.300 H&H Magnum Match box

I picked up this box of Remington Kleanbore .300 Holland & Holland magnum match cartridges at our local gun show - probably paid too much for it, but it is full and in great shape, and I didn’t have one in the collection. I don’t recall ever seeing the match box before; am I correct in assuming it is uncommon?


I can’t say what that box is worth but I can give you a short history lesson that I won’t charge you anything for.

300 H&H Match cartridges have been around for more years than you or I have, made by both Big Green and Big W. For most of the first half of the 20th Century the 30-06 dominated conventional long range shooting in the United States, however, in 1935, something astounding happened. In that year a shooter named Ben Comfort won the Wimbledon Cup with a rifle chambered for the 300 H&H Magnum, shooting factory match ammo of all things. Popularity of the cartridge picked up immediately but ground to a halt with WW II. After the War shooters returned to the big magnum but when the AMU was created in 1956 the H&H was replaced with the improved versions and that was pretty much the end of it as far as a match cartridge was concerned.

The only boxes of 300 H&H Match ammunition that I have seen are the Remington, like yours, and one by Western hand loaded with 200 grain BT bullets. I have heard that Norma also made match quality H&H cartridges but can’t say when.

Because of it’s short run of popularity I would guess that a box of 300 H&H Match ammo would not be common.

Can you or Ron date that box? I have a 1962 Shooter’s Bible that still shows them being made by both R and W.


I’ll take a shot at dating the box; let’s see how my guestimate compares with Ron’s. This box style with the white ‘KLEANBORE’ and the Remington and Dupont logos dates from about 1938 to about 1962. The product coding changed in the late 1940s (around 1946?) to a four digit code consisting of just numbers, so the 7730 on this box should indicate that it was made between the late 1940s and the early 1960s. Based on your statement that popularity of the .300 H&H match cartridge died out around 1956, then it is most likely that this box was made between 1946 and 1956.

Guy–You ALMOST got a Gold Star for your analysis, but I will have to dock you a few points for some “Fuzzy” parts. The 4-digit Index Numbers started in1946 with the resumption of civilian production after WW-II, not “late 1940s (around 1946?)”. The box style shown was used from 1946 to 1960, not “late 1940s and the early 1960s.”.
The “Remington and DuPont logos dates from about 1938 to about 1962” should be 1934 and 1960. The 7730 load was listed from 1938 as R467 to 1966 as 7730.

So you were close, just not definitive enough for the Gold Star.

An interesting point concerning Remingtons listing. It was listed as “.300 Magnum Match (Rimless)” and was headstamped “REM-UMC .300 MAGNUM”. No mention of H&H and to add more insult to H&H Remington says “Must not be used in foreign made hunting rifles” (due to being loaded to higher pressures).

Ron - Man you’re a tough grader.;)

I believe that all of the REM-UMC cartridges were headstamped REM-UMC 300 MAGNUM. The first AMU Improved cartridges used brass made by Remington with an altered bunter and so they are headstamped REM-UMC 300.


Ray–I wasn’t trying to be hard on Guy, just attempting to keep things accurate.

Speaking of accurate, I think you are correct about all Remington .300 H&H Magnum being headstamped just “.300 MAGNUM”. I checked all of mine and all my PETERS, REM-UMC and R-P all use just “300 MAGNUM”. However, in the catalogs, starting with 1946, they did change the name to .300 Holland and Holland Magnum.

Ray Maketa wrote: [quote]Can you or Ron date that box?[/quote]

It is tough sticking your neck out there for Ron to take a chop at, but I guess I had no choice - you had issued the challenge, and Ron wasn’t going to answer without giving me ample opportunity to trip myself up. But its worth the humiliation, as it seems to be the only way we have to get the information out of Ron, even if only in drips and drabs, until he gets something into print on REM-UMC. I suspect most of us added those little tidbits of information to our files.

I expect you to take the next one, Ray; I’ll see if I can’t do as good a job as you did asking a seemingly innocent question.


I have been asking those innocent questions about REM-UMC and have been copying and filing his answers. When his book finally does come out I won’t have to buy one. The same with Chris P. Why buy his book when we can get all the answers right here.

So far, Ron and Chris have not caught on to our scheme. Do they REALLY think we are THAT ignorant???