Taming the 378 weatherby

[skydiver386]

In an article in the 1951 Gun Digest Weatherby wrote, "It doesn't matter whether you shoot (a game animal) in the ham, the ribs, the paunch, or the shoulder; you do not have to hit the heart, the lungs, or the spine in order to kill when using a bullet that disintegrates inside his body. I recommend you try a .25-caliber bullet travelling at 4,000 fps to shoot your next game animal, whether it be deer, moose, or African buffalo."

When a Cape buffalo escaped after being hit once with a .375 Weatherby, twice with a .300, and once more with a .470, Weatherby wrote, "You must hit them right unless the bullet has sufficient velocity to disintegrate. Now, I am going to try the 87 gr. .25 caliber on them -- this may have the shock we are after."

I think Weatherby was going down the wrong track concerning bullet disintegration. The use of factory loaded Barnes X bullets has probably made a big difference in the performance of the Weatherby rifles and cartridges, but I personally don't see the need.

 

[Flipper Dude]

Ok, so I’ve had a couple of glasses of Bordeaux, but explain to me why some people feel the need to reinvent the wheel?

Why do people choose to shoot off the wall calibers, in an attempt to ….. ………..?

Rather than using tried and true performers?


Eff if I know

 

[skydiver386]

Because variety is the spice of life.

 

[JimP]

In an article in the 1951 Gun Digest Weatherby wrote, "It doesn't matter whether you shoot (a game animal) in the ham, the ribs, the paunch, or the shoulder; you do not have to hit the heart, the lungs, or the spine in order to kill when using a bullet that disintegrates inside his body. I recommend you try a .25-caliber bullet travelling at 4,000 fps to shoot your next game animal, whether it be deer, moose, or African buffalo."

When a Cape buffalo escaped after being hit once with a .375 Weatherby, twice with a .300, and once more with a .470, Weatherby wrote, "You must hit them right unless the bullet has sufficient velocity to disintegrate. Now, I am going to try the 87 gr. .25 caliber on them -- this may have the shock we are after."

I think Weatherby was going down the wrong track concerning bullet disintegration. The use of factory loaded Barnes X bullets has probably made a big difference in the performance of the Weatherby rifles and cartridges, but I personally don't see the need.

You need to look at the bullets that were available and their performance way back 74 years ago in 1951. Fast forward to today's bullet technology and the Weatherby line is starting to shine with their ultra velocity cartridges.

Ok, so I’ve had a couple of glasses of Bordeaux, but explain to me why some people feel the need to reinvent the wheel?

Why do people choose to shoot off the wall calibers, in an attempt to ….. ………..?

Rather than using tried and true performers?


Eff if I know

But where would the fun be if we all shot the tried and true calibers/cartridges?

I shoot a few wildcats, not because they are really any better than factory rounds but because I enjoy working up the loads for them knowing that I am shooting something that there are a limited number of people out there that are shooting it. It is amazing at the shooting ranges that I have gone to the number of shooters that move over to my area when they hear what I have to shoot and the development of the cartridge. Sooner than later the subject moves to hunting and a number of them are amazed at the game that I have taken with them.

 

[Flipper Dude]

I like variety too. I like to shoot a different elephant or buffalo than I shot last time

Seriously, I’ve never been a guy to mess with what works, and that’s on me. Not a gadget guy. Some people are, and whatever you like , I suppose.

 

[Ontario Hunter]

In an article in the 1951 Gun Digest Weatherby wrote, "It doesn't matter whether you shoot (a game animal) in the ham, the ribs, the paunch, or the shoulder; you do not have to hit the heart, the lungs, or the spine in order to kill when using a bullet that disintegrates inside his body. I recommend you try a .25-caliber bullet travelling at 4,000 fps to shoot your next game animal, whether it be deer, moose, or African buffalo."

When a Cape buffalo escaped after being hit once with a .375 Weatherby, twice with a .300, and once more with a .470, Weatherby wrote, "You must hit them right unless the bullet has sufficient velocity to disintegrate. Now, I am going to try the 87 gr. .25 caliber on them -- this may have the shock we are after."

I think Weatherby was going down the wrong track concerning bullet disintegration. The use of factory loaded Barnes X bullets has probably made a big difference in the performance of the Weatherby rifles and cartridges, but I personally don't see the need.

Incredible. Old Roy was advocating blowing animals to pieces any way possible, even shooting them in the ham. It is hard to believe hunters from that era would buy into purposeful meat mangling. Most of them would have lived through the hardships of the Great Depression. Wasting meat was a capital offense in their mind. Had my dad read that article he would would have burned a potato sack full of dog shit on Weatherby's porch!

 

[Bob Nelson 35Whelen]

Because variety is the spice of life.

@skydiver386
Unless the wife finds out.
Bob

 

[Arthur Morta]

"I've had the opportunity to shoot the .378 Weatherby Magnum for some years now, and I can attest that it's a potent cartridge capable of delivering impressive performance. With proper stock design and fit, I've found the recoil manageable. By meticulously reloading with premium bullets as Peregrine VRG-3's, I've achieved consistent and accurate results. Furthermore, Having taken sound advice on the .378 from the renound (now late) Adriaan Rall and I stand under huge correction - Adriaan shot out a number of premium barrels in his hunting lifetime!

In my experience, the key to shooting this cartridge effectively lies in selecting the right rifle build and tailor-made loads for the application, equally important the proper technique makes all the worlds difference.
With practice and attention to detail, I've found that I can shoot my .378 Weatherby Magnum with confidence and accuracy, even surpassing the performance of those with their perceived experience using the lesser performing rifles in the same calibre...!

 

[skydiver386]

@skydiver386
Unless the wife finds out.
Bob

I have a completely different problem. My gal hunts and shoots, so when she likes one of my guns, it mysteriously becomes "Her gun".

 

[Flewis]

I’ve shot all the 378 based cartridges from 338-378 to 460 wby quite a lot and mostly from the bench. For me stock design is the most importance factor. I think it’s funny to read what the people who have never shot either have to say about it. The only one that I shoot that has a brake is the 338-378 and I have shot it a lot with out the brake. My advice is to shoot one before you pass judgement.

 

[Bob Nelson 35Whelen]

I have a completely different problem. My gal hunts and shoots, so when she likes one of my guns, it mysteriously becomes "Her gun".

@skydiver386
@Action Bob has the same problem with his darling wife @Just Gina. Solve the problem by buying two of each rifle.
Bob

 

[C.W. Richter]

Neck it down to .338! Wby actually stole the .338 A-Sq from Art Alphin (he created the .338-378 using Wby brass). In the .338 version he used a heavy stock, with a large surface area butt, a Decelerator pad, and having one-it doesn't need brake or reducers due to its proper hefty design. You may want a quality brake minimum and/or reducers in the stock. You could also shoot "reduced" loads that mimic 375 HH performance (as you really don't need any more than that for Africa or Alaska.) All that said, your gun using 350 gr slugs (with proper recoil reduction measures pretty much makes it a better performing 416 Mag.) Robert Ruark actually said in that case, it's "More than Enough Gun!" And, Art Alphin quipped "Any Gun You Want-Just Not That One!" LOL GL

 

[C.W. Richter]

*With reduced loads, you'll hear two sighs of relief (one from the Gun and the other by You, the shooter!!) PM me as I have a .375-50 BMG semi for sale (it weighs 24 lb, has an integral drink holder and comes with a standard Zero-turn mower mount.)

 

[549]

@skydiver386
Unless the wife finds out.
Bob

And then life can get spicy.

 

[C.W. Richter]

Ok, so I’ve had a couple of glasses of Bordeaux, but explain to me why some people feel the need to reinvent the wheel?

Why do people choose to shoot off the wall calibers, in an attempt to ….. ………..?

Rather than using tried and true performers?


Eff if I know

I LOVE U. Roy's creations (esp. sm-mid bore!!! Some post-RIP,-owned a pile!) but in the mid-big bore dep't. he went too far (unnecessarily.) Unless profit was the only motive. LOL I "get" profit, but I'm more of the-provide what i need and you WILL profit type of guy. LOL corp. America (McDs, Wallyworld, blk plastic crap guns not made in America but the avg. commercial TV/MSM show touting same "consumer" thinks so) is no diff. than what i speak down upon...

 

[JimP]

If you think that Weatherby's rifles and cartridges are out there, you need to check out the Lazzeroni line.

Lazzeroni Rifles

​

 

[Keelebilly]

I guess I fall into that camp that just likes a challenge. I think with all the tools available to help with recoil, the modern bullets, and improved stock design that we should be able to take advantage of the 378’s strengths and mitigate its weakness. I like the idea of taking two scopes with QD Talley rings on a safari. One dialed in with 270gr TTXS or LRX loads for plains game and swap the scope to one set up for TXS 350 grains for buffalo. There’s been lots of chatter lately on this site about the 375 h and h using a 300 grain being light for buffalo. Stepping up to a 378 weatherby with a 350 grain bullet gets you into comparative range of a 400 grain 416. Thoughts?

 

[Rifleman97]

An ugly recoiling cartridge.

Not really. Weatherby makes those rifles way too light, the cartridge itself is fine and I’ll prove it

In an 10 pound rifle, it has BARELY more recoil than a 416 rigby of the same weight.

416 rigby:

For the 378, I used sierra’s data for a 300 grain bullet for velocity and powder charge. For the 416 rigby, I went with noslers load for a 400 grain bullet with 4350.

It’s literally less in every measurable metric when in the same weight rifle. The ONLY reason the 378 based cases have any form of bad wrap is because weatherby loads them in 7.5-8.5 pound rifles which are just… frighteningly too light.

Here’s the same 378 data, but in an 8 pound rifle

The numbers here are shocking, and no surprise why the rounds have such an awful reputation. I’m sure some of the old cup and core bullets not designed for weatherby velocities didn’t help either.

Look particularly at the recoil velocity. THAT is what gives it the reputation of being “snappy.” Weatherby also used to load the ammo hotter than they do today, probably leading to some issues as well. But modern 378 is a great case and you can easily load it down and essentially have a rigby pressure case if you wanted, with 375 h&h velocities.

As long as you keep the weight between 10 and 12 pounds, the recoil should be manageable. At 12 pounds the rifle starts to get a lot worse to carry but would shoot more like a 338 win mag than a weatherby.

 

[Rifleman97]

If you think that Weatherby's rifles and cartridges are out there, you need to check out the Lazzeroni line.

Lazzeroni Rifles

​

If you think lazzeroni is crazy, check out the Allen Magnum Wildcats. He’s building me a 25 Stalker soon, which is a 25-300 norma magnum improved

apsrifles

apsrifles.com

 

[BryceM]

Rifleman97 makes a good point, but the fact is that the rifle arrived on the scene when the bullets available weren't suitable to make it any better than a .375 H&H and even today it isn't generally found in suitably heavy rifles. It has a reputation, and at the time the reputation formed, it was well-deserved.