This cartridge if I can get Hornady to make it would cure allot of problems that we have all had with respect to getting brass and ammo for
our H&H Flanged cartridges. Ross Seyfried is the one that brought this potential excellent cartridge to my attention. This cartridge has 6% more volume than the 375 H&H Belted Mag. and would allow for a double rifle cartridge that would come very close to the belted mag. preformance. If Hornady was to produce this cartridge it would be affordable and would be an excellent source for brass.
I'd be very interested in your opinions on this
cartridge. And if you feel like I do about this cartridge it wouldn't hurt to contact Hornady and encourage them along.

Not just for Dr rifles, but also Ruger nr 1 would be nice to have one of the chambered for it .

Butch, I agree this little cartridge would make a fine double rifle cartridge. I've had two different 375 H&H flanged doubles, and no longer have either of them because componants were so hard to come by. The 375RUGER FL, both loaded, and componants for handloading would be a real boon to a modern made double rifle!

Hope this takes!

Mac,
Things are still in the discussion stage, but it does look very positive. I've already ordered a 1000 rds. of brass and ammo when it does happen. And yes it might be a while before anything happens, but I have got things rolling with the help of Ross.

Good show Butch!

Man, that cartridge would sure fill a nice gap between the 9.3X74R & the 450/.400 in the SXS realm. And, yes, Mac, that would make another great Ruger #1.

.395 Ruger Flanged cannot be too far behind.


Seriously though, it does sound like a great idea, this .375 Ruger Rimmed, and I am impressed by the Searcy and Seyfried collaboration. Might happen.

I can hear the Ruger Haters groaning now. Poor misguided souls.

Allright everybody, let's contact Hornady NOW via Email.

Rich
DRSS
Knowledge not shared is knowledge lost...

With all the wailing and moaning about high pressure rounds in double rifles, how in the world could you get H&H performance from a 375 Ruger Flanged round without the accompanying high pressure?

Would have to have a much bigger case.

Why not just neck down the 500/416 case? If you are going to have low pressure and still zing out 300 gr. bullets at speed, you might wind up with a 500/416 case size anyway.

Or neck up the 9.3x74R case? And add a little length for increased case capacity.

And what is the point of a 375 double anyway when it is going to wind up a 9 1/2 or 10 lb. tank? If someone would make a 7 1/2 pound double it would be great, like the 7.3 lb. Chapuis in 9.3, but it AIN'T goin'ta happen.

oh man, someone pissed in bill's wheaties again...


hey bill.. i bet butch knows more about doubles that all the rest of us on here!!

Butch, 300gr at 2400, about 44,000 psi, right? Would be a super neat round.

Piss on Will if you wish, but he ain't too far wrong on rifle weight.

JPK

If, if, if .....

All I have done is stated the obvious. It doesn't matter who suggested another 375 flanged, physics is physics.

And lugging around a 9 1/2 or 10 lb. high pressure 375? Ooooh, where do I sign up?

quote:

Originally posted by Butch Searcy:
This cartridge if I can get Hornady to make it would cure allot of problems that we have all had with respect to getting brass and ammo for
our H&H Flanged cartridges. Ross Seyfried is the one that brought this potential excellent cartridge to my attention. This cartridge has 6% more volume than the 375 H&H Belted Mag. and would allow for a double rifle cartridge that would come very close to the belted mag. preformance. If Hornady was to produce this cartridge it would be affordable and would be an excellent source for brass.
I'd be very interested in your opinions on this
cartridge. And if you feel like I do about this cartridge it wouldn't hurt to contact Hornady and encourage them along.

Butch,
That sounds like a great project. I hope you and Ross can pull it off. This is on par with Elmer Keith getting S&W to build the 44 Mag.
Bill

WOW ! great, just what we need ! another new cartridge !!! WOW

wouldn't a more rational solution be to have hornady just make 375 H & H flanged brass ? and loaded ammo ?

at least it could be used in all the existing 375 flanged double rifles.

somehow i get the feeling this new round will be taking the shooting world by storm, just like the 500/416
which was going to be the do -all end -all round of the century. wonder what ever happend to it ?

.375 Ruger Flanged 3", 3.25", and 3.5" Everlasting.

This one is not for short bolt actions and can be as long as necessary.

Lets give it a retro 8.5-degree shoulder and enough neck to make at least 3 inches.

I agree with Will.

quote:

Originally posted by Showbart:
I agree with Will.

But Will doesn't agree with you!



Or anyone else! Just kidding!

The so-called high pressure, of the 375 H&H in a double rifle is not as much the problem, as the damn rimless, belted case. That's why they made the 375 H&H flanged in the first place! A double built got the 375H&H, or 458 Win Mag pressures are not going to be anymore prone to go off face than one made for a 30-30. A full 90% of off face doubles were caused by poor care, not pressure!

Tom,
Your right it would seen easier to just make the H&H Flanged. But not so. The engineer at Hornady has told me that as the 375 Ruger comes off the line it has a rim that needs to be removed anyway. So there you go, it's a ready made cartridge with a rim and no extra work to make them. And I'll say it again, cheap and available.
The presures are not even a concern of mine.

Butch
I'm glad to hear your comment about presure not being a concern for you.
We have been around this issue here before and I've been a proponent that bolt trust not pressure is the enemy to the double.

A rimmed .375 will be a great round. I won't be interested but many here wil be.

quote:

Originally posted by Butch Searcy:
This cartridge if I can get Hornady to make it would cure allot of problems that we have all had with respect to getting brass and ammo for
our H&H Flanged cartridges. Ross Seyfried is the one that brought this potential excellent cartridge to my attention.

I guess I'm too accustomed to looking at numbers and profit margins. I certainly understand where Butch is coming from. Although I rarely disagree with Ross, I do here. While a new .375 Ruger Flanged may solve the short-term problem Butch describes with respect to new built rifles, it creates what will be yet another rare, low volume problem child a few years down the road, and does nothing to help those already trying to feed .375 Flanged Magnums. I think there's a solution to this problem that's just as easy, but much more commercially viable and, thus, more realistic.

quote:

Originally posted by jeffeosso:
Butch, 300gr at 2400, about 44,000 psi, right? Would be a super neat round.

For any practical purpose, we've had that for 95 years. The .375 Flanged Magnum does 2425 fps in 28" barrels and has a modern CIP max pressure of 47,137 PSI. In 26" barrels (c'mon guys, let's ditch the 24" coach gun barrels on doubles - it's just a fad that doesn't make 'em any handier) it's more like 2375 to 2400 fps. Since CIP MAP is 47K, actual pressure is somewhat lower than that in factory ammo.

Butch is certainly right - .375 Flanged Magnum ammo and brass has long been a serious pain in the ass. Why? The hard part of any of these flanged nitros is making the brass. NOBODY that's loaded .375 Flanged Magnum factory ammo in the last 35 years has made their own brass for it and nobody does it today - they depend on the same folks that handloaders do, and it's low enough volume that most manufacturers don't want to make it.

If the argument here (.375 Ruger Flanged vs .375 H & H Flanged Magnum) is better performance at the same pressures, or the same performance at lower pressures, then I think that's splitting hairs too much for a completely new cartridge to be commercially viable in the context of the double rifle market (vastly different in this respect from bolt rifles).

If the argument is availability - that since Hornady is making .375 Ruger brass and can then easily make a .375 Ruger with a rim - then a much more commercially viable alternative becomes obvious - a similar modification of another round they're already making. The .375 H & H Flanged Magnum is the same case as the .375 H & H Belted Rimless Magnum - with a rim and without a belt. The .09" greater length will make no difference in the manufacturing process. How much difference in the set up cost is there between these two alternatives? I'll bet it isn't much.

Which is more commercially viable to a cartridge manufacturer and which offers better likelihood of long-term availability for the modern DR shooter?:

1) Introducing a completely new .375 Ruger Flanged DR cartridge with zero rifles chambered for it in the existing marketplace and thus depending solely on new built rifles to support it; or

2) Introducing production of the existing .375 H & H Flanged Magnum, a cartridge which has a ready market with quite a number of existing rifles chambered for it already in circulation and new rifles in production for it today, but is currently an expensive, cast iron bitch to get, thus killing two birds with one stone?

I don't think there's any contest. Demand for the Flanged Magnum is far more likely to support manufacturing costs and remain commercially viable longer term than an entirely new .375 DR cartridge has any hope of doing. After all, even though it's currently hard to get, it IS still available.

Which US manufacturer makes it own brass and is known for being capable of doing well with lower volume projects that others don't want (and is, indeed, already headed down this road - .405 Win, .450/.400 NE, .450 NE, 9.3X74R...)? Hornady. This project is tailor made for them. Far better to encourage them to solve the .375 Flanged Magnum problem that Butch mentioned for us than to ask them to create a new problem that will almost certainly be less profitable for them.

California Rigby did something like this some years ago with their "new" .350 No. 2 Rigby. "We took the .348 Winchester and necked it up to .358 because there are so many bullets available in that caliber. The result is basically a .35 Whelen with a rim on it." Well yes, there are plenty of bullets, but Rigby had already had that cartridge using a different case for 100 years - the original .350 No. 2 Rigby (yeah, a .35 Whelen with a rim on it isn't far off). Worse, the brass had never been out of continuous production and was easy to get - it's just that it was headstamped "9.3X74R". How hard can it be to get someone to make a run of 9.3 headstamped ".350 Rigby"? Horneber does it all the time. What a boner.

We already have plenty of fine DR cartridges to fill any real DR need, and the DR community needs to concentrate it's resources on keeping them viable.
----------------------------------------------
"Serious rifles have two barrels, everything else just burns gunpowder."

Not a bad idea, but while it may be inexpensive for Hornady, the same would not necessarily be true for Ruger.

If you take a look at Ruger's latest financials and shareholder materials, it does not look like a low sales line is within the scope of their plans. While their financial condition is good, they are struggling with implementing their plans for the future while simultaneously trying to fix legacy line, marketing and engineering issues.

I am certainly not privy to their sales and profit numbers on the Ruger 375, but I have to believe they are still in the red on that project.

Let's error on the high side and say they sold 5000 Ruger 375's. And coutinuing to be generous, let's say they made $200 on each sale. That would be a gross profit of $1 million, before design, tooling and marketing costs. While a good portion of capital expenses can be amoritized over a number of years and not taken as a current expense, the profit margins Ruger is looking at are not all that attractive for a retailer.

Ruger has indicated they are interested in garnering a share of the self defense and "black rifle" market, which right now is a much hotter sales market than the hunting rifle market. Add to that bringing out a "new" caliber that already has a good deal of competition in flanged calibers in 375 and 9.3, and the increase in availability in components for the 9.3, I doubt they would be looking at a very rosy sales forecast. Particularly when the new market would already compete with what they offer in the Number 1, and when the most likely new business for that new market would be in double rifles.

Unless Ruger was planning to come out with their own line of double rifles, it would be a stretch to convince them to add a new caliber for the sake of a new caliber.

And without Ruger or another manufacturer paving the way, I don't see Hornady manufacturing cartridges for a caliber that would essentially be a wildcat.

My 2 cents.

Mark, I agree with your analysis. But short term I'll have enough brass to take care of any customer that might want a 375 Ruger Flanged rifle. And as you know one of the purposes of a project like this is the challenge. This cartridge might take the place of the H&H, I doubt it but at least there will be a 375 flanged for those that want a rimmed 375 to choose from. I don't expect to set the world on fire with this cartridge, just offer an alternative.

On barrel length, I'd like nothing better than a 26" bbl, get the velocity. But I don't know if I would like the handling better in a big bore. I'd try, but I'm skeptical that the bigger barrels in 26" would handle as well, for me personally, in tight bush, given my choices of makers (entry level). I don't feel that any of these, even my soon to be beloved Demas, would have the proper barrel contour combined with OA weight/balance except the Heym. They are deceivingly light given all the metal relieved from the bottom of the receiver. A 500 Merkel might work too. But again not the Demas, as I recall the 470 and 500 barrels had contour and profile specific to caliber and the 500 was very nicely weighted and balanced, slightly heavier than the 470, as it should be. This in contrast to they way the Merkel and Chapuis present.

In a bespoke gun from a higher end maker 26" might could just work, for me, if not noticably tighter to negotiate the bush. I know old schoolers, even with fine H&H, Rigbys and the like, drew the line at 26", this general consensus imparted to me by Anton Allen. No 28" bbls for DG work, even tho his old man used one.

Understood, Butch, and best of luck with it.
-----------------------------------------------
"Serious rifles have two barrels, everything else just burns gunpowder."

anyone know how they are marking these ruger rifles in 375 ?

if they don't specifically state " RUGER 375 FLANGED " i'm sure some unlucky soul will be trying to stuff a
real 375 flanged into it

and conversely, trying to stuff the ruger into a real 375 flanged.

what confusion for the poor sporting goods houses around the world, esp africa as the natives try to figure out what they have versus what you need.....

this seems like much ado about nothing

i think history will record this as another stillbirth after a few years.

Butch
Would you make the 375 Ruger Flanged on the same frame as your 450/400 or would you thin down the frame for a little lighter trimmer double?

For all the 375 cartridges I now have an action that is 10% smaller than the 450-400 action. I will post pictures of rifles on that small action soon. Currently, I'm finishing up on three sidelock 375 H&H Flanged for three sisters. Now that's a special daddy.
Tom you shouldn't worry so much. I give more credit to my customers than that.

I thought this was a fascinating thread and an I have to say that Mr. Searcy's idea is really intriguing. However, I think that Jim Manion and 400 Nitro Express make some good points as well. It's hard to understand how a flanged .375 Ruger could be a commercially viable proposition for either Ruger or Hornaday. I agree with 400 Nitro Express that it would be a better idea to have Hornaday simply run some .375 H&H flanged brass for all the rifles that are already out there. Hasn't Jamison already done this? In addition, as I believe that the 9,3X62 Mauser will do pretty much what the .375 H&H will do, I also believe that the 9,3X74R will do what the flanged .375 will do and there are a number of fine, light, handy factory doubles and good brass already available at a much reduced cost for the 9,3X74R. There is another thread on AR where Kebco says he has Chapuis doubles readily available for $4500 or so. Does a new .375 really make that much sense?

Dave

I like the idea of a 450/400/375... neck the 450/400 to 375 and keep the same shoulder position and angle.

we are only talking 36 thou here so forming brass would be easy...just stick readily avaliable 450/400 brass in fl 450/400/375 dies.

a 450/400/9,3 would be interesting too.
get a relatively cheap used 9,3x74 and ream it out if it can handle it.

quote:

Originally posted by mr rigby:
Not just for Dr rifles, but also Ruger nr 1 would be nice to have one of the chambered for it .

The Ruger No. 1 does NOT need a rimmed case. A rimmed case does not make the No. 1 any more reliable than it is with rimless cases....

What am I missing here??? Didn't Ruger already have 375 dia barrels, an existing action that is rather sweet and can be produced at a reasonable cost? So what other costs were involved except for a chamber reamer and a bit of R&D which Hornady surely did most of?

That's what I would have figured anyway.....

Gary
DRSS
NRA Lifer
SCI
DSC

Garby:

Ruger wouldn't make any money at all unless they decided to chamber the flanged .375 Ruger in a No.1. They don't make doubles. Why would they chamber a rimmed cartridge in the No.1 when the No.1 is already suitable for the .375 Ruger? There is nothing in this for Ruger.

Hornady has to run the brass. If Mr. Searcy is correct, the cost wouldn't be to great as long as they didn't make to much but don't forget, they are making a run of brass for a new double rifle cartridge. Besides what Mr. Searcy may purchase, how much of a demand could there be? Hornady would lose money on the deal.

Dave

Sorry Dave....I should have been more clear. I was responding to Jim Manion's post above concerning the initial 375 Ruger project. I would have thought that only a reamer would have been needed for that one.

Yes, I am VERY knowledgable on the rimmed/no-rimmed situation....and, as of late, the rebated rim..as in 425 WR. I think the #1 in 375 "Flanged" Ruger would be great....but why when the 375 H&H works so well.

But if Ross/Bruce convince them to do it...what the heck....one more caliber to ponder over.

Sorry for the confusion....nice explanation tho' .

Gary
DRSS
NRA Lifer
SCI
DSC

quote:

Originally posted by boom stick:
I like the idea of a 450/400/375... neck the 450/400 to 375 and keep the same shoulder position and angle.

we are only talking 36 thou here so forming brass would be easy...just stick readily avaliable 450/400 brass in fl 450/400/375 dies.

a 450/400/9,3 would be interesting too.
get a relatively cheap used 9,3x74 and ream it out if it can handle it.

This is probably only a matter of simantics, but if you neck the 450/400 brass down to 375. then the cartridge wouldn't be a 450/400/375, it would bea 450/375! The same goes for the 9.3 which would then be a 450/9.3

The 450/375, or 9.3 would have more powder capacity than the 375 FL mag, or the 375 R. The 9.3. However other than available perent brass, the bracket is already full of exapmles if fine old cartridges already!

quote:

Originally posted by MacD37:

quote:

Originally posted by boom stick:
I like the idea of a 450/400/375... neck the 450/400 to 375 and keep the same shoulder position and angle.

we are only talking 36 thou here so forming brass would be easy...just stick readily avaliable 450/400 brass in fl 450/400/375 dies.

a 450/400/9,3 would be interesting too.
get a relatively cheap used 9,3x74 and ream it out if it can handle it.

This is probably only a matter of simantics, but if you neck the 450/400 brass down to 375. then the cartridge wouldn't be a 450/400/375, it would bea 450/375! The same goes for the 9.3 which would then be a 450/9.3

The 450/375, or 9.3 would have more powder capacity than the 375 FL mag, or the 375 R. The 9.3. However other than available perent brass, the bracket is already full of exapmles if fine old cartridges already!

OK so does everyone agree( ) that the 450/400/375 is much better and has more pinache???

Maybe the single shot might be a cheap test rig but I would wager 300 grains@ 2500 would be doable at DR preasures.

With the advent of hornady and the 450 3 1/4" and 450/400 3" reloading components are no longer an issue with this idea.

COTW 38-90 Winchester Express, WOW!

quote:

Originally posted by BigFiveJack:
COTW 38-90 Winchester Express, WOW!

yes yes the 38-90wcf is a fine obsololete cart...but that is why people are not jazed about the 375 flanged...same direction...

Also the 450/400/375 will be more capacity.

the 38-90wcf is the predecessor of the 9,3x74

Also it is a yankee cart and that wont do since most fine DR's have an English parentage.

A major European ammunition and case manufacturer will start making .375 Holland & Holland Flanged ammunition in spring 2008.

OK so does everyone agree( ) that the 450/400/375 is much better and has more pinache???

Nope, sorry!