View Full Version : .300 H&H compatible bolt action

August 10, 2010, 12:36 AM
Hey guys,

I've been looking into building a .300 H&H over time from the ground up. Does anyone know of a common bolt action that I can use for the project. I've heard and old Remington/Enfield 1917 action can be used. Any others. Any tips on the build would be helpful.

August 10, 2010, 01:48 AM
Look at Brownell's site and check out the CZ 550 action.
You also might check out the Montana Rifleman.He makes a pre-64 M-70 clone for aa reasonable price,also barrels,he sells bbl'd actions.Look for a .375 H+H action.Folks still ask for those.No dis for the 300,but folks don't ask for them much.
An original 1917 is worth a lot as an original,more than either action I mentioned.They can be a fine 300 H+H,but ear reamoval,cock on opening,change bolt,replace bolt handle,flatten and modify guard assembly,then sculpting a lot of steel.......
Maybe if you find a nice pre built 1917 sporter from the 50's-60's with the work all done,maybe still a 30-06,you have a reasonable project.
The pretigious British makers built rifles for africa on p-14/p-17's

Dallas Jack
August 13, 2010, 01:44 PM
Here's a good start.
Dallas Jack

August 13, 2010, 02:52 PM
C'mon guys. It's not that hard. Winchester Model 70. That's why the Model 70 was introduced, to allow the use of full-length magnums without buying a Mauser Magnum action. The Model 54 would only handle 30-06 length cartridges, so they lengthened the magazine a little and moved the bolt stop.

Jim Watson
August 13, 2010, 04:02 PM
Always made me wonder about the short magnums; .264, .300, 338, .458.
Why make a short magnum when you have an action that will hold real H&H magnums?

August 26, 2010, 06:54 PM
Hi, I'm actually interested in building a 300 H&H as well. I'm more of a Remington 700 fan. Nothing wrong with the Winchester 70's and others, just my own preference. I'm assuming I would have to find a 700 already chambered for a 375 H&H due to the length of the action or are there others that would fit the bill. Perhaps one of the new ultra mag length actions. I know there are other more efficient cartridges out there, but the more I read about the old H&H the more I want one for myself. Any help on the idea of building one on a 700 action would be greatly appreciated. Thanks

August 26, 2010, 07:10 PM

Hey guys,

I've been looking into building a .300 H&H over time from the ground up. Does anyone know of a common bolt action that I can use for the project. I've heard and old Remington/Enfield 1917 action can be used. Any others. Any tips on the build would be helpful.

I think your hearing about a P-14, not the 1917 action? The P-14 action is long - Plus the bolt face on a P-14 should fit a 300 H&H w/o alterations.

Also, wellerhouse is on a right path. A Rem 700 or a Win 70 chambered in 375 H&H could be rebarreled to 300 H&H w/o any bolt face or action alterations.

August 26, 2010, 08:51 PM
I think your hearing about a P-14, not the 1917 action? The P-14 action is long - Plus the bolt face on a P-14 should fit a 300 H&H w/o alterations.

The 1917 Enfield action is the same size as the P-14, in fact they are basicly the same action. The P-14 was designed to handle the .303 British round and the 1917 the .30-06. Both actions are long enought to handle most magnum calibers.

In fact here are some pictures of my .300 H&H built on a 1917 action:


August 30, 2010, 06:02 PM
Remington 700 long actions are all long enough for the H&H cartridges. Find a 700 magnum action from a 7mm mag or 300 Win Mag and they will work fine. The bolt face will be ready to go. Just for kicks, I loaded a .375 H&H cartridge into the magazine on my Remington 700 chambered in .270 Win. The 375 H&H fit fine in the magazine box.

Jim Watson
August 30, 2010, 07:14 PM
Makes me wonder why Winchester and Remington came out with the "short magnums" when they had guns that would handle full length magnums.

Seems to have been a good commercial decision, though. The 7mm RM and .300, .338, and .458 WM have all done well, only the .264 did not catch on.

August 30, 2010, 10:26 PM
Remington 700 long actions are all long enough for the H&H cartridges. Find a 700 magnum action from a 7mm mag or 300 Win Mag and they will work fine.
Not exactly. There are magnum-length Remington 700 actions, but these are not the same action as a "long action" Remington 700. Remington used these actions for the 8mm Rem Mag, the 7mm STW, and recently for the RUM cartridges. If I am not mistakes, they are available only on complete rifles.

August 31, 2010, 02:25 AM
Just because I am curious,and interested in learning,is there something undesirable about the Montana Rifleman M-70 clone action? I think they list at $800 ish these days,and a mini is scheduled to come out.
Dakotas and such are quite higher,and original M-70's can be had,but not always easily or cheaply.
Doesn't the CZ list a touch cheaper?
Or am I just overlooking the idea of retrofitting an existing rifle rather than stripping an old M-70 for the action?

August 31, 2010, 02:39 AM
Scorch, this is very interesting to me. I just measured the magazine box on my Model 700 in .270 Winchester, and it measures 3.695 inches. Both factory .375 and my handloaded 375 H&H fit right in the box. The overall length for the .300 H&H and the .375 H&H cartridges are both 3.6 inches, as well as the 7mm STW, 300 Rem Ultra Mag, etc. Why would a action on a rifle originally chambered for 7mm Mag or 300 Win Mag not work for a .300 H&H ? I would be interested in learning the internal dimensions of the magazine box of one of the magnum length 700s you are talking about. I do know that the sides of the magazine box on rifles chambered for the Ultra-Mag cartridges are cut out, to allow for more lateral space in the magazine box, but I was under the impression length was the same.

August 31, 2010, 03:38 AM
roklok, you may be right. I don't own a Rem 700 any more, but I was sure the magazine box was longer on the 8mm Rem Mag and RUM action. I may be full of it.

September 1, 2010, 10:06 PM
Would the extra lateral space in the magazine create a problem if an action from an ultra mag were used build a 300H&H? I have an ultra mag action located for a pretty good price I think. I just want to be sure about the measurements. I'd hate to fork over the money and not use it. Not that I couldn't re-sell but it's just a hassel. Anyone out there recommend a specific barrel maker for a custom? I've researched a lot of them. Leaning towards Hart or Kreiger. Both of those offer a rebarreling service, which would be nice. I don't really have a gunsmith close by that I'm familiar with. Kind of went off topic there, but everyone here seems pretty knowlegable. Thanks,

September 2, 2010, 11:17 AM
I don't think the extra room in the mag will affect anything. As far as barrel makers, I recommend McGowen for barrels. Their prices are reasonable and the barrels are of excellent quality. They also offer rebarreling services.

September 2, 2010, 11:48 AM
I don't think the standard Winchester and Remington actions (those for the 300 WM, 7 Rm, etc) are long enough for the 300 H&H. It's the same length as the the 375 H&H.

Remington at one time made the 8mm mag, it was as long as the 375/300 H&H but didn't sell well.

I converted a friends Rem 8mm Mag into a 375 H&H, Its' long enough.

1917s are about the cheapest way to go, it inst that expensive to replace the bolt/firing pin to cock on opening. Also a good grinder followed by a belt sander will take care of those ears without much effort.

I made a 416 Rigby on the 1917 action and don't have much money in it at all.

Rem 721s will work too, but probably wont find a cheap 721 action.

You can make some damn nice rifles out of the 1917 actions.

September 2, 2010, 09:53 PM
A standard 700 long action will work for the H&H Magnums. There may have been a longer version of the 700 made, but I am not convinced. Still waiting for magazine measurements of a 700 originally chambered for an H&H magnum, 8mm Rem Mag, or 7mm STW.

Here are photographs of a 700 factory chambered in 7mm Remington Magnum. The first photograph is of a 7mm Mag round in the magazine, with the cartridge head against rear of magazine box. It is evident that there is a lot of extra room at the front of the magazine box. The second photograph is of a factory 300 grain .375 H&H round in the magazine of the same rifle. There is a bit of room at the front of magazine box even with the .375 H&H.

The 375 round feeds fine from the magazine as well, just wont chamber in the 7mm Mag chamber, of course. The .300 H&H shares the same overall length as the .375 H&H.

James K
September 3, 2010, 02:14 PM
Frankly, I don't see why anyone today would want to build a rifle on an antique action like the M1917, but it would be strong enough, even though overly heavy.

But, IMHO, anyone wanting to use a M1917 action should check around for either an action or a rifle that has already been "sporterized", of which there are plenty, rather than working over an untouched rifle that has historic and collector interest (spelled dollars if you don't care about collectors).

FWIW, the Model 1917 and Pattern 14 actions are not the same. Outside dimensions are the same, but the magazine well on the 1917 was opened up for the longer .30 cartridge, and the magazine box is longer. That is also why the rear sight leaves are not interchangeable, since the rear receiver ring and sight ears of the M1917 are shorter, cut down so the clip guide would match the lengthened magazine.


September 3, 2010, 09:14 PM
Well I've solved my action search. I just found a bought a NIB 1983 classic Remington 700 chambered in the 300 H&H. I'm very excited. Hoping it comes sometime next week. I will check magazine length and get back to you. Now all I need is brass and dies. Just picked up some 200gr Nosler Accubonds today. I'll give them a try. Probably also try some Sierras as well. Can't wait to shoot it!!

September 3, 2010, 09:50 PM
I have a Husquvarna I built with a 26 in Lija #3 bbl .I neck a 338 down to 30 call,its a 30-338.It is a bit shorter than a 300 Win,so I can seat bullets longer in a 30-06 length box.
I built that rifle to trajectory match a 200 gr Accubond to a Leupold B+C retcle sighted in @ 300 ydsI get 2900 fps..I live at 4800 ft and hunt higher.
That combination has about the same bullet weight and velocity at 700 yds that a 30-40 Krag has @ 100 yds.The 200 gr Accubond flies very well.
Its kind of fun because I worked all that out with Sierras Ballistic software before I ever started building.
Good for you,finding that Remmy!!

September 4, 2010, 01:50 AM
I neck a 338 down to 30 call,its a 30-338.
30-338 is very close dimensionally and performance-wise to the venerable .308 Norma Magnum, the reason behind Winchester making the 300 Win Mag just a little bit longer and different from all their other 2.5" magnums.

September 26, 2010, 12:33 AM
I haven't been able to get exact measurements on the magazine yet in my 700, but I just finished my first set of handloads for my 300 H&H. They are 185 VLD Bergers 3.640 COL. I also have a Rem 700 BDL 280 Rem. with the detatchable magazine. My 300 H&H cartridges fit right in the Detatched Box Mag even with the bullet seated out a bit. It appears both magizines have the same clearance in the front, ahead of the bullet. I'm not sure where the added length in the action would be, not sure there's any difference. I also got curious and attempted to swap bolts. The bolts interchange. That's all for the update. I'll shoot the new loads sometime this week. We'll see how she shoots...

October 24, 2011, 09:51 PM
I have multiple old original boxes of 300 H&H ammunition if anyone is interested.