Home Forums Hunting & Shooting Ask The Gunwriters 7x64 or 8x57

gerrygoat,

I dunno if a muzzle brake might be considered (or even be legal), but it might help. I am not crazy about them myself, but my wife started suffering from recoil headaches s few years ago. Before then she had no problem using a light .30-06 with stout 180-grain handloads, but that definitely changed.

Since then we have experimented enough with both rifles and shotgun to know what her limits are--around 100-grain bullets in a light .243 Winchester or .257 Roberts, or loads of similar recoil in a light 28-gauge double or heavier semiauto. To tell the truth, she isn't all that handicapped with those limits, having taken cow elk and Canada geese handily since.

But Eileen also has a very nice .308 Winchester on a Kimber 84 action with a custom-fit fancy walnut stock that weighs only 6-3/4 pounds with a 3.5-10x40 Leupold. We experimented with various lighter loads but didn't find a satisfactory solution, for various reasons. She wanted to keep using the rifle, because it fits her so well, and she's found a little more punch helpful on some animals. And aside from the possibility of a really big bull elk, we have plenty of grizzlies around here these days that might get aggressive while hunting other stuff.

So she is getting the .308 fitted with a muzzle brake. She'll hunt with electronic muffs so she can hear, but won't have to worry about headaches. We considered a suppressor (now legal in Montana for big game) but she doesn't want to pack that much more weight, and likes the balance of the rifle just the way it is. A thin brake won't change that.

Not saying a braked .308 (or whatever) is the solution for everybody, but over the past few years I've

Thanks to all those who responded, even the ones that didn't read the original post lol.

John, a muzzle brake is legal here but I really don't want to go there unless it is absolutely necessary as in the case with your wife. I have read good things about the Airtech Limbsaver pads and would go that route first.

We did some shooting this afternoon in preparation for a deer hunting trip starting Thursday and she did well again with her 6.5x55 with some full power 120 and 140 gr loads so I'm sure she can handle something a little heavier for certain hunts.

I know you have done some extensive bullet testing is there really much difference between the different bullets I mentioned? (Partitions in 7mm 160 and 175's, 308 180's and 8mm 200's) I would guess there isn't much difference.

Ironically we also have a 28 gauge for her as well and she handles it well, good to hear the non toxic loads do well on geese.

There may be a major difference in the Partitions you list, but I'd hate to call it.

I don't know about anyone else, but this has put an itch inside my brain that won't go away...

270 Winchesters are generally not 'twisted' for the long heavy bullets so accuracy may suffer. Also, cartridges based on the '06 cases require ~25% more powder than those based on the 308 case, powder charge weighs heavily in the recoil formula.
So, a 7mm-08 which is a modern day equivalent to the 7x57, may be worth a look.
Also, a clamp on brake may be worth it on any caliber. I have one on one of my Tikkas and it performs very well, great recoil reduction, ability to neutralize muzzle torque along with Tikka accuracy puts this rifle into 1"@ 109yds/100m for 10 shots. here's a link to the one I have http://www.hss.net.au/index.php?cPath=118 it showed up in ~10 days. The Tikka is metric and so are these so there will be a size that suits.
I haven't noticed any significant increase in noise.

That article was in Sports Afield. A much better publication than F&S...

I have a old 98 military rifle and have come to enjoy the 8x57. The factory loads are pretty mild but plenty for general hunting of deer sized game. Then if you choose you can reload it to levels that are on par with the 308 and 30-06. Of course you can load either of those rounds down just as easily.

I hope you are able to pick one Gerry. I think the old 8x57 is calling your name though. The data appears to be pretty mild and I know it can be pumped up pretty decently as well. An 8x57 in a modern rifle would be cool..

Yeah, My bad. Typical old geezer's brain fart. Still a good article though.
Paul B.

I have NOT read any replies so here goes.

From your list -

1. 7X64--(280 Rem) I know, not exact.

2. 06

3. 8X57 ?? or last.

Gerry, I would find her a Tikka 338 Federal, have your pad installed and let her shoot 180's at 2800 or 200's at 2700. I'm not a woman but that gun really doesn't kick that much w/the Limbsaver. Perfect for mule deer, elk, moose and meets the Bison requirements. Even loaded down to 2500-2550fps either of the 180, 200 or 210 partition would be perfect medicine against bears. I'd stick w/a straight 200gr bullet across the board myself cause I think that's the best bullet for the 338F. Hornady, Speer, Fusion, but Nosler's 200gr BT w/the beefed up jacket would for me be just about perfect. If you want to stick w/the partition find a good load w/the 210gr at 2500fps and she'd be good to go and as a husband I would feel safe w/that load in my wife's arms. powdr

If you want to keep recoil down one possibility is a .308 loaded with 165/168 TTSX. You would get plenty of penetration at a lower level of recoil. You could always load 180 grain bullets if you wanted to hunt bison.

Gerry,

im not a gunwriter nor a BC resident but i will add my two cents from the north ...


except the legal thing for bison i do not think there is that much difference between the 7x64 and the 6.5x55.

they northern explorers used a lot the 6.5x55 with 160 gr rn.

i think with the conditions explained i will go with the 8x57js and maybe starting low load to help your wife shooting it before getting the better load.

a PAST recoil shield can help her on that too.

Did you ever think about a 9.3x62 with load development?

all the best.

Phil

Love the Brenekee.
Ballistic twin of the 280 handloaded.
Try the SB SPCE.