new cartridges standard length magnums vs H&H length?

[HuskyMusky]

The 375 Ruger is the prime example for me that comes to mind...


I like the idea of the cartridge being the width of the belt of H&H magnums but without the belt,

but a standard length instead of H&H length? why not have the full length and get extra powder?

I mean aren't most actions H&H length anyway?

I don't really see what's gained by say the 375 ruger being that bit shorter....to fit in standard actions?

pulling the bolt difference wouldn't matter to me either, that difference in length.


What am I missing?

 

[fackelberry]

I think the idea of all the new short magnum and beltless magnums that have came out in the last 15-18 years is they headspace off of the shoulder instead of the belt. Supposed to be more "inherently" accurate. That's debatable from many shooting and reloading pros. Good selling point though. Another thing with these new cases as you mentioned are they hold more powder than most older cases as internal capacity is greater. Plus the powder technology is way better now than 20+ years ago. Powder is more efficient, cleaner, and consistant than it ever has been. And about every powder company and ammo maker has engineers mixing a pinch of this with a scoop of that and a touch of something else and shazzam!!! You come up with powder like Hornadys Superformance, or The new Enduron powders that IMR has and they burn cleaner, less fouling, lower pressures and more velocity as compared to the older powders.


About the action lengths. I think the gun and ammo manufacturers are trying to sell the new cases. They are shorter and can fit in a shorter, lighter action. But the case is fatter than the older case and holds more of the newly created witch's brew powder and thus creates a cartridge which in the right gun and with the right bullet, powder, primer and barrel length combo will be on average 150-200FPS faster than the comparable "out-dated" magnums. To me that isn't enough gain or benefits to justify running out and buying a rifle, brass, dies, which will probably total 1,000 bucks or more, just for a gain of 150-200FPS. Now if your new to the market and are gonna start hunting, then it would probably be worth it to have one of the new beltless magnums. But that is really up to the person and if they only shoot factory ammo, or reload their own.

I'm like you too. The shorter action and bolt throw isn't even worth mentioning. I don't know of one person who missed an animal or didn't get a shot because their action was 1/4 to 1/2 inch longer! And the weight savings on them? If the gun manufacturers are worried about a few extra ounces in wieght difference on a hunt, maybe they should not get the supersize meal at McDonalds and maybe loose an extra pound of body wieght. That would fix that! It's all ploys and marketing to get rifle and ammo sales going. Just like auto manufacturers, always making the newest, fastest, best fuel mileage car every year.

My thoughts are, if you already have and shoot one of the " outdated" magnums, pre-1998. I don't think it's really beneficial to spend alot of money on a new rifle, components just to gain a couple hunded FPS. No animal or target will know the difference in velocity. Now that being said, if you NEED to buy a new gun and have extra money burning a hole in your pocket or an empty spot in the gun safe that needs filled, i might look into one of the new ones. Just my thoughts and the experiences on this subject.

 

[Bonecollector]

Agreed and well stated.

 

[Colorado Cowboy]

I think the idea of all the new short magnum and beltless magnums that have came out in the last 15-18 years is they headspace off of the shoulder instead of the belt. Supposed to be more "inherently" accurate. That's debatable from many shooting and reloading pros. Good selling point though. Another thing with these new cases as you mentioned are they hold more powder than most older cases as internal capacity is greater. Plus the powder technology is way better now than 20+ years ago. Powder is more efficient, cleaner, and consistant than it ever has been. And about every powder company and ammo maker has engineers mixing a pinch of this with a scoop of that and a touch of something else and shazzam!!! You come up with powder like Hornadys Superformance, or The new Enduron powders that IMR has and they burn cleaner, less fouling, lower pressures and more velocity as compared to the older powders.


About the action lengths. I think the gun and ammo manufacturers are trying to sell the new cases. They are shorter and can fit in a shorter, lighter action. But the case is fatter than the older case and holds more of the newly created witch's brew powder and thus creates a cartridge which in the right gun and with the right bullet, powder, primer and barrel length combo will be on average 150-200FPS faster than the comparable "out-dated" magnums. To me that isn't enough gain or benefits to justify running out and buying a rifle, brass, dies, which will probably total 1,000 bucks or more, just for a gain of 150-200FPS. Now if your new to the market and are gonna start hunting, then it would probably be worth it to have one of the new beltless magnums. But that is really up to the person and if they only shoot factory ammo, or reload their own.

I'm like you too. The shorter action and bolt throw isn't even worth mentioning. I don't know of one person who missed an animal or didn't get a shot because their action was 1/4 to 1/2 inch longer! And the weight savings on them? If the gun manufacturers are worried about a few extra ounces in wieght difference on a hunt, maybe they should not get the supersize meal at McDonalds and maybe loose an extra pound of body wieght. That would fix that! It's all ploys and marketing to get rifle and ammo sales going. Just like auto manufacturers, always making the newest, fastest, best fuel mileage car every year.

My thoughts are, if you already have and shoot one of the " outdated" magnums, pre-1998. I don't think it's really beneficial to spend alot of money on a new rifle, components just to gain a couple hunded FPS. No animal or target will know the difference in velocity. Now that being said, if you NEED to buy a new gun and have extra money burning a hole in your pocket or an empty spot in the gun safe that needs filled, i might look into one of the new ones. Just my thoughts and the experiences on this subject.

You are right on a lot of what you say. Remember the new stuff is burning more powder to get that 150 to 200 fps.

I shoot a custom .300 Wby Mag and my son has a Rem Ultra mag. We both reload exclusively and chronograph our loads. Using the same 180 gr bullet, my son's Ultra get about 180 fps more than my Wby.....but he uses 10 more grains of powder to get it. The only place where the difference is really noticeable is with a 220 gr bullet, but ballistics are still pretty close.

IMHO for the most part the short, beltless mags are a marketing gimmick to sell more rifles.

 

[JimP]

On the headspace issue I have always resized my reloads to headspace on the shoulder and not the belted rim. Years ago I read a article about this and that is the way that I went. I actually don't see any real differences between the two. Even with my wildcats that I shoot that are based on the .30-30 case, they all headspace on the shoulder and not the rim.

There are a lot of arguments about if a belt is even needed on the belted cases and the new rounds coming out that are based on the .404 Jeffery cartridge which does not have a belt shows that it isn't needed.

On the case length argument it was once said that the shorter or short action rifles weighed less than the long action ones and were able to get that second and third shot of quicker. The last time that I looked the short action rifles were within a couple of ounces of their long action counterparts so I threw that reasoning out the window. Same for being able to cycle the action quicker.

When it comes down to it shoot what you want to shoot and don't worry about it. The problems come up when a person that is not very knowledgeable goes into a gun shop and tells them to give them the newest and fastest one out there for his upcoming elk hunt out west and has no idea of what he is buying. I once had a coworker that took his 12 year old son into a gun shop and told them that his boy wanted to go elk hunting and needed a rifle. The salesman sold him a nice .243 and a scope that was bigger than the rifle. He asked me that following Monday what I thought of the set up, he didn't like what I told him.

 

[Tim McCoy]

I think the idea of all the new short magnum and beltless magnums that have came out in the last 15-18 years is they headspace off of the shoulder instead of the belt. Supposed to be more "inherently" accurate. That's debatable from many shooting and reloading pros. Good selling point though.

Iirc, the whole short fat thing really got going as result of some articles and experimentation done by a gun hack, Rick Jamison. Story goes he also shared some info with Win and the WSM's ensued, as did the lawsuits. Anyway, a central idea was a more consistent powder burn I think. The accuracy kings of the day were the PPC family based off the 220 Russian. Anyway, most accuracy guys seem to use some short fat design, 220 Russian derivatives, .284 Win based cartridges for a time was hot, the Creedmore now. So there may be some competition accuracy gains, but doubtful if one would see much with a hunting rifle/bullet.

 

[scubohuntr]

Actually, very few actions are H&H length. The "standard" Mauser action was made to handle the 8X57, which is roughly .30-06 length. The 1903 Springfield is a close copy of the Mauser and was built for .30-06. The 1917 Enfield is H&H length and has enough magazine for four, if you don't mind cock on closing and carrying around a boat anchor. You can still find Brevex Magnum Mausers here and there, but be prepared to pay modest-sports-car prices. CZ, Remington, Winchester, Ruger, and most others make magnum-length actions, but they make relatively few of them so they cost more. Commercial "short" actions are made to handle .308 length cartridges, which saves part of an inch and a few ounces. It's also debatably a bit faster with a shorter bolt throw.

Personally, I like long actions. If I were building an elk rifle today, it would be a .300 H&H, only because I already have a .375. The thing with the H&H cartridges is they are tapered much more than most "modern" designs. The lack of sharp shoulder and the long taper were originally designed for cordite powder. The side result is better feeding and much less problem with stuck cases. If I needed to go with a short action for some reason, I'd go with .284 Win. Yeah, I know, it's the "anti-H&H"; the original short-fat. What can I say, I'm eccentric.

I don't see any need for the latest and greatest "super dooper tactical mondo improved magnum" cartridges. I'd never take a shot over 400 yards in a hunting situation, and all my 1,000 yard competition is done with .308, so all I'd be doing is burning up more powder and replacing barrels more often for no real gain. If I were building barrels or selling powder, you bet I'd be pushing them.

 

[mgorm16640]

If I were building barrels or selling powder, you bet I'd be pushing them. Well said

All of this short and fat vs long and skinny, belt vs shoulder, tapered vs straight, 6.5 vs .284. It is just the gun writers selling for the gun companies. To stay in business they have to invent the end all be all every couple of years and then have someone convince the hunters and shooters that they need the new wiz bang as thier trusty 06 or 270 just can't cut it anymore.

That being said I just built a 300 H&H and I plan on it being my go to elk rifle for seasons to come. Does it do anything my 06 already did? No, not really, I just wanted one to go along with my 375 H&H, which is one heck of an elk rifle as well.

 

[Colorado Cowboy]

Never seen a gun writer that reported anything bad about a gun....like em all...buy em all!