300 Holland & Holland ...anybody played with this one ?

[Bart B]

I was never bitten by the short magnum bug either as I saw it purely as marketing hype.

If you check the cartridge shapes of those enabling best accuracy in competition, their short, fat shapes are common. Pretty good bandwagon for cartridge companies to jump on.

First few successful ones are the 22 and 6mm caliber PPC cartridges, the 308 Winchester, the 30-338 and 308 Norma magnums. Eliminating the H&H belt was a blessing as the 6.5x284 kicked the belted behemoths off the thousand yard firing line.

 

[Bart B]

Pressure is pressure. Here is the formula to convert between cup and psi.

https://www.shootingsoftware.com/ftp/psicuparticle2.pdf

Will it convert all the SAAMI spec cup pressures to less than a 500 psi error value?

I've not seen any conversion that will.

 

[mmacfive]

.

 

[mmacfive]

If you check the cartridge shapes of those enabling best accuracy in competition, their short, fat shapes are common. Pretty good bandwagon for cartridge companies to jump on.

First few successful ones are the 22 and 6mm caliber PPC cartridges, the 308 Winchester, the 30-338 and 308 Norma magnums. Eliminating the H&H belt was a blessing as the 6.5x284 kicked the belted behemoths off the thousand yard firing line.

I absolutely agree short/fat have advantages

 

[mmacfive]

Will it convert all the SAAMI spec cup pressures to less than a 500 psi error value?

I've not seen any conversion that will.

500psi? I doubt it but is that needed? An R value of .93 is phenomenal considering the crude methods of the copper crushing method.


For me it is a way to covert then compare to today's standards. Like I said I know I should be able run my 6.5x55 around 65Kpsi like every other modern cartridge so I can get an idea of where it is at with the CUP limitations.

 

[Sykes]

I currently have 2 rifles chambered in 300 H&H, a Sako l61r and a Remington 700 classic, and going to start looking for a Winchester model 70 soon. Finally have dies, 200 gr partitions and 180 accubonds coming. I'm excited to start some load development for them. Hoping they both like the 200gr partitions. Sure is a cool old classic cartridge

 

[JohnyRingo]

I had a Remington Model 700 Classic and shot tons of game with Nosler 180 grain Ballistic Tips, including moose, bighorn sheep, black bear and numerous mule deer and whitetails. I sold that one and now own a Browning XBolt Stainless Stalker. I put a McMillan Game Scout and Huskemaw scope on it. I love the way it shoots and how it handles. I did switch over to 180 grain Accubonds. I'm shooting 67.5 grains of IMR4831 and getting about 2950 fps out of a 24" barrel.

 

[mmacfive]

I have a 300 H&H in the Remington Classic and my dads pre 64 super grade.

Both shoot 165s, 180s, and 200s sub sub moa. The classic shoots the 165s at 3200fps, the 180s about 3050, and the 200s over 2900fps. The Super Grade does a little better with its 26" barrel.

nothing has been done to the Winchester . The Remington has been bedded, floated, and trigger worked.

My dad bought the Winchester new and I bought the classic new in 83-84. We started reloading the Winchester in the 70's when H4831 was the goto powder and it maybe the only one it has seen. It also works in the classic. Everything from 4350 to H870 has given good results in the classic. I'd also try 4955, 7977, 8133 or one of the reloader powders. I'd put H1000 and Retumbo into the mix if they were available.

inside of about 900 yards I don't think it really matters if you shoot the 165's, 180's, or 200's. Personally I'd see if the Barnes 175 LRX, or either of the Nosler 200's shoot well and be happy.

I've been very lucky, both of my long, tapered, belted 300H&H's and my 375 H&H shoot around 1/2 moa, or about as good as I can do.

 

[Deerhunter47]

I have a 300 H&H in the Remington Classic and my dads pre 64 super grade.

Both shoot 165s, 180s, and 200s sub sub moa. The classic shoots the 165s at 3200fps, the 180s about 3050, and the 300s over 2900fps. The Super Grade does a little better with its 26" barrel.

nothing has been done to the Winchester . The Remington has been bedded, floated, and trigger worked.

My dad bought the Winchester new and I bought the classic new in 83-84. We started reloading the Winchester in the 70's when H4831 was the goto powder and it maybe the only one it has seen. It also works in the classic. Everything from 4350 to H870 has given good results in the classic. I'd also try 4955, 7977, 8133 or one of the reloader powders. I'd put H1000 and Retumbo into the mix if they were available.

inside of about 900 yards I don't think it really matters if you shoot the 165's, 180's, or 200's. Personally I'd see if the Barnes 175 LRX, or either of the Nosler 200's shoot well and be happy.

I've been very lucky, both of my long, tapered, belted 300H&H's and my 375 H&H shoot around 1/2 moa, or about as good as I can do.

In the last year, I have my 2nd 300 H&H, Win. Pre 64, mod. 70.
I have just started working a load for it; bullet will be the Hornady 200 gr. ELD-X. Going to try RL-22 powder, CCI MAG. Primers. Bullet seating is 2.930", measured from ogive.
The Hornady manual says 65.9 grs should be max. powder charge, but this sounds to me, to be 2 or 3 grs on the lite side.

 

[mmacfive]

Not quite, case design, particularly the slope of the shoulder makes a very big difference.

The extreme example is the comparison of straight walled cartridges to bottlenecks with the same case volume.

I shoot the .375 Ruger and variants off of the same case as well as some of the very long cases such as the 7mm STW and Rum's.

I'm beginning to understand how case design comes into play in the equation.

I'm quite sure I'm alone on an island here but I'll give you some of the reasons I don't believe that case design has an effect on velocity:


The amount of energy in any given powder and charge weight is fixed. It's how we harness the energy that will affect the velocity. If all things are equal 80grs of H1000 in a 280 nosler will give the same results as 80grs of H1000 in a 7mm STW.


Velocity will be determined from the pressure curve, i.e. the "area under the curve" will determine the final velocity. The area under the curve can be manipulated in many ways. e.g. powder, primer, freebore, headspace, dimensions, etc. it's not the peak pressure that matters it's how long we can hold that peak pressure.


The case is not the total combustion chamber. Most rifles hit their peak pressure when the bullet is around 3" into the bore. Depending on caliber this can have a huge effect on the combustion chamber volume thereby minimizing the actual case design.


Then there is that physics thing: PV=nRT or the ideal has constant. Or P= nRT/V. Which says that volume of any shape has the same effect on pressure.


I really like it when new cartridges are introduced. An example is the 6.5 PRC. The 6.5 PRC has nearly identical case capacity as my 6.5-06 or the 6.5 RM. I now have access to a whole bunch of modern reloading data for my 6.5-06 with new powders that make it seem like a new gun.


I am not saying a steep shoulder case design doesn't have benefits like head space, brass growth, etc but I don't think velocity (or "efficiency") is one of them.

 

[dennisinaz]

Who digs up these 10-year-old threads? Only thing I will add is that loading data is hard to come by and you can pretty much use 300 WSM data to the grain.

 

[WildRose]

If you check the cartridge shapes of those enabling best accuracy in competition, their short, fat shapes are common. Pretty good bandwagon for cartridge companies to jump on.

First few successful ones are the 22 and 6mm caliber PPC cartridges, the 308 Winchester, the 30-338 and 308 Norma magnums. Eliminating the H&H belt was a blessing as the 6.5x284 kicked the belted behemoths off the thousand yard firing line.

The evils of belted magnums are nothing but marketing hype.

They perform as well today as they have for the last hundred years.

 

[WildRose]

Who digs up these 10-year-old threads? Only thing I will add is that loading data is hard to come by and you can pretty much use 300 WSM data to the grain.

They usually get dug up by people searching for a similar topic and not noticing how old they are before replying.

They still make for good info and discussion. Everything doesn't have to be new to be of value.

 

[WildRose]

I'm quite sure I'm alone on an island here but I'll give you some of the reasons I don't believe that case design has an effect on velocity:


The amount of energy in any given powder and charge weight is fixed. It's how we harness the energy that will affect the velocity. If all things are equal 80grs of H1000 in a 280 nosler will give the same results as 80grs of H1000 in a 7mm STW.


Velocity will be determined from the pressure curve, i.e. the "area under the curve" will determine the final velocity. The area under the curve can be manipulated in many ways. e.g. powder, primer, freebore, headspace, dimensions, etc. it's not the peak pressure that matters it's how long we can hold that peak pressure.


The case is not the total combustion chamber. Most rifles hit their peak pressure when the bullet is around 3" into the bore. Depending on caliber this can have a huge effect on the combustion chamber volume thereby minimizing the actual case design.


Then there is that physics thing: PV=nRT or the ideal has constant. Or P= nRT/V. Which says that volume of any shape has the same effect on pressure.


I really like it when new cartridges are introduced. An example is the 6.5 PRC. The 6.5 PRC has nearly identical case capacity as my 6.5-06 or the 6.5 RM. I now have access to a whole bunch of modern reloading data for my 6.5-06 with new powders that make it seem like a new gun.


I am not saying a steep shoulder case design doesn't have benefits like head space, brass growth, etc but I don't think velocity (or "efficiency") is one of them.

What we know from hundreds of years of tinkering and experimentation is that the shape of the tube and angles affect temperature and pressure along with how the flame coming out of the source is shaped and it's length.

Modern jet and rocket engines using variable thrust technology demonstrate this magnificently.