So, where's the .458 Ruger?

[Loosedhorse]

For some folks, the .375 Ruger is the definition of a new era.

It "replaces" the old-fashioned, slower, weaker .375 H&H--sorry, Granpa! Because it doesn't have a belt or taper, you can get MORE powder into a shorter ("standard" .30-06 length) cartidge while keeping the bolt face diameter the same. And it is more accurate, too! (Well, at least in theory.)

So simple and obvious. A 3-year-old probably thought of it. (Lost somewhere in the Ruger's design was the fact that the presence of a taper and belt in the .375 H&H was specific and intentional: they are supposed to guarantee dependable headspacing and extraction in the worst of field and dirty-rifle conditions. But I digress...)

So, I would have thought it was time to redesign ALL of the progeny cartridges of the .375 H&H...all of the belted magnums. And indeed, we have seen .375 Ruger's children: the .300 and .338 RCMs...even a .416 Ruger!

But where is the .458 Ruger?

Long-winded way of asking: once we come to a .458 cartridge, one CLEARLY intended for use hunting dangerous game, will everyone again agree that the reliability advantages of the belted magnums belong to a previous century, and have now melted away like last Winter's scant snow? Have field conditions and rifle fouling (or dangerous animals) become much friendlier in the last few decades?

 

[Hizzie]

It's called the .458 Winchester Magnum and already fits a 30.06 action.

 

[GooseGestapo]

That, and the fact that the .458winmag is considered "marginal" to the point that it is slowly being superceded by the .458Lott. Most .458win are already in actions long enough for the Lott, and a .458Winmag can be fired in the Lott chamber ala .38spl in the .357mag, so either cartridge is useable in a Lott chamber making it the best of both worlds.
A .458RemUltMag would be the RUM/RUGER case necked to .458 at full length, but since the even larger .460Wby already exists, and the market for such a cartridge is minimal, don't expect either a .460Ruger or .460RUM.
Ruger did their homework with the .375 and .416. (I can't say that for the .300/.338RCM's) The .375H&H taper was to deal with the limitations of the powders of the time, and the belt was to headspace the cartride in break and falling block actions, and was also a "defining" marketing tool. None of these are considered necessary today......

In my experience, there is no realistic difference between the performance of the factory (Hornady) ammo of the .375H&H and .375Ruger. The factory ammo for the .375Ruger that I've chrono'd suggests that the .375Ruger does this to get .375H&H performance at lower chamber pressures, which negates the so called disadvantages of the "unbelted" and "untapered" case. It does in fact have "some" taper, just not as much as the H&H which was originally loaded with a form of "Cordite" powder which was notoriously temperature sensitive, and the metalurgy of the brass 100yrs ago isn't what it is today.
Which takes us back to the advantage of the Ruger in that it is chambered in a "standard length and diameter" action, such as the Mauser/Ruger action. If you have a "magnum" diameter bolt face standard action, all you have to do is screw on a .375Ruger barrel, and you have a .375magnum rifle.
If Winchester or Remington had developed the .375Ruger in the 1910-20's, the .375H&H would be an antique curiosity, like the 9.3x74R.

 

[MachIVshooter]

Correct me if I'm wrong, but you are arguing in favor of certain belted magnums?

Just curious, no personal preference. I own both belted and unbelted

 

[Kachok]

It would be hard to top the already impressive 458 Lott and 460 Wby. I suppose there is something to be said for a modern caliber without the useless belt, but I still have a hard time seeing such a thing catching on. All of the above are too much for my likeing, I am no expert on .45 cals larger then the 45-70.

 

[Pete D.]

In my experience, there is no realistic difference between the performance of the factory (Hornady) ammo of the .375H&H and .375Ruger. The factory ammo for the .375Ruger that I've chrono'd suggests that the .375Ruger does this to get .375H&H performance at lower chamber pressures......

I do agree about there being little realistic difference between the two.
About chamber pressures, though, all of the reload data that I have seen indicates that the Ruger cartridge operates at about 10000 - 12000 psi higher pressures than the H&H cartridge.
Pete

 

[Loosedhorse]

Correct me if I'm wrong, but you are arguing in favor of certain belted magnums?

I (once again) am asking for education. I am currently in favor of ALL the belted mags (well, except the really excessive Weatherbys, like the .460) for the reasons stated: good field reliability in the worst conditions. I have been confounded by the ability of the .375 Ruger (for example) to defy the "conventional wisdom" that produced the .375 H&H. Apparently, straight-case and no belt equals no problem at all in the field.

Was the concept of the H&H magnums just a good theory that held on for about 100 years, but now will be eclipsed by the Ruger "experiment's" results of dependability?

It's called the .458 Winchester Magnum and already fits a 30.06 action.

That, and the fact that the .458winmag is considered "marginal"

Well, that's the point: the Ruger concept is that with a belted magnum, having to make the bolt face big to accommodate the belt, but then shrinking the case diameter, robs you of powder space. The Ruger case stays the same diameter as the casehead (so there is no belt or taper).

The .458 WM is nothing more that a short belted mag (a belted non-mag?); the .458 Ruger would theoretically have enough case capacity to outclass the .458 Lott, yet in a standard action. No, it wouldn't be a .460 Weatherby...but I haven't heard a lot of hunters, even dangerous game hunters, say a lot of good things about that cartridge when loaded hot.

So: is the .375 Ruger telling us the belt-and-taper H&H mags' supposed dependability advantages were just false assumptions?

 

[MachIVshooter]

is the .375 Ruger telling us the belt-and-taper H&H mags' supposed dependability advantages were just false assumptions?

The reason for the belt, of course, is headspacing, due to the relative absence of a shoulder on the H&H. The .375 RCM (and the WSMs and RUMs) have plenty of shoulder to headspace. A .458 RCM/RUM, however, might not do so well, since their shoulder diameters are only about 0.03" greater than the .458 WM/Lott case mouth OD. They'd have to headspace like a pistol cartridge, which I don't think would be desireable in a dangerous game rifle.

The absence of significant body taper isn't limited to the beltless mags. Most of the American-designed belted mags based on the H&H have been blown out to nearly straight. They still have a little bit of taper, but not really more than the new breed:



7mm Rem Mag, .300 Win Mag, 8mm Rem Mag.

Like I said, I personally don't care whether they have one or not. The mag capacity argument is really moot; Even with the belt removed, the traditional magnums will still only fit 3 in a normal internal magazine. What is silly is people who sell off a perfectly good rifle chambered in a belted mag for some perceived advantage of a non-belted, rebated rim cartridge.

The .375 Ruger has it's place, I suppose, but unloading a .375 H&H to buy one would be pretty silly. All you would gain is a theoretical loss of a few ounces from the shorter action. But, as with a Rem 700, sometimes there is no length or weight difference between one chambered in a LA cartridge and a true magnum. My 24" 700 BDL .25-06 (2nd from left) is the exact same length and weight as my 24" 700 BDL 8mm Rem Mag (3rd from left):



The 700 BDL SS .375 RUM on the far right is also the same weight, though longer with it's 26" tube.

 

[Kachok]

375 Ruger is actualy quite a buit faster according to my reloading manuals.
Nosler 260gr Accubond 375H&H max 2793fps 73gr of RL-15, same bullet in a 375 Ruger is 2931fps with 82.5gr of Big Game. About the same advantage with 300gr bullets too. I cannot vouch for factory fodder, but in handloads the 375 Ruger has more potential across the board.

 

[Loosedhorse]

the relative absence of a shoulder on the H&H.

Yes. Again, as I understand it, the lack of a sharp shoulder (contrast to .416 Rigby, for example) was a specific design feature--if what I've read is correct--to allow the bolt to close in a dirty chamber/dirty ammo situation; with the belt still guaranteeing proper headspacing and ignition.

Which is what I'm wondering about: was all that just a good theory that turns out not to have any reality behind it? For instance, no one I know is complaining about the .416 Rigby being undependable in dirty field conditions. Or the .375 Ruger, either.

A .458 RCM/RUM, however, might not do so well, since their shoulder diameters are only about 0.03" greater than the .458 WM/Lott case mouth OD. They'd have to headspace like a pistol cartridge

Ah. Maybe that is the whole problem right there. Thanks. Perhaps the .458 WM is then destined to stay at the head of the .458 standard-length cartidges (that have a casehead no bigger than the .375 H&H).

375 Ruger is actualy quite a buit faster according to my reloading manuals.

Yup...which is why I suspect a .458 Ruger would also outclass a .458 Lott. But if, as MachIVshooter says, it won't headspace well on a narrow shoulder, it's a dead idea.

Maybe if the shoulder was very squared...kind of like displacing the forward edge of the belt well foward, thus leaving almost all of the case at the larger diameter of the casehead...

 

[rule303]

Ruger was one of the first companies to chamber the .458 Lott in a factory rifle, and large bore magnums are a small niche market. Add that to the fact that Ruger can't even come close to meeting demand on their current models, I doubt we will be seeing a .458 Ruger anytime soon.

 

[Loosedhorse]

Trouble with a good idea...

Or a bad idea: someone's thought of it before:

The round second from the left is the Lott. The two long unbelted rounds at center are both .450 Vincent Longs. Not based on the .375 Ruger case, but the .404 Jeffery. That means it's "related" to both the WSM and RUM families.

The casehead diameter for the .404 is .543; for the Ruger (and H&H) it's .532. That gives the Vincent an additional .0055 of shoulder width for headspacing.

 

[jmr40]

The purpose of the short, fat, non belted magnums is that they burn powder more efficeintly. This leads to several other advantages. Equal velocity, with less powder and shorter barrels along with less recoil. Doing away with the belt makes for better feeding, at least in theory. They are an improvement from a technological point of view, but for most folks there is just not enough improvement to justify a change. If they can hang around long enough I can see new shooters adopting the new rounds, but very few are going to sell a rifle they own and replace it with one in one of the newer chamberings. Other than the 300 WSM and 270 WSM I don't see a bright future for any of the short fat rounds.

I think there are several reasons why we may likely never see a 458 Ruger.

#1, there is very little demand for anyone to ever need such a large round. Few can afford to hunt anything where they would be useful.

#2 The advancement of better bullets has led to a downsizing of the need for all bigger calibers. A 243 with todays bullets will almost match what could be done with a 30-06 of 50 years ago. Bullets from today's 375 will outperform 458 loads from years ago. That has cut dramatically into the need for large calibers.

 

[Vern Humphrey]

One problem is that the .458 Win Mag and .458 Lott need the belt, They are shoulderless and only the belt provides a headspace datum point.

If you look at the cartridges pictured in #12, above, you note the only beltless magnums in this class have shoulders.

 

[MachIVshooter]

Bullets from today's 375 will outperform 458 loads from years ago. That has cut dramatically into the need for large calibers.

Yup, that's why I went with the .375 RUM. Shoots much flatter and hits harder at any range than the .458 win mag. Handloading really brings this cartridge into it's own, spitting out a 300 gr. spitzer at 2,970 FPS. In point of fact, even the .458 Lott only holds a (small) advantage to about 75 yards with the crappy BC of big, blunt 450 or 500 gr. .458 slugs.

 

[GooseGestapo]

.375H&H vs. .375Ruger;
Unfortunately, my rifle can't read loading manuals or magazine articles.
With the Hornady 270gr "Superformance" factory load, cataloged at 2,840fps, my rifle gets 2,740fps. (23"bbl). This is almost exactly what factory .375H&H gets, from Winchester, Remington, ect. This means the "actual" ammo is producing less pressure than claimed by Ruger/Hornady.... But, it IS accurate, and a 270gr PtSpt at 2,7XX fps "ain't tossing nerf balls". My rifle was used by the original owner in 2010 to take several african plains game, including a notable Cape Buffalo.

My top performing handloads with H4350, RL17, and IMR4350 get almost the exact same velocity.
The Ruger case holds more powder, and takes 5-6% more powder (3-5gr) to get the same or perhaps 50-75fps more velocity than an H&H.
Not a significant difference in my book.......
But, my rifle weighs ~7.7lbs w/o scope, and with a Burris 3x-9x weighs less than 9lbs.
This IS an improvement over my reference .375H&H, an aquaintance's Interams MkX "Whitworth" at ~10lbs w/o scope....

Recoil from the Ruger is about like a Remington M870 12ga with 1-1/2oz "Magnum" duck/turkey loads.... Noticeable, but not brutal..... Until you've fired off about 25rds in a morning collecting a limit of ducks.....

Taper/belt vs. Short, fat, little taper; The .30/06,.308, and .223/5.56x45 in over 100yrs use in combat in b/a, semi-auto, full-auto, and machine guns has proven satisfactory. Hence, No sloping shoulders, or belted cases necessary..... in the 21st century.

 

[MachIVshooter]

Recoil from the Ruger is about like a Remington M870 12ga with 1-1/2oz "Magnum" duck/turkey loads

That seems very light for such a load. My 7.5 Lb. BDL SS .375 RUM comes out at 81 ft/lbs with my 300 gr. load (95.2 grs. IMR4350), and it definitely feels like it. According to the calculator, and assuming an 85 gr. charge, that Ruger should be hitting you with about 54 ft/lbs, which is a bit more than a very stout .45-70 load in an 1895 SS.

http://www.huntamerica.com/recoil_calculator/

 

[Hizzie]

Keep in mind stock design affects "perceived" recoil considerably. IMO 510gr @ 2040fps out of an 8.5 lb Whitworth wasn't nearly as crushing as the recoil calculator indicated. Proper stock design helps a lot. Or a bad stock design makes things that much worse if you're a "glass is half empty" kinda guy.

 

[Loosedhorse]

.458 Win Mag and .458 Lott need the belt

Again, I think that's likely it. As MachIVshooter suggested, if you straight-wall the H&H case at .534 (the width of the belt), and then give it a shoulder to .486 (the external diam of the .450 Vincent at the top of the shoulder), that gives you a whopping .024" of shoulder width.

Is that enough for good headspacing? Well, the belt width of the .375 H&H is .0105.

So, if we made the shoulder very abrupt--as I said, kind of like moving the front edge of the belt forward--why wouldn't .024 be enough to headspace on?

Bullets from today's 375 will outperform 458 loads from years ago

Exactly how is a .375 300gr slug going to "outperform" a .458 500gr slug? Kinda like saying a running back is going to outperform an offensive lineman--not if the RB is playing RT, he won't!

there is very little demand for anyone to ever need such a large round.

Hey--how much demand is there for the .416 Ruger? But it's been introduced.

But, my rifle weighs ~7.7lbs w/o scope, and with a Burris 3x-9x weighs less than 9lbs.
This IS an improvement over my reference .375H&H, an aquaintance's Interams MkX "Whitworth" at ~10lbs w/o scope....

Well, this might be another argument against .458 Ruger. .458 Lott power in a lighter rifle--OUCH! Why in heck would I want that?

 

[MachIVshooter]

Exactly how is a .375 300gr slug going to "outperform" a .458 500gr slug?

Velocity & expansion.

Not many argue that the .357 magnum won't perform at least as well as a .45 ACP, and what we're talking about is basically the same thing on a grander scale.

Or a turbocharged 4 cylinder versus a normally aspirated V6, if you prefer.

 

[Loosedhorse]

Velocity

Not necessarily. Norma, for example, loads the 350 gr .375 at the exact same speed that most company's load a 500gr .458: 2300fps. One reason for that is that there is little consistent opinion that loading .375 much hotter than that (or with lighter bullets) is of any advantage on dangerous game; and dangerous game is really the only role where .375 and .458 Lott overlap at all.

Now sure: using lighter bullets you can get .375 faster; and that's the running back's role.

But velocity isn't necessarily peformance. The rating of the .458 Lott's performance is how it does on animals like elephant and Cape buffalo--and specifically, how it does stopping the angry one's coming at you. In that setting, I don't know of any hunters who would prefer an expanding 300 gr or 270 gr .375 at to a 500gr .458 solid.

'Cause that's the lineman's role! Different roles mean different definitions of performance.

& expansion

There is such a thing as expanding too much (meaning fragmenting). Some of the early .375 "lion loads" got a bad rep for (believe it of not) breaking up too rapidly in the chest muscles of lion and failing to stop them.

As for controlled expansion (leading to "shock" plus penetration), there are few things in this world like a 500 gr .458 Lott slug.

 

[MachIVshooter]

If we're strictly comparing .375 H&H against .458 Win Mag/Lott, I'll give you that the .458's are more capable. But it's a little different when you start using a .375 RUM or .378 Weatherby and pushing 350 gr. TSX's or bonded Woodleighs at 2,700+.

Me? If I'm expecting to be charged by a ticked off elephant, I'd rather have my AR-50 than any of these little guns. A Double Tap-loaded 750 gr. Solid at 2,800 should do the trick

 

[Loosedhorse]

If we're strictly comparing .375 H&H against .458 Win Mag/Lott, I'll give you that the .458's are more capable.

Again, what's "capable"? If I'm ranging a wildebeest at just over 300m, I'd much rather have the .375!

The .378 Weatherby is (I've been told) well known in Africa...but not favorably.* If a 350 gr bullet @2300 is considered "all you need", the velocities available from the Weatherby might just produce more noise and recoil, without more result. (I guess it might even possible to drive a TSX hard enough to break off its petals and reduce penetration, but I haven't seen that with the bigger bullets). I don't think I know of anyone who believes that you can substitute velocity for larger bullet mass and size and thereby keep effectiveness on large animals the same.

But that's just supposition; the most I can say about the .378 W as an elephant-stopper is that I don't think it's very popular with African PHs in that role. I don't know of any study comparing .378 W 350s to .458 500s or 550s on charging big stuff.

Same with the .50 BMG. Don't see much reason why, if you can't stop an elephant with a .470 NE, you'll be able to do so with an AR-50. And if you can stop it with a .470, who'd use a .50 BMG?

That's why, with this .458 Ruger idea, I wasn't so much as looking for a way to improve the Lott's ballistics, as interested that the belted magnum's dirty conditions dependability engineering appears to be...

Either mythical or passé.


*I'm sure someone could download it, or use the fullhouse loads for taking BIG animals at BIG distance--and just eat the recoil!

 

[MachIVshooter]

Same with the .50 BMG. Don't see much reason why, if you can't stop an elephant with a .470 NE, you'll be able to do so with an AR-50. And if you can stop it with a .470, who'd use a .50 BMG?

Well, 2-1/2 times the energy drivng a larger, heavier bullet would suggest greater capability to me. Of course, there aren't really any expanding projectiles for .50 BMG, but I should think being able to drive a half inch bullet completely through the animal would be pretty effective.

As for practicality, that's another subject. Personally, I'm not interested in hunting elephants. Cape buffalo are my allure to African hunting, and for those, I'll be using my .375 RUM (if I ever actually get there).

...but not favorably.*

I can't say one way or the other, but I do know that bullet technology has advanced a bit since the .378's early days, probably prompted by some of the newer .375 cannons like the RUM that aren't so exclusive. A properly constructed 3/8" bullet carrying 3 tons of energy should have no problem putting down any land animal on the planet.

 

[Loosedhorse]

Cape buffalo are my allure to African hunting, and for those, I'll be using my .375 RUM (if I ever actually get there).

I hope you get there.

Cape buffalo are usually taken at 50m and less, because of the terrain in which they are found. One hundred meters is considered a long shot.

I have no doubt that a well-placed .375 380 gr Rhino, 350gr WC or 300 gr TSX will do it as a hunting round. Perhaps there arises the question, if you can get that buff with the 300 gr at 2450 fps, why lauch it at 2900 for a animal 50 yards away? I suspect that most PHs would rather have a more accurate shot than a louder shot; but since you shoot it well, I don't see any real problem.

As a "stopper", I don't think I'd take any .375 over a good larger caliber (that the hunter shoots well), whether it is .416, .458, .470, or .505.

...should have no problem putting down any land animal on the planet.

As long as the animal agrees with that, sound fine. "Shoulds" sometimes fall to experience, and I'm not sure how much experience there is with the .375 RUM as a stopper for buff; even the .famed 375 H&H, despite its versatility, is not considered great for that role. As I said, however, I have no doubt about the RUM as a hunting round.