So I have just put on layaway a new Winchester Alaskan in 375 h&h, for a project I have been imagining of a ‘do anything anywhere with one gun’ 375…in wood and blue. I found the right rifle, and now could use some advice from people with experience in the field with 375’s in choosing the scope, bases, rings, and, eventually ammo choices. I have had a 375 Safari Express in the past, but this one’s focus is a little different and I could use some advice in achieving my goal for this rifle.

Let me first say that though I have other rifles, the purpose of this project is one rifle to be a do it all everywhere, a real ‘one world gun’. Deer to Buffalo, forest to mountains, (despite the fact that I will probably never make it to Africa or Alaska), 10 yards to 400 +. I realize there may be other ‘better’ calibers to achieve this, that’s fine. I want to do this with a 375, that’s the project. There is no reason for this except that I think it will be fun and I love the idea.

So that being said, unlike my previous 375, which had a different focus and I felt was too heavy for this broad scope of use, I wanted one that comes in around 8.5 to 9 lbs, with scope, bases and rings. The 375 I recently purchased weighs in at 7.54 lbs (gun alone), leaving about 1.5 pounds max for the scope and rings etc.

Being that I want one rifle to do it all, I want a scope to serve me out to 400 yards or so, but also up close. Something in the 2.5-10 range seems to make sense. To help with trajectory, I am considering scopes that have BDC reticles and also possibly the ability to accept custom turrets to dial in distance. I do not like Nikon’s BDC solutions, though I generally favor their scopes, so right now I am considering the Vortex Viper HS, the Weaver Super Slam, and maybe a Leupold VXIII with the B&C reticle , but it’s not quite as wide as I would like. I am definitely open to consider other options, but I would like to keep the scope price down to the 400 or so range before turrets, so that puts out lovelies like Swarovski etc., and I want at least 4 inches of eye relief…my old Swaro AV hit me in the head a bit much with it’s 3.5 inches.

I would like to end up with what I consider a very flexible rifle (but with wood and blue, it’s my style) that I can imagine hunting anything anywhere.

So what are the recommendations on scopes, bases and rings?

As far as loads go, one load would be ideal, but it seems two loads might be necessary for longer shots, but maybe not with the BDC scopes. Any advice on this? This should probably be a post on it’s own, but I include it here because it may effect considerations on the scope, or vice versa.

So what do you all think? I am not wholly without experience with the 375, as I mentioned, but as I said, this one is a little different and I would like to hear other’s experiences with scopes, BDC’s, newer bullets…etc… that have changed the game since I had my last H&H.

Thanks!

Chad,

Let's discuss boats in Dillingham instead of the .375 for a moment.

In front of town we have a bay thats a little deep, a little wide and tends to be choppy most days. The ideal boat for our bay has high sides, a strong prop and a bow capable of cutting waves. Attached to this bay are shallow streams that favors boats with jet motors, flat bottoms, tunnel sterns and square bows. "One size fits all," doesn't exist. If you use a boat capable of the worst seas the bay can produce you can't get up the stream. If you use a boat capable of getting to the top of the small stream,......You get it.

I've used a .375 for a few years and it has its place. "All around, do everything?" Hardly.

Were I in your shoes I'd hang a Leopold 2x8 in Leopold rings. I'd fill Winchester cases with Book loads of R-15 and cap the powder with 270g TSX's. This combo is perfect for cape buffalo, Alaskan bears, Maine moose and way to destructive on coyotes.

No rifle or boat is a "Do Anything". I just don't believe I'd try a 400 yard shot with my H&H.

I had my M70 set up exactly like Scott's...Leuplod VX111 2.5-8 in quick detach rings and my cases filled with RL-15 and topped with 270 gr. TSX's....hard for me to imagine a more versital rig!!

Yep,
Leupold VXIII 2.5-8x36mm with Boone and Crockett reticle, or standard mildot reticle, in Leupold QRW rings and bases.
8x40 the base screws and JB Weld the bases to the receiver,
silicone adhesive between scope and rings.
Full glass bedding with pillars, and seal all remaining wood surfaces internally and externally with clear epoxy.
If the metal is not to have a baked-on coating, then use paste wax on all metal before you go out in the rain, a la Aagaard.
The bullet(s) and handload(s) will be chosen by the rifle's liking,
with many one or two-bullet combos between 250 to 300 grains.

I like the 300-grain Barnes TSX or (better) 300-grain GSC HV loaded with RL-15 or (better) Varget Extreme to about 2550 fps in that 25" barrel.
Good argument for the 270-gr TSX or 265-gr HV however,
though I do love the Barnes 250-gr TTSX for sheep hunting with your .375 H&H.


My Winchester M70 Alaskan .375 H&H rifle weighs 7.625 lbs with 25" barrel, which is 2 ounces lighter than the the 7.750-pound Ruger Hawkeye African .375 Ruger with 23" barrel.
Winchesters made in South Carolina:

Thanks for the replies!

Sounds like the 2.5-8 is very popular. With the Boone and Crocket and some custom turrets from Kenton, that might just do the trick.

Rip, sounds like we are on the same track as me. Maybe a two load solution is in order? Would you use that 250 or maybe a 260 accubond on Elk sized game? I must admit that I do wish for a 270 TTSX...that bump in BC would be awesome and would probably be a one for everything bullet.

Where are the GSC bullets available from and how do they perform?

On the scope, I had the 3.5-10 on my last 375 and like it reasonably well, just not sure about the wide end. What do you think about the 8 power for long shots, and the 36mm for light gathering vs 40's and 42's on scopes? I know it's not just objective (glass and coatings too) but all other things being equal?

I did 5yrs ago what you are doing now. My base rifle was a .375 Ruger Alaskan (got to have stainless steel, synthetic stock, short barrel and CRF). I mounted a Nikon Monarch 1.5-4.5 in low rings. It has now been packed just about everywhere and taken everything from pine squirrels, coyotes and a wolf to big game. For ME it is the perfect rifle.! Good luck with your project.

If you sight in 270 gr TSXs for 200yds, a bit of load development probably will get 300 gr softs/solids to be spot on at 100 yds. It will take a bit of fussing, but I think it was worth it. I'd also suggest you give some thought to the scope and really close range shooting. A 1x or 1.5x setting really helps at close range and will be faster than open sights. I'm hopelessly slow with even 4x at close range.

Enjoy the project,
Dean

Chad,

I've owned a half dozen 375's over the last 30 years and I'm a big fan of the cartridge.

To acheive your goal I think as suggested you need to look at the 270 TSX and 260 ACB with the TSX for the big stuff and the ACB when you think the range may reach out to 400.

I also think the 2.5x8 Leupold would be your best choice for a scope. If your talking about 400 yards max you don't need knobs. With a little practice you'll know exactly where to hold to make that hit. Leupold QRW rings are my favorite these days for most rifles.

Personally when I think of a do everything rifle I think of something that can withstand harsh weather with minimum maintenance and is light enough to carry all day in the mountains or on an elephant track. So I would probably try to trim a pound or so off you total weight and have the rifle weather proofed.

Good hunting

Mark

quote:

Originally posted by Chad T:
Thanks for the replies!

Sounds like the 2.5-8 is very popular. With the Boone and Crocket and some custom turrets from Kenton, that might just do the trick.

Yep, no mystery why Saeed claims to have used one on his personal .375/404 Jeffery for many years without ever having to re-zero it!

Rip, sounds like we are on the same track as me. Maybe a two load solution is in order? Would you use that 250 or maybe a 260 accubond on Elk sized game? I must admit that I do wish for a 270 TTSX...that bump in BC would be awesome and would probably be a one for everything bullet.

Yes, two loads, like a 250 to 270-grainer zero-ed high and a 300-grainer zero-ed right on at 100 yards.
Unless you want to rechamber your Alaskan to .375 WBY and just stick to 300-grainers at 2750 fps for everything, like Saeed does.
That is an easy handloading proposition with the .375 Wby, but I digress.
Although Hal Waugh, legendary Alaskan guide, swore by "Big Nan" in the 1950's and later (an M70 .375 WBY of walnut and blue),
and guided many griz and brown bear hunters, let us just stick with the standard .375 H&H handloading
for accuracy and realistic velocity, and no pie-in-the-sky "Hornady Heavy Magnum" or "Superformance" loads, or whatever.

Of course the 250-grain TTSX, or 260-grain ACB, or 265-grain HV would all be great elk bullets with long range potential.
And yes, a 270-grain TTSX (if it existed) would be great at about 2750 fps in your rifle for everything,
but the 270-grain TSX will have almost the reach, and all the 270-grainers are the "Kinetic Energy Kings" in the .375 H&H.

Where are the GSC bullets available from and how do they perform?

The GSC bullets are now coming from Michigan, USA, right on the Indiana border. I have an order in now for a .411-cal/320-ish grain HV for my 400 Whelen. You will be able to get higher than classic velocities with either the 265 HV or 300-grain HV.
Gerard Schultz has always pushed the 265-grainer as best for the .375 H&H, recommending the 300-grainer for the bigger-cased .375-caliber rifles.
He says they are adequate for buffalo and any plains game, and I am sure they will do the job.
You can even slug your barrel and get the "TRUE DRIVING BAND" diameters to match your rifle as dictated by Gerard's RSA patented proprietary methods. Or just use the "one-size-fits-all" approach like all the other bullet makers use.
How do they perform? Internal and external ballistics are tops. Terminal ballistics are as good as possible with monometal copper.
They always seem to shoot more accurately than other bullets of same weight when I have tried them side-by-side.

On the scope, I had the 3.5-10 on my last 375 and like it reasonably well, just not sure about the wide end. What do you think about the 8 power for long shots, and the 36mm for light gathering vs 40's and 42's on scopes? I know it's not just objective (glass and coatings too) but all other things being equal?

The Leupold 2.5-8X36mm is the best compromise for light gathering, ruggedness, long-distance power, up-close-low-power utility, and making the weight. Anything more is a negative, and a detractor from ruggedness and speed, including the add-on knobs to be "a-dialing-with" in the field.
Use the fixed reticle and know your bullet's trajectory.

Mark H suggested you go lighter.
I have tried that and it is fine, but all you will gain is trimming off 12 ounces,
and end up with less velocity and less accuracy potential,
through a lighter stock and barrel.

Below is a 6.75-pound Winchester M70 (Pre-64 action). That dry/bare/empty weight required use of a 1-pound stock (Brown Precision)
and a No. 3 Sporter contour barrel from Douglas, put together circa 1993,
early settling on the 2.5-8x36mm Leupold as tops all around,
long before I ever heard of ar.com.
The load it liked best was the Barnes 300-grain XFB-Cannelured, with 72.0 grains of RL-15 for about 2530 fps,
24" barrel length,
settled on before I heard of the GSC HV.
It required bedding with 5 pounds of up-pressure on the barrel at the forend tip to make it shoot 3 shots into 0.75" at 100 yards.
Free-floated it was a 1.5" shooter.
Light-barreled rifle: 0.625" diameter at the 24" muzzle.
Your M70 Alaskan is about 0.640" at 25" muzzle, so probably about 0.650" diameter at 24" length,
considerably thicker, eh?




Your walnut stock weight and barrel contour and length make for another perfect balance.
You can weather proof it.

Pics of the Alaskan compared to the approximately 2-pound heavier Safari model M70 Winchester,
also a well-balanced piece (fatter all over), both from South Carolina:





So pictured above are three .375 H&H rifles, bare-naked weights of which are approximately:
6.75 lbs.
7.5 lbs.
9.5 lbs.

No flies on the 7.5-pounder.

PS: Add a second crossbolt behind the primary action recoil lug when it is glass bedded, either a hidden or visible one.
Oops, there goes another ounce.

Chad,
You have some good advice above. I don't think you can beat the 270TSX and a low power variable with a 375H&H. Mine wears a 1.5-5 VXIII which I prefer over some of the larger scopes I have had on it because that little scope doesn't screw up the handling. Mine weighs just under 9lbs.
Don't hold your breath for a 270TTSX as I believe it is too long to stabilize. At least when I emailed Barnes about a 150 TTSX for my 270 that's what they said. Good luck

Great replies from everyone, thanks so much for sharing your experience!

Took a look at those GS Customs, I remember them now from years ago when they had to be ordered from SA when I usto lurk around here. That 265 looks really good, I am going to run it through Point Blank Ballistics and see how it compares to the 7 other loads I have charted there. Right now, that might be a good all arounder on it's own, but I'd probably want to go the two load route as suggested, pairing it with a stout 300.

So the other option would be as recommended...a 260 AB or maybe that 250 TTSX for the long shots on deer, Elk, Moose etc, and then a 270 TSX or 300 (accubond? TSX, Partition?) for closer in big stuff. Truth is, according to Point Blank, the 300 accubond does really well due to it's high BC, but I don't think it's a buffalo bullet due to it's construction, but I really don't know. I would think the TSX or Partition would be a more reliable choice for full penetration, but that is a wild guess on my part.

As for the scope, it looks like the 2.5-8 is the strong favorite. I must say I do like more magnification on long shots, but with so many recommendations (including, apparently, Saeed's), I am going to move that onto the top of my list to have a look at. With the B&C reticle, that could be really nice.

Great stuff all around, and lots to consider and mull over!

RE: scope, for a bit more $ you can upgrade to a Zeiss Duralyte w/lighted reticle. I have their 2-8x on my .375 Ruger BLR ( rebarrelled) and I really like it. Used it so far on critters from javelina to cape buffalo.

How much is a bit more, and does it offer a BDC reticle?

Chad,

I have a 2.5-8x36 Leupy on mine and have taken skunks, badgers, opossums, Rio Grande turkey, whitetail deer, red-eared turtles, hogs, cotton tails, armadillos, and Scimitar Oryx.

As much as I like RL15, H335 is also a fantastic powder for this ctg. 250gr North Fork SS, 235gr ESP Raptors(Cutting Edge Bullets) are my current favorites.

It wouldn't be my first pick for prairie dogs or pachyderms. However, in a pinch it'll do them too.

Enjoy your rifle.

Andy

With the Long Range Raptor from Cutting Edge or the 200gr HV from GS Custom I'd have no problem feeling comfortable with a 400yd shot. Would I like to get closer if possible, yes. Possible isn't always probable or doable.......Bang AWAY!

Those are some bullets I am not familiar with. Good BC's? How do they hold together, expand, penetrate?

Still researching the scope issue, I need to find a local place with all the scopes I am interested in. But there are just so many of you all that love the 2.5-8, that alone makes a very compelling argument! One the other hand, Vortex has a reticle I really like, Super Slams have a great rep for glass and durability, Minox has a really nice range, lightweight and supposedly good glass...and Zeiss...well it's Zeiss! And none of these are available locally for me to look at except the Leupold!

Chad,

Go to the top of the Big Bore Forum and read Terminal Bullet Performance. I know it is a long thread. The information found therein is invaluable. I'll be one of the 1st in line to buy the hardback if Michael ever has one published.

Those 2 are pretty much the only bullets my 375 sees these days, with the vast majority being Cutting Edge Long Range ESP Raptors.

The Cutting Edge bullets are a brass monometal design that both expand and penetrate. The petals seperate and become individual projectiles slashing their way outward from center usually exiting. The remaining 2/3 of the bullet drives a straight path much the way a solid performs.

GS Custom has a plant in the United States now. They are fine copper monometal bullets. With the 200gr HV you can really crank up the velocity safely.

I took my badger, whitetail, and Scimitar Oryx with the 250gr NorthForkSS-another fine bullet.

One thing all these bullets have in common is driving bands which reduce the bearing surface therefore reducing the pressure and allowing the handloader to increase velocity safely.

Stay within the recommended impact velocities and you'll have no problems as long as you are able to put the bullet where it counts.

Plastic stocked rifles cannot do it all.
They look like crappola.

what SR says...

300gr Sierra MK's would be all you need. My 375, an improved version, is built on an FN commercial magnum action. With a 3-9X Leupold on it, it comes in, fully loaded, at 10.25lbs. It also has a 26" medium sporter weight barrel.

For me, it is the perfect all-around rifle. If I took it to Africa my next trip, I would just add a load with 300gr solids that I could juggle to hit inside the Sierra's group at 200yds, and go happy...

Rich

Definitely will check out the trajectory article. There is a part of me that wants to just use one bullet weight, but in reality, I think that two bullets will probably always be needed (300 deep penetrator, and another more flat shooting choice), but two probably makes more sense. But I'll go through that article and then evaluate.

On those Sierra's that's definitely an idea. One high BC 300 like the Sierra or maybe the Accubond, and then a hard bullet in a 300 like a TSX...something to consider.

Thanks again for all these really well thought out pieces of advice!

I got my zeiss thru cameraland (they are on AR frequently, esp. on the "optics" thread) Great guys, honest & good prices. I cannot answer your reticle question, you can look it up on their site. I do highly reccomend a lighted reticle on whatever scope you choose.

On the scope discussion:

I´ve tested them all.

BDR, Ballistic Turrets ...

My humble opinion as a HUNTER:

Forget cluttered reticles.

But get an illuminated one, VX - R instead of VX - 3.

As much as I like the auto illu shut off on those, the brightness control is clumsy, and the FOV is inferior to Euopean scopes. Noticeably smaller.

The VX - R 2 - 7 x 33 is nice and light. The 3 - 9 x 40 is fine at distance, but not good up close.

The Dialyt is good, but heavy, and the Illumination control is also not perfect.

On a do - it - all .375 I want at least 7 x for longer shots. The Objective bell should, for handiness and weight, be not over 40 or 42 mm.

My Opinion?

The best scope there is is the Swaro Z 6 i, 1,7 - 10 x 42.

Cry, cry, and cry, but get that scope.

It´s only Money.

Yes, I have that scope: on my "Hunting trip including far shots" Win 70 Featherweight, .30-06, current SC Production.

You want the most universal rifle?

-> get the most universal scope.

Cry, but the FOV, ease of TWO brightness settings, and clarity of glass have to be seen, to be appreciated.

Save, cry ( CRY! ) and buy that scope!

Sorry, Hermann

On my Win 70 .375 Safari Express, current SC Production, there is a Zeiss Dialyt 2 - 8 x 42, illuminated, sighted in for 270 grainers.

There´s a backup scope, mounted as low as possible:

an old, VERY reliable, not illuminated Swaro 1,25 - 4 x 24 , sighted in for the 300 grainers. If it gets down and dirty and close.

Just my 2 cts, Hermann

Scope? Yep, get two.
Have a backup scope pre-sighted, easy to do with the Leupold QRW QD rings and bases.
How about a backup iron sight too? A Lyman receiver sight is easy to do with the M70 and QRW bases.
Side mounted on the left of the rear receiver, you can leave the Lyman peep sight base installed and use your scope.
The rear QRW base interferes not.
There is also the less effective NECG peep, which is however still better than any open rear iron sight.
That is sight system No. 5.
Quintuple sights, quadruple redundancy!
The previously mentioned 6.75#-dry .375 H&H, that was closer to 7.0# when wetted/wedded with this sight:



Excuse the 1-pound-of-crap synthetic stock, painted with black epoxy paint and sand.
Here is another way to give a turd a non-slip finish:



If Saeed would paint his no-checkering-slippery-smooth, greased, too-fat-to-grip-well 577 T.rex with something like that,
fewer of his "champions" would drop it,
and if they dropped it anyway, touch-up is easy.

So what does everyone think,drop the BDC requirement? I find it much harder to shoot long when I am holding without a focus point, thats why BDC or turrets appeal to me. Frankly, I prefer a very simple plex or german 4 reticle, but I want a way to aim more accurately when I am trying to compensate for 20 inches or drop, or 30 or whatever.

Chad,

I've put a Vortex HS-LR on my 375 Ruger and shoot 74 gr on RL-15 behind a 260 Accubond. I know this scope is a bit heavier than what you want but I really like the Vortex optics. The BDC on my gun gun works very good out to 500 yards.

I looked at the weight of oft mentioned Leupold VX3 2-8 compared with the Vortex Viper HS 2.5-10. The Leupold is 11.4 oz compared to 16.5 for the Vortex. If weight is your driving factor, then go with the Leupold. If you want to have a little bit closer view of an animal at 400 yards, go with a Vortex. Hell, for 3 more oz over the Viper HS, you can go to the Viper HS-LR and have turrets that are customizable by Vortex to your load.

Good luck, you can't go wron either way.

Tyler

Thanks for that advice! I just went to look at some Vortex optics today. Tomorrow, I found a place 100 miles from me that has the Minox 2-10 in stock for me to look at so I will go there to check it out.

Then Sunday, I will drive to Bass Pro to hopefully check out a Leupold 2.5-8.

All of these, I can get custom turrets from Kenton or directly from Leupold. Kenton, I think, will be having a special shortly for the Vortex turrets.

However, looking at the turrets I saw on the Vortex PST today , they were really nice, but I have concerns with those exposed turrets (which would apply to the Minox as well). It seems like in a hunting situation, it would be very easy to accidentally bump these or whatever. I would get Kenton's or Leupold's lower profile turrets, but the risk is still definitely there.

On the other hand, when you use covered turrets, then making on the fly changes in the field becomes unrealistic unless you have tons of time.

So how do you all handle this? No turret adjustments for hunting field use?

That would suggest a bdc reticle of some sort is important for long range hunting?

Is there another solution or process? Is it just Kentucky windage? Seems at 400 yards, this would be very difficult to do well. I have shot at 600, but that was at targets with a spotter telling me where I hit so I could find a reference point to hone in on to make consistent hits. Once I knew what to aim at, then hitting was consistent, but obviously, that is not going to do so well in a hunting situation, hence my desire for either a turret or BDC solution.

But please educate me on how you guys do it.

Thanks!

Chad,

My brother used the Viper HS-LR and a 300 Ultra Mag to take a 4x4 muley this fall at 850 yards. The scope has the custom turret and is a pretty sweet setup. As for accidentally bumping the scope, I would not worry about it. Scopes with exposed turrets usually come with a zero stop capability that will enable you to always make sure that you are where you should be in terms of clicks.

Hope this helps,

Tyler

Thanks for the input, Tyler. That is a SERIOUSLY long shot!

Chad,
Don't know where you are in Texas but the DSC show is just 6 weeks away and you can see all of the scopes there and even compare side by side.

I am in Austin, about 4 hours from there. That would be a really cool deal to do, may need to try and run up there for a day to see that, thanks for the info!

Chad--

I have the VX3 2.5-8 with the B&C reticle on my 375. Realize you may be using the small triangle if you need the BDC help. It is a great combo as far as size, weight, and power goes for that round. I would not want target style turrets (too unwieldy) or illumination unless you find something VERY light.

Make sure you get bases and rings like the Leupold weaver style....steel and recoil lugs for each ring. The rifle will kick, and I've had a friend break a single-dovetail Leupold mount from recoil.

I like the 300g Accubond.....

Cheers,

Dan

I'm not a .375 guy (great cartridge, but ...), I think the .416 (Rem. or Rigby) is the best all around calibre. But the principles are the same. On my .416 Rem., I have a 1.5x5 Leupold, with detachable mounts. I always carry a 2.5x8 as a spare, also sighted in and on detachable rings. I seldom use the backup.

In Africa, I've taken animals from duiker to elephant with that rifle. In the States, turkey to deer. It works.

My shots have not been beyond 300 yards. I sight in at 100 and my 400 grain bullets are about 6 inches low at 200 (not a problem) and 21 inches low at 300. That begins to be a problem and I won't shoot beyond that. I'd prefer taking shots inside 200 and closer is always better, but if the conditions are right, out to 300 will work.

I've always used 400 grain Trophy Bonded Bear Claws for softs (a brief foray into the Barnes X 400 grain but I've abandoned that) or Trophy Bonded Sledgehammers or Nosler Solids for solids. Never a complaint on bullet performance.

The Swift A frames look good for softs, but no personal experience with them.

Well, I got out to see some scopes today. Drove about an hour or more to a place where they had the Minox 2-10, a 3-9 conquest and a 3-9 Meopta. Unfortunately for me, I found the Minox almost unusable at 10 power. Any slight movement of the head and it whited out. The position where you have to be to see is very very tight at 10 power, where the BDC reticle is calibrated.

The Meopta was actually really nice. Not quite as clear at long distance as the Zeiss, but really nice, and the FOV is noticeably better. However, the problem with that scope is that the eye relief is a worry. It is listed at 3.75 inches, and I am told it runs to about 3.6 at the long end. My old Swaro AV had something around 3.5, I think, and would bing me lightly now and then, but maybe it really had less than listed...not sure. The other issue with the Meopta is it's about a pound, maybe an ounce less...not sure what Talley lightweights will add, but I really want to keep the weight to around 8.75 or less.

The Zeiss was probably the best balanced of the three, the FOV was not as nice as the Meopta, but it was just a bit more crisp at distance, and it had a longer eye relief. The eye box was reasonably forgiving as well. But there is no BDC available on them anymore, and turrets are not an option without an expensive retrofit.

BTW, checked out the Terra vs the Conquest as well. Not too bad, not as good....but definitely shorter eye relief.

Looking at the Leupold 2.5-8 hopefully tomorrow, gotta drive to find that one too, but a different place in another direction. The FOV difference bwtn the Meopta and the Leupold is only 1.2 feet at 100 yards, and the Leupold lists the eye relief at 8 power as 3.6 inches, the same or less than the Meopta. The Meopta's low light is supposed to be stellar, but in the Leopold's corner are those nice CDS turrets, and a much lighter weight. They are both available with BDC reticles.

Thoughts? If it were not for the weight, I think the Weaver Super Slam would be ideal...2-10, BDC, 49.7 FOV, 4" constant eye relief, CDS like turrets and reportedly built to handle at least 375 levels or recoil. It also weighs somewhere between 18 and 23 ounces (sites differ on this), and NOBODY stocks them that I can find anywhere near me....

Thoughts?

Leupold VX-6 2-12x42mm, 30mm tube, and illuminated. Leupold was providing free cds turret when I bought mine. For me, I would rather have a $1000 scope on a $400 rifle than a $400 scope on a $1000 rifle.

Talley one piece lightweight mounts are always a good option.

270 grain Swift A-Frame with whatever powder you prefer - H-4895, Varget, RL-15, IMR-4320.

Yeah, that looks like a phenomenal scope! Unfortunately, I just can't swing that kind of coin for the optic. I have not even gotten my rifle out of layaway jail yet, but it'll be free next month.

Dropping an additional 1k on a scope is probably not realistic for me.

But otherwise, that or a Swaro would be high on my list to check out!

quote:

Originally posted by BigBoreMan:
Leupold VX-6 2-12x42mm, 30mm tube, and illuminated. Leupold was providing free cds turret when I bought mine. For me, I would rather have a $1000 scope on a $400 rifle than a $400 scope on a $1000 rifle.

Talley one piece lightweight mounts are always a good option.

270 grain Swift A-Frame with whatever powder you prefer - H-4895, Varget, RL-15, IMR-4320.

Chad,

Welcome to AR.

What you seem to be looking for is exactly what I have been using for years now.

I designed and built the 375/404 before Remington came up with their 375 RUM, otherwise I probably have picked the Remington.

My rifle is built on the Dakota 76 action, and has a Leupold 2.5-8 scope on it in Dakota mounts.

It weighs just over 9 pounds with scope and 3 rounds of ammo.

I have used it to shoot animals from s few yards to about 500 yards.

These include all plains game, as well as elephants, lion, leopard and buffalo.

I only use 300 grain bullets.

Saeed,

Thanks for the response. Yes, that is exactly what I am trying to achieve! But with a little less horsepower than your 375/404.

I looked at the 2.5 - 8 this weekend, as well as a conquest 2-10 and 3-9. I also checked out the Meopta 3-9, Minox 2-10, Leupold 3-9 Vx-R, 3.5-10, and a VXII 3-9.

I still want to look at a Minox ZA 3-9. But for the eye relief, I would probably grab the Meopta as it has almost the same field of view of the 2.5-8, but a much broader eyepiece. But the eye relief is only 3.6-3.75...my Swarovski AV usto have 3.5 and popped me lightly on the brow from time to time, so I sold it. So I am a bit nervous about that scope, but the glass is glorious.

Anyway, all that is to say, I am on the same track as you. So two questions. First, how to you handle hold over at those distances? I was planning on getting both a BDC reticle and decent turrets, then choosing the one I like based on the situation. With the H&H being much less flat shooting, I'll need to have considerable holdover for 400 yard shots. I have made these before with my old 375, longer actually, but only on targets, never game, and only with the help of a spotter to 'walk me in', so to speak. I know it can be done, I just don't know the best way to do it in hunting conditions.

Second, what bullets do you prefer, all the same or do you have different loads based on what you think the game/distance might be?

Thanks!

Chad,

Trouble with BDC scales is knowing the distance in the first place.

Also, how one can actually judge a few inches at 400 yards is beyond me.

So I use what I think is the right hold over, and it seems to work.

My rifle is dead on at about 170-180 yards. Passed that distance and the bullet nose dives. So you just have to make allowances for that.

I used to use the Barnes X 300 grain bullets in this rifle.

Now we use our own Walterhog bullets, also 300 grains.

I use a single load, at about 2800 fps, which I found suits my hunting best, and the bullets seem to penetrate more at this muzzle velocity.

I can go to 3000 fps for flatter shooting, but the bullets do not penetrate as much at this velocity.

I set up my do it all 375 with a leuold VX6 1x6, and I shoot 300 grain TSXs or 300 grain northforks. Mine is a RUM so it can still kick those 300s 2650 fps without breathing hard.