What's your opinion on H&H's 400 and 465?

No thanks. I think I would rather stick with my 416 Rigby and 450 Rigby.

My opinion on the 400 H&H and 465 H&H: Hilarious.

Ditto Ming.

I see the 400 and 465 H&Hs being somewhat similar to the 224 Wby and 240 Wby. By that I mean they are npt particularly practical calibers given other calibers that are available.

But just as someone might get a 300 Wby from Wby custom shop and get a 240 Wby to go with it as oppposed to a 243 or 25/06, then same with someone getting bolt actions from H&H.

For example, the 465 H&H would be nice to have along side the 375 H&H and a double in the 465 H&H Nitro.

But to have the 400 H&H or 465 H&H in a non H&H rifle, would not be too attractive given the lack of practicality due to bullet diamter and brass.

Mike

The .400 H&H is designed to replicate .450/.400 NE performance in a magazine rifle, and the .465 H&H does the same for the .465 NE. Both cartridges are based on the H&H cartridge style as defined by the .375 H&H -- belted brass and lots of body taper, and low-pressure loadings.

Holland is having the cartridges loaded with the same Woodleigh bullets as are used in the respective NE double rifle rounds loaded for the firm.

I am planning on building a .400 H&H (the action is on order) as soon as they release the cartridge specification to the trade. Later I will convert my BRNO .375 H&H M602 to .465 H&H.

All the parts are available to build the rifles, and the performance of their Nitro Express double gun analog cartridges are "totally rad dude".

If nothing else I will at least get another Cape buff hunt and an ele hunt for fodder for future African Hunter articles.

We already know that we do not "need" new cartridges, but some mistakes are too much fun to only make once.

jim dodd

the 400 and 465 H&H were designed by someone who did not learn the lessons of the past 100 years of cartridge design. In particular:

1. The belt is not needed, and some feel it is a disadvantage.

2. The case taper increase bolt thrust and stretches cases.

H&H should have just used some of the excellent existing rounds, like 416 rigby and 450 dakota, or 416 Rem and 458 Lott if they wanted belts, etc.

Marketing is what sells rifles, and Holland has their own style of marketing.

The best technical solution is not what sells, rather the best marketed solution is what will sell. We have European gun makers who have been quoted on this site complaining that stupid Americans won't buy their stuff, but they do no marketing to this customer base.

I also recall a personal computer that was introduced with much fanfare in Silicon Valley, it was such a technical tour de force that it going to capture the market. The CEO of the introducing company put his Ferrari in a ditch the first week of introdcution killing himself, and the computer and the company sank like a stone.

Holland has their own style, and at $US23K and up for their bespoke rifles, they don't want to put .416 Remington or .450 Rigby on the barrel if they can put .400 H&H or .465 H&H.

Holland uses the belt for headspace, the taper for feeding ease with easy extraction, and low pressure loads for easy extraction and lower bolt thrust.

Having talked to the designer, I understand his design requirements, and his implementation.

jim dodd

I suspect H&H will sell very few of those rifles.

I had originally thought that the 400 would be a fairly interesting in a single shot "stalking" rifle, similar to some of the Rigby's or other Farquharsons. So I asked you guys. You know more about this stuff than I do. Thanks for the comments and any additional comments are surely appreciated.

YJ

[ 10-25-2002, 22:31: Message edited by: Yukon Jack ]

500 grains...it's like the little girl selling kittens. When ask how much they were, she replied "$1,000 each". The potential customer commented that she wouldn't sell many kittens at that price and she replied "I only need to sell one". Like Holland & Holland she knew that you don't sell bacon...you sell the sizzle.

DB Bill,

Perhaps they are selling sizzle, but I think they owe their customers more than that.

And I think that a lot of their potential customer base knows that the new calibers are inferior to some offerings already out there, and will stay away.

If H&H wants to maintain a top end reputation, then they should offer top end products, taking into account what other cartridge designers have learned from 100 years of experimentation. Simply charging a top end price is not enough to stay top end.

Oh, and they should also hire some polite sales people - just my personal gripe.

I'll be glade to take one on consignment.

500 Grains,

They know I will not be buying one of their rifles, but they treat me like a customer anyway. I can't say they are any different than other gun makers in that regard. So that aspect does not affect me.

I have an open mind when I approach their ideas, and the rifles I have handled are certainly really well made.

Whether other cartridges are indeed "newer, cheaper, better, faster, etc." or whatever is determined by the Holland Gauge (if you will), and they have their own set of requirements. By their requirements, they are making proper choices.

You have a whole 'nother set of requirements, so you would choose otherwise. This does not make either of you right or wrong, it makes you both doing your own things. Thing One and Thing Two are very different!

I see enough to interest me in the .400 H&H to build one and take it hunting (if Holland indeed gets the ammo to market).

jim dodd

Personally the look of the H&H cartridges just make me wet all under. I love the long sloping shoulders and all that. MMMmmmmm ooozes muscularity.

Unfortunately they cannot be purchased in every store. Believe it or not you can find .300 H&H in even the tiniest little village in the Bush, as well as .30-40 Krag, .303 British and .222 Remington.

I think the rather unusual calibres ie 400 and 465 is an attempt to capitalise on exisitng H&H double rifle chamberings - by adding a bolt action rifle chambering

ie
double rifle 500/465 H&H and adding a 465 H&H Mag in a bolt action

double rifle 450/400 3 inch NE adding a 400 H&H Mag bolt action

plus the 375 Flanged and H&H Magnums

What is the 400 HH? Is this just the 375 opened up to 400?

Roger QSL

Hello gents,
I contacted H&H about these ctgs and they were kind enough to send some info. THe reason for these new ctgs, is to fill a gap with their own ctg line. This is from the info I rec'd:

"The relationship of the respective ctg energies are designed for the 400 to carry the ME of the 375 to 100 yards ahd the for the 465 to take that onto 200 yards. Likewise the 465 carries the ME of the 400 out at 100 yards"

This Ballistics are as follows:

@ ME 50 100 150 200

465/480gr/2375fps @ 6013 5445 4905 4410 3960

400/400gr/2375fps @ 5011 4565 4125 3735 3365

375/300gr/2500fps @ 4161 3800 3441 3130 2820

Call it what you want but it does as they intended. It will make a nice addition to the H&H family. IMHO

Regards
JAG
(I will scan the doc and post it here. )

Jag,

Thanks.

Both rounds look very good.
Do you know the actual caliber of the 400?
Will it be another 416?

Roger QSL

Roger,
According to the lit, its .400" and .465".

The .465 will use the same 480gr bullets as for the 500/465. (From the lit)

Interesting because at this opint in the game, yes most would agree that it may not be the best, but what about in 50-75 years? Will we look back at them the same why we look back at other ctgs that were developed 50+ years ago? Do you think that J.Rigby in 1911, thought that people would still be chambering in the .416 rigby(nice pic of rigby letter floating around here at the ar forum)?

My point, however dull it may be is, will the shooters of tomorrow think that JUST because H&H made it, it is law? Anyway, just somthing I was thinking about.

JAG

I understand that the .400 H&H is actually a .411", and will use the same bullet as the .450/.400 NE.

Dr. Don Heath, the editor of African Hunter had some editorial commentary on the .400 H&H and .465 H&H based on the factory material. This ran is Vol 8 #3 (July '02)

Don says:

"It will be interesting to see whether the new H&H .465 can make any impression on the .458 Lott as the standard "back up" round out here. Somehow I doubt it. There is room for a good .400 though. The .416 Rigby is excellent but the round very oversize for the performance with modern powders. The .416 Rem is just too small with pressures being just too high."

jim dodd

<this is only partially in jest>
The .411 hawk is bring copied in a belted mag? Hmm, I can't get the 375hh in a 1904, so how can i get the 400 HH?

what's the vels/weights? can it be that the 411 hawk will be within 100-200 fps?
jeffe

jeff,
I believe the 411 Hawk tops out around 2100 for the 400 grain and around 23-2400 for the 350 grain. Looks like the H&H has a little speed on it, though at short to mid range, I'm not sure that it would really make a difference. However it appears that the H&H is intended to have the extra velocity at lower pressure. The belt should give those with doubts about the 411's headspacing some added confidence.

Here's some info from Holland & Holland's web site.

Holland & Holland introduces two new cartridges.
(There are two pages to the article. Be sure to use the Next Page button at the bottom. It's easy to overlook.)

Roger (all),
My apologies, the correct dia for the 400 IS .411 as per an email I just received. Sorry but I was merely going by the lit that was sent. I would have thought that if they went to hte trouble to refer to the ctg as .400 calbre the that would be what it was such as the .375.

quote:

---

Dear Mr. Gifford,

Thank you for your inquiry. The bullet diameter of the new .400 H&H Magnum Belted Rimless Cartridge is .411".

Very truly yours,

John Collins

---

My error I guess.

At last we have a 404 with a belt!!! zounds!!!

Actually in 10 years or so some modicka will rediscover the belted case and it will become the new rage....so goes the world of the gun nut...

Oh well, the belted case does extract and feed very well indeed, and it never has much headspace and I doubt that the 375 and 416 REm will ever be replaced by the new non belted cartridges that are now popular as they were 200 years ago when the Germans invented them and 200 years later the Americans reinvented them and took all the credit.

Good for H&H, they are cute rounds and I will have to have one of each I'm sure because I am a sucker for such stuff as .411 bullets on the 300 H&H case, it just has sex appeal...Maybe one of each on a Ruger No. 1 with a 26" half round/half oct. full ribbed barrel, iron sights and, Oh Lordy.....

JAG,

The British practice was to refer to the bore diameter when naming cartridges, which is the diameter of the bore before the rifling is cut -- so the .400" is the bore diameter. After the rifling is cut, the distance from groove to groove is .411" in this case (which is also the bullet diameter). So the .275 Rigby was the English name for the 7X57 or .284 as we would have it here.

Of course the naming of cartridges has been delightfully inconsistent between Great Britain, Europe and the good ol' USA.

Part of the introduction to the gun culture is to learn what to call things.

jim dodd

Bob,

Those people hate us, and will continue to hate us in spite of anything we do. The only thing they want is the removal of all guns from our hands.

jim dodd

Jim,
Great info.

Introduction to the "gun culture"?

Not sure were you are heading with that statment, but I am a bit futher along then the "introduction". Not knowing that fact shouldnt have been a reason for you to assume I am at the "introductory stage".

Again thanks for the info, thats why we are all here.

JAG,

No problem. Good of you to get me the info you did.

I went to HH's site and they don't show any specs for the new rounds. Looking to get specific case deminsions. Looks visually to be the 375 necked up to 411. Very nice visual look from the photo.

Again, thanks.

Roger QSL

Anyone got specs yet?

Roger QSL

Roger,

The specs refered to were some details on velocity, energy and trajectory that were on the Holland website previously. They were part of the product announcement in January, 2001. That information was posted on AR last year, so a search should find the thread. As I recall it was a long one.

They have not published either the case dimensions or chamber dimensions yet. Real soon now I supppose, although I don't know.

jim dodd

[QUOTE]Originally posted by 500grains:
[QB]the 400 and 465 H&H were designed by someone who did not learn the lessons of the past 100 years of cartridge design. In particular:

1. The belt is not needed, and some feel it is a disadvantage.

2. The case taper increase bolt thrust and stretches cases.

H&H should have just used some of the excellent existing rounds, like 416 rigby and 450 dakota, or 416 Rem and 458 Lott if they wanted belts, etc.
--------------------------------------------------
I agree.

Don

500grains & Don Martin29,

Let's examine the two postulates advanced as critical of the .400 H&H.

First, the belt is the feature that allowed positive headspace control on the original .375 H&H case with its long, gently sloping shape. The belted case is actually a type of rimmed case, and Holland understood building double guns for rimmed cases very well when they introduced the .375 H&H in magazine rifles 1912. The some that feel it is a disadvantage don't understand the question.

Second, bolt thrust is an interesting problem. Dan Lilja's website defines it as the pressure developed by the load multiplied by the cross sectional area of the interior of the case head less the effect of the friction between the chamber walls and the expanded case.

I use Dan's definition because folks that read this thread can go his website and read all about it.

Numbers I see in the literature talk about measurements in the 70,000 psi range for the bolt lugs and in the 25,000 range for the bolt. (you need to include areas to get the forces involved).

The H&H case actually has less bolt thrust than the more modern short, fat cases with their larger head sizes, higher pressure and shorter cases.

The .400 H&H can be expected to have the same sorts of numbers on firing as the .375 H&H, a cartridge that is well-known for not destroying rifles.

Cartridge case life is another story.

jim dodd

[ 11-03-2002, 20:47: Message edited by: HunterJim ]

Don,
Someone said "the belt is unnecessary and not needed" and all fell into line, and 2001 started the belt bashing syndrome of the followers.....

What a bunch of bunk!! A belted case is just as good as a non belted case...the 375, 300 H&H have certainly stood the test of time. So has the 300 Win., the 338 Win. and a few others, that will be with us much longer than such great rounds as the Lazeroni, Dakotas, and I will bet the RUM etc. don't shake the world a bunch...

Not needed? perhaps, perhaps not, but it won't go away. I could debate the belt from both sides and make a pretty good case for both..IMO the belt isn't any big deal one way or the other, but from a hunting point of view it does have something to offer.