375 Ruger

[USMA84DAB]

I also notice that the Hornady QC could be improved - the new cases run a large spread of case length - last I checked a batch, I think it ran .008" spread. My solution is to just trim them all so I can get consistent bullet seating.

On the other hand, I recently bought a bag of 500 .308WIN brass made by Barnes - .001" spread between the dozen I measured. I gave up measuring and just chamfered and loaded!

 

[Taylorz1]

Does Barnes source from Norma ? I thought so. I wish I could get Norma to make 375 and 416 ruger brass

 

[USMA84DAB]

Amen to that, brother!

 

[CoElkHunter]

I bought a barely used 2014 .375 Ruger Guide Gun last year. Handles well, smooth action and shoots very well with open sights. Need a scope for it and eventually a .416 Ruger Guide Gun. They are great rifles.

 

[cajunchefray]

Ruger safety is very safe, but not the best for a DG rifle. A tang safety is a better choice there. Practice with it a lot. I know of one PH who had an issue with his Ruger safety when a buff charged and ended up in the hospital. He has since removed it.

Am curious about the Ruger safety issue and a PH, in a tight spot. Agree with many other experienced hunters, that the Ruger 3 position safety, is not as ergonomic, as the Model 70 Winchester safety.
Can you share some more details?

 

[Pablo]

I bought an African model about 10 years ago specifically for my trip I finally took back in July. I’m not a reloader, but I do keep my Hornady brass after buying several boxes. I’ve had a Ruger M77 .270 for about 30 years and is my go-to rifle. The .375 feels pretty much the same to me, so I have a lot of confidence in it. I fired 6 times and got 6 animals, with only the kudu running maybe 50 yards using 270gr SP-RP ammo. My PH told me that it would definitely work for buff with 300gr.
I’m not as savvy about ballistics and such as a lot of guys here, but it goes bang and does its job for me.

 

[Ryan]

Am curious about the Ruger safety issue and a PH, in a tight spot. Agree with many other experienced hunters, that the Ruger 3 position safety, is not as ergonomic, as the Model 70 Winchester safety.
Can you share some more details?

Somewhere back in time here in I think 2018 or so is a mention of Bossie Mostert of Limpopo Big Game Safaris having a run in with a buffalo, his rifle not ejecting a shell properly and ending up in the hospital. I hunted with him in January 2021. Now, it's been four years for me and I'm currently nowhere near my own rifle to try and repeat this so I'm going to try and recall what he said happened. He owns a Ruger RSM in 416 Rigby. He had to deal with a wounded buffalo and it came charging at him. I believe he got one shot off and apparently the safety got pushed back a little between fully forward-Fire and half-Safe somehow. He attempted to eject the shell and as he opened the bolt the bolt handle got caught on the safety lever and jammed up. While he was trying to get it to function the buff found him. By the time I hunted with him he had solved his issues by removing that safety lever completely. If someone is better at using the search function than me (it gives me way too much) feel free to go looking for more on his story on this forum. I've had no issues with the Ruger safety myself. But after using my Savage with a tang safety for a few years now a tang safety for a DG rifle would be my preference between the two.

 

[hoytcanon]

... he got one shot off and apparently the safety got pushed back a little between fully forward-Fire and half-Safe somehow. He attempted to eject the shell and as he opened the bolt the bolt handle got caught on the safety lever and jammed up. While he was trying to get it to function the buff found him. By the time I hunted with him he had solved his issues by removing that safety lever completely.

That didn't happen, because it is impossible. There is no position the safety can be in where the bolt handle can jam against it. It is more likely that in his excitement and anxiety he short stroked the bolt... this can happen with any rifle... I did it one time myself on a charging bear. I don't know this gentleman, but I do know human nature, and when one feels they did not perform well under pressure there is an impulsive motivation to find someone or something to blame. Removing the safety is just a physical action to cement the mental excuse.

 

[Red Leg]

I'll be the contrarian here - at least with regard to the Ruger package. The cartridge is fine - how could it not be when essentially duplicating the H&H - but I truly loathed the rifle. I purchased one very early on so it had the sling stud. Ergonomics, at least for me, were just wrong. The problem was drop rather than LOP (which can be easily fixed). The same high comb issue made using the open sights instinctively very difficult without bruising one's cheek. Add to that a rifle that was too light for the recoil it was generating. The stock looked like a stained 2x4 and the recoil crossbolts looked like a couple of random wood screws. After the second trip to the range, I could not get rid of it quickly enough. I have been using the H&H ever since to include with my R8. Though the Ruger cartridge itself would be fine in the right rifle.

Just as a word of caution. Mitigating the recoil issues with the Ruger by using a muzzle brake is a bad idea if you plan to actually hunt the rifle in Africa. Brakes are truly loathed by professional hunters because of the lateral noise and blast effect. These guys depend on their ears as much as their eyes, particularly when trailing elephant of buffalo. He won't say anything to your face, but picking up tinnitus while chasing zebra will not endear him to you.

 

[BoarHog375]

I'll be the contrarian here - at least with regard to the Ruger package. The cartridge is fine - how could it not be when essentially duplicating the H&H - but I truly loathed the rifle. I purchased one very early on so it had the sling stud. Ergonomics, at least for me, were just wrong. The problem was drop rather than LOP (which can be easily fixed). The same high comb issue made using the open sights instinctively very difficult without bruising one's cheek. Add to that a rifle that was too light for the recoil it was generating. The stock looked like a stained 2x4 and the recoil crossbolts looked like a couple of random wood screws. After the second trip to the range, I could not get rid of it quickly enough. I have been using the H&H ever since to include with my R8. Though the Ruger cartridge itself would be fine in the right rifle.

Just as a word of caution. Mitigating the recoil issues with the Ruger by using a muzzle brake is a bad idea if you plan to actually hunt the rifle in Africa. Brakes are truly loathed by professional hunters because of the lateral noise and blast effect. These guys depend on their ears as much as their eyes, particularly when trailing elephant of buffalo. He won't say anything to your face, but picking up tinnitus while chasing zebra will not endear him to you.

Would an aftermarket stock of better quality fixed some of the issues you encountered?

 

[Taylorz1]

I also dont like the laminate wood stock on these rifles. Too thin, too light and too slick. The Hogue stock worked great for me though and made the rifle a totally different animal. I will echo the “dont hunt with the muzzle brake” warning. I had it on the rifle for a little while when working up loads and the noise level is dangerous. I think plugs and muffs together are mandatory. One shot would be enough for permanent hearing damage. Standing behind and to the side of my son the shock wave is unpleasant even with double hearing protection

 

[Red Leg]

Would an aftermarket stock of better quality fixed some of the issues you encountered?

Yes

 

[Daisy]

I'll be the contrarian here - at least with regard to the Ruger package. The cartridge is fine - how could it not be when essentially duplicating the H&H - but I truly loathed the rifle. I purchased one very early on so it had the sling stud. Ergonomics, at least for me, were just wrong. The problem was drop rather than LOP (which can be easily fixed). The same high comb issue made using the open sights instinctively very difficult without bruising one's cheek. Add to that a rifle that was too light for the recoil it was generating. The stock looked like a stained 2x4 and the recoil crossbolts looked like a couple of random wood screws. After the second trip to the range, I could not get rid of it quickly enough. I have been using the H&H ever since to include with my R8. Though the Ruger cartridge itself would be fine in the right rifle.

Just as a word of caution. Mitigating the recoil issues with the Ruger by using a muzzle brake is a bad idea if you plan to actually hunt the rifle in Africa. Brakes are truly loathed by professional hunters because of the lateral noise and blast effect. These guys depend on their ears as much as their eyes, particularly when trailing elephant of buffalo. He won't say anything to your face, but picking up tinnitus while chasing zebra will not endear him to you.

Easily remedied with a suppressor

 

[Red Leg]

Easily remedied with a suppressor

Not if balance and retaining the open sights for a follow-up are of any interest to the owner hunting DG. I have zero use for one on a DG rifle or any rifle that I will be maneuvering through brush. You will certainly never find a PH using one except perhaps on a SA game farm. There they may be just the ting for a captive bred lion. I find a suppressor great for shooting feral pigs not for African game.

 

[Daisy]

Not if balance and retaining the open sights for a follow-up are of any interest to the owner hunting DG. I have zero use for one on a DG rifle or any rifle that I will be maneuvering through brush. You will certainly never find a PH using one except perhaps on a SA game farm. There they may be just the ting for a captive bred lion. I find a suppressor great for shooting feral pigs not for African game.

We just disagree then.

 

[USMA84DAB]

Red Leg - welcome to the fray!

I remember hearing from Kevin Robertson that the initial .375 Ruger stock was terrible for the reasons you named - he also discovered that the recoil was battering the magazine cartridges severely and inducing bullet set-back into the cases. Your description I think about matched his (a 2"x4") and the rifle was just too damned light.

My Alaskan runs about 10 pounds when it goes to the field, but the overmold grippy quality with the 20" barrel makes it balanced and wieldable in tight quarters. I am quite glad that Ruger wisened up on the stock!!!!!! I also carry it with an over the shoulder/combat sling, so the weight is riding across my torso vs. being carried by my biceps. I dealt with the bottom mounted sling swivel studs by running a piece of 225 cord through the stud and tying it off into a knot over the comb and barrel. I then hook the sling (Viking Tactics) into the loop above the comb and barrel.

 

[hoytcanon]

Easily remedied with a suppressor

Suppressors are great in "World of Warcraft" or on Swat Teams... they have their place... but have significant drawbacks on a hunting rifle for most applications. Stalking through brush with one leaves a lot to be desired.

 

[Daisy]

Suppressors are great in "World of Warcraft" or on Swat Teams... they have their place... but have significant drawbacks on a hunting rifle for most applications. Stalking through brush with one leaves a lot to be desired.

Never played that game.

I’ve hunted with them 100’s of times. You won’t find thicker brush than what we have in Alabama. Also used it in the brush of Africa. Never been a problem. That’s more of an excuse for those that have some romance of days gone by.

Really, there is no reason not to use one. From the sound and concussive damage mitigation alone older gentlemen should be using them. 100 percent causing more hearing damage your family hates. And probably causing increase in cognitive decline your family also hates

It’s especially relevant in this thread. A 375 Ruger is 4” shorter than your traditional h&h. My Blaser is almost 7” shorter due to combined mag well. So this “it’s not good for going through brush” is completely negated.

 

[Daisy]

Blast exposure from firing heavy weapons potentially causing unrecognized brain injuries — Concussion Alliance

Repeated blast exposure from firing heavy weaponry such as cannons, mortars, shoulder-fired rockets, and even large-caliber machine guns is causing long-term injury to the brains of our military service members. The New York Times reported on the military’s struggle to understand the life-changing m

www.concussionalliance.org

 

[hoytcanon]

Never played that game.

I’ve hunted with them 100’s of times. You won’t find thicker brush than what we have in Alabama. Also used it in the brush of Africa. Never been a problem. That’s more of an excuse for those that have some romance of days gone by.

Really, there is no reason not to use one. From the sound and concussive damage mitigation alone older gentlemen should be using them. 100 percent causing more hearing damage your family hates. And probably causing increase in cognitive decline your family also hates

It’s especially relevant in this thread. A 375 Ruger is 4” shorter than your traditional h&h. My Blaser is almost 7” shorter due to combined mag well. So this “it’s not good for going through brush” is completely negated.

To each their own... there are other ways to protect your hearing. Go ahead and lug around your suppressed rifle, with my full support and blessing. I will pass.