thoughts on the 375 BB winchester?

rjohns94 · Post by **rjohns94** » Sat Oct 31, 2009 8:15 pm

Tell me your experience with this rifle. What do you think of it as an all round rifle for a levergun hunter?

Post by **Old Savage** » Sat Oct 31, 2009 8:16 pm

I think it is great and SO does Paco.

CEMENTHEAD · Post by **CEMENTHEAD** » Sat Oct 31, 2009 8:19 pm

Old Savage wrote:I think it is great and SO does Paco.

+ 1

TedH · Post by **TedH** » Sat Oct 31, 2009 8:44 pm

I really like mine. It's a real shooter with cast bullets and with the 220 Hornady with a stout charge of RL7. It has harvested deer very well with the cast bullets, but I'm sure the Hornady bullet would do just as well or better.

I've been thinking of selling it though, as lately I've been really wanting a Marlin 375 and I never seem to have the cash when one turns up.

Pete44ru · Post by **Pete44ru** » Sat Oct 31, 2009 8:47 pm

Having owned several different examples of both, I think the .375 Winchester is the best classic mid-bore levergun chambering, excepting the .356 Winchester.

It's sorta like a miniature .45-70, but in a rifle without the attendant size/weight that a .45-70 usually carries with it.

Every animal I shot with one was DRT, and it's very cast boolit capable for those so inclined.

I, personally, would prefer a peeped .375 BB94XTR to a Marlin .375 , just because I think them prettier - but YMMV, of course.

All 3 of my .375 BB94's were early production (1978-9), and so were able to easily accommodate the firing of .38-55 ammo - a plus if ammo went astray when afield somewhere far from home.

.

Kansas Ed · Post by **Kansas Ed** » Sat Oct 31, 2009 8:49 pm

Mine's taken elk and antelope. Funny thing..I've never shot a deer with it. Not my first choice these days, but I don't feel undergunned with it up through and including short range elk/moose. I don't particularly like the Hornady or the Speer bullets for it. Really liked the Barnes Originals though. Winchester factory bullets did just fine by themselves. Good jacketed bullets seem to be the downfall of this cartridge IMO.

Ed

rjohns94 · Post by **rjohns94** » Sat Oct 31, 2009 9:33 pm

there is a nice one on gungroker for 475 with some ammo at $475, seems like a great deal? wondering if I am missing something?

TedH · Post by **TedH** » Sat Oct 31, 2009 9:40 pm

$400-$450 seems to be the going rate around these parts.

wm · Post by wm » Sat Oct 31, 2009 9:47 pm

I have shot both the Marlin and the Winchester in 375 win and I own and hunt with the Marlin.

The 375 win is to the 38-55 what the 44mag is to the 44spl. Which is a way of saying it is a darn fine cartridge. You could not touch my Marlin 375 for $500.

Wm

LeverBob · Post by **LeverBob** » Sat Oct 31, 2009 9:57 pm

My thoughts on the .375 Winny? Sweet Lord Jesus...I wish I owned one...

LB

txpete · Post by **txpete** » Sat Oct 31, 2009 11:01 pm

I have killed alot of deer with mine and never had to track one ever.$500.00 wouldn't be a down payment on mine

its not forsale...ever.marlins come and go but a winny never.

see my signature below.
pete

Nate C. · Post by **Nate C.** » Sat Oct 31, 2009 11:29 pm

It's spot on for feral hogs!

marlin shooter · Post by **marlin shooter** » Sun Nov 01, 2009 6:04 am

I have a Marlin .375 and a Win BB .375. The marlin wears a weaver 1-3 and the win has a peep sight. I use Rel 7 powder with either the sierra 200 grn bullet or the 220 hornady. I have never taken any deer with the hornady, but did shoot a buck with the 200 sierra and it worked perfectly. I really like the .375, I could easily choose it as my only lever for hunting deer (glad I don't have to). 450.00 is a good price, you should buy it.
Karl

txpete · Post by **txpete** » Sun Nov 01, 2009 6:46 am

+1 on the RL-7. 36.0 grs with the hornady 220 is a killer.I just picked up 2 lbs of AA1680 for the 357 max but plan on trying it in the 375 win.
every gun show I go to if I see any 375 win brass on a table at a fair price it comes home with me

.you can blow out 30/30 brass in a pinch or trim back some 38/55 but I like keeping my head stamps correct.
for cast bullets I like the lyman 375449.itis a gas check bullet and with the gas check and lube it runs right at 280 grs.I size .377 for mine and in my rifle 1600 fps is the sweet spot.for powders I have used unique,2400,IMR 4227 and AA5744.

fwiw I also shoot that lyman 375449 in my brno 375 ouch & ouch.it is a excellent bullet for both.

pete

76/444 · Post by **76/444** » Sun Nov 01, 2009 9:07 am

I don't know the rifle,.... but 375 is a very fine classy classic caliber to me!!

86er · Post by **86er** » Sun Nov 01, 2009 9:52 am

I had the rifle, a newer AE. The rifle was awesome. The caliber wasn't particularly impressive. It works good but to me was very close to a 35 Rem and many others. I gave it to my friend Chris.

txpete · Post by **txpete** » Sun Nov 01, 2009 11:50 am

paco likes it

In my first book on leveractions I write about what I call the "Bone Crusher" calibers. The top eject 375 was manufactured from 1978/9 thru 1983...then it was upgraded to the side eject. That book was written in 1984/5. I mentioned in the book that the 38-55 brass will chamber and function thru the 375 BB action without a hitch...and because it is thinner and longer slightly than the 375 brass .. it will take up to 4 grains more powder with some powders, and give up to 250 fps more velocity. I also found that the old lies about 38-55 brass being weak like the 45 Colt brass, were just that lies. I still have 38-55 brass from the 1980s that has been reloaded many hundreds of times...still going strong. The 375 and the 356 are in the medium ‘Bone Crusher’ class.

I made a mold that takes .375 diameter copper tubing for a 300+ grain jacketed/cast bullet (3/8" copper tubing)...and with 35 to 36 grains of Reloader #7 I get just under 2300 fps for over 3600 lbs of muzzle energy. That’s more muzzle energy than the best Speer load listed in their Reloading Manual #12 for the 30-06 and their 200 grain bullet! Almost 700 Ft. Lbs. better.

The down range ballistics for the 30-06 will be better with less bullet drop. Speer’s 200 grain Spire point runs well over .550 BC...where as I figure my .375/300 gr bullet runs around a .220 to 230 BC. But I find that with a three inch high point at 100 yards...my bullet drops 16 inches at 300 yards. It is on at 200 yards and down 9 inches at 250 yards.

And at 250 yards it still has more muzzle energy than a fully loaded commercial 44 mag round from a handgun! I just wanted to put it all into perspective for you...my drop figures are actual measurements from groups I fired. At an elevation of 1500 ft. And a temperature of 96 degrees...I use WW brass and WW mag/standard primers. I use very soft lead for the bullet core...and copper tubing that is used for plumbing. It comes in straight sections of a yard or so each. I can’t use the coiled type...can’t get the bend out of it completely even for short bullet lengths.....

My mainstay bullet comes from an old NEI mold. It was designed again for copper tubing and a spire rounded nose bullet...I cut a flat tip on them for the loading tube of the leveraction rifles. It was supposed to drop at 250 grains, but because I use very soft lead the drop closer to 265 grains. Again using ReL#7 I have a top load that’s very accurate at over 2470 fps...and almost 3600 ft. lbs. of energy at the muzzle. Drop figures did better than the 300 gr. because of the better shape and much better BC.

I have found that 4198 powder (IMR) is also very good in the 375BB Win/94 levergun...I have a 155 grain Lyman mold, (old Ideal shape) cast hard with 35 grains of this powder I can send this bullet easily over 2600 fps and a real flat trajectory.

Winchester back around the turn of the century... before and after, produced ‘Gallery Molds’...multi cavity cuts....I have one that was manufactured in 1898, a seven cavity beauty. Bought it 25 years ago, at a gun show for $40...it drops 250 grain bullets....and I can make hundreds in no time. The bullet is very accurate...in both my .375s and from a Marlin 38-55. Cast shooting requires the right alloy for the pressure involved, the right powder, and the right sizing diameter for the bore involved. I use .379 for the 38-55 Marlin and .376 for the 375 WBB.

My accuracy load for the recut mold’s 300 grain plus jacketed bullet, is 36 grains of H335 it gives 2020 fps...and near one hole accuracy at fifty yards...only an inch and a half group at 100 yards, three and a half inch group at 200 yards and five inches at 250 yards....gads that’s good for peep sights.

This bullet was inserted into the butt...a very large butt at that...of a wild, open-range bull in 1982. This animal was really fouling up a number of Black Angus breeding cows that belonged to Stuart Anderson, the restaurant owner and pure beef cattle producer. I was asked to eliminate the problem.

At well over 125 yards I caught him sniffing around one of the breed cows.....The bullet cut his tail almost in half, going in...it ripped a four+ inch radial wound channel from the top of the hams to the front of the back legs (35 plus inches), then coned down to three inch radial thru to the back of the left lung along the bottom of it, and out the lower chest with a two inch exit.

The animal turned at the shot...surprised....suddenly put it’s head down and fell. Never gaining it’s feet again...the cattle scales topped it 1800 plus lbs....it’s the biggest critter I ever took with this round....but it shows what the 375 and the right reloads can do. That load gives just over 3000 lbs of muzzle energy.

I wrote the above words over a year and a half ago...I still have not changed my mind...with the right reloading to the pressure the .375 Win BB was designed for, with the right bullets and powders....this is a very powerful 20 inch barreled rifle. I have two of them. This one we just spoke of is an original Winchester before USRAC. The second one is also a top eject and it is a USRAC....I decided to se if I could put the little gun into the power range of the old cordite 375 H&H ammo I used in Africa in the late 1950s. Don’t go looking in your reloading manuals for 375 H&H velocities....I am speaking of cordite powder loads that were loaded down for hot African hunting....I have little knowledge of the velocities of that ammo...but I do know the English loads gave 2500+ fps with the 300 solids and a might more with the soft noses....giving 4160 ft. lbs of muzzle punch. Very respectable. And I took everything except Rhino with it.

76/444 · Post by **76/444** » Sun Nov 01, 2009 1:11 pm

I always had an ignorant respect for the capabilities of the 375,.... thanks for giving my feelings, some facts to go by.

txpete · Post by **txpete** » Sun Nov 01, 2009 4:30 pm

the real deal is if you can't kill it with a hdy 220 gr sp and a stiff load of RL-7 your doing something wrong

pete

rjohns94 · Post by **rjohns94** » Sun Nov 01, 2009 4:32 pm

I bid on it, another hour to go and got out bid. going to be wisely strategic and let this one go. If my .357 '92 or my double can't take a deer, then shame on me.

tman · Post by **tman** » Sun Nov 01, 2009 4:50 pm

i had the top eject. had to sell it in the divorce

i've since replaced it with a pre safety .356 and a crossbolt

.444. these calibers may be a little better, but i miss the WINCHESTER. the usra's are nice, but the .375 was a true 94. the author of CARTRIDGES OF THE WORLD felt the .375 was a brownbear and african game cartridge, who am i to argue?

Buck Elliott · Post by **Buck Elliott** » Sun Nov 01, 2009 5:03 pm

Gonna keep my mouth shut on this one --- more or less.

The Winchester '94 FB (Fat Broad) is an aberration, and in Angle Eject guise, an abomination to be sure.

The genious(es) at W added metal where it wasn't needed, and removed metal from where it could do the most good.

IOW, I wouldn't have one as a gift.

P.S.: Don't believe everything you read in COTW...

tman · Post by **tman** » Sun Nov 01, 2009 6:06 pm

long time ago, marlin had an advertisement for the .444, .308 ,and .35 rem fired into a COLD ROLED 3/8 STEEL PLATE. the .444 and .308 made nice clean holes thru the plate. the .35 put a nice dent in it. this was the same .444 240 grain that was bouncing off or moose and elk, according to the gun magazine writers. quit buying gun magazines after that one.

Noah Zark · Post by **Noah Zark** » Mon Nov 02, 2009 8:26 am

I have both the 375BB Early Production and a Marlin 375, and a used Marlin 336CB in 38-55 just joined them.

My pet load for the 375 is the 220 Hornady over 35.5 gr of IMR3031. RL7 wasn't available then, or maybe just not available where I lived at the time. Using my pet load, I shot two whitetail with it in the mid-late 80s with shoulder shots and both dropped where they stood as if poleaxed. Distance was about 65 yds through brush, and 80-85 yds in a gas pipeline right-of-way. Both 375s wore Lyman receiver sights then as now.

I had to loosen up the bands and mag tube on the Winchester and put everything back together in alignment in order to get any kind of decent groups out of it. Once that was done, it has been possible to get 1.5" groups at 100 yds with my pet 220 Hornady / 35.5 gr IMR 3031 load. The Marlin is a little bit tighter at 1.125-1.25" with the same load, and if I fire my pet load in 375W cases from my new-to-me 336CB in 38-55, I get 0.75"-0.85" 100-yd groups.

Noah

Kansas Ed · Post by **Kansas Ed** » Mon Nov 02, 2009 10:05 am

Buck Elliott wrote:Gonna keep my mouth shut on this one --- more or less.

The Winchester '94 FB (Fat Broad) is an aberration, and in Angle Eject guise, an abomination to be sure.

The genious(es) at W added metal where it wasn't needed, and removed metal from where it could do the most good.

IOW, I wouldn't have one as a gift.

P.S.: Don't believe everything you read in COTW...

Buck,
Were you the one in Star Valley years ago that did the blowup tests on the 3 different '94's? IIRC one pre-64, one Post-64 and one BB? Believe I heard this from Jay Romine (name ring a bell?)

Ed

Buck Elliott · Post by **Buck Elliott** » Mon Nov 02, 2009 12:13 pm

Kansas Ed wrote:
Buck Elliott wrote:Gonna keep my mouth shut on this one --- more or less.

The Winchester '94 FB (Fat Broad) is an aberration, and in Angle Eject guise, an abomination to be sure.

The genious(es) at W added metal where it wasn't needed, and removed metal from where it could do the most good.

IOW, I wouldn't have one as a gift.

P.S.: Don't believe everything you read in COTW...
Buck,
Were you the one in Star Valley years ago that did the blowup tests on the 3 different '94's? IIRC one pre-64, one Post-64 and one BB? Believe I heard this from Jay Romine (name ring a bell?)

Ed

FIVE '94s in all, and a Marlin 336. The tests were not of the "blowup" variety, but to prove the (in)adequacies of the above actions to stand the pressures of the .454 Casull cartridge. The Marlin failed (became unserviceable) after the fewest shots fired, with the BB '94 (originally a .375) failing quickest of the Winchesters. The '94 that lasted the longest (?!?) had a forged, nodular iron receiver, from the 1920s, and it too failed in fewer than 50 rounds.

The receiver of the '94 BB (AE) actually stretched and twisted so much (on the right side) that the bolt could barely track in the frame, and metal was peened up out of and behind the locking lug recess.

We determined "failure" to be extreme excessive headspace (over .010"), from severe peening of the locking lug recess, and/or receiver side-wall stretching; or the inability to lock up properly and securely. The 336 bit the dust in the latter category. It didn't make it to 20 rounds. The locking lug and its recess were seriously deformed...

The used factory-equivalent loads for testing, consisting of (nominal) 300-gr. hard-cast, GC bullets (315-gr. actual wgt.) over 30 grains of H-110, sparked by CCI Large rifle primers, in NAA cases (the original Freedom arms issue.) Muzzle velocity from a 7 1/2" revolver was 1700 fps. From a 24" rifle barrel, it clocked 2100 fps.

Yup, I remember Jay. Lived in Smoot. Interesting feller.

Post by **Old Savage** » Mon Nov 02, 2009 4:35 pm

But ---- how about for the pressures of the 444. Mine shoots great but I haven't many rounds through it. Will it distort?

Kansas Ed · Post by **Kansas Ed** » Mon Nov 02, 2009 5:11 pm

I don't offhand know what the pressures are for the .444 so can't say for sure. But in the mid-90's Tom Hartog was the plant mgr at FA. He left there and went to Winchester/Browning. I suspect because of his ties to FA, Winchester sent two or three BB94's and asked FA to chamber and test them for the 454. Results were not good, and the guns didn't hold up. They literally shook themselves apart. (If only they'd talked to Buck first huh

)

What I do remember about that whole deal though was a discussion I had with Bob over the tests. At the time I couldn't understand how a rifle built for the similar peak pressures of the .307 and .356 could be so damaged by the .454 which ran at about 5000 psi more. Surely you would think that +5000 psi was the approximate proof pressures for those rifle cartridges. What Bob told me at the time was that he surmised that the quickness of the pressure rise was the culprit. That the 454's pressure curve up was so steep (and needed for a handgun) that it just shook the guns apart. Once you think about it, it makes sense...at least to me. When I looked at it in drag racing terms (which may have even been Bobs analogy)...the strain on mechanical parts going 150 mph in 16 seconds is a lot less than the strain on parts going the same speed in 8 seconds.

Ed

Buck, did you keep notes and specs of your tests? I would like to read more details about the whole testing scenario that you went through for that, who you worked with on it, conclusions you drew from it, original intent, and how the project came to be, etc. etc.. I think it would make for a fascinating article.
And Jay Romine BTW stocked my brothers Mdl 70 .257 Roberts with some of the most beautiful European Walnut I've ever seen. He did some really neat stuff out of his back shop.

Ed

Ranch Dog · Post by **Ranch Dog** » Mon Nov 02, 2009 7:39 pm

Old Savage wrote:But ---- how about for the pressures of the 444. Mine shoots great but I haven't many rounds through it. Will it distort?

No, the 444 Marlin is a relatively low pressure cartridge 42.0K PSI/44.0K CUP compared to the 375 Win which is 52.0K CUP. Depending on the scource, the 375 Win has a PSI limit near 60.0K.

NonPCnraRN · Post by **NonPCnraRN** » Wed Nov 04, 2009 2:14 pm

txpete wrote:paco likes it

In my first book on leveractions I write about what I call the "Bone Crusher" calibers. The top eject 375 was manufactured from 1978/9 thru 1983...then it was upgraded to the side eject. That book was written in 1984/5. I mentioned in the book that the 38-55 brass will chamber and function thru the 375 BB action without a hitch...and because it is thinner and longer slightly than the 375 brass .. it will take up to 4 grains more powder with some powders, and give up to 250 fps more velocity. I also found that the old lies about 38-55 brass being weak like the 45 Colt brass, were just that lies. I still have 38-55 brass from the 1980s that has been reloaded many hundreds of times...still going strong. The 375 and the 356 are in the medium ‘Bone Crusher’ class.

I made a mold that takes .375 diameter copper tubing for a 300+ grain jacketed/cast bullet (3/8" copper tubing)...and with 35 to 36 grains of Reloader #7 I get just under 2300 fps for over 3600 lbs of muzzle energy. That’s more muzzle energy than the best Speer load listed in their Reloading Manual #12 for the 30-06 and their 200 grain bullet! Almost 700 Ft. Lbs. better.

The down range ballistics for the 30-06 will be better with less bullet drop. Speer’s 200 grain Spire point runs well over .550 BC...where as I figure my .375/300 gr bullet runs around a .220 to 230 BC. But I find that with a three inch high point at 100 yards...my bullet drops 16 inches at 300 yards. It is on at 200 yards and down 9 inches at 250 yards.

And at 250 yards it still has more muzzle energy than a fully loaded commercial 44 mag round from a handgun! I just wanted to put it all into perspective for you...my drop figures are actual measurements from groups I fired. At an elevation of 1500 ft. And a temperature of 96 degrees...I use WW brass and WW mag/standard primers. I use very soft lead for the bullet core...and copper tubing that is used for plumbing. It comes in straight sections of a yard or so each. I can’t use the coiled type...can’t get the bend out of it completely even for short bullet lengths.....

My mainstay bullet comes from an old NEI mold. It was designed again for copper tubing and a spire rounded nose bullet...I cut a flat tip on them for the loading tube of the leveraction rifles. It was supposed to drop at 250 grains, but because I use very soft lead the drop closer to 265 grains. Again using ReL#7 I have a top load that’s very accurate at over 2470 fps...and almost 3600 ft. lbs. of energy at the muzzle. Drop figures did better than the 300 gr. because of the better shape and much better BC.

I have found that 4198 powder (IMR) is also very good in the 375BB Win/94 levergun...I have a 155 grain Lyman mold, (old Ideal shape) cast hard with 35 grains of this powder I can send this bullet easily over 2600 fps and a real flat trajectory.

Winchester back around the turn of the century... before and after, produced ‘Gallery Molds’...multi cavity cuts....I have one that was manufactured in 1898, a seven cavity beauty. Bought it 25 years ago, at a gun show for $40...it drops 250 grain bullets....and I can make hundreds in no time. The bullet is very accurate...in both my .375s and from a Marlin 38-55. Cast shooting requires the right alloy for the pressure involved, the right powder, and the right sizing diameter for the bore involved. I use .379 for the 38-55 Marlin and .376 for the 375 WBB.

My accuracy load for the recut mold’s 300 grain plus jacketed bullet, is 36 grains of H335 it gives 2020 fps...and near one hole accuracy at fifty yards...only an inch and a half group at 100 yards, three and a half inch group at 200 yards and five inches at 250 yards....gads that’s good for peep sights.

This bullet was inserted into the butt...a very large butt at that...of a wild, open-range bull in 1982. This animal was really fouling up a number of Black Angus breeding cows that belonged to Stuart Anderson, the restaurant owner and pure beef cattle producer. I was asked to eliminate the problem.

At well over 125 yards I caught him sniffing around one of the breed cows.....The bullet cut his tail almost in half, going in...it ripped a four+ inch radial wound channel from the top of the hams to the front of the back legs (35 plus inches), then coned down to three inch radial thru to the back of the left lung along the bottom of it, and out the lower chest with a two inch exit.

The animal turned at the shot...surprised....suddenly put it’s head down and fell. Never gaining it’s feet again...the cattle scales topped it 1800 plus lbs....it’s the biggest critter I ever took with this round....but it shows what the 375 and the right reloads can do. That load gives just over 3000 lbs of muzzle energy.

I wrote the above words over a year and a half ago...I still have not changed my mind...with the right reloading to the pressure the .375 Win BB was designed for, with the right bullets and powders....this is a very powerful 20 inch barreled rifle. I have two of them. This one we just spoke of is an original Winchester before USRAC. The second one is also a top eject and it is a USRAC....I decided to se if I could put the little gun into the power range of the old cordite 375 H&H ammo I used in Africa in the late 1950s. Don’t go looking in your reloading manuals for 375 H&H velocities....I am speaking of cordite powder loads that were loaded down for hot African hunting....I have little knowledge of the velocities of that ammo...but I do know the English loads gave 2500+ fps with the 300 solids and a might more with the soft noses....giving 4160 ft. lbs of muzzle punch. Very respectable. And I took everything except Rhino with it.

If you are not as talented as Paco making you own 300 gr bullets using copper tubing for the jacket, Hawk bullets makes bullets in FN configuration in 300 gr (and other weights) using different jacket thicknesses. The jackets are pure copper and the cores are pure lead. You can load these in 38-55 brass to duplicate Paco's loads. I figure if you can shoot a 300 gr softpoint stem to stern through a 1800 lb range bull, you should be prepared for pretty much anything. You can accurize any 94 by removing some of the metal from inside the barrel bands with a dowel and very fine grit wet/dry sandpaper. With the barrel and mag tube given some room to move when the barrel heats up will prevent binding in the bands and verticle stringing. I have used a tiny o-ring between the mag tube and barrel where the screw goes through the end cap. Snug the screw down just enough to keep the tube from rattling but not so loose that the screw falls out.
The little o-ring is barely noticeable but acts as a dampener.

Post by **Hobie** » Wed Nov 04, 2009 3:39 pm

I don't think you can talk .375 without talking .38-55. A modern .38-55 can do just as much as the .375 Win.

tman · Post by **tman** » Wed Nov 04, 2009 5:00 pm

too bad that the .375 and .356 were never factory loaded to their full potiental.perhaps they would still be around, along with the 94. the bigbore cartridges really increased the range and power of the 94. with the .307, 356, and .450 marlin, you could hunt moose and elk at moderate ranges, the 450 marlin , which duplicates the 45-70, could hold it's own with anything on the planet.

Ranch Dog · Post by **Ranch Dog** » Thu Nov 05, 2009 3:52 am

Hobie wrote:I don't think you can talk .375 without talking .38-55. A modern .38-55 can do just as much as the .375 Win.

Very good reminder Hobie, I just wish modern leverguns where being chambered in 375 or 38-55 Win. With Mossbergs hint of "other chamberings" I had always hoped that the 38-55 Win might be in the cards.

I have a number of my Ranch Dog Mold customers shooting rebored/chambered Marlins in 38-55 Win, as many as I do 375 Win shooters and they all push the bullets the same, 55.0K to 57.5K PSI.

After fiddling with my 30-30AI, I decided to greet Saturday's whitetail opener with my Marlin 375 and the TLC379-235-RF. My favorite load is 36.0-grains of H322 for 1945 FPS. Very comfortable whitetail load, though I killed a desert mule deer with it last year, that is extremely accurate with the 235-grain bullet.

Noah Zark · Post by **Noah Zark** » Thu Nov 05, 2009 6:03 am

Hobie wrote:I don't think you can talk .375 without talking .38-55. A modern .38-55 can do just as much as the .375 Win.

+1.

Both the 375W and the 38-55 are like the 45 Colt -- handloader's cartridges, IMO. True potential for power and accuracy are not seen until properly handloaded.

Noah

txpete · Post by **txpete** » Thu Nov 05, 2009 6:38 am

just a short story on my WIN bb 94 375...

back in 93 I was getting ready to retire from the army and worked in the QC shop(1st cav) I was a T.I. on cobra's and the apache.we had about 10 guys in the shop.I had a good friend that let me hunt his ranch and if I wanted I could bring a friend with me.this was prime hunting here in cen tx.oh and free if I kept him sausage and steaks

.
just about every week I would asked these guys in the QC shop if they wanted to go hunting with me.I didn't get any takers until just before thanksgiving.1 guy said he would like to and we headed out to the ranch that weekend.
we got out to the ranch at about 4am and I we were getting our gear out of the back of the jeep.I asked him what he was using and he pulled out a high dollar sako 308 with german glass on it.he bought it at the rod & gun club in germany.when I pulled my win BB 94 375 out of its case he laughed "hey man why don't you buy a real rifle".I just blew it off

.
I set him up in the front part of the ranch where he had a chance to use that 308 for some longer shots and I headed back in the brush and cactus.
about 0930 I hear a shot fired and head up to help him dress out the deer.it turns out he gut shot a doe and I spent most of that morning tracking that deer down for him.
the evening hunt I was back in the brush again and had a nice 8 pt come out of the cactus at about 60 yards.I put a lyman 375449 where it counted and the buck went down.it was dusk and he came down to help me track my deer

.I already had the deer dressed out and he asked how far the deer went? oh about 2 foot

as we were walking up to get the jeep I told him he should swap that high dollar sako for a winchester then he would have a REAL gun also.
I still have that winchester and that bullet mold.I have killed more deer with it than all my other rifles combined.everytime I think about "hey man why don't you buy a real rifle" I just smile.

pete

Lefty Dude · Post by **Lefty Dude** » Thu Nov 05, 2009 10:59 am

Very interesting to read Paco's loading Data for the .375 Winchester.
I just looked up the load I developed for my Ruger #3 .375. This load is dated in my reloading Book as September 1982.
235 gr. Speer Spitzer with 34.5 Gr. of Hercules Reloader 7, with a comment "Best Load".

As I posted in another thread, this load & bullet I shot a 3 point Bull Elk in 1984.

The 235 gr. speer is a heavy jacketed bullet designed for the 375 H&H.

TedH · Post by **TedH** » Thu Nov 05, 2009 12:58 pm

txpete wrote: gun also.
I still have that winchester and that bullet mold.I have killed more deer with it than all my other rifles combined.everytime I think about "hey man why don't you buy a real rifle" I just smile.

pete

More often than not it's the rifleman, not the rifle that gets the job done.

Ranch Dog · Post by **Ranch Dog** » Thu Nov 05, 2009 2:04 pm

Interesting txpete, a tale that is often repeated on my place. Big fat bullets at levergun velocities hammer whitetails in this part of Texas also!

Nath · Post by **Nath** » Thu Nov 05, 2009 3:34 pm

It's a bit like the story of two bulls, one youngster and an old bull on a hill look down at all the young heifers and the young bull is all excited and say's "lets run down there and get some of those gals", the old bull says" steady now pard, lets walk down gentle like and get all of them"

Nath

RSY · Post by **RSY** » Mon Nov 09, 2009 11:06 am

Buck Elliott wrote:FIVE '94s in all, and a Marlin 336. The tests were not of the "blowup" variety, but to prove the (in)adequacies of the above actions to stand the pressures of the .454 Casull cartridge. The Marlin failed (became unserviceable) after the fewest shots fired, with the BB '94 (originally a .375) failing quickest of the Winchesters. The '94 that lasted the longest (?!?) had a forged, nodular iron receiver, from the 1920s, and it too failed in fewer than 50 rounds.

The receiver of the '94 BB (AE) actually stretched and twisted so much (on the right side) that the bolt could barely track in the frame, and metal was peened up out of and behind the locking lug recess.

We determined "failure" to be extreme excessive headspace (over .010"), from severe peening of the locking lug recess, and/or receiver side-wall stretching; or the inability to lock up properly and securely. The 336 bit the dust in the latter category. It didn't make it to 20 rounds. The locking lug and its recess were seriously deformed...

I'm confused. Why is it a knock against any rifle when it cannot succeed at a task it was not intended to perform?

Standing by for enlightenment...honestly.

Scott

Kansas Ed · Post by **Kansas Ed** » Mon Nov 09, 2009 12:44 pm

If I understood Buck's intent in the post (and I'm sure he'll correct me if I'm wrong), the BB94 was re-engineered in such a way that it proved to be weaker than the original design. I had heard rumors that the BB94 barrel threads were larger, which translated into less metal surrounding the barrel in the receiver, especially between the barrel shank and mag tube hole, and that this was one of the weak points. Also, according to his experiments he is indicating that the cutout for the AE version actually contributed to a one side receiver weakness which translated into the twisting that resulted from the high pressure rounds.

Sometimes the engineering looks good on paper (or in CATIA) but when put up against all of the unaccounted for variables in the real world it doesn't pan out. I'm certainly not speaking for him, but it does beg the question, that if the new and improved version didn't handle the pressure as well as the others (and of course a base group of 5 rifles with one from each design format, doesn't constitute statistical reliability) where is the improvement?

IMO it's really no different than many on here who refuse to own a 1964-1978 Winchester. Truthfully the ability of the rifles to do the same job are no different, but the quality of the rifles is different, so they are less desirable to some.

Ed

Buck Elliott · Post by **Buck Elliott** » Mon Nov 09, 2009 1:10 pm

"" I'm confused. Why is it a knock against any rifle when it cannot succeed at a task it was not intended to perform?

Standing by for enlightenment...honestly. ""

The purpose of the tests was NOT to "knock" any particular rifle or design, but to prove, once and for all, to any number of sceptics, that the '94 Winchester or the 336 Marlin were NOT capable of standing the pressures (65,000 psi+) and the pounding delivered by the .454 Casull cartridge. That the rifles tested were more than adequate for the task for which they were designed was never in question. There was one man (a neighbor) who had experienced stretching in his new '94 BB AE, using out-of-bounds handloads, and that was the impetus for including the BB AE in the tests (different rifle, BTW...)

(FWIW, you can't make the .375 Win. perform like the H&H version -- at least not in a levergun, and not within pressures that won't melt brass...)

This all came about because of my interest in making a lever gun that would be compatible with the .454 round ( and other hi-pressure loads of similar construction, i.e.: the Linebaugh .475 & .500, regular and maximum versions, and, as it turns out, the then-unheard-of .500 S&W...) I wanted a rifle that had a near-100% safety (pressure) factor, and that is what I designed.

RSY · Post by **RSY** » Mon Nov 09, 2009 11:03 pm

Thanks for elaborating and clearing that up, Buck.

I have been aware of your tests for a few years, now, and have always found them very interesting and the results thereof useful. However, your first post in this thread was pretty damning (aberration, abomination, wouldn't have as a gift) overall of the rifle, and without reference to your specialized tests, so I wanted to make sure I wasn't getting you wrong. Heck, you even had Old Savage worried about .444 pressures, which is a relative pussycat pressure-wise. So, you can see I wasn't the only confused soul.

Thanks,
Scott

Buck Elliott · Post by **Buck Elliott** » Tue Nov 10, 2009 12:52 pm

Maybe I 'vilified' the '94 BB AE too harshly for some readers. There are reasons for my not liking the "New/Improved" version of the (to many) venerable 1894. Maybe I'm an old man who has come to his conclusions the hard way, and feels justified in presenting them in his own way. So be it. I still have all my fingers and both my eyes...

NOTHING that Winchester/USRAC did to the '94 served to "improve" it in any way, IMNSHO. All the cost-cutting changes made to it over the years since 1964 only managed to "cheapen" the product. The Angle Eject feature was a tacit admission that the W/USRAC engineers could not come up with a really new, 'scope-compatible design. The Big Bore AE "refinements" did exactly what I have described: they removed important metal from the right receiver sidewall, and placed extraneous material behind and around the locking lug, where it offered no real strength or support. The sidewall is the weak link in the chain.

Engineering should NEVER become the province of the Marketing Department.

As someone mentioned, just because it may look feasable on paper doesn't mean it translates well into the real world.

Yes, the '94 BB AE serves well enough with the class of cartridges for which it was designed. It is marginal but acceptable for the .375, and a little scary in .307 and .356 chamberings. Note the experience of my old neighbor with his .375. Yeah, his loads were a little beyond the norm, but should NOT have distorted his receiver as they did. They likely generated pressures akin to those of the high-end .307...

Many moons ago, before there was a .307 Winchester, I rechambered several .30-30s to what eventually became the .307. I doubt that I was the first, but I was one of the earliest. I used necked-down and shortened .444 Marlin cases (formed in .308 Win. dies) loaded to near-minimum .308 levels. We achieved 2500 fps or so with 170-gr. Speer Flat Point bullets, using the slower-burning powders, and that was really all we wanted.

I altered only sound, pre-'64 guns, and never had anyone experience any problems with any of them, although the conversion may have put the basic design into "marginal" territory...

Buck Elliott · Post by **Buck Elliott** » Thu Nov 12, 2009 12:41 pm

rjohns94 wrote:Tell me your experience with this rifle. What do you think of it as an all round rifle for a levergun hunter?

After all that has been said, I can imagine that you could be quite happy with a .375 Big Bore, within its parameters. It is at least as close to an "all-around" combination as a .444. It can not compare to the .45-70 at the top end of power and penetration, nor will it shoot as flat as a .30-30 or a .25-35.

Are there "better" all-around candidates? Probably . . . The .307 and/or .356 Winchester offerings come to mind, along with the .338 MX, but the .375 offers good cover for almost any situation it might be asked to handle -- within reason.

Enjoy...!

RSY · Post by **RSY** » Thu Nov 12, 2009 1:03 pm

Thanks, again for your take on things, Buck (you do have "knowledge," whereas people like myself have but glorified opinions).

A quick theoretical question for you: Had they just chambered a standard M94 in .375 Win., would that have been a viable platform for that cartridge? From what I gather by your comments above that the changes embodied by the BB (both top-eject and AE ?) didn't offer any real strengthening, so it sounds like it would have worked fine. Is that an accurate statement?

Scott

Buck Elliott · Post by **Buck Elliott** » Thu Nov 12, 2009 1:19 pm

As I said (I think...), The '94 is "marginal" for the .375 application. Nonetheless, in Top Eject form, it should have proved 'adequate', at least.

One major problem encountered in the .375, especially with bullets weighing 250 grains and above, is the pounding the action takes from accelerating that much mass so quickly, which was also a part of what happened when rebarreled to .454 Casull. ( Pure pressure was the other BIG factor with the .454.)

Adding strength (thickness) to the sidewalls of the receiver would have been a smarter move, mechanically.

The AE treatment and the Fat Butt configuration were almost assuredly marketing gimmicks, to give a jolt to lagging sales. And Marketers AIN'T Engineers...

I'll not get into metallurgy here, other than to say that the receivers in the AE BBs I've encountered are much more 'plastic' and much less 'elastic' than '94s of any other vintage, in my opinion

Nath · Post by **Nath** » Thu Nov 12, 2009 1:29 pm

You know what, when ever I have looked at them BB actions I always felt that it did not make sense all that steel to the rear.
If they had tapered it forwards some then yes, that would of made sense.

I feel somewhat vindicated about my gut feelings now

Nath.

Buck Elliott · Post by **Buck Elliott** » Thu Nov 12, 2009 7:35 pm

You coulda' been a Engineer, Nath...

RSY · Post by **RSY** » Fri Nov 13, 2009 10:27 am

OK, so assuming that the built-up material in the rear of the BB94 receiver is not adding anything appreciable to the strength of the receiver, where does the added strength lie in the design to allow it to shoot the higher pressure rounds? Is it all in the chamber area? If that is the case, then they could have left the receiver alone and just beefed up the chamber. Would that be right? Or, could one safely fire .375 Win. through a recent-production M94 in .38-55?

Also, if the BB94 is only marginal for the .375 Win., then the same is true for the .307 and .356. Would that be correct, as well?

Not trying to be combative here. Just trying to wrap my head around all this.

Thanks,
Scott