Supposing you had an incurable itch to build one.Which action do you choose, and why?P-14Mo;itary M98

P-14 is a lot bigger than you need for that cartridge. I would suggest a commercial mauser for a repeater or a falling block for a single shot. I made my choice a few years ago and went with a .300 H&H single shot.

I think calling a modern built .300 H&H a 30 Super or calling a modern built 7x57 a .275 Rigby is a bit pretentious. The same would go for building a rifle in .30-40 and calling it a Caliber .30 US or building a .22-250 and calling it either a .22 Varminter or a .22 Wotkyns Original Swift.

I would build on a 98 myself. Mine is on a PD farquharson action. A mid 20's build and labeled 30 Super on the barrel. Build it in a H&H style and label it as you like.

quote:

Originally posted by Grenadier:
I think calling a modern built .300 H&H a 30 Super or calling a modern built 7x57 a .275 Rigby is a bit pretentious.

Pretentious? I just think it demonstrates someone's love of history and the ground breaking cartridges of old. To each his own...
I vote an 09' std 98 with one of Wiebe's BM's and an H&H contour barrel.
Matt

quote:

Originally posted by dpcd:
Wait!!!
The 300 H&H by any name is way too long for a 98 mag box or receiver; it takes some doing to make them fit, although it certainly can be done; I have done several of them. A 98 is a viable option, but....
.

I know what you say..

dpcd - that's why I said "commercial" mauser.

pre·ten·tious (prəˈten(t)SHəs) adjective - Attempting to impress by affecting greater importance, talent, culture, etc., than is actually possessed.

I stand by my comment. But opinions, mine included, are just that.

Grenadier,

my first factory Winchester was stamped "30 Holland Super" on the barrel.

Almost everything we truly enjoy and admire is pretentious when spoken/written of to the masses...

That includes paying thousands of dollars for a DR when a used $800 new model 70 will do. Or a convertible, or Cuban cigars instead of the machine made ones from Alabama, or Leupold instead of Tasco.

Appreciation of beauty and history is innate in some of us...

The key word you are misinterpreting in your dictionary description as it relates to this thread is "attempting". I cannot, by definition be pretentious because I do not care what others consider proper. 30 Holland Super is the original name of the cartridge.

It is akin to my calling my Jaguar a Jag-wire. People know what I am referring to, but it is technically incorrect. It is Jag-u-ar.

I built my wife what I planned to call a 275 Rigby. Then I made the mistake of also calling it a 7x57. Since it was her rifle and she was born July 1957 the idea of a Rigby never surfaced again.

Only issue might be on resale but heck might be a plus who knows.

I have no experience using the p14. So between your choices I would pick 98 but would prefer new vs military.

Pre 64?

i think i'd use a model of 1934..... that's maybe been opened up for a magnum length action... with lots of machine work already done to it.... yup, that's what I'd use... you know where its at, and available to you....

True, dpcd, but there are plenty of Mark-X, FN, Parker-Hale, etc. actions out there already opened up for long magnum cartridges.

quote:

Originally posted by dpcd:
The OP said standard military 98; hence my comments. A true mag length commercial Mauser costs more than a good car.
When I show people my 275 Rigby, marked as such, they are all awed and very impressed at it. If it said 7x57, they would just yawn and give it back. That alone is worth $1000.

All of of my 7X57's are marked as 7X57's or 7mm Mauser. I don't think it takes away a thing from them.

I forgot about the magnum Mkxs etc. but they aren't common.
Yes, the markings make the 7x57 plain jane and ho hum, whereas markings of 275 Rigby automatically make it exotic and sexy. Every time I take it to the range, guys ooh and ah about it. If it was a 7x57, they would just say, ok. And the 275s shoot better than the 7x57s too.
That last part may not be true.

.275 Rigby

Holland and Holland has made many 300 and 375 Holland rifles on shoehorned and recarburized/hardened 1909 actions. I would like a P14/m1917 if the extensive work is done to redo the tang angle, convert to cock on opening, model 70 type safety, M98 Shaped Bolt release, conventional bolt handle etc (i.e Burgess or Echols). Ya, you can easily convert one, but without putting in a lot more work than goes into a Std 98, you end up with a truly Fugly rifle (An excellent, strong, potentially accurate, highly utilitarian, but Fugly). If you are going to take the trouble to mark it in the classic style, then why not build it in the classic style as well.
Matt.

quote:

Originally posted by dpcd:
And the 275s shoot better than the 7x57s too.
That last part may not be true.

I just picked up 100pcs of new hornady 275 Rigby brass at Sportsman's Warehouse. I'm certain that they will make those 160 grain sierra's group much closer.

quote:

Originally posted by dpcd:
Converting P14s and 17s is not as hard as you make it out to be.
Yes, the markings on rifles make a lot of difference to me.
On 98ks, one little skull and crossbones can mean the difference in thousands of dollars.

My G33/40 has a "Dirty Bird." No big deal to me.

All rifle markings mean a lot to me.

If, that's if, you can get a .303 calibre BRITISH PATTERN '14 (in other words the thing we Brits ordered from the USA) that then, in 30-06, the US Army designated the Model of 1917...well..you'll find that the bolt is already suitable for .300 H & H.

Even more useful is that if, if, you can get a "Brit" Pattern '14 that has the .303 bolt but was re-barreled for target shooting to .308 Winchester then all you need to do is reamer the chamber and re-profile the barrel.

Hope it helps!

quote:

Originally posted by dpcd:
All rifle markings mean a lot to me.

And well they should. Consider this:

CIP lists the .30 Super Belted at 53000 psi (piezo)

CIP lists the .300 H&H at 62000 psi (piezo)