ever say, in print, that my test rifles had rifling?" John Buhmiller told me that story at his shop.

No offense, but what will such a tiny sample prove?

Good Luck, and batten down the hatches when you post the results.

Rich

quote:

Originally posted by Idaho Sharpshooter:
No offense, but what will such a tiny sample prove?

Rich

at least a billion times more than no-sample-spouting proves, i reckon

anyone ever notice its the HH faNATICS that are worried about barrel to barrel?

other than the atf frowning on short barreled rifles, we considered a chamber only section, screwing to the same barrel, and firing the rounds down the same tube ...

but, frankly, it being an SBE ruined the idea, even though it would eliminate the "faster slower" barrel concept

I know it is cost prohibitive, but would be fun to add the new .375 B&M into the mix.

quote:

Originally posted by jeffeosso:
900
here's a question --
if you order a 30-06 with a 24" barrel, and a 308 with a 24" barrel, would ANY reasonable person expect them to be different?

didn't think so

The point of measuring barrels from the casemouth in this case is that if you use the 375 Ruger-case for both the 2500 and the 2660 load, the barrel needs to be 0.27 inches shorter for all shots with the 2500 load to truly simulate the would have been bullet travel if the case was 375H&H. Get it?

Is'nt there anything we really wonder about and dont know the answer to, to test instead?

quote:

Switch barrel, if you will. Same 27" length and taper, same twist. He had over 100fps difference with the same loads in the two barrels. Those two barrels went back, but Dan could never find any measurable differences in dimensions.

I hope there is no chance we are going to have minimum chamber on one gun and loose on the other.

http://www.loadammo.com/Topics/October05.htm

read the above. And note:

quote:

It seems that little useful information can be gained by comparing the muzzle velocities of two different rifles, of the same caliber, but with different barrel lengths. Varying dimensions in the chamber, throat and start of the rifling affect the velocity too much for a meaningful comparison.

The more obvious solution is to use a single rifle, cut the barrel off, in given increments, and carefully measure the muzzle velocity at each barrel length.

This is NOT a good JOUST of HHv.Ruger. IE a CONTEST to show the 375Ruger is better. But a valid comparison of effect of barrel length, on each load, independent of the other. Not as a JOUST. There will be no winner or looser as implied in the other thread.

I can find data out there now all over the web for the old H&H, some dating back to the 1950's. Calculated and actual measured. I guess that will be usefule to verify the accuarcy of jeffs work and lend credability to the Ruger data

The the case of the Ruger (no pun intended) He will be measuring the performance of the new Hornady propellant.

quote:

Originally posted by fourbore:
http://www.loadammo.com/Topics/October05.htm

read the above. And note:

[QUOTE]This is NOT a good JOUST of HHv.Ruger. IE a CONTEST to show the 375Ruger is better. But a valid comparison of effect of barrel length, on each load, independent of the other. Not as a JOUST. There will be no winner or looser as implied in the other thread.

I can find data out there now all over the web for the old H&H, some dating back to the 1950's. Calculated and actual measured. I guess that will be usefule to verify the accuarcy of jeffs work and lend credability to the Ruger data

The the case of the Ruger (no pun intended) He will be measuring the performance of the the new Hornady propellant.

New Hornady propellant?
Why do you keep bringing that up as Jeffeosso is using handloads!

Ive not read all six pages. I thought he was using factory Hornady superformance ammo?

Why dont you correct me sooner?

Am I hallucinating or has this experiment changed? I just went back an re-read the first entry and dont see any mention of factory ammo for this experiment.

quote:

Originally posted by fourbore:

The the case of the Ruger (no pun intended) He will be measuring the performance of the new Hornady propellant.

No special powder required

1) The 375 Ruger is a bigger case capacity

2) The shape of the case has the effect of making any given powder have a slighty faster burn rate than in the 375 H&H. That fact plus the bit bigger case capacity makes the 375 Ruger much better for the 4350 type powders then the 375 H&H and doubly so for long spitzers. In fact it is for this reason that the 375 Wby shows velocity increases above the 375 H&H that are greater than the increase in case capacity would suggest, with 300 grain bullets.

Whether the additional velocity is of value is a seperate issue. But a 375 Ruger will always be faster than a 375 H&H

I dont see these advantages based the published Hornady ammunition ballistic tables

Hornady Superfoamance 300GR DGS 375 H&H 2670 fps
Hornady Superformance 300Gr DGS 375 Ruger 2660 fps

Ruger is 10 fps less? With a improved case design? Seems about the same here.

quote:

Originally posted by fourbore:
Ive not read all six pages. I thought he was using factory Hornady superformance ammo?

Why dont you correct me sooner?

Am I hallucinating or has this experiment changed? I just went back an re-read the first entry and dont see any mention of factory ammo for this experiment.

I didn't say anything sooner because I figured Jeffeosso would.. Besides that's why he asked that you supply the factory ammo, since you wanted to see factory ammo comparison? You refused to do so..
So no the experiment hasn't changed..
Anyway I think it is a good experiment for those who happen to have a .375 H&H and would like to cut their barrel back.. This will give them an idea at what length to cut in relation the vel. loss.. I am one of those .375 H&H owners who would like a handier rifle..
But I see a .35 WSM (.35 Sambar) or 9.3 B&M in my future and already have the donor rifle..

quote:

Originally posted by fourbore:
I dont see these advantages based the published Hornady ammunition ballistic tables

Hornady Superfoamance 300GR DGS 375 H&H 2670 fps
Hornady Superformance 300Gr DGS 375 Ruger 2660 fps

Ruger is 10 fps less? With a improved case design? Seems about the same here.

Either you are plain stupid or a troll. Maybe both?

If you cannot comprehend that reloads in the 375 Ruger is faster (everything else equal regarding pressure and barrel length) then just stop posting any more in the future - please...!! Just listen and learn instead.. For a long time before you try to post again..

quote:

Either you are plain stupid or a troll. Maybe both?

Here is exactly what i was talking about when I refer to the acceptable tone and language on this forum.

Those are REAL Hornady published ballistics from there website.

Different is one thing, significant is another. Can you understand 2 is greater than 1.

And 1.002 is greater than 1.001.

And 1.0000000002 is greater than 1.0000000001.

But who cares?

Now think about it, Europe and N America are moving apart every year some inches. Do we see that reflected in higher airline ticket cost. All things equal, tickets prices should be adjusted for that increase travel distance.

quote:

Originally posted by fourbore:
I dont see these advantages based the published Hornady ammunition ballistic tables

Hornady Superfoamance 300GR 375 H&H 2670 fps
Hornady Superformance 300gr 375 Ruger 2660 fps

10 fps LESS? With a improved case design?

These are so close, I would think gun to gun variation would be greater than any improvement du to case volume. How many grains of powder more will the Ruger hold?

But that is simply "their" loads and claims.

And it is not superior design it is a bigger case and again, that shape speeds up the burn rate. it is very noticeable with 6mm-284 and 6mm/06. In the 6mm/06 and lighter bullets 4350 is good but 4831 is needed in the 6mm 284

But that aside the 375 Ruger is a bigger case.

But I think your are missing the point of the 375 Ruger. It is about different rifles to the 375 H&H and the case of the 375 Ruger is fairly obvious when you think about it. It just so happens when you extend the .532 head diameter up the full body you get a bigger case than a 375 H&H. If by chance it worked out a little smaller the 375 Ruger would still have appeared.

If a 375 H&h can be as fast as 375 Ruger then a 7 X 57 can be as fast as a 284 Winchester

As a side note, I am not in the 375 Ruger camp. I don't like Ruger rifles and I don't want a 375 Ruger. I think the 375 H&H is one of the most attractive of all cartridges and I have had a lot of them and a lot of 378s. But none of that changes the very simple fact that the 375 Ruger is a bigger case than the H&H and will always be faster if all else is equal.

quote:

Originally posted by fourbore:
Ive not read all six pages. I thought he was using factory Hornady superformance ammo?

Why dont you correct me sooner?

Am I hallucinating or has this experiment changed? I just went back an re-read the first entry and dont see any mention of factory ammo for this experiment.

factory ammo - period, full stop

traditional 375 hh vs traditional 375 ruger ..

what powder in the case is immaterial

quote:

Originally posted by fourbore:
I dont see these advantages based the published Hornady ammunition ballistic tables

Hornady Superfoamance 300GR DGS 375 H&H 2670 fps
Hornady Superformance 300Gr DGS 375 Ruger 2660 fps

Ruger is 10 fps less? With a improved case design? Seems about the same here.

one freak load, son -- you yourself said the 375 HH is traditional and GOOD ENOUGH -- well, and you keep refusing to put your money where you mouth is..

at times you remind me of milton, from office space

quote:

Originally posted by fourbore:
Can you understand 1 is greater than 2.

wrong

quote:

Originally posted by fourbore:

And 1.001 is greater than 1.002.

WRONG

quote:

Originally posted by fourbore:



And 1.0000000001 is greater than 1.0000000002.

wrong

quote:

Originally posted by fourbore:

But who cares?

wow -- 3 stikes and you are out, right?
its amazing when one fails THIS laughably

you do, when are you either going to shut up or send the ammo?
I will test it, you provide the FACTORY hornady ammo

we can test all three

otherwise, you are trolling/wenging/whining that it wasn't done just your way

quote:

Originally posted by fourbore:

quote:

Either you are plain stupid or a troll. Maybe both?

Here is exactly what i was talking about when I refer to the acceptable tone and language on this forum.

Those are REAL Hornady published ballistics from there website.

Different is one thing, significant is another. Can you understand 1 is greater than 2.

And 1.001 is greater than 1.002.

And 1.0000000001 is greater than 1.0000000002.

But who cares?

But you are missing the point. They are claims and even if they are right that is how Hornady loaded them. Such things as powder they want to use, who fucking knows. Maybe they see 2660 with 300 grains as being top velocity for reasonable recoil.

Why don't you write to Hornady and ask them can the smaller H&H be loaded to equal the 375 Ruger if pressure is the same and equally suitable powder is used. I will bet the answer comes back NO. If the H&H can be as fast as the Ruger with a smaller case capacity then best to trade in a 30-378 on a 30-06 so as to flatten trajectory

I always thought the goal of the 375 Ruger was to approximate (more or less) the 375H&H in a ctg that would fit in a std lenght action.

I think you make a good point on the 6mm/06 v 6mm284. Having zero experinece with either, I will accept this. Seems like the 375's effieiency are not as significant as the 6mm example you cited.

To make a difference (IMHO), I would expect the company that introduced the new round would post actual improved performance against the round it was expected to better. You have to give Hornady high points for integrity.

If all we care about is velocity, why not a 375 Weatherby or 378 Weatherby. I'm sure the 378 Wby would be fun to shoot in a 20" barrel! Ease of feeding, extraction, case life, pressure under high temperatures all come into play and were designed into the 375 H&H.

Comparing a 375 H&H to the 375 Ruger is like comparing Grace Kelly to Snooki ...



Chuck