375 Caliber A-max...might be a possibility. Please read.

[Swamplord]

My vote goes to something in the 350 gr or heavier in a 375 cal A-max...... or Berger
there is absolutely no need for another 300 gr or lighter 375 cal bullet, virtually every bullet maker offers something in that range........

I thought this was LRH, why all the slanted views on a light for caliber 375 designated for the 375 H&H and 375 Ruger ???? those two WILL never be long range cartridges, I don't care how light of a bullet and long of a bbl you use..... the powder capacity is just not there !
you may gain a couple hundred yards but still NOT long range cartridges,


We are supposed to push development in bullet technology that supports us and will provide better bullets with higher BC's than any 300 gr bullet will ever offer....

a 300 gr 375 cal bullet in A-Max or Berger has nothing to offer that is not already here, I will quietly pass it by...

 

[Lefty7mmstw]

I thought this was LRH, why all the slanted views on a light for caliber 375 designated for the 375 H&H and 375 Ruger ???? those two WILL never be long range cartridges, I don't care how light of a bullet and long of a bbl you use..... the powder capacity is just not there !
you may gain a couple hundred yards but still NOT long range cartridges,

The same reason people bring out 308's, 270's, 6.5x284, etc.. They bring what they've got and what they can handle... whether recoil or cost of doing business, it doesn't matter. Loosing sight of peoples inherent limitations is one of the biggest problems here.
If I were to buy everything someone has recommended here I wouldn't have a pot to pee in.
Most of us simply can't build a $5,000 wonder stick to toss the latest and greatest. If you can, good for you, but I for one will continue to pay my bills, feed my kids, shoot my factory rifles with mild mods, and leave the blind spending to others with deeper pockets than me.

 

[Doublezranch]

Loosing sight of peoples inherent limitations is one of the biggest problems here. If I were to buy everything someone has recommended here I wouldn't have a pot to pee in.
Most of us simply can't build a $5,000 wonder stick to toss the latest and greatest. If you can, good for you, but I for one will continue to pay my bills, feed my kids, shoot my factory rifles with mild mods, and leave the blind spending to others with deeper pockets than me.

Couldn't have said it better myself......

 

[Erik Kiser]

You might be able to get away with it with light for caliber bullets such as a 300 grain .375 cal bullet but its not going to be as much as you think. About 10%. While form factor is important, sectional density is a much larger peice of the pie. The limiting factor here is the bearing surface of the jacketed lead version. That said why limit yourself to a 300 grain bullet in this caliber? A 300 grain .375 bullet will never match that of a 300 grain .338 bullet be it a mono metal or jacketed lead. Using a 300 grain bullet in a .375 is kind of like using a 180 in a 300 magnum. If you need to use a 180 grain for long range hunting, Its time to go 7mm. If you get things up into the 350 grain, the .375 starts to become beneficial. At this point, if you make a mono metal with the same weight and profile of the lead core, the mono metal will be longer with more drag and require a tighter twist. In my mind, mono metals aren't advantageous unless you're looking for durability which sometimes I do. Exterior ballistics are another story.

I see your point and won't say you're wrong. We both have to remember that there are limitation to both and I'm seeing things from my point of view and you're seeing it from your point of view. I won't say either of us is wrong, just that both types have their upper and lower limits. But I dare you to compare side by side the 178 amax against the 177 GS mono metal. The results might shock you.

M

If you go back and read my posts you'll see I agree with you 100%, I only picked the number 300 as a good even number.

 

[CA48]

I've read this thread and agree with a lot of the post. Then there is a lot I don't agree with. If there is a .375 bullet on hornadys mind,R&D need to be around the idea of this bullet being launched out of Chey tac case. It's needs to be able to handle those speeds first then see how it will do on game second IMO. I think it needs to be between 375-420 grns. Yes this would make it a niche market. There are plenty of bullets that will take full advantage of the lesser .375 chamberings presently. It would be a waste of time to build a 350gr bullet as the same performance that can almost be achieved with current offerings. My 338 Allen mag will almost equal the .375 Allen ballisticaly with the 300 gr berger .338 vs the .375 350 smk. Yes monos in the .375 will beat the the .338 AM but that is if you want pay $2 a bullet vs .338s at 70 cents a bullet. Yea bbl life is short but it's cheaper to rebarrel than to pay $2 a bullet. Plus monos are going to be more picking with bore tolerances needing a more exact to match the bullet according to Kirby Allen. I know a big company hates to start producing a product for a niche market because of the risk. But how is a new .375 bullet to take advantage of the Chey tac case not going to be anything other than a niche market. Even the lesser .375 chambers are somewhat a niche market. Elr shooting is expensive, is does take 5000 custom rifles. With newer bullet designs it may take faster than average twist rates that is just part of it no way around it. I think hornady can do this I'm not sure if they need to redesign a whole new bullet with ultra low drag design with one of the aluminum tips like on the 750s. Or if their a max design would work just fine for providing a high BC at the 375-420 gr weights, but I doubt it. As a company this can be a hard decision. But some one will do it in the near future and when they do others will follow. I beleive if berger wasn't blessed with keeping up production with their current offerings they would have a .375 375 gr + bullet out. There is a high risk that's why you only see small company's devoted to LR high BC bullets filling the niche as of now. But they are small in comparison to the big name bullet makers plus they still have to make a decent profit for all the efforts so of course cost is high. I think hornady could do his endeavor but it might cost us a little more than a $1/bullet. Also I have used the a max bullets to take game and have been impressed on the handful of game I have taken with the a maxes.

 

[benchracer]

Essentially what we have here is a divide analogous to the difference between Stock Class drag racers and Top Fuel drag racers. Both groups want to push the boundaries within different sets of limitations.

Regardless of which camp a person finds themselves in, I think the important thing to focus on is the fact that current industry offerings do not satisfy the needs of either camp. Little more than a decade ago, the state of .338 development was in a similar place to where the .375's are now. Talented people pushing the boundaries and consumer demand have brought about some radical changes for the better in the last few years.

If we want better bullets for our .375's, we have to establish a pull for the industry to follow. To be successful, that pull has to benefit both camps.

 

[bigngreen]

If you build it, we will shoot it!!!!

 

[Kennibear]

Everybody has an opinion!

Lets see, having read all the posts and respective opinions, I have determined exactly..... none are wrong. You want one thing and I another. But there is a demand and we should combine our voices to fulfill at least part of it.

Two basic factions here:

1) Niche market guys. Big & bad barrel burning 375's. They need a >350 grain high BC bullet. Duh. 7mm & 308 cal shooters have a boat load of prospects. Not so the 375 caliber. But the shining light in the darkness is the 50 cal. It is a Niche caliber if there ever is one and Hornady makes a match bullet for the Big 50! Therefore it is possible.

2) Standard 375's. RUM's and 378 Weatherby's are not in this category. They can utilize the heavier bullets to good effect. But everyone posting that there is a good selection of bullets 300 grains or less is kidding themselves. In 300 grains its the SMK, AccuBond and the GSC. Even the Hornady 300 gr Interlock is gone. None of these bullets has the newer form factor as seen in Barnes LRX, Nosler ABLR, or Hornady's A-Max. There is room to improve the 300 grain form factor. Top dawg right now is the Nosler 300 AB @ G1= 0.485 BC. <0.5 BC ain't squat or his brother diddly.

Using Nosler's numbers in 308, 200 & 210 grain Accubond and Accubond LR have G1 BC's of 0.588 & 0.730 respectively. (I know that nobody here has gotten that but just go with it). So if the 375 300gr AB has a G1 BC of 0.485 then a 315gr LR profile should fall around 0.600. That is a useful increase and I for one would be thrilled with a 0.600 BC bullet in 375.

I have a 375 Ruger. It is not my choice for a LR Hunting rig but neither is a 308 or a 6.5/284. Yet there are very successful hunters using those calibers. My best load to date is a lot flatter shooting than a 308. Where I fall into this thread is I want a Longer Range 375 Ruger. Therein lies the marketing potential for case #2, standard 375's. Hornady, Berger et al will sell a boat load to every regular 375 shooter out there and make their money doing it. Because it will add range to already great cartridges.

If Hornady makes a, say, 320 gr A-Max or better yet an InterBond in 375 with a decent G1 BC >0.550 the rush on that bullet will act as impetus for them to bring out an even better 375 caliber heavy weight bullet with a BC approaching 1. Everybody , standard 375 and niche shooters both, will buy the 320gr. But not all of the Standard 375 shooters will buy the heavy weight. If they come out with a standard however, the market response will move them to produce the heavy weight also, I firmly believe this.

It boils down to this, done right we both get what we want.

KB

 

[HARPERC]

2) Standard 375's. RUM's and 378 Weatherby's are not in this category. They can utilize the heavier bullets to good effect. But everyone posting that there is a good selection of bullets 300 grains or less is kidding themselves. In 300 grains its the SMK, AccuBond and the GSC. Even the Hornady 300 gr Interlock is gone. None of these bullets has the newer form factor as seen in Barnes LRX, Nosler ABLR, or Hornady's A-Max. There is room to improve the 300 grain form factor. Top dawg right now is the Nosler 300 AB @ G1= 0.485 BC. <0.5 BC ain't squat or his brother diddly.


I have a 375 Ruger. It is not my choice for a LR Hunting rig.
KB

I said something like this, maybe did not say it well. "Standard" .375 H&H, and .375 Ruger users typically, buy those for closer range, medium to heavy game, some dangerous some not.

I've played with the H&H for 30+ years, and have never known anyone besides me to have shot a 350 grain bullet from one. Or express a desire for a heavier, higher BC bullet. We would all like a higher BC, but I don't see the H&H or Ruger users willing to pay the price in terms of recoil, and lower velocities.

There is a good selection of bullets for what most users buy one for. A question for the Ruger and H&H owners have you tried an existing 350 grain bullet in those rifles?

Some of the loads listed for these max out well under 2400 fps in current references. I got my load of 75 grains IMR 4350 from an ancient Gun Digest it's just under 2450 fps from a 20" barrel. Given the standard of 1800 fps and a 0.8 BC 5-600 yards is doable, but a custom chamber might still be needed. The Barnes Original in 350 is a round nose. My barrel is 1-10, but 1-12 will stabilize these.

The RUM users I suspect will try a few, and the .378 folks can begin to make some use of the potential, but mostly in the moderate ranges. The Woodleigh brass turned 350 grain is over 2"s long, and over a dollar an inch, and 1-8 twist to stabilize if memory serves

The Barnes attempt at such bullets is under ATF review as "armor piercing", so lead will likely need to be present for a domestic manufacturer to get such a bullet to market.

Just for clarification I'm not likely to use such bullet in either setting due to injuries in my neck. My thoughts are for theory and discussion only.

 

[Topshot]

I think this is not going to be as hard as some are making out.
The 350gn SMK is a very simple match bullet. It is not an overly aggressive design at all. It has a thick jacket that does not expand readily, has a BC of about 0.80 and stabilises in a 1 : 12 twist barrel easily.

I have played with these bullets quite a bit and modified them extensively. Adding tips and hollowing out the points etc. This has been done to improve the terminal performance of this bullet as well as to test what effects these changes have on its BC. It is possible to add a tip the 350gn SMK and raise the BC to 0.82.

Given this information, all Hornady has to do to make a better bullet is the following…………

Improve the form factor of their bullet within a 350 to 375 grain weight window.
Aim for 1 : 11 to 1 : 10 twist stability.
Maintain jacket thickness.
Add a plastic tip to initiate expansion.
Serrate jacket nose section to regulate expansion.

Expect a realistic BC of about 0.84

 

[benchracer]

A question for the Ruger and H&H owners have you tried an existing 350 grain bullet in those rifles?

Some of the loads listed for these max out well under 2400 fps in current references. I got my load of 75 grains IMR 4350 from an ancient Gun Digest it's just under 2450 fps from a 20" barrel. Given the standard of 1800 fps and a 0.8 BC 5-600 yards is doable, but a custom chamber might still be needed. The Barnes Original in 350 is a round nose. My barrel is 1-10, but 1-12 will stabilize these.

I tried the 350g SMK in my H&H with a 25" barrel. I don't remember the exact COAL I loaded to. I measured to the rifling and backed off .040". Final COAL was north of 3.9".

With load data obtained from Sierra, I tried H 4831 and H4350. I also tried RL-17 using H4350 data. 76 grains of H4831 yielded a compressed load that topped out just a hair over 2300 fps.

72 grains of H4350 was very near 100% load density and topped out at just over 2400 fps. There was still some throttle left, but I don't think I could have gotten much above 2450 fps.

72 grains of RL-17 still left a lot of room in the case. From the starting load of 68 grains, velocities jumped up very quickly. 70 grains produced mid 2430's. 71 grains produced a DROP of about 50 fps, which I understand to be the telltale warning sign with RL-17 that safe pressures are being exceeded. So, in this instance, RL-17 behaved like a faster powder than H4350. I would consider 70 grains to be the max load with RL-17 and 350g SMK's in my rifle.

I only shot these test rounds over a chrono. I didn't put them on paper, so I don't know for sure if they were properly stabilized in my 12 twist barrel. However, the bullets produced deep, straight line penetration several FEET into a dirt bank about 50 yards away that I was using as a back stop. That tends to indicate to me that the bullets were indeed stable. IIRC, the 350 grain SMK is about 1.750" long. When I plug that information into a stability calculator, it spits out a stability factor of 1.713, which means this bullet is easily stabilized in a 12 twist.

If one had the barrel throated specifically for the 350 SMK, it might be possible to seat the bullet out far enough to pick up some velocity, but I don't believe it would be enough to be useful. This bullet only yields an .805 g1 bc down to 2200 fps, after which the bc falls off pretty quickly. Launched from the smaller cased .375's, this bullet is going to spend most of its time in a velocity range that yields a .720 g1 bc. Based on its drag characteristics and its thick jacket, this bullet really is built for SPEED. It is sexy, but just doesn't offer much when launched from the smaller cases.

The Cutting Edge bullets I am shooting have a higher bc and I can launch them 300 fps faster than the SMK's. I just can't afford to shoot them all the time. A lighter cup and core bullet with a .550 to .650 g1 bc would perform well enough from my rifle to allow for affordable practice at extended range. I could then use the CE's to polish my skills that last little bit and would load them when I carry my rifle afield for more serious purposes.

UPDATE: After running the tested velocities from my rifle with the 350 SMK through JBM, I am intrigued. At sea level, with a muzzle velocity of 2450 fps, it stays above the transonic range past 1100 yards and stays supersonic past 1500 yards. If someone made a bullet like this that would actually expand, it could be useful as a hunting round. As is, I may actually use this bullet as a practice round. I will have to work with it some and see if I can get it to shoot accurately in my rifle.

 

[royinidaho]

I think this is not going to be as hard as some are making out.
The 350gn SMK is a very simple match bullet. It is not an overly aggressive design at all. It has a thick jacket that does not expand readily, has a BC of about 0.80 and stabilises in a 1 : 12 twist barrel easily.

It is possible to add a tip the 350gn SMK and raise the BC to 0.82.

Given this information, all Hornady has to do to make a better bullet is the following…………

Improve the form factor of their bullet within a 350 to 375 grain weight window.
Aim for 1 : 11 to 1 : 10 twist stability.
Maintain jacket thickness.
Add a plastic tip to initiate expansion.
Serrate jacket nose section to regulate expansion.

Expect a realistic BC of about 0.84

After all of the "chatter" Topshot nails it.

If ya don't have a large case 375 cal you have no idea of the growth potential that can be experience when tripping the trigger on the big thing.

The 375 RUM is pretty much entry level into this experience.

The 375 CT is solidly into that realm.

The 375 Allen Magnum and 375 SnipeTac (Both pretty much the same design) have the upper edge, so far.

A well designed 375 cal lead core offering of at least 370 grains would be the cat's meow.

The SMK is "good enough" in all aspects except for iffy expansion on game.

I'd very happily purchase factory Hornady offerings than spending hours and hours, though it is very satisfying, repointing SMKs to gain potentially nothing more than better terminal performance.

How many would a fella shoot over a period time?

My favorite LR rig is a 270 Allen Mag with 169.5 Original Wildcats, bc of ~0.74 @ 3300 FPS (to extend case life)'

The 375 AM shoots the 350 SMK @ 3250 with a bc of ~08 a schooshi bit more accurately than the 270 AM.

Think about it, 350 grains with same time of flight, accuracy and trajectory as a 170 grain offering with only a little more recoil.

Which would you be shootin' at long range anything. In my case the 270 AM would quickly become a safe queen.

Meaning I'd shoot way more 375 bullets than any other caliber.

Tell Hornady to bringeron!

Just sayin'

 

[Swamplord]

After checking my 375 cal. bullet stock I came up with this list and looked up the BC's from the manufacturers websites for each bullet.....

even in these times of huge demand and short supply most of these bullets are readily available and easy to find on the shelves....... (all except the 350 gr SMK)....gee, I wonder why ?

the average 375 H&H shooters either DO NOT handload or shoot their rifles very often simply because they normally have glossy blued and walnut thingy's with 22-24" barrels without muzzle brakes that beat the hell out of them and they won't shoot at game much over 200 yards ......... NOT LONG RANGE RIFLES !!!
producing a 300 gr bullet with a bc of .500 or .550 will not magically transform those rifles into long range lasers and definately will not benefit the guys with rifles capable of long range shooting....

looking at what is currently offered in 375 cal. it sure looks like the 375 H&H and 375 Ruger shooters have ALL their bases covered....... based on what those cartridges can muster in capacity/velocity, numerous appropriate bc bullets are available already ....
(and the list does not contain the round nose type bullets specifically designed for these cartridges)

I have doubts Hornady or Berger can develop a 300 gr bullet with .550 bc... it would have to be a bit heavier than that..

The time is now...
the LRH crowd needs more 375 cal bullets with at least .800 BC,
Hornady should create a minimum of a 350 gr A-Max or a BT Interlock and Berger a 350 gr Hybrid and /or Elite Hunter......... 375 gr would be optimum !

There may be more 375 H&H and 375 Ruger owners...BUT they don't shoot often enough to warrant another bullet designated for them, the long range guys far outshoot (pun intended) them and will eat up those bullets... as was seen with the 210, 215 and 230 gr 30 cal bullets.. cannot find them in stock anywhere, but all the lighter weight bullets are available everywhere !!! same thing with the 338 cals........

what will happen with a 300 gr or less Amax or Berger bullet ?
they will gather dust on the shelves with these other bullets.................


Nosler Accubond 300 gr. bc .485
Nosler Accubond 260 gr. bc .473
Nosler Partition 260 gr. bc .314
Nosler Partition 300 gr. bc .398

Sierra Gameking 250 gr. bc .371
Sierra Gameking 300 gr. bc .480
Sierra Matchking 350 gr. bc .805

Hornady Interlock 225 gr. bc .320
Hornady GMX 250 gr. bc .430
Hornady Interlock 270 gr. bc .380 (temp. suspended)

Barnes TTSX 250 gr. bc .424
Barnes TSX 235 gr. bc .270
Barnes TSX 270 gr. bc .326
Barnes TSX 300 gr. bc .357
Barnes TSX 350 gr. bc .425

Swift A-Frame 250 gr. bc .271
Swift A-Frame 270 gr. bc .349
Swift A-Frame 300 gr. bc .325

Speer Hot Cor 235 gr. bc .317
Speer GrandSlam 285 gr. bc .354
Speer Boat Tail 270 gr. bc .429

AccuBond
Partition
https://www.sierrabullets.com/products/bullets/rifle.cfm/caliberID/13
Hornady Manufacturing Company :: Bullets :: Rifle :: Choose by Caliber :: .375 375 CAL
All-Copper Tipped TSX® | Barnes Bullets
TSX - One Of The Deadliest, Most Dependable Bullets | Barnes Bullets
Swift Products
Speer Bullets - Product Offerings

 

[Erik Kiser]

Great post Swamplord