300 H&H Magnum Load

[BluegrassBilly]

I'm getting back into hunting after a near decade of absence. Just before I was going to spring for a new rifle, I inherited a cache of arms from my grandfather-in-law, which included a '56 serial Model 70 in 300 H&H. While a bit much gun for most of my needs, it's hard to justify buying new with this in the safe.

With factory loads for this obsolescent cartridge somewhat limited and relatively expensive, I'm considering my options.

I've tried Berger 168s from HSM, and currently I'm using the Nosler factory load 180 ABs. Certainly nothing wrong with either of them, but my 'smith offered to help me work up some loads. Given the cost of factory loads, it wouldn't be a huge difference. So I'm considering working up a load with 150 BTs for deer/pronghorn and another with 210 AB LRs for elk.

Anybody have thoughts on these loads?

 

[std7mag]

I'd use 168gr. Berger VLD hunting for everything.
The 150 Ballistic Tips will certainly work for deer and antelope.
No need to go so heavy for elk.

Guys from Gunwerks use 168gr. Bergers for elk out past 1000 yards.

You may want to check out the Accu Bond Long Range. Work well in my 7mm Rem Mag. And expand down to 1,300 fps.

 

[Wally Dog]

I have the same gun. My father bought it in '58. His/my pet load for is is 66 gr imr 4350 behind a 180 gr Nosler partition. Without any pressure issues this comes out of the tube at ~3130fps.
It's a very good shooting old beast that I have largely retired.

 

[MThuntr]

180 accubonds (or similar bullet) or 180 TTSX (or similar bullet). I think RL22 would do nicely in that cartridge as would one of the 4350

 

[mtmuley]

200 grain Accubond. mtmuley

 

[375H&H]

http://www.barnesbullets.com/files/2014/11/300H-HMagWeb.pdf

Everything you need right there. I bet that is a sweet gun.

 

[std7mag]

Interesting...
You quote the 66gr. start load of IMR4350 but also quote the max velocity.
66gr of IMR 4350 should give you almost 200fps slower velocity.

180 is way overkill for deer, much less antelope.

 

[JohnyRingo]

I've been shooting an H&H for the last 20 years. I think it is a great rifle that flies under the radar. I shoot 180 gr Nosler Ballistic Tips...66-68 grains of IMR 4831 at 2950 fps out of a 24" barrel. 66 grains in my new Browning XBolt Stainless Stalker. 68 grains in my old Remington Model 700 Classic. The BT's are great for mule deer. I'm an archery elk hunter. If I were to use the H&H on elk, I would go 180 gr Accubonds.

 

[mtmuley]

180 is way overkill for deer, much less antelope.

No it isn't. mtmuley

 

[700Rem]

Sweet Rifle/cartridge combo first off! I have a late 50's M721 Remington in the 300 H&H, and it likes Barnes 168 gr. TTSX getting pushed by 70.5 Gr. of RL19. I think it would work nicely in almost any situation. Great classic cartridge, the cartridge feeds like butter compared to the "new" big magnums.

 

[6mm Remington]

Very cool rifle. Sure would like you to post up some pictures for us to drool over! I think a 180 gr. Accubond or Partition would serve you very well for anything you hunted and any distance you wanted to shoot.

 

[belly-deep]

Congrats on inheriting a sweet rifle.

I’d pick a versatile load and stick with it for all species.

150’s are just going to create a lot of bloodshot meat on those smaller critters. 210 ABLR isn’t going to give you much unless you’re shooting at extreme ranges. Jackets are fairly soft up front and expect it to lose quite a bit of weight on close shots. 200 “regular” AB would probably out-penetrate.

I’d go 168 Barnes TTSX, 180 AB or Partition, or 200 AB and call it good.

 

[BluegrassBilly]

Thanks for all the responses! From the sounds of it, I think I'll just stick with my OTC Nosler 180 ABs (but I'll keep my brass, just in case). And for 6mm Remmy and anybody else who wanted pics, here you go.

She's wearing a Vortex Crossfire II in 3-9x40, which I think is an exceptionally good scope for the price. I may upgrade at some point, but there are more pressing demands (tags, packs, binos, rangefinder, cetera, cetera, et cetera.) There was some difficulty in mounting the scope. Like many new scopes, the mounting length on the Crossfire II is short: only 5.0 inches. Not a problem on a short action, but nobody was thinking about a true magnum length action. With the Talley one-piece mounts both turned inward, you can see it just barely fit. And I wanted a low mount height, so that necessitated removing the rear ramp sight for the bell to clear.

After a few rounds, I HAD to replace the metal butt plate, but wanted to retain the classic look so I went with the Pachmayr Deluxe Field with white line spacer.

Anyway, too much talk, not enough gun porn:

 

[1_pointer]

Very nice rifle! A red decelerator would look very slick on that...

 

[AlaskaHunter]

Yes premium factory loads are pricey in the 300 H & H...>$75 a box in Alaska.

I've hunted and reloaded with the 300 H & H for 25 + years primarily moose in Alaska.
(I use a .270 for caribou/sheep)

My reload was 180 gr Nozler partition with 68 grains of IMR 4831 which was fine.

Recently I've been reloading 180gr Barnes TSX with 64 grains of IMR 4831.

Both reloads performed well on big bull moose with proper bullet placement.

I do like IMR4 831 for the 300, and IMR 4350 for my .270.

 

[Bambistew]

Dang, that thing looks mint! Be hard to pack it in the woods if it were mine.

Super jealous. That is the one pre64 I've lusted after for years. No help on loads. I would suggest buying good factory ammo, like nosler and keeping the brass. I think 300h&h brass is next to impossible to find.

 

[1_pointer]

One way to get "modern" load data for the 300 H&H is to use 300 WSM data. The two have virtually identical case capacities.

 

[BluegrassBilly]

Dang, that thing looks mint! Be hard to pack it in the woods if it were mine.

Like my vehicles, I take care of my guns but at the end of the day they are tools. I considered making this one a safe queen, but several factors weighed in favor of not. (1) It's not one of the rare or high-demand chamberings. (2) It's a standard grade. (3) It's from a high-production year, not a pre-war or transition gun. And, perhaps most importantly (4) I couldn't sell my wife on the necessity of a new rifle when there's nothing this one won't do.

It did hurt just a tad to run a band saw through the stock to shave off the in-letting for the lip of the steel butt plate. Again, once I had determined it was going to be a hunting rifle, I had to make it usable as such. Maybe some day I'll have a custom high-grade stock made for it and leather-wrap the recoil pad.

One way to get "modern" load data for the 300 H&H is to use 300 WSM data. The two have virtually identical case capacities.

Did you mean the 300 Win Mag? I had read that it was the ballistic twin of the H&H, which Nosler's reload data seems to support.

 

[1_pointer]

Like my vehicles, I take care of my guns but at the end of the day they are tools. I considered making this one a safe queen, but several factors weighed in favor of not. (1) It's not one of the rare or high-demand chamberings. (2) It's a standard grade. (3) It's from a high-production year, not a pre-war or transition gun. And, perhaps most importantly (4) I couldn't sell my wife on the necessity of a new rifle when there's nothing this one won't do.

It did hurt just a tad to run a band saw through the stock to shave off the in-letting for the lip of the steel butt plate. Again, once I had determined it was going to be a hunting rifle, I had to make it usable as such. Maybe some day I'll have a custom high-grade stock made for it and leather-wrap the recoil pad.



Did you mean the 300 Win Mag? I had read that it was the ballistic twin of the H&H, which Nosler's reload data seems to support.

Nope, I meant 300 WSM. Using 300 Win Mag data could get sporty at max/near max loads in an H&H.

 

[375H&H]

Nope, I meant 300 WSM. Using 300 Win Mag data could get sporty at max/near max loads in an H&H.

The 300 WSM has about 10% greater case capacity...I am not sure if that classifies as "nearly identical" but maybe it does in the case of reloading?