I'm looking at a .375H&H that has been chopped to 20". I tend to think that is a bit to short. What do you guys think?

What do you feel is the optimal .375H&H barrel length?

I like 24" barrels for the .375H&H.

For me (6'4" w/35" sleeve-length), a 20" .375 would be too 'whippy'.

George

24" is 'correct' for the H&H. But I prefer 25" in that caliber.

Simply because of balance verses handiness for some of the cover I hunt, I am going with a 23" on my current .375 H&H, but based on the other two I have owned, anywhere in the 22" to 26" range works well. Shorter than 22" and muzzle blast starts to get obnoxious to me, and longer than 26" gets too awkward.

quote:

Originally posted by fireman:
I'm looking at a .375H&H that has been chopped to 20". I tend to think that is a bit to short. What do you guys think?

What do you feel is the optimal .375H&H barrel length?

Too short for what? George makes a good point - how it fits and handles in your own hands is what matters most.
Certainly there are velocity losses with shorter barrels but you would have to honestly answer the question as to whether your target would know the difference.
I was a 26" - 28" barel length guy but have come to appreciate the handling qualities of shorter barrels even on the boomers.
Best advice (since you were asking) is to handle it, swing it around and if possible, shoot it. Then do the same with a longer barrel version. Only you can decide the "correct" barrel length.

quote:

Originally posted by CCMDoc:

quote:

Originally posted by fireman:
I'm looking at a .375H&H that has been chopped to 20". I tend to think that is a bit to short. What do you guys think?

What do you feel is the optimal .375H&H barrel length?

Too short for what? George makes a good point - how it fits and handles in your own hands is what matters most.
Certainly there are velocity losses with shorter barrels but you would have to honestly answer the question as to whether your target would know the difference.
I was a 26" - 28" barel length guy but have come to appreciate the handling qualities of shorter barrels even on the boomers.
Best advice (since you were asking) is to handle it, swing it around and if possible, shoot it. Then do the same with a longer barrel version. Only you can decide the "correct" barrel length.

+1

quote:

Originally posted by buffalo:

quote:

Originally posted by CCMDoc:

quote:

Originally posted by fireman:
I'm looking at a .375H&H that has been chopped to 20". I tend to think that is a bit to short. What do you guys think?

What do you feel is the optimal .375H&H barrel length?

Too short for what? George makes a good point - how it fits and handles in your own hands is what matters most.
Certainly there are velocity losses with shorter barrels but you would have to honestly answer the question as to whether your target would know the difference.
I was a 26" - 28" barel length guy but have come to appreciate the handling qualities of shorter barrels even on the boomers.
Best advice (since you were asking) is to handle it, swing it around and if possible, shoot it. Then do the same with a longer barrel version. Only you can decide the "correct" barrel length.

+1

+2

optimal is what feels, shoots, and looks good for you, not the perceived difference in effect of 25-100 fps impact velocity

Thanks for the input guys. I should have been more specific. I am wondering if there is any real world difference on game due to the shorter barrel.

The 20" is for sale on line so I would not have a chance to handle it before buying. My other .375H&H's have been CZ550's or M70's. All standard length. This is a Whitworth that has been chopped to 20 inches.

quote:

Originally posted by fireman:
Thanks for the input guys. I should have been more specific. I am wondering if there is any real world difference on game due to the shorter barrel.

The 20" is for sale on line so I would not have a chance to handle it before buying. My other .375H&H's have been CZ550's or M70's. All standard length. This is a Whitworth that has been chopped to 20 inches.

OK,
If I were you, I would buy the rifle and do all that has been suggested including carrying it around in the field shooting it from various field positions. Keep it in good shape and if you don't like it after putting a bunch of rounds through it, put it up for sale. Yo umay get a few doallars less than you paid but you would have had some fun with it in the meantime.

As far as real world differences on game - they'll be plenty of debate in the internet and in print - none of it written by game animals hit properly with a 375.

If you look at the ctg proportions and ballistic performance of the 375H&H it looks very much like a scale up of the 30-06. I would expect a 22 in barrel would be just as appropriate for the H&H as for the 06.

I guess it is a question, do you want a 375 that recoils like a 308 or carries like a 308?

The CZ is built like a tank in 375H&H. Great to shoot, but an unnecessary pain to carry. My arm is sore just carry from the jeep to the shooting bench. Like you, I have both the Win M70 and the CZ. I enjoy shooting both, but I have been waiting to see if Ruger offers the Alaskan in a conventional caliber like 338 or 458win, dont want an BS 375Ruger ctg.

The Whitworth, IMHO, will be very handy if you can handle it. I would not worry about performance loss. I do suspect a lot of Ruger Alaskans are being return after the first shot trauma, by the uninitiated.

After shooting the 458Lott and 505Gibbs, I think I could handle a 20" bbl in 375, but I cannot say that I have had the opportunity.

You might be able to buy one of those Hoag over molded stocks. I think they are available for most common rifles. Whitworth is a mauser, might be. I hear the rubber stock helps with keeping a grip and recoil.

The 375 H&H M-70 with a 20" bbl that I keep in camp as a loaner has always been one of the most popular rifles - however now that the 375 Ruger Alaskans have arrived the H&H doesn't go out as often.
A 20" bbl in the H&H makes a very handy, yet still powerful rifle and I have never been able to see that having a short barrel made any difference on game.

My .375 is a Montana 1999 with a 20" bbl. I don't have any problems with it, but at 5'8" I'm a tad on the short(er) side. Short bbl and short oal rifles just work great for me.

I get 2,550 fps with 300 gr. bullets and 1-1.25" accuracy. A 23 or 24" bbl is only going to get me another 100 fps or so. I don't miss the barrel length, but the rifle does look a tad "odd" with the short bbl and long action.

I had a 20" barreled 375. You won't miss the barrel length at all. We chronoed my 375 and found no real dissadvantage in muzzle velosity, actual loss was less than 100fps. Thats going down from a 24" barrel.

FWIW, I prefer 24, but 26 would work if I found a rifle that liked and it balanced well.

My Mod 70 is 24", but on my last buff hunt in the thick stuff, I would really loved to have had a shorter barrel. If you're hunting the thorn thickets, you'll appreciate the shorter barrel.

I think how it handles is lmlore important than any velocity loss. I have a 376 Steyr with a 20" bbl and a 450 Dakota with a 20" bbl. The Dakota ia not shy of any velocity as far as I know. It gets over 2400fps with modest loads.
I have a Win 70 and a CZ in 375 H&H and both are 24". The Dakota is still the handiest of the bunch for a big boomer.
Go for the shoty if youlike the feel.

And here's a pic of my 20" Montana. It's blacked out Ceramacoated now and really looks great. But here's the size to see.

I had a little Sako carbine in .375 H&H, and it seems to me it was only about 18.5"...it could have been 20"; it was some years ago. Anyway it shot very well, but I hated the muzzle blast! I decided I wanted to get my head a little farther from the spout, so I traded it for a 'regular' Sako L61R in .375 H&H which I believe is about 24". Nothing but peace & quiet, by comparison. That short barrel made an awful commotion.

One way to answer that is for you to compare velocities and energies, then calculate the energy difference.

Energy is calculated at the square of the velocity or directly proportional to the bullet weight.

In other words energy increases/decreases quicker by increasing/decreasing the bullet velocity than by increasing/decreasing the bullet weight.

That being said the difference between a 20" bbl and a 26" bbl using exactly the same load components is just over 100 f/s, or ~320 ftlb of energy calculated by LD5 and a bit over ~325 ftlb/~100 fs loss from 26" to 23" in my 375 H&H, chronographed...I determined that information for MY rifle by starting with a 26" bbl and cutting to 23" in 1" increments using H4831 and 300 gr Hornady RN's.

Incrementaly wise there isn't much change per inch, but add them up and it the energy does change quite a bit.

I just can't see much difference in the handling properties of the 4" difference but a bunch in terms of striking energy, but there IS a visual difference.

The only other fly in the pie is I just, BASICALLY, turned my sedate 23" bbl 375 H&H MAGNUM into a hot loaded 26" 375-06 and it cost me an additonal ~25 gr of powder plus the slight additional recoil. I can't get all that "good velocity" the 375 Ruger gets with a 20 " bbl because they won't let me use their proprietary powder.

A bunch of people seem to forget these extraneous facts when getting all hot and sweaty over chopping off barrels and stuff.

So it boils down to how much of the "stuff" you want to believe or where you want to compromise or what "other" facts were left out when the discussion began in the effort to prove some point.

I believe my hide is worth something so I tend to pick the balance that is weighed heavily on the side of saving MY bacon...pholk the rest of the BS.

375 cal is good...416 is better...458 is very nice, but 50 cal or larger gets my vote every time.

Of course, this is all highly argumentative and there are ways to increase the velocity of a 23" bbl to equal a 26" bbl...but you can do the same with the 26" bbl and increase the velocity proportionaly, so the results are still proportional.

You have to pick your own poison and live or die with it.

Luck

How about a 13 inch barrel?

Fireman,

I have used a pre 64 w Atkinson stainless bull barrel since early 1980's. It is 21 1/2 inches long. Based on a 30-06 pre 64 bull barrel profile but cut down to length above. It handles very well. Short enough I can carry it on my left shoulder muzzle down.

Andy

One .375 H&H I owned had a 26" tube. It would make 2710 fps quite easily from 300s. When cut to 22" it lost 180 fps, down to 2530 fps, with the same load. So, I don't think any individual barrel tells the whole story.

The powders I was using were RL-15 and IMR 4320.

Bob

www.bigbores.ca

I had my Whitworth .375 H&H cut down from 24" to 22" and lost 65 fps with my favorite 300-gr load. It is handier and balances better FOR ME. Your results may vary.

As for the OP and the 20", I say go for it. If the barrel ends up being too short for his tastes, no matter; he still has a hard-to-find Whitworth. Just rebarrel it to whatever length suits his fancy.

My Ceska has 25" of barrel.

Oscar.

At the risk of being tarred and feathered by certain members of the AR community I might suggest looking into the .375 Ruger, which has shown good potential with 20" barrels. In addition, there are nice factory rifles with such barrel lengths. The Ruger Hawkeye also does this is a shorter action which translates into a shorter overall length and better handling.

But, if you are a .375 H&H traditionalist you could probably get away with that as well.

20 inches is too shot for me. I prefer a min of 22 and max of 26. In fact, nobody I know of in Alaska uses a 20 inch barrel except for those that have a Ruger Alaskan and that's because it only comes that way. Most of them would have preferred something longer, but my sample of 375 users is pretty small.

quote:

What do you guys think?

22"

I had a Browning stainless stalker 375H&H with a 26" barrel. It always seemed just to long and ungainly. I bought the .375 Ruger alaskan with the 20" barrel and the difference is dramatic. Getting it in and out of vehicles, manuevering in the brush,fitting it in a scabbard, the shorter barrel is just all around easier. Velocity loss will be minimal with the shorter barrel but handling is vastly improved. My 2 cents!

I've had a 20" .375H&h for years. You don't loose enough velocity to make any difference on game. The thing is wicked handy to get in and out of vehicles with and it's stupid accurate. That little H&H has claimed hundreds of head of game over the years.

The quickest one shot kill I've ever had on a buff was with this rifle a couple of years ago.

Surestrike

They cannot tell if the 300 gr. bullet was going 2550 or 2350 when smacked. As to flater shooting at longer distance.. know your flight. Ownership of the firearm,fit,handeling and the proper pill for the job are the keys. My wife shoots 20" Sako .375 H&H it has taken elephants to brown bear. As he said "wicked handy".

The FN actioned Sako taht I just picked up has a 21" barrel and feels perfect. I have only fired a few rounds, but that little lightweight is accurate and very pleasant to shoot. I like it so much that I will probably sell my Winchester. The Model 70 feels like it weighs twice as much!

quote:

Originally posted by loud-n-boomer:
Simply because of balance verses handiness for some of the cover I hunt, I am going with a 23" on my current .375 H&H, but based on the other two I have owned, anywhere in the 22" to 26" range works well. Shorter than 22" and muzzle blast starts to get obnoxious to me, and longer than 26" gets too awkward.

Agree with this. My .375 H&H is 23" in the barrel and the muzzle blast is noticeable, but not objectionable. It's a handy length (for a bolt action) and have used it in Africa in a variety of open and thick cover.

Regards