Don't get me wrong I'm sure the .375 Ruger is a fine cartridge, but the way it gets hyped on Internet forums reminds me of when the WSM cartridges came out. They were the greatest thing since sliced bread - until the shine wore off.

as a gunsmith and cartridge designer, I see that your opinions are good on the surface, but not so much on the details.

Converting a model 70 7rem or 300 win to 375 is a task, and ABSOLUTELY requires modifications. Further, the ruger 77mlII action is equally as adaptable to 375 length rounds. and, frankly, with dual square bridges and rock solid basis, from an engineering and cost-effectiveness, the ruger is a superior action.

now, WSM vs ruger .. this is an unusual comparison, as the rounds a VERY different in approach to solving a problem. the WSM offered the power of the 3.35 carts in a 2.86 package- but a much higher pressure AND smaller capacity. this is a narrow solution, in IT, we call this a shim, as it solves the problem, but with costs.

The 375 ruger is a wee bit larger than the HH, so for same pressure and loading practices, the ruger will have higher vels, or at the same vel and loading practices, would have lower pressure - the ruger has nearly the capacity of the 375 weatherby/ 375HH improved .

in the case of custom guns, a 3.65 length action is $$ more than a 3.35 action - and modifying a 3.35 to 3.65 has engineering compromises.

Yet the ruger feed EASILY in common actions - i could go on for DAYS about the feeding intricacies, but let's just say it's easier to get a 300 winmag to feed properly in a 98 than a 300 HH ..

In my core, I am a technologist with ZERO nostalgia -- If I were to pick a 375, it would simply the best one available for the constraints of budget and time - of which, I loved (and still do) the 376 steyr .. though the 375 ruger is a GREAT solution to more parameters than the 375 HH

if one wants .375" 300gr at 2500, and building a custom rifle, the ruger is the better, more efficient solution to the problem - and since *I* prefer stainless guns (i am somewhat lazy) it's even an easier solution

quote:

Originally posted by Cougarz:
new Winchester model 70 which can take a .375 H&H without modification since it's already that length.

quote:

Originally posted by Cougarz:
Don't get me wrong I'm sure the .375 Ruger is a fine cartridge, but the way it gets hyped on Internet forums reminds me of when the WSM cartridges came out. They were the greatest thing since sliced bread - until the shine wore off.

Jeffeoso has presented helpful analysis and commentary on the Ruger/HH comparisons. And as he mentioned, the Ruger/WSM comparison is less frequently discussed.

Cougarz would apply a diminished liking to WSM cartridges to Ruger's future. However, that misses what has happened in the "WSM" world. It is true that larger rounds like the "338WSM" and 325WSM have apparently receded in popularity, probably due to their smaller capacity in comparison to the 338WinMag. As diameter increases, the need for powder capacity increases, too. However, in the smaller diameters the WSM concept is being expanded. A new 270 WSM is coming out this year, named 6.8 Western. This 6.8 Western is playing on the one natural advantage a shorter cartridge has. It will increase barrel twist to 7.5 and 8" twists so that "long for caliber" bullets can be sent downrange with increased ballistic coefficients. It remains to be seen how this 270WSM+fast twist will do commercially, but it is promising ballistically.
When one returns to the Ruger/HH comparison, one sees that the Ruger has both increased capacity and increased flexibility with bullet lengths and nose lengths, along with the inherent advantage of more platform availability with "standard" length actions. I would have to conclude that the 375Ruger is sitting in a good spot. I'd like to take one out hunting for an elk.

A century of nostalgia is the biggest hurdle the 375 Ruger faces.

Interesting idea. I hadn't thought of this concept applied to the 375 Ruger. Are you imagining a sort of high BC bullet over 300 gr., faster twist, seated long?

quote:

Originally posted by 416Tanzan:
Jeffeoso has presented helpful analysis and commentary on the Ruger/HH comparisons. And as he mentioned, the Ruger/WSM comparison is less frequently discussed.

Cougarz would apply a diminished liking to WSM cartridges to Ruger's future. However, that misses what has happened in the "WSM" world. It is true that larger rounds like the "338WSM" and 325WSM have apparently receded in popularity, probably due to their smaller capacity in comparison to the 338WinMag. As diameter increases, the need for powder capacity increases, too. However, in the smaller diameters the WSM concept is being expanded. A new 270 WSM is coming out this year, named 6.8 Western. This 6.8 Western is playing on the one natural advantage a shorter cartridge has. It will increase barrel twist to 7.5 and 8" twists so that "long for caliber" bullets can be sent downrange with increased ballistic coefficients. It remains to be seen how this 270WSM+fast twist will do commercially, but it is promising ballistically.
When one returns to the Ruger/HH comparison, one sees that the Ruger has both increased capacity and increased flexibility with bullet lengths and nose lengths, along with the inherent advantage of more platform availability with "standard" length actions. I would have to conclude that the 375Ruger is sitting in a good spot. I'd like to take one out hunting for an elk.

In my 40 or 50 years of going to Africa for extended periods of time every year, I never needed to buy a round of anything, don't think thats a viable fact to consider...pHs have lots of ammo and guns, that will get you by...

I love the old H&Hs both of them, but I see the Ruger a hands down better rifle..Some refer to the claim that the H&Hs feed better because of their taper, they are just repeating a old saying...The H&hs do not feed any better if both feed properly, but I will give them credit to the fact that they will extract better than any case when shot with a too hot load..thats when the taper counts...but we can go on and on, some will agree others not, mostly depends on who has which one, and like a good dog you do not verbally attack it!!

Jeffrey, yes, but ...

There are two ways to get a long-for-caliber bullet. Adding a sleek shape with a lead core could produce 300gn or 350gn or even more grains. All copper bullets are also long, even before reaching the 300 grain level. However, even lighter bullets can be stretched into long, optimal ogives that go beyond a standard 3.4" magazine. They can be single-loaded or magazine loaded if the action is longer.
Personally, I always check winddrift statistics when I am building loads and debating a heavy bullet vs. a light bullet. often, a light bullet with a fairly good BC is a better overall choice 0-500 yards over a heavier, slower bullet with a higher BC. A person needs to check. I'll bring an example later.

Ok I’ll bite. Is the .375 ruger a big bore? Personally I think it’s a medium bore. Carry on.....

The 250g Barnes TTSX is long for its weight, as you describe. In the 243 world, the 62g Barnes HP is very long for such a light bullet. I haven't paid as much attn. to the wind drift numbers, looking instead at BC. Perhaps there are some 270g 375 bullets of this sort.

quote:

Originally posted by 416Tanzan:
Jeffrey, yes, but ...

There are two ways to get a long-for-caliber bullet. Adding a sleek shape with a lead core could produce 300gn or 350gn or even more grains. All copper bullets are also long, even before reaching the 300 grain level. However, even lighter bullets can be stretched into long, optimal ogives that go beyond a standard 3.4" magazine. They can be single-loaded or magazine loaded if the action is longer.
Personally, I always check winddrift statistics when I am building loads and debating a heavy bullet vs. a light bullet. often, a light bullet with a fairly good BC is a better overall choice 0-500 yards over a heavier, slower bullet with a higher BC. A person needs to check. I'll bring an example later.

quote:

Originally posted by gunslinger55:
Ok I’ll bite. Is the .375 ruger a big bore? Personally I think it’s a medium bore. Carry on.....

we've chewed this a couple (thousand) times - Saeed defined it as a big bore, and regardless if some of us think big bore starts with 0.4, it's here

The examples on winddrift and BC follow below.

The simple answer on .375" is that 0.375" is 0.375" No more, no less.
Bigger than .338 and smaller than .416, smaller than .458, smaller than .510.
So .375 is "pretty big" for large deer and plains game, but on the smaller side for buffalo, though legal. We get what we pay for.

So how do BC and bullets work with 3.4" magazines and 3.6" magazines?

The 250gn TTSX bullet fits fine in a 3.4" magazine. In fact I may use it as a back-up bullet that fits in a 3.4" magazine. COL can be 3.315˜3.32 to fit the top groove.

A better bullet in my opinion is the 244gn Hammer Hunter (AKA 248 H.H.) It is only 1.43" long but the grooves/ridges are farther back on the bullet, so that its COL is typically around 3.55. (It's ballistic table is listed in this thread in page one.) To use that bullet in a magazine I need to seat it about 0.15" deeper into the case, with only a couple of ridges engaging the neck. The practical hunting solution is to single load the bullet on top of a second bullet like the 250gnTTSX as numbers 2, 3, 4 in the magazine.
This is doable, provided that the two bullets can be loaded to approximate POI. We wouldn't want the rifle throwing one of the bullets an inch or two at 100 yards in another direction.

As for BC and winddrift:
In my new Mossberg, the 244 Hammer Hunter gets 3000fps in a 22" barrel with 90gn StaBall-6.5 powder. That is just shy of 4900ft# muzzle energy. At 400 yards (and a 2.1" maximum rise above line of sight) it drops -17.7" and drifts 12.7" in a 10MPH wind. Remaining energy at 400 yards is 2654ft#, plenty for about anything.

Hammer bullets also have a 276gn "Dead Blow Hammer" and a 329gn Hammer Hunter.
Those are even longer, 1.60" and 1.84", respectively, and need a magazine longer than 3.4". Those bullets will have slower muzzle velocities, of course.

Here is the 276gn DB Hammer:
2800fps, 4804ft#, at 400 yards (2.1"max above line of sight) drop -20.7" and winddrift 11.6". That saves 1.1" of drift, better than the 244gnHH.

The 329gn Hammer Hunter, .375":
2600fps, 4922ft#, at 400 yards the drop is -24.4 and winddrift is 10.4", saving another 1.2" of drift from the 276, and 2.3" from the 244gn. Remaining energy 400yards is 3174ft#, impressive, but not really necessary. Accuracy and penetration are the guiding parameters, and all of these bullets will penetrate just fine with their flat-nose cylinder cores.

So the heavier bullets can save one or two inches of drfit at 400 yards. Practically, I just want to know which one is most accurate in a particular rifle. So far, the 244gn is promising in my Mossberg and the 250TTSX looks like a good magazine bullet, so I will not need to check out the 276 and 329gn.

The .375 250gr. TTSX does just fine on African plains game. As the one shot kill in the picture and many other will witness.
cool 2k names

416Tarzan,
Thanks for the detailed information. I had not heard of Hammer bullets before. Interesting product line on their site. Wish they made some 410 diameter bullets; the selection of all-copper bullets in that caliber is limited. Anyway, don't want to derail the thread. Back to the great 375 Ruger discussion!

LIve Oak,
your post that Ruger ammo is hard to come by, jsut off hand I cannot think of any ammo or parts thereof thats easy to come but, all our store shelves are totally empty of ammo, brass, primers and powder. If any shows up the salesmen buy it!

ah yes the fabled one shot kill, an myth since man invented the speer, it proves not a thing!

Don't know about the ammo but rifles in 375 Ruger are hard to come by! Fairly tales, war stories and one shot kills! The story just starts different! Humor!

Cougarz said "Don't get me wrong I'm sure the .375 Ruger is a fine cartridge, but the way it gets hyped on Internet forums reminds me of when the WSM cartridges came out. They were the greatest thing since sliced bread - until the shine wore off."

Indeed, and true for all new products. The makers send hunters to shoot game, birds, or whatever and pay them for favorable reviews - to hype new products from guns to ammo and clothing. This became apparent many years before the Internet.
I have no Iron in the fire and wish Ruger well with it's products.

Further, Dead Wildebeest tell no tales! A .338 230 grain Failsafe heart shot shows similar results - 100 yard dash and death at mid leap into a cloud of red Limpopo dust. Memorable!

The 375 Ruger was an easy choice for me. I had come to appreciate Ruger’s stainless rifles and I really liked the 375 H&H. I started off by having a 375 Ruger Alaskan’s barrel replaced with a longer one, sights, stock, etc. During the excessive wait time, I purchased another 20” Alaskan replaced the stock and trigger, and began using it. I had 20”’ish 375 H&H’s in the past, but not stainless. I have come to really like this rifle and the 375 Ruger cartridge.

The 375 Ruger gives me 375 H&H performance in basically the same package as my favorite 338 Winchester. As to bullet performance compared to the 375 H&H, same bullet at same speed, same performance.
I bought a M70 stainless standard magnum action that has a 375 H&H barrel, magazine well and bolt stop modified to feed and eject loaded rounds. It seems to function fine. It is still a work in progress, stock bedding, sights, etc. I still prefer the Ruger.

The 375 H&H is a cool looking old cartridge, with a lot of history. And I agree with Ray, it would appear that it’s long sloping/tapered case would have an extraction edge if there was an issue. But, I have 416 Remingtons, 458 Winchester, 458 Lott’s , 45-70’s; which I give up that long tapered advantage also.

I have been fortunate, the rifles that I have fired in 375 Ruger, have all grouped very well with a single no science project hand load. And it mattered not if they were in the factory Hogue stock or a bedded McMillan or H-S Precision stock.

Good logic tells me if you have a favorite 375 H&H then your pooping in tall cotton, if you do not and wanting a 375 Id go with the Ruger and probably in the great Ruger African model..

Hard to get? I have one for sale in the classified thats an awesome rifle, the one that sold me on the 375 Ruger..Father time has voided my beloved Africa, and the 30-06 rules the roost in my beloved Texas and Idaho with pit stops between the two!!

On rifle availability, I picked a Mossberg 375 Ruger about three months ago for under $600. Cases have been available and I picked up 100. Bullets have also been available, picking up the 244gn Hammers and 270gn TSX, and I've had some older 250gnTTSX and 270gnLRX among some other odds and ends, powders and primers.

Load development has taken place as I've had free time. Ladder testing of some bullets and powders has suggested that this rifle will shoot. Because it is light, under 8lb with scope, it may get chosen for any hunt on a mountain.

Yesterday, I was able to test the 244gn Hammer Hunters, 89gn StaBall6.5 and 90gn, at 100 yards. The 90gn and 90.5 had good primers, no signs of high pressure. However, the groups opened up to just over 2". The 89gn loads look like the best choice. I shot two rounds with the 244gnHH seated deep, 3.50" COL, and two rounds seated long, 3.60" COL. The "long" bullets were +16 fps faster for some reason, though it is impossible to know if that is a reliable statistic with so few shots. The spread of both pairs was only 3fps. Pretty tight.

Altogether 4 shots were taken at 89gn. Here are the two pairs, with a tracing of the other pair in each picture so that one can see a 4-shot group, with two seatings.
Seated deep:


Seated long:


Now who wouldn't want to go hunting with such a rifle?
The grey cerakote and black charcoal plastic stock may not be appealing, but it's a hunting rifle, not a safe queen. If I didn't have this I would be tempted by Ray's offer. The Ruger African is pretty much everything one could want in a hunting rifle out of a factory.

I think I'll give the scope 1 click left and one click up before doing some confirmation groups and more testing with the 250TTSX for rounds that can be carried down in the magazine. The Hammer Hunters are too long for the Mossberg magazine and only one can sit on top. From a previous ladder I am expecting that 88gn powder, or possibly 88.5 or 89 will produce a usable second load with the TTSX. With greater engraving pressure, the 250gn TTSX bullets may use less powder for a similar output.

I have some of the 250 grain TTSX and 270 LRX, that eventually I will try. Though, once the 270 LRX came out, my interest in the 250 grain has diminished.
The 270 grain TSX has grouped very well. And, in reality it’s ballistics / performance are plenty sufficient for me on 200 yard and under shots. I have not choreographed my load, but suspect it is probably around 2650 FPS out of a 20” barrel.
The advantage I see with the 270 grain LRX is that I would basically retain the 100 yard velocity at 200 yards, compared to the TSX. Though, I have zero complaints with the TSX on moose to about 180 yards. Thus, the reluctance to experiment.

Idmay375,

Thank you for raising the 270gnLRX. It is a good bullet, even great, and provides a good example about factors to consider in choosing a bullet for load development.

I have done a ladder with the 270gnLRX and StaBall6.5 powder 83-86 grains. It appears that I started too low and then shot a couple more at 87 grains printing about 0.5", at 2850fps and no pressure signs. So I am soon going to do a test for groups at 87gn, and maybe 87.3gn.

Accuracy, of course, is the first criterion for any load.
Let's assume that the 270gnLRX and 244gnHammerHunter are equivalently accurate.

I like to use 2.1" as my maximum height over the line of sight. So I generate trajectory tables with that limit and look at things like the drop at 400 yards, the drift at 400yards in a 10mph crosswind, the stability factor, and sometimes even recoil ft#. Here are the tables for the 244gnHH at 2950fps and for 270gnLRX at 2850fps

244gn Hammer Hunter drops -18.7" at 400yards, with a 13" drift, and 49ft# recoil in the lightweight Mossberg:


The above table may be compared with the following table for
270gnLRX at 2850fps, dropping -21.1" at 400yards, with a 14"drift, and 53ft# recoil.


In traditional thinking the 270 grainer would seem the natural all-around choice if a buffalo might be on the menu. However, the Hammers are a special bullet. They shed their nose into petals with about 30% of the weight. The remaining cylinder of 70% weight is a full, blunt nose solid that penetrates beyond what a mushroomed bullet would do. I would expect the 244gnHammerHunter to exit from any well-shot buffalo unless going lengthwise or taking in a lot of angle through the stomach. In other words, the 270gn LRX shoots through a marginally larger trajectory, dropping an extra 2.5" and drifting an extra inch at 400 yards. In real-life hunting that is negligible for Africa, where distances are 95% under 300yards, and to be honest, pretty negligible for NorthAmerica, too.

Still, the advantage goes to the 244gnHH. The decisive criterion would end up accuracy. If one averaged 1" groups at 100 yards and the other averaged 0.6" groups, then I would go with the 0.6" bullet. However, either way, I would be confident of a bullet that would deliver significant energy 0-400 yards with impact speeds over 2000fps. Pretty decent for a deer, elk, or even buffalo bullet.

This kind of analysis may help me with my 338, too. The 185gnTTSX is currently my most accurate, but I am testing this new StaBall powder with 210TTSX, 225TTSX, and 250LRX. the heavier bullets do better in wind. Accuracy would influence the winner, and I would prefer something heavier than 185gn for elk. In Africa we have an accurate Tikka 338WM with 225gnTTSX. The heavier bullet is definitely the better 338 back-up cartridge on a buffalo hunt (where it would be a "2nd rifle").

For my particular purposes, I will be very satisfied with 2600-2650 FPS from my 20” barrel, with the 270 grain LRX. I think this velocity range should be reasonably obtainable.
2700 FPS would ideal. But, I am not optimistic of that being possible with the shorter barrel.

quote:

Originally posted by ldmay375:
For my particular purposes, I will be very satisfied with 2600-2650 FPS from my 20” barrel, with the 270 grain LRX. I think this velocity range should be reasonably obtainable.
2700 FPS would ideal. But, I am not optimistic of that being possible with the shorter barrel.

it should be pretty easy

quote:

Originally posted by ldmay375:
For my particular purposes, I will be very satisfied with 2600-2650 FPS from my 20” barrel, with the 270 grain LRX. I think this velocity range should be reasonably obtainable.
2700 FPS would ideal. But, I am not optimistic of that being possible with the shorter barrel.

That well kill lots of stuff.

Even if you could only get 2600.

I can second Jeffeoso that 2600fps-270gnLRX should be easy to achieve in a 20" version of either 375 H&H or 375 Ruger. You can probably reach 2700fps with an H&H, and 2725+ in 375Ruger, 20" barrel.

Bascially, a 270grain bullet at 2600fps is approximately the power level of the 338WinMag, which is a great hunting tool.

Here is a trajectory chart for the 270gnLRX at 2600fps.
(NB: the temperature is set at 30* Farenheit, elevation 1200 feet, and humidity at 25%. That coldness results in winddrift figures that are a couple of inches more than warmer or higher environments, so care must be taken when comparing these tables to some table running at 70*F or 4000ft elevation.)



This would be a great load for most hunting. The bigger bullet would give a little bitty (insignificant?) advantage over a 338 with a heavy bullet. Cross canyon shots at 400 yards might want something faster or with better BC.

Besides adding a barrel and chambering it, what has to be done to a regular mauser magnum action (say currently a 7mm rem mag) to make it into a .375 Ruger. Is the bolt face the same. Do the rails have to be changed. What else?

quote:

Originally posted by Kolo-Pan:
Besides adding a barrel and chambering it, what has to be done to a regular mauser magnum action (say currently a 7mm rem mag) to make it into a .375 Ruger. Is the bolt face the same. Do the rails have to be changed. What else?

Jeffesoso could probably give a more complete answer.

From my limited perspective, the bolt face remains the same. The rails may need some minimal work.

If the 7mmRM was on the sloppy side, it may work as is. If the 7mmRM is too tight for the fatter-at-the-shoulder Ruger, then minimal side-rail work might be necessary, maybe 0.01" inch. The follower may affect this as well, and I've had to modify a follower on rifles from time to time.

The RM shoulder is 0.4909" diameter while Ruger is 0.515. since the side margin is only 1/2 of the diameter, I'm guessing that 0.012" is the max that should be necessary to remove from the side rail. But one should not start with such a material removal.

For those who think that case length is not so important, please remember two fairly successful cases. The 30/06 and the 300 H&H. And then think of the 308 Winchester and the 300 Winchester.
Yes, the 308 has a pressure change v the 30/06.
So the match is between long and thin vs the short and square on the contender.
Also, all 375 H&H bolt actions can become donors actions for 375 Ruger cambered barrels. The reverse is not true.
Sincerely,

Feeding is always the sticky wicket - though with 2 decades of people making RUM/WSM feed in the same, it's pretty well known.

Frankly, as sloppy as many commercial actions handle the "short mags" (remember with a 2.5" HH was a short mag?), it may feed, it could always use tuning.

The feeding issues and importance of rapidity of fire were pretty well settled when the military chose the 308 over the 30-06, even for semi and full automatic usage!

Hard to find? Where have you been, any part of the hunting industry is hard to find under this new (old and senile) administration, it applys to most everything, not just a Ruger 375!!, its the sign of tthe times