In my June 1957 Outdoor Life, JOC, in his SHOOTING Column writes about the 7x57. Back then he said public and industry pronounced it dead 20 years earlier. But, according to JOC, it keeps sitting up taking nourishment. Even though the ammo was limited and Winchester stopped making it for their Model 70, it will not give up. JOC traces its military history and points out that it was the 7x57 that prompted the US Military to scrap the 30-40Krag and develop the 30-06. He talks of Karamojo Bell "braining" over 1000 elephants with the 175gr. solid. Oddly enough in 1957, the only US made load was a 175gr at about 2490fps. The 139gr load was dropped before WWII. However, Dominion still imported a 139gr load from Canada. JOC was chumming around with the Prince and Princess of Iran. They were worldwide hunters with unlimited funds. JOC had Winchester build a 7x57 for the Princess and in a 1953 African safari, they both used it on 80 head of game.
They used the Remington 175gr load and the Dominion 139gr load. The Prince used it exclusively for his worlwide sheep hunts until JOC gave him a custom 270. JOC wrote quite a bit about handloading for the 7x57. His favorite load was the 160gr Nosler bullet (doesn't say Partition or Solid Base) using either 49gr of No. 4350 or 51gr. of No 4831 (doesn't say IMR or H) but I think it was only IMR back then. He cautions the handloader by saying that Remington brass was thicker than WW brass. Anyway, I thought it was interesting to get a perspective on the 7x57 from "270Jack" that was written 49 years ago!

He wrote a chapter about the 7x57 in one of his rifle books as well. If I recall, the chapter is called "Big Punch in Little Case." The chapter mentions some of the history of the round that you have referred to and discusses various loads and applications for the cartridge. He appears to have thought quite highly of it as a very effective cartridge that is easy to shoot well.

The magazine article and book chapter are one and the same. Jack's book THE HUNTING RIFLE was mostly a collection of previously published OUTDOOR LIFE pieces.

Actually the 4831 mentioned was Hodgdon, specifically the surplus powder so designated. IMR's 4831 didn't appeared until the early 1970's, I believe.

O'Connor liked the 7x57 so much that late in life he used it more than the .270, mostly because it kicked less.

MD

Harvey Donaldson was a big 7x57 fan too. I think that his favorite bullet was a 154 grain Hornady RN.

Jeff

I attended the University of Idaho, about 20 miles north of Jack's home in Lewiston. Shortly after he died, I was in a little sporting goods store there, and they had some odds and ends that they'd picked up from his estate. They even had quite a bit of his handloaded ammo. I had a 7 x 57 at the time, so I bought a couple of boxes, and also a box or two of his .270 loads. One box of 7 x 57, Winchester brass I believe, had the name "Bradford" written on it. Jack had a son named Bradford. I still have some of that ammo. I wish I had been able to buy one of his rifles. I believe they may have bought some of his guns as well. Many of his trophies were donated to the University of Idaho, and were on display in the Biological Sciences building. It's been many years since I've been there, but I assume they still have that collection. It was quite impressive.

MD - "O'Connor liked the 7x57 so much that late in life he used it more than the .270, mostly because it kicked less."
___________________________________________________

In JOC's book, The Complete Book of Rifles and Shotguns," Harper & Row, 1961, he recommends the 7x57 Mauser for Grizzly bears and moose, too.

Also says the best all around calibers for U.S., are .30-06, .280 Rem., .270 Win. 7x57 Mauser, and .308 Win.

I have several of his books, plus the various "Gun Digests" with his articles, and over and above all, JOC stressed bullet placement.

Sounds like a plan to me.

L.W.

Hard to argue with that line of thinking.

When I first moved to Coeur d'Alene, I drove to Moscow just to see Jack's collection. What a huge disappointment. Mounted heads on walls that said "African Lion" Well duh ! In my opinion little had been done other than just putting the heads up and a name under the head. IIRC, there were a handful of pictures but not nearly what should have been displayed. I would have liked to see when, where, who, with what, etc. about the mounts. Pictures can do that without a lot of narrative.

Before it closed, Intermountain Sports in Merridian, ID, had a display of Elmer Keith's trophies. Lots of pictures and a general good display. Again, background was missing on the mounts but at least the photo's filled in for some of the questions about who, with what, and where.

Say Tripledeuce, do us a favor and chronograph some of that 7x57 ammo, please. <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/smile.gif" alt="" />

Just reading "Hunting Big Game in NA" where JOC states he used the /06 more than anything else, and thought it the best round for North America, with the 270 second.

Interesting that he got such a reputation for pimping the 270...I think 90% of it was to piss off Keith.

What an excellent idea. I wold love to know the MV of O'Connor's handloads for both the 7x57 and the 270 W.

Please do it and let us know Tripledeuce !

I believe that this surplus powder was marketed as "4350 Data" powder. It was later called 4831. O'Connor's The Rifle Book , Second Ed., 1964, pg. 78, mentions DuPont 4350 thusly: ".., and of the powders now in use DuPont No. 4350 is the slowest burning of all."

Well boys, don't get your powders mixed up!
Wasn't the stuff that Bruce Hodgdon sold as H4831 really 20mm canon powder called 4350Data Powder? I mean talk about ruining your day - not to mention the rifle!

Yes, Jack did like the 7X57. Here is some of his writing about it found in the 1974 Gun Digest. It is some of my favorite writings of his. <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/smile.gif" alt="" />

It was because of JOC's writing that when I decided to make my wife a rifle, I chose to chamber it in 7x57. I figured if it was good enough for Elenor OConnor, it was good enough for my wife. While I have several 7x57s and have enjoyed them, I've come to regret the choice for my wife. Had to do over again, there would be no second thoughts... it'd be a .308 Win. hands down. The 7x57 wouldn't even get a second thought.

There's been a whole lotta 'stuff' I accepted from JOC when I was young that I have since found was pure and simply wrong. He was great writer... I think less of him than that regarding his "gun knowledge".

Paul

It is because of Jack O'Connor that I bought my 7x57s, including my last one. Have used the caliber on whitetail, mule deer, antelope, elk, coyote, wild hog, javelina, even a wild turkey and have nothing but praise for the caliber. It's the Energizer Bunny of the shooting world, it just keeps going, going and going! Tom Purdom <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/cool.gif" alt="" />

I've always liked the 7x57, and have owned a bunch of military clunkers in the past. I've also read JOCs comments on the cartridge. Yup, I got a Ruger 7x57 for my wife too.

If JOC preferred the 7x57 with a 160 grain, over his 270, 130 grain, I'm surprised that he even noticed the difference in recoil.

The advantage of the 7x57 over the 270, if there is one, would be the 175 grain high SD bullet at a moderate velocity. Isn't that what built the 7x57s reputation for terminal performance in the first place? Maybe I'm wrong. ???
Smitty of the North

.........and why would that be? <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/laugh.gif" alt="" />

Ted

"Say Tripledeuce, do us a favor and chronograph some of that 7x57 ammo, please."

It will be awhile before I can do that. I don't have a 7 x 57 any longer, and I'm also deployed to Southwest Asia. I'm not really sure what bullet those loads have in them. It seemed like Jack was not scrupulous about writing his load on the box. One of the boxes had kind of a mix and match of different bullets. Some looked like old-style Nosler Partitions with a groove in them, and some looked like Speers. I think I got to the store after his stuff had been somewhat picked over, and I unfortunately didn't get the best of what they undoubtedly had. I just bought it for the novelty of having been loaded by O'Connor himself, though I could never prove it and neither could the store I bought it from. I have no reason to believe it wasn't his stuff though.

Smitty--

Jck O'Connor was one of the first gun writers to realize the advantages of the Nosler Partition, while many of the rest of the boys were still wallowing around shooting standard bullets. On his later safaris he often used the 140 Partition in the 7x57, because it penetrated plenty on plains game. So there was no need for the 175.

Too many of still theorize about the great advantage the 7mm's have over the .270 due the "wider bullet selection." This one reason some give for choosing a .280 over the .270. Well, gee, but I have run into a lot of .280 users over the years, and only one loaded 175's--and those were Sierras, which on average would penetrate no more than 140 Partitions. Most .280 fans use 140-150 grain bullets--pretty much standard in the .270 these days.

I have pretty much decided that if you can't kill it with one of today's modern 150-grain 7mm's in a 7x57, then you need more cartridge, not more bullet weight.

MD

Gitano--

Please explain the big advantages of the .308 over the 7x57. I have used both cartridges a lot and have a hard time seeing any difference in field results, recoil, etc.

I can appreciate that the .308 has more factory loads available, at somewhat higher velocities. Also that it is generally slightly more accurate, which I believe is mostly due to more consistent throat dimensions. We could also argue that it fits in a short action, saving us maybe a 1/4 of a pound.

But on big game they work the same.

MD

I've read Jack's article and books since the 50's. It was his writings that got me to buy one of the first 7X57's that Ruger made, hollow bolt knob and all. After using a borrowed 30'06 for my first deer, a cheap Marlin .35 Remington for my second and having gone through two 7 mm Remington Magnums for my next bucks, the 7X57 Ruger was quite a surprise. I found I could shoot that rifle better. Not just off the bench or on a "good day." I could consistantly shoot it better than any of the others. Some of it was a better trigger. Some of it was less recoil. Some of it was simply a nicely balanced rifle with a simple 4X scope.
I cuckled a good deal when Jack wrote of his observations during an african hunt. There were three 7mm rifles in their party. A 7X57, with Nolser Partition handloads. A .280 and a 7mm Remington Magnum were the other two. Again with good ammo. He wrote that he couldn't see any difference in how well any of them killed various african antelope. He and his pals seem to think that the critters shot with the 7X57 may have taken one or two more steps than the 7X57 vs. the other two. He concluded that his comments may have caused a magnum fiend to have a stroke, but that he said is what observed.
I no longer own that 7X57. The action from that rifle is the basis for my custom .280. Since experience has taught me that it is not necessary to get more velocity than the 7X57 to get the job done, I don't worry about getting the last 100 fps from that round. And, sure enough, that rifle does the job. It's a little heavy, 8.5 lbs., but, unlike my other two custom/customized rifles, it doesn't need any modifications done to it to make me happy. E

There was a Guns&Ammo special edition put out a year after JOC left us exclusively on his work. It covered a good range of his writing mainly reporting on a hunt, the rifle used and what happened.

Quite a good read if you can find a copy.

AGW

Lolo's Sporting Goods was the gun shop that sold some of Jack's "stuff'. Mostly ammo and reloading supplys. A couple of gun were also sold at the store, all high dollar/built by big name gunmakers--except one! I still kick myself for passing it up. A 250/3000 FN mauser with a 6X Bear Cub scope, with a rollover check piece stock. Sold for $450. I've seen pictures of it in some of 1954-55 Outdoor Life articals. Pedro

About 28 yrs ago a guy I worked with offered me a FN commercial barreled action in the white with a 6x Weaver mounted and a block of walnut that the action had been inlet into. It was in 7x57. I took it to the range and at 100 yds it shot a dime size group with his handloads. For $75 I couldnt get the money out of my wallet fast enoiugh. It seems his father had built the rifle. His father was a gun constructor at FN and escaped one hop before the nazi's arrived. In the states after the war he took a trip back to Denmark and went to visit the old FN plant where he had worked. He brought back ten actions. He gave a gunsmith 8 of them in payment for barreling two of them with 7x57 barrels, 18 1/2 long. Seems that was the preference for mountain hunting over there. He finished one for himslef with gold and silver inlays on the reciever. He started the next one for his son but died before he finished it. Large gold rose with silver leaves and tendrils on the receiver. This was the one my co-worker offered me. I finished it and it has been my hunting rifle since then. Do I like the 7x57? oh yeah, with 154 gr bullets and IMR 4895 or BLC-2 powder it is a tack driver. Oh, and by the way, the son-Eherling Hagfeldt was with Pattons 3rd army at the end of the war and was his interpretor when Patton sent the cavalry into Checoslovakia to rescue the Lipizaner horses from the Russians. Ehrl spoke fluent German.

ROLLY - "Before it closed, Intermountain Sports in Merridian, ID, had a display of Elmer Keith's trophies. Lots of pictures and a general good display. Again, background was missing on the mounts but at least the photo's filled in for some of the questions about who, with what, and where. "
___________________________________________________

Rolly, I'm acquainted with Gerry Sweet, who was co-owner of Intermountain Sports in Meridian. After they closed (Damn! I hated to see that great sporting goods store close!), I asked Gerry what happened to that fine collection of Elmer Keith's game heads, pictures, etc.?

He told me that they had been on loan from Elmer's son, so they took them back when Intermountain went belly up. Gerry didn't know what the Keiths did with them afterward.

I was in Intermountain many, many times, and always went over to the long wall and stared at those game heads and pictures. The word "envy," would not be adequate to my feelings.

FWIW.

L.W.

And



I think it first needs to be said that I have no intention of engaging in an arguement about the relative virtues of the 7x57 vs the .308 Win. There's no "discussion" there... I won't convince you, and you won't convince me. Second, I've no interest in challenging or joining a praise-fest of JOC. He's already been sainted, and who am I to suggest he isn't one. (It's a rhetorical question if course... <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/grin.gif" alt="" />)

That said, I'll offer the first-hand experiences I've had with both carridges. If you don't agree... well, that's what horse races are made of. <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/smile.gif" alt="" />

Above, Mule Deer make's my case in several areas of comparison, so without belaboring those points, I'll go straight to big game "performance" about which Mule Deer asserts "they work the same".

As I said in my initial post, enamored with JOC as a youth, when it came time to make a rifle for my wife, I chose the the cartridge OConnor chose for his wife, the 7x57 Mauser. I waffled back and forth a bit between the .308 Win. and 7x57, but in the end OConnor's influence won out, so she got a custom 7x57 built on a Ruger M77 action. She, armed with the 7x57 and me with a variety of 7mms, wandered the alpine tundra and plains of Montana after caribou, pronghorns and mule deer. Over the course of about 15 years, I got to see quite a few kills made with the 7x57.

It is probably appropriate here to mention another perspective of mine. Doing so will shed a little more light on my attitude about "performance". It will also provide further proof that my heresy is not limited simply to failure to worship OConnor and the 7x57 (or even -gasp, dare I say it - the .270 Win.) but extends far beyond that to reject even more sacred mythologies. (Heresy alert! All you high SD folks better have a seat.) Specifically, except for calibers larger than .40, I prefer light-for-caliber bullets. That preference is based on almost 5 decades of hunting in Alaska, supposedly where"big", "manly", bullets are called for more often than not. For example, I shoot ONLY the Speer 115 grain HP in every form of 7mm I own EXCEPT the 7x57. There are two reasons: first, it is the most precise bullet from those rifles, and second, it flies like a laser, and hits like a sledge hammer. (The 7x57 case however, simply can't drive that bullet to velocities that result in the type of kills I prefer, except at ranges too close for most caribou shots - about 100 yds.) Sectional Density was a relevant bullet characteristic only until we started to have available to the average hunter, choronographs and an understnding of the physics of external ballistics. Today, to put it as nicely as I can, SD is a distraction and really nothing more than a ballistic paper tiger. If you're serious about discussing a bullet's potential for penetration, then the most reliable and appropriate measurement is momentum. (I would be happy discuss this specific point at some length, but I've digressed far enough already.)

In side-by-side kills on caribou, numbering well in excess of 20, I have NEVER seen the 7x57 put one down in it's tracks. NEVER. NOT ONCE. At the same time, while the .308 Win has not accomplished "bang-flops" EVERY time, it has for more than half of them. Let me ralate a specific instance in which the 7x57 performed what would be called "perfectly" by the heavy-for-caliber/high SD crowd.

We had completed a long and exciting stalk on two caribou bulls, and they had no clue to our presence. I positioned my wife to take the closest one but that position didn't allow me to see "my" bull clearly. As a consequence, I had to move to a slightly different spot. From my shooting position, I could see neither my wife or her bull. I told her to shoot when she was ready, and I would follow her shot. My bull was 211 paces away, hers about 100. At her shot and after shooting mine, I leapt to my feet. I saw her caribou high-tailing it straight away from us. Every step that caribou took, was two I would have to carry it. My wife, a novice hunter, wasn't certain she had hit the bull, AND she couldn't reacquire it in her 'scope. I watched that bull run approximately 100 yds, wanting to give my wife every opportunity to shoot it again before I shot it. (Chivalry was paramount, but issues about "food" were a VERY close second. This was a meat hunt, and dinner was running away. <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/smile.gif" alt="" /> ) Just as I was about to shoot her bull, he started to slow down, and shortly, he stopped. When he did, he had that staddle-legged stance that most experienced hunters recognize as "dead on their feet". As I looked at him closely through my 'scope, I could see "steam" coming out of both his sides. He was indeed "dead on his feet". In a moment, he rolled.

When we got to him, I saw that Susan had made a textbook, broadside shot. The 139 Hornady had gone right behind the shoulder on the right side, trashed both lungs, and exited out the left side, again behind the shoulder. I seriously doubt we "lost" an ounce of meat from that bull. My bull was a different matter. He had been quartering toward me with his head down when I shot. The point of his shoulder was a perfect aimpoint, and the 7mm 115 Speer HP in front of the necked-down 300 Weatherby case, hit precisely where I aimed. At a stepped off 211 paces, the bull folded like a wet rag. I suspect he was unconscious before he hit the ground. HOWEVER, that bullet, hitting exacty where I aimed, did its job well. When we took my bull apart, I couldn't find a piece of bone bigger than my thumbnail within 6" of the point of impact - the shoulder joint. We lost about two pounds of meat from that bull.

"Wait a minute!" you say. "What's that got to do with a comparison to the .308 Win?" Patience is a virtue. <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/smile.gif" alt="" /> I relate the story to present an example of the "performance" of the 7x57 that illustrates why I don't like it, not to suggest anything about the relative performance of the .308 Win. That comes next. <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/smile.gif" alt="" /> (Also, I have to admit, I try not to pass up the slightest opportunity to tell a hunting story. <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/laugh.gif" alt="" />)

The above after-the-shot behaviour of that caribou bull exemplifies the after-the-shot behaviour of almost every caribou I have ever seen shot with the 7x57. They ALWAYS run away SOME distance. Do they also always die? Absolutely. "So", you say. "What's the big deal? Dead is dead." Very true. But you know as well as I do that "dead is dead" is not the point on several levels. (A minor point is that the 7x57 is consistently extolled as "almost magic" in its "lethality". I don't consider animals consistently running around after being shot as conclusive evidence that a particular cartridge's terminal performance is "almost magic".) But there is really a much more relevant point, and it's unrelated to whether a particular cartridge is "sanctified" or not. Regardles of the number of my wife's kills, she was and still is, a "novice" hunter. This is a non-trivial point UNRELATED to her shooting skills, which are excellent. Instead it is an issue of the Hunting experience. I could go on considerably (as you may now realize) about the the internal, external and terminal ballistic performance in the above example, but that's really just fodder for internet and campfire "discussions". What was important about the above example was what my wife felt about the experience, and what role the 7x57 played in shaping that experience.

As we watched the caribou run away, first, my wife doubted her shot. Then, because she was inexperienced, she couldn't re-acquire the bull quickly in her 'scope. More stress. The competitor in her didn't want the outcome to be that I had to shoot her caribou "for her" because she either missed or couldn't "get back on it" in time. Finally, maybe it was only wounded and getting away! None of the above thoughts and emotions are present when an animal falls within a body length or so. And there's my 'rub' with the 7x57 Mauser.

Is the 7x57 an excellent cartridge? You betcha. Is it "up to the task" for caribou and a whole host of other big game? You betcha. Is it the better choice for a novice hunter, with excellent shooting skills, than the .308 Win?

No.

And multiple "bang-flops" from the .308 Win. on caribou , mule deer and pronghorn antelope (using a 130 grain HP <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/smile.gif" alt="" /> ) are "proof" enough for me to make that assertion.

Paul

Paul,

Excellent stories. However on an "apples to apples" basis ANYTHING punched through both lungs without touching bone or CNS will run around for a while. It is the nature of the shot.

If you hit bone and cause enough assorted trauma from fragmentation, things will B-F much more often. The trade off is you may or may not have fragged more meat. As with many things around the campfire the issue is where something was shot and with what bullet and NOT with the brass case and quantity of powder that pushed said bullet.

"Then again, I could be wrong" ... Dennis Miller

Maybe it�s just the way that I read your post, but it seems to have a bit of an unnecessary rude and disrespectful/sarcastic tone to it. Nobody challenged you to prove that the 308 was a better choice than the 7x57, they just asked why you felt that it was. And what did anybody do to deserve the "Hugs and kisses" crap?

Jeff

Sorry you're offended Jeff. Certainly wasn't my intent. In my opinion, "discussing" the pros and cons of 'favorite' anything requires a certain amount of skin-thickening by the participants.

With respect to "rude" "disrespectful" and "sarcastic"...

Rude - ain't there... Its 'existence' lies indeed in the way you read it.

Disrespectful - Hmmm. Am I supposed to genuflect to someone (other than OConnor)? Is there a hand with a ring I'm supposed to kiss? If so, please let me know the specifics, so that in the future I can exhibit the proper "respect".

Sarcastic - guilty as charged. <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/smile.gif" alt="" /> This often comes out in me when I see shameless fawning. (Now you see my 'trouble' with "disrepectful". <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/smile.gif" alt="" /> ) Sorry, can't help it. It's gotten me into trouble before... but that doesn't mean it wasn't appropriate. <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/wink.gif" alt="" />

Now about the "hugs and kisses". Your response helps me make a good point. If people don't like what you say (write), there's nothing you can say, no matter how nice, that won't be taken offensively. Would you prefer the following instead?


Here's mud in your eye,
Paul

"Hugs and kisses" signatures edited out of all of my posts at 24-hour Campfire.

I've been around for a while and think that the tone of civility, collegiality, courtesy, and mutual respect of this site needs a little work, so I elected myself as the civility police.

I grew up reading JO'C and have always had a lot of respect for his body of work. He wasn't perfect, nobody is, but he was generally acknowledged as the best of an outstand crop of post-WW2 writers. He probably wasn't the best at any particular aspect of shooting, but he was a man for all seasons. Kind of like Barsness, probably not the best at any particular aspect of shooting, but he is well rounded and appears to do his research before he offers an opinion.

BTW, I�ve been shooting the 7x57 since 1970 because JO'C's chapter in The Hunting Rifle spoke to me. Based on my experience in the field with both the 7x57 and 308, I can't see that there is $0.05 difference between the 2 when all other factors are equal. Most any projectile, from most any firearms, that penetrates into the pleural cavity with a modicum of speed will produce clean kills. I can even do it with 60 grain Partitions for a 22-250, or a 95 grain SBT from a 243 WSSM, or a __ grain ______ from a _____, or a .........

Jeff

"Just for the record", you're the second to be offended by my "hugs and kisses". I'm new here at 24-hour Campfire, and I didn't realize there was some 'special', offensive meaning to "hugs and kisses". My apologies to all offended, and it won't happen again.

Paul

Paul,

Interesting post.

I on the other hand have seen not only little barren ground caribou, like those you hunted in Alaska, go down instantly on the spot with a single hit from a 7X57, but have also seen the same on our big Mountain Caribou bulls, which are the size of mature elk. <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/shocked.gif" alt="" />

I guess we have just been lucky! <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/grin.gif" alt="" />

Ted

You write well and appear to be a literate person, so I'm sure that you knew exactly what tone "hugs and kisses" would convey. I perceive it to be a written sneer and don't think that the people asking you to expand on your position, asked in a polite tone BTW, were due a sneer. Like I tell my Daughter, a little kindness and respect costs you nothing, but will earn you meaningful dividends.

Jeff

NOOOOOooooooooo . . . . . .

Say it isn't so . . . . . . .

How will I spend the Winter if I can't argue that the 308 is better than the 7-08/7x57?

Oh well, I guess I can tie flies . . . . .

Did you know that a Wolly Worm is better than . . . . . <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/grin.gif" alt="" />

BMT

Not a Wooly Worm! Don't you know that a Hornberg will out fish any wooly worm that was ever tied?

Jeff

<img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/grin.gif" alt="" /> <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/grin.gif" alt="" /> <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/grin.gif" alt="" />

BMT

Compared to many or even most of you who post here my actual hunting experience is minimal, but my reading, research and historical expertise is, let me blow my own horn, frankly, quite high. Smokess ammo with jacketed bullets has been around now for more than a century and the general experience has been that the longer the bullet, the deeper it digs.

True, but now we have X bullets, which go all the way through 98% of the time, almost, but not quite, regardless of bullet lenght.

BMT

And.....there are those of us who have used .270's 7x57's, 6.5x55's for many years....and many kills.....ans SOME of us.....have even taken a lucky Elk with a .243.........(my brother and I did that on the same day in Wyoming about 20 years ago).....so....I say....choose you weapon....and enjoy the sport!!

MD:
Thank You for you comments. I've loaded 145 grain Speer SPs for my Wifey's 7x57. This is for Caribou hunting, but frankly, I wonder if that's the best choice, especially should we run into a BAR.
Smitty of the North

gitano:
Your conclusions are based on insufficient data, and perhaps a need to toot your own horn.
Smitty of the North

John,

The advantage I see the .308 having over the 7mm Mauser is this: in the 7mm Mauser I guess that 140-150 grain bullets are commonly use. When compare to the .308Win using 180 grain bullets, the advantages I see are: about 20% great bullet weight/(mass?), and the .30cal having a greater frontal area, about ~18/19% over the 7mm calibers. This might not be that big a difference with deer, but shouldn't it provide a little better margin of error, given similar bullet construction, on larger game??? Just my thoughts said aloud, so I could be wrong and I'm open to correction.

I agree that the difference between the 7mm bullets and .270 caliber bullets is insignificant. About 5% greater frontal area and 5% great bullet weight....not that significant of a difference in my opinion.

I agree that bullet construction, especially in the premium bullets, helps the sub 30cal bullets in game larger than deer. But the 30 cal bullets get the same help from premiums bullets as well. Just some rambling thoughts.


Leo

Jack's wife as far as I can tell from my notes actually owned and shot a 257 roberts more than the 7x57. When I get home tonight I would be more than happy to check this for everyone. Not a lot of difference as this is simply a necked down 7x57 but I thought it was worth noting as some other posters had noted that they purchased 7x57's for their wives because Jack did the same. Both are great rounds and I am in the process of building a 7x57 for my wife as we speak. They are truly a dream to shoot.

James

I've found the thread interesting 'cause I'm looking to buy, and have been leaning towards a .308... I'm also trying to educate myself about comparable cartridges (including 7x57)

Gitano... you think the .308 has better knock down power than the 7x57 because of your experience with your wife's 7x57 compared to other calibers (including .308) on caribou. Fair enough.

Just wondering whether it was always your wife who was shouldering the 7x57?

I don't mean to imply that your wife is a poor shot or anything like that. Maybe because she's less experienced than you, she might be more inclined to take the classic double lung/heart shot like you described in your story. G???_Esq said what I was thinking, there was a big difference in bullet placement for the 2 shots you described... I'm not that experienced of a hunter either. The handful of deer I've shot (so far) have all been heart or double lung shots... Exactly where I intended it to go, 2 holes and no wasted meat. Not one has been a bang flop. They've travelled between 15 and 75 yards before expiring (no second shots needed). I haven't shot a deer with either .308 or 7x57 so I don't know if the effects would've been more immediate with another cartridge (but I doubt it). The deer that I've seen that have gone flop (other hunters) always have involved a shoulder or something other than just through the boiler room. So far, that's the common feature, not the caliber.

From the "bang flop" thread it seemed that some shooters either purposely go through the shoulder (a bit in front of where I've been shootin' them) or a bit higher on the broadside shot (closer to spine) to a get more immediate response. Anyway, I wonder whether the bullet placement preferred by the shooter has something to do with your observations (?). Or maybe like in the story... she consistently took the animals that were broadside (="easier" ?) , and you took the tougher quartering shots (more likely involving a shoulder) ?

You think it could be a factor?

I wonder if anybody could really tell any substantial difference at all between the cartridges discussed. They are all very similar.

I believe it was Mule Deer that wrote here at the campfire at one time and this is not a quote.



It is difficult at times to type to please the masses.

Personally I enjoyed reading your reply and the additional cup of coffee.

I too grew up reading the old writers. I enjoyed them all for different reasons. I felt jack had the best sense of humor and was a Master with words. I also thought he was very practical. I liked Elmer for his brash boldness, but I suspect a lot of that came from "Littleman syndrome". He gave great advice with the big, heavy bullets, especially in timber. But it was so obvious the problems he ran into were bullet 'design" not caliber. Those big bullets either didn't open well at distance or Military Ball ammo in the 30-06 for elk? yet, the .44 magnum handgun was peaches for 600yd mule deer...granted, a finishing shot. Then pushing those older steel jacketed .333 cals too fast and them them splitting/fragmenting. I did get a chuckle how he "almost" shot several guys he called out...it was "so close"...I guess he did, but it sure sounded like BS to me. But I have used several of those medium calibers with good, modern bullets and man oh man, they DO work well on bigger game. The good Col was always a horse's behind, but hey, I have met many guys just like him, growing up in East Texas. I think he was a pretty good shot, never followed the Matches he mentions, etc. He himself hated the 30-06 yet loved the 8mm caliber. He was definitely a very prideful man, but, I still enjoy his writings. They were all just human beings, flawed and yet each saw life from their own perspectives. It makes a good overview, to me. I would have liked to have met them all, but my favorite was always Jack, not because of the .270, but the writings about the 30-06 and the 7x57 just thrilled me more, oh yeah, and the .375 H&h.

No experience with the 7x57 but my primary rifle is chambered in 7mm-08 Rem. From what I've read there isn't much difference between the two, especially for a handloader.

I've never hunted caribou but I hear they're smaller than elk. The two bull elk I've killed with the 7mm-08 went an average of zero yards after the shot. A single 140 gr Partition apiece. My dad used a single 140 gr Accubond on his big 5x5 a couple of years ago, but it went 90 feet before it died.

I have a hard time believing there's a nickel's worth of difference between the .308 and the 7mm-08. It's tough to die faster than DRT and I'm okay with 90 feet.






P

I also grew up with the writings of JOC, Elmer Keith and others. I have rifles chambered in many different calibers but there are more in 7X57 than anything else combined and 284 diameter reigns supreme in the safe with a 280 and a couple of 7MM-08 to keep the 7x57's company. I load all my own ammo and an animal hit in the right spot with either a 140 gr .284 diameter, 130 .270 or 150gr 30 cal isn't going far and after all dead is dead. My 270's and 308 haven't been in the field for a very long time because I always seem drawn to one of the 7x57's.

Feel free to add to the 7x57 references, it would be appreciated.

7X57 Mauser References

2015 - Guns Magazine, May, The Magnificent 7x57 Mauser, John Barsness

2015 - Sporting Shooter Magazine, Handloading the 7x57 Mauser, Nick Harvey

2014 - Rifle Magazine #273, March, Ruger 7x57mm Mauser, Dave Scovill

2014 - Handloader #289, April, 7x57 Mauser Part II, Gil Sengel

2012 - African Expedition, Mauser's 7mm, Koos Barnard

2012 - Rifle Magazine, Fall 2012 Special Edition, 7X57mm Mauser, Dave Scovill

Rifle Magazine, Fall 2012 Special Edition, Contemporaries of the 7x57, Mike Venturino

Rifle Magazine, Fall 2012 Special Edition, The 7mm Comes Full Circle, John Haviland

Rifle Magazine, Fall 2012 Special Edition, Seven Deadly Millimeters, Ron Spomer

Rifle Magazine, Fall 2012 Special Edition, The Legacy of the 7x57, John Barsness

Rifle Magazine, Fall 2012 Special Edition, The Commercial Sevens, Mike Venturino

2010 – New Zealand Guns and Hunting, #119, July/August, The 7X57 Stalking Rifle, Garry Keown

2010 – New Zealand Guns and Hunting, #118, May/June, The 7X57 – the 7mm Mauser and the 275 Rigby,
Garry Keown

2009 – American Rifleman, November, A Perfectly Delightful Cartridge – 7x57 mm Mauser, Jim Wilson

2008 – Handloader, #252, April/May, 7x57 Mauser - The “First” 7mm, John Haviland

2007 – Handloader, #246, April/May, 7x57mm Mauser – The Original 7mm, John Barsness

2004 – Handloader, #231, October/November, 7x57mm Mauser – Accolades from an admirer, Steve Gash

2001 – Handloader, #211, June/July, 7x57mm Mauser – The grand, old 7mm, Stan Trzonec

2000 – Handloader, #206, August/September, 7mm’s – The all-American standard, John Barsness

1999 – American Rifleman, February, 7x57mm Mauser in Modern Rifles, Edward A. Matunas

1995 – Handloader, February 1995, Modern Powders in the 7x57, Ken Waters

1992 – Game Loads And Practical Ballistics For the American Hunter, (see index), Bob Hagel

1991-Guns and Ammo, 1991, 7mm Mauser…Smallbore Blockbuster!, Ross Seyfried

1991 – Rifle, #137, September/October, The 7mm Mauser, Ludwig Olson

1990-American Rifleman, April, 1990, John Rigby & Co., Finn Aagaard

1989 – Nosler Reloading Manual, The 7x57 Mauser, Finn Aagaard

1986-American Rifleman, Nov. 1986, The 7x57 Mauser, Finn Aagaard

1986-Guns, July, 1986, Know Your Hunting Cartridges: The 7mm Mauser, Ed Matunas

1984 – Outdoor Life, March, The 7x57 Mauser, Jim Carmichael

1983 – Handloader, #102, March/April, light hunting bullets in the 7x57mm, Mike Venturino

1982 – Rifle, #83, September/October, Model 70 Featherweight – 7x57mm, Bob Hagel

1982 – Handloader #95, January/February, still popular…7mm Mauser, Ken Waters

1977 – Handloader, #66, March/ April, Super velocities in ONE 7x57, Dennis Hall

1974 – Gun Digest, #28, Forty Years with the Little 7mm, Jack O’Connor

1976 – Guns & Ammo, November 1976, 7x57 Mauser, Les Bowman

1973 – Sports Afield, August, The Welterweight Rifle With The Heavyweight Punch, John Jobson

1973 – Rifle, #27, May/June, Ruger 77 7x57---, Bob Hagel

1970 – The Hunting Rifle, Big Punch in Little Case, Jack O’Connor

1968 – Handloader, # 16, November/December, Cartridge of the Month, 7mm Mauser, (Staff)

1968 – Handloader, September, The 7x57 Mauser, Ken Waters

1967- Gun Digest 1967, The Mysterious Seven, Robert Sherwood

1964 – The Rifle Book, The All-Around Rifle (7x57), Jack O’Connor

1948 – Outdoor Life, October, Arms and Ammunition – The 7mm is great stuff for most big game. Jack O’Connor

Eleanor O'Connor's 7x57



Eleanor's 7x57 and 30-06

In the 308 vs 7x57 debate I’ll agree with MD and say the difference on game is negligible and that can be expanded to a whole bunch of other medium capacity rounds that throw 140- 180 gr projectiles from .26 cal to 32 caliber. Though I currently own a 7x57 and have owned if I recall 3 others and like the cartridgefine I too would go with a 308 if starting from scratch. Why well stipulating performance is similar I have found that the 7x57 usually takes some load tweaking to get them to shoot acceptably. The 308 however is usually a pretty decent shooter out of the box with a variety of loads bothfactory and hand loaded. So cheaper ammo off the shelf, larger selection, less finicky, comparable recoil and performance. What’s not to like?

Maybe I’ll use wooly worms for elk next year.

Eleanor O'Connor's 7x57



Eleanor's 7x57 and 30-06



W O W- H O L Y S M O K E! !

There's a LOT of heritage right there.

Jerry

Beautiful rifles...I really love the Open wrists.

RoundOak
those are great pictures of some sweet rifle craftsmanship. What power and brand is the scope on the 7x57?
Gitian
comparing a double lung 100 yd run off to a bang flop with a full shoulder break down shot using a page of well written dialog still leaves you with an apple vs an orange......
no sarcasm intended.
I enjoyed the story of your wife's 7x57 hunt. Most guys I see looking for the, drop in its tracks with no meat loss, go for a less well thought of shot that works most of the time.
Ill take the shoulder meat loss after seeing the "does not always work" aspect of the other choice a few times.

Amazing how Eleanor and Jack hunted with low powered glass without a Hubble objective, variable power, twisting turrets or rangefinders.

DF

I was thinking the same thing myself.

I would have a hard time finding those fine cross hairs against a dark background. I like old rifles (pre64 M70's) but modern glass is a blessing.

Not amazing at all, they were simply using the best available at the time.

Of course. Those old scopes were pretty good, beat the heck out of irons, even a good peep sight.

But, compared to today’s glass, even Chinese glass, those old scopes don’t fare so well.

We’re spoiled.

DF

The old scopes left a lot to be desired.

Anyone remember what brand of camo the O’Connors plugged?

I always here about Jack O'Connor since I got my first computer back in 2002.

I even met him at the NRA convention when I was a a teenager, (for about 5 minutes) but I have never read much of what he wrote. I do remember a few articles in (I think it was ) Outdoor Life. All the reloading manuals credit him with bringing the 270 Winchester out before the public to the largest degree that any writer did, and I know that he was able to hunt in many places in the world and that he had a passion for sheep hunting.

That's about all I know about him.

Did he ever publish a book? Or books?

What I read posted about him seems Hot vs. Cold. Many people liked his writings, and many hated them. What made him so polarized?

I am a pretty old man, and I have been a "gun-guy" all my life, and yet I know next to nothing about Jack O'Connor, and I feel a bit "outside, looking in" when I read posts about his articles. Having not read much of his writing myself, I can't have a valid opinion.

What do you guys think?

When did lack of information ever affect opinions here on the Fire...?



DF

well.......................that's a good point and hard to argue with.

Not much of what he wrote is really all that controversial (medium cartridges put in the right spot, etc), but I think its due to the fact that from what I've heard he could be distant so people projected onto him the characteristics they wanted him to have. Most of the critics have some variation of him being born with a silver spoon, being well off financially, hunting with custom rifles, and needing a guide. From what I've read his life wasn't always all that easy, he just didn't talk about the bad parts as much as other writers of his period. The guy was born in Arizona less than 20 years after the end of the Apache wars, was from a divorced home when those things just didn't happen without scandal, so I'm sure his childhood wasn't always that easy. And "having money" in early Arizona was probably a lot different than being rich.

Looking at the bio the Jack O'Connor center put together, at times as a kid he lived in a tent, market hunted to feed a sawmill crew, and lied about his age to join the WWI army at 15 before being discharged due to tuberculosis which was often a terminal illness back then. If some other gun writers of his period had those experiences they would've mentioned them in every article. If O'Connor mentioned them at all it was just in passing and even then only partially.


Most of the stuff people fault him for such as guided international hunts and Biesen rifles was from the late 1940s on, when he was over 50. Seems that he worked multiple jobs to that point (teaching, outdoor life, and writing non-hunting stuff for other magazines) and he seems to have figured out early on that the money from publishing books was a lot better than magazine articles (write once and cash a royalty check every time it sells rather than pay check to paycheck of articles). I think he talks about this in his last book of how the monthly articles were his paycheck and the books were for his nest egg. So he was probably doing a lot better financially at that stage of his life than some other writers of the period that are held up as the "common man" but I don't think its necessarily because he was handed anything but rather just good old fashioned smart decisions.

What made him so polarized?

To all other monkeys, their view of the top monkey....

To all but the lead dog, the view is the same.

JOC was lead dog, top monkey. All the others could see was his posterior...

Seriously, he was pretty sure of himself, wrote with authority. So he became a big target. But all that controversy, real and contrived, sold copy, put money in his pocket.

For sure EK and Askins, Jr. did a bunch of the same, selling more and more copy.

I read that JOC became an expert marksman on moving targets, shooting jackrabbits as a youngster.

DF

Jack O’Connor’s writing has stood the test of time and is as realivent today as when he wrote it.

I'd love to know the contour on her 7x57. JOC said that the last one he had put together by Winchester/Biesen had the barrel turned down, I assume to FWT contour. Her's looks like a solid Sporter. That must be the one she fed a steady diet of 160-grain bullets.

Steve, he did write books. I have 8 of them.

Used to work at the Popular Science/Outdoor Life book club mailing center in the late 60's and early '70's. Thousands upon thousands of Jack O'Connor's books were sent out....

Round Oak please tell us more about Elenor's rifles. Your name doesn't happen to be Bradford does it?

Eleanor may have used the 25s more state side but the 7x57 was her safari rifle for plains game and the 30-06 was reserved for Lion, Tiger and other specialized uses. She shot an impressive number of trophies with it and could have filled her own museum. I only have heard of her needing to track anything once in Namibia on a ranch I had the pleasure of hunting. I liked to have a night cap in the same chair Jack did.

True. O'Connor was IMO the best gun writer of his time, and for that matter maybe of all time. Though most people connect him to the 270, he used many other cartridges, and wrote about them as well. I really don't see where he was "controversial," or why was "hated," or anything of the like. He was just good at what he did, and that rubs some people the wrong way.

I thoroughly enjoy reading anything written by JOC. Growing up, I read everything I could get my hands on that concerned hunting and fishing. I dreamed of someday going to exotic locales and spending my days and nights in pursuit of all kinds of animals. Then, along came O'Connor, and I was converted into a gun nut. I have been one ever since and the hunting part became secondary to owning, and shooting, as many kinds of firearms as I could lay my hands on.

Jack, I think, was responsible for more members of my generation taking an interest in guns than any other writer. He wrote in a clear, concise manner and explained things in a way even a 16 year old kid could understand. He, along with Havilah Babcock, Robert Ruark and Jim Kjelgaard sparked,in a dumb country boy, an interest in reading that continues to this day.

Quite a few. There's a list here: https://www.outdoorlife.com/articles/-editors/2007/09/books-jack-oconnor

I have several of them, and have always enjoyed his writing.

Sorry, I am not Bradford and I can not offer information on Eleanor's rifles. I received the pictures from a gun-nut friend of mine who lives in Boise, Idaho.

Some of his books are out of print and bring some pretty hefty prices on the used market. I don’t know who holds the copyright but I wonder if it would be possible to have them reprinted. I used to own The Hunting Rifle but somehow it got away from me. I’d like to read the chapter on the 7x57 again.

Rev,

Chapter 8 "Big Punch in Little Case". 9 pages. I can scan it and send. Let me know.

Wayne

Several times over the years I have picked up used copies of Jack O'Connor's books, "Complete Book of Rifles and Shotguns", and "The Rifle Book".

I have passed these books on to my young nephews and other young people just getting interested in guns and hunting.

https://www.abebooks.com/servlet/SearchResults?sts=t&an=jack+o%27connor&tn=complete+book+of+rifles+and+shotguns&kn=&isbn=

"The Rifle Book" is a little more popular, and a bit harder to find.

I read these books cover to cover as a teenager. I found that whenever I followed the advice given in Jack's books, I never went wrong.
I believe that 90% of what he wrote is still as true today as when he wrote it.

PM coming. Thanks.

I think most of us of a certain age probably did the very same thing. Although he wrote mostly about hunting out west, I still devoured his books while the smell of orange blossoms wafted through the window screens. And although he was primarily known for his rifle articles, I found his shotgun book to very helpful. Some of what he says is dated, but in a lot of ways it's still the same.

RM

I remember he recommended sighting in 3 inches high at 100 yards to maximize point blank range. I did for years until I realized 100 was about the maximum range I could shoot.

I used to sight all my centerfire rifles in that way, and never had a problem. Now days, I sight dead at 200, unless it's a rifle with a BDC scope. Of course, O'Connor was hunting in the West and the mountains where long shots were the rule, rather than the exception. Here where I hunt, a shot can be from pointblank to 400-500 yards, with most being in the 100-200 yard range.

Your experience has been almost a parallel of mine in terms of the impact/influence that JOC had on me when I was growing up. The first CF rifle that I bought with money that I had earned working for a local farmer was a sporterized FN built Model 24/30 Venezuelan Mauser carbine in 7x57. I still have the $37.50 price tag from Welch's Gun Shop in Lebanon, NH, in the log book for that rifle. After damaging it, from firing it with a barrel that I managed to plug with snow, well known Springfield, VT, 'smith Creighton Audette repaired and rebuilt it as a restocked and rebarreled 257 Roberts that is the longest serving of my 11 rifles chambered for that cartridge.

I first embraced that same piece of JOC's advice circa 1967 and continue to use it for the majority of my deer hunting rifle 50 years later. Despite the improvements in technology that we've seen since JOC shared the bit of advice, it has stood the test of time and is as valid today and it was when he first offered it for the vast majority of the average North American deer hunters.

I called him a few years before he pasted away. By way of introduction I said that we had some things in common. First of all I majored in Journalism at the University of Arizona where he once taught Journalism. Secondly I had hunted many of the areas in Southern Arizona where he had. Finally I mentioned that I had read nine of his books. His first comment after all that was "That shows you're not very bright".
In my many years of hunting I have found nothing he wrote about rifles, calibers, hunting methods to be outdated or erroneous. I wish he were still writing for us!

I believe my Dad used the same JOC advice and passed it on to me and I used it until I read a piece in Rifle magazine by our Mule Deer. Now I take my Bourbon three fingers (3") high in a glass and use the following numbers for my hunting rifles

Initial sight in to get on the paper - 35 yards.

"Woods" range - sight in @ 50 yards = 1 inch high @ 100 yards and 1 inch low @ 200 yards.

"Open Country" range - sight in 1 inch high @ 50 yards = 2 - 2.5 inches high @ 100 yards

Just noticed this old listing of mine.
In the interests of integrity, I never heard of Jack or Outdoor Life when this edition was sold under the Guns and Ammo moniker, so he had no influence on me whatsoever.
I tried the .270 myself several times but was already entrenched in the .257 Weatherby and 7x57 at the time so there was no scope for it to succeed in my rack. The other thing is that Oz is saturated in medium deer sized game for the most part, so needs were covered.

These days and 4 .257's later, I have moved more to the 7mm's and 30's but still use a 7x57 as it always shined as a performer.
John

I promise y'all it STILL works today. BobinNH was also a believer. I've been using it longer than I can remember.
No need for 'Turrents' or Knobs inside 400 yds.

Jerry

About a year before Jack died, I was working second shift in a factory. I was friends with one of the inspectors, and he was as big a fan of JOC as I was. One night he told me that he had gotten Jack's phone number and was going to call him, and wanted to know if I'd like to speak to him as well. I laughed and said that JOC would never talk to two no-names like us. He called him anyway, and talked to him for about 20 minutes. My friends father was college professor and baseball coach at the local college, and he said that when he mentioned that to Jack, that O'Connor immediately begin to show interest in the conversation and even told my friend to call again. Sandy said that it was very obvious that JOC was a very educated and worldly man. I always regretted not getting in on that conversation.

I'd always read Jack's piece in OL before anything else. To the point that, when I got out of the Army in '74, I searched until I found a .30/06 Parker-Ballard Mauser with 24" (not 22), featherweight contour barrel, lighter and better balanced than all the Rugchestingtons. Second rifle was a Mannlicher stocked 7x57, which has acquired two siblings along the way. We won't discuss the three .257 Roberts. JOC influence? Well, maybe a bit.

I shared a hunt O'Conner in the early 60s . We had a big Swed as a guide named Bror, out of Orifino. At the time Jack was shooting a .280 and the two of them
would argue a good part of the night away on the merits of different calibers. All I took away from that hunt was O'Conner could cuss like a sailer.

I don't think the two of them ever did agree on what was the best all around round for state side hunting, but I did learn some new words!!

Respects,
Richard

JOC was a sailor in the USN early in life, so I don't doubt that he could cuss up a storm. IIRC, JOC was a hospital corpsman on a pre-WW1 era battleship shortly after WW1 ended.

Tell us more about the man behind the legend!!!!!!

The 139 Hornady had gone right behind the shoulder on the right side,

There is your problem with the 7x57. I've shot a huge amount of game, some of it a lot bigger than caribou. The 139 Hornady doesn't work worth a damn on whitetails when shot behind the shoulder either, they always run 40 or 50 yards and fall in the bottom of the biggest ditch in the area. I couldn't even guess how many head I've shot with one, but it's a lot, I've shot two head twice, one my son gut shot a running hartebeest and I finished it with a .338, the other was a buck, I let it lay down, followed it up about 45 minutes later and shot it again still laying down.

It was JOCs writings that had me try out for myself the "hard/soft" bullet issue. Hornady's were the hardest ( its why they go so fast so easily, like the Partition's "partition" is similar effect) and Speers (along with a few others, like Nosler Solid Base and some Sierras) were on the soft end. Its more noticeable on deer (to me) than other critters. From that, I instinctively knew to start very low in workups using the pure copper/pure lead bullets ( i.e Hawks, the older Barnes, Bitter- roots, etc) I learned a lot of other things, of course, but he was one of my favorites for sure.

I had an uncle that gave me an autographed copy of The Rifle Book when I was about 12 years old. I still have it.

Now I just need to find a 7x57. Should go well with my 6.5x55 and 9.3x62. 😎

Here you go 340boy.
http://www.gunsinternational.com/gu...er-grade-7mm-mauser.cfm?gun_id=100824556

Here you go 340boy. :

https://www.24hourcampfire.com/ubbt...77-7x57-tang-safety-red-pad#Post12520554

I got one (circa 1984) and contrary to many opinions on the fire, i.e., variable length throats and a Ruger you can get it to shoot respectable groups.

roundoak, I bought mine in 1977 brand new in the box for $160, I was sure I got screwed. It has the longer throat but I've never had a problem using 139 gr Horn SP,140 gr NPT's in it for decent groups. The 154 grn Hornady RN's are of course exceptional in it. Jack could have wrote and hunted more about the 7x57 and left his wife at home. MB

MB, The 154 gr Hornady InterLock SP is my all time favorite in this rifle and used it with success on Moose, deer, elk and Mountain goat. In addition to O'Connor, Harvey Donaldson wrote favorably about the 7x57 Mauser and it struck a chord with me.

As you have found, you need not be askeered of the long throat In fact, the Ruger is very accurate with the 120 grain NBT and Hornady HP even though the bullet is a long way from the lands.

Finn Aagaard wrote that his all-around load for the 7x57 was the 154-gr Interlock at 2600 fps. Personally, I think the 150-gr class bullets (up to 160) are pretty under-rated. J. O'Connor talks about the 154-gr Interlock being his all-around loading as well; Mule Deer has written positively about the 156-gr Oryx; C. Boddington's daughter has used 150-gr Sirroccos at 2700 fps (albeit out of her 7-08) on just about everything that doesn't bite back, even things that most of us would hesitate to use it on, namely eland; ; and even our own Ingwe was playing with 150-gr NBTs at 2500 fps out of his Ingwe Special, before he retired it Florida. Not wanting to further pollute the barrel with plastic tips, I sighted it in using factory 158-gr Prvi Grom at an advertised 2460 fps, and killed quite a few pigs with it, including one of my largest boars. I just ordered some 150-gr Partitions from SPS and will see how they shoot in my MRC at around 2600, although I think I already know. It's too bad that Hornady doesn't load the 154-gr Interlock for those who don't reload. I think it would be a winner.

[. Jack could have wrote and hunted more about the 7x57 and left his wife at home. MB[/quote]

I got the impression that Eleanor "let" Jack go hunting...she seemed like a pretty strong woman, ha. don't get me wrong, I love strong women, married one myself, but I never saw Mrs OC as a Shrinking Violet type.

I use a 7x57 for many of the mentioned reason. I witnessed a few unbelievable feats of markship by my father , using his 7x57. I read Finn Aagard a lot and he impressed me with his love of the 7x57. He also used many other rifles as did my father, but always took time to talk about a 7x57. My father was not a writer and not famous. But he hunted a lot and was a story teller around a lot of camps. First in Pa. deer camps , then as a cook in the BigHorn mtns. elk camp. I continue to carry his rifle each fall and relay my experiences to him. as dementia and bad health limit his ability but not his Spirit.
I came along at a time when J.O.C. and Elmer were well past their prime and writing careers . It is interesting that in that 1957 article The tone seems to be that 60 years ago J,.O.C. seemed to use and appreciate the 7x57 for the same reason that MD and others ( myself) included use it. It works , is classy and is has a long history of "Honorable" Even though as stated 60 years ago ' Factory ammo was limited and reloading for best results were the norm. At 125 years old I wish to be the classy choice that is still effective!!!

It sounds like we need a Campfire 7x57 build - maybe along the lines of Mrs. O'Connor's rifle, with Mule Deer's input regarding throat length. Anyone want to talk with Darrik about it?

I just had a custom rifle built along the lines of the Rigby stalking rifle. Of course I had the caliber designated as a 275 Rigby. It's a classic cartridge that has stood the test of time and will still be standing tall when the fizzle has left the new hot rod cartridges. You can't improve on greatness.

Roundoak:

Was that the 7x57 built on a VZ33 action?

tomk,

In the BIG GAME RIFLE by O'Connor published in 1952 there is a picture of Bradford O'Connor shooting Jack's 7x57 that was built on a Czech VZ-24 action. Metal work was done by Tom Burgess of Spokane and stock done by Russell Leonard of Spokane.

Gun Digest 1974 Jack said the rifle was built on a VZ-33 action.

Tom Turpin did an article on Tom Burgess in Gun Digest 2016 called TOM BURGESS - METALSMITH EXTRAORDINAIRE. His research found that Burgess built the rifle on a VZ-24 action.

Was O'connor's memory not so good 22 plus years later? I would think if he had the rifle built in 1951 and published a reference to it in 1952 as VZ-24 it is a VZ-24 action.

A close inspection would confirm.

Thanks. Bought a VZ from an old gent some time back and the article came with it, IIRC. It was probably that Gun Digest 74 piece about a 7x57 made for Eleanor on a VZ33.

Gun Digest


Not real busy currently, would be happy to do that close inspection...:)

Outstanding, that Gun Digest article. Thanks for the link.

He is pretty convincing...

Thanks for posting that link -- it brought back memories of when I read that article as teen!

John

Had indeed read O'Connor's stuff both in library books and waiting in the barber's shop--then a place where your mom dropped you off at the curb and might peek her head in to call you away from a magazine, but would not risk stepping inside the dirty clime. A bastion for males, hunting and fishing rags on a ratty looking table, and dusty long guns sitting in the corner.

But Finn Aagaard's string of cartridge articles in mid-80's (IIRC) in the American Rifleman nearly sent me to the homeless shelter. And, of course, Bob Hagel's stuff...:)

Aagaard did an article somewhere on the 7x57 referencing his father shooting out a 7x57 barrel on game in Africa, killing anything and everything--basically with the same bullet. It made me believe I needed a 7x57. He also mentioned how his dad would have been amused by the bullet specialization we do. Guilty. Around the same time, a friend killed a massive buck by our UP camp during a snowy season. It was only a 6 pointer, but it was wide, had long tines and so much mass that you could not get your hand to fold completely around the beams.

Karma, of course. Obviously it was the influence of the 7x57.

Good memory! He wrote that in American Rifleman, November, 1986. It's included as Chapter 17 in "Guns and Hunting" Safari Press, 2012. That's a great book.

One of the things in that article is JOC's mentioning that Al Biesen turned down the factory barrel on his last 7x57, presumably to match his other Featherweights. I've often wondered whether or not it is the same contour as the Featherweight produced today. Does anyone know?

One of many reasons I liked JOC. Reminds me of another writer I like. Hangs around here sometimes.

I met a gentleman yesterday whose in his early 80s and has amassed quite the gun collection. Probably north of 200 rifles, made me think of this thread when he said he didn't know why he bought any of them
as he already had a 7mm Mauser which is all he's ever hunted with

Seems I have a love hate relationship with the 7x57. So far it's been a bad luck cartridge for me for one reason or another.. First one I had was a neat sporter made up in some little gun shop in England. Looked like a close copy of a Rigby and was stamped .275 Rigby-7x57 Mauser. Nice lightweight rifle, quite accurate as well. I lived in a small western town at he time and the only ammo available was that federal 175 gr. round nose. Well, that was the load it made it's reputation on so what the hell, I used it. Got a shot at a nice Mule deer at about 50 yards and planted the bullet right behind the shoulder. Deer took off at a dead run. I shot it about eight in the morning and was still looking for it when it became too dark to look any longer. I found it the next day,well at least what the coyotes had left over two hundred yards away from where I'd shot it. I was so damn mad I sold the rifle off. Still kicking myself to that dumb move.

Many years later I got into a smoking deal on one of the Winchester M70 Featherweight XTR's in 7x57 and took it on a deer hunt. I was using a handload using the 140 gr. Ballistic Tips and W760 in Winchester brass. The load was decently fast and very accurate. Got a shot at a nice deer which ran into a gully. I had to climb a ridge to reach the gully and my right foot slid one way and the rest of me the other way. Sat down hard with my right knee hurting like hell. My hunting partners carried me off the hill, I could not walk unsupported and they refused to go look for my deer. They wanted to take me into town to the hospital.

This year I played with some handloads using Re17 and the 150 gr. Partitions and got a decent load doing 2700 FPS with good accuracy. Took a while before I had the time to even get started due to caring for my wife who had a stroke last year. Before I could load up a supply of ammo for an elk hunt, I only had five rounds left over from the range test, it was time to leave for the hunt. So I did the hunt with another rifle to take my elk.

I guess the 7x57 jinx is still with me. Maybe next year. I do so want to hunt with that FWT.
Paul B.

I too have a long history with the 7x57. Having read several articles he wrote in praise of the cartridge, bought the first one I ever saw; a Ruger 77. This was at a gun shop in Phoenix in 1972. Ruger had made what was referred to as a limited run of these plus a like number chambered for the 257 Roberts. So, ok I found one of those too!
Then the fun began. I took the 7mm on a Coues hunt that fall and got my first real trophy Whitetail, I still have the mount. This was followed by a nice Mule Deer on the Arizona Strip, A 6 foot Black Bear, numerous Javelina, Columbian Blacktail, well you get the idea.
As for the 257 Roberts, a 16.5" Arizona Pronghorn, several Javelina,some Coues and a Rocky Mountain Bighorn in Eastern Arizona that completed my Grand Slam!
Thank God I have never had to limit myself just one of these two rifles/ cartridges. They have proven to be excellent mountain rifles, just as Jack said they were!

Boy. Not to hijack the JOC mojo but this thread brought back a few great memories. Not only of O'Connor (whom I still collect books & articles from) & Keith but Paige, Brister, Trueblood, Askins, Ackley, Cooper, Milek, Whelen, Skelton, Jordan, Hagel, Mattis, and more modern fellas like Weishun, Benoit, Boddington, Simpson, VanZwoll, Carmichael, Ayoob, many more that shaped my life in one way or another over the years. I'm new here so cheers to the Campfire & like minded folks for a collective stroll down memory lane.

Still sight 3" for almost everything and hand roll
60+ of H4831 behind a 130gr Speer or Nosler in WW cases.

Thanks for the link tomk, very good read. I’ve read most of JOC’s books but not much of his shorter pieces.

Not to stir the pot, but couldn’t you repeat every attribute about the 7x57 to apply to the 7mm-08? I guess you would be limited in bullets greater than 150 grains, but for bullets of 120-150 gr, the 7mm-08 seems like it would be much easier to find good factory ammunition for?

You can't get 7-08 in a rimmed version, factory loaded.

Yes indeed. And the 7mm-08 is the route I'd go.

All of this 7X57 talk has got me to thinking that I'm going to drag mine out of the safe. It's a Winchester 70 Lighweight, made back in the late 80's-early 90's period. I bought it from Grice's, where it was advertised as being made for the European market. It has iron sights, and the Featherweight barrel. I put it in a synthetic stock years ago, but I'm thinking I might put it back in the wood stock, and put the iron sights back on. I'll load up some heavy bullets, and make this my tiger rifle..............in case any ever make an appearance around these parts.

That is without a doubt accurate. But with handloads, which I expect most 7x57 shooters use, it's an entirely different story. I believe it was AussieGunWriter (John) who someplace wrote that the 7x57 is a hunter's cartridge. I think the versatility as a hunting cartridge, using bullets from 100- to 175-grains in all sorts of configurations, is where the old cartridge shines. And it has for the past 126 years.

JamesJr:

I see you're in Kentucky. You have elk there. Think of them as tigers with antlers, and not quite as ornery.

The catch is drawing an elk tag. I've put in for the drawing every year, but never luck out. My son put in for archery tag, and drew one, but I gave bowhunting up years ago. If I ever do get a tag, I'll more than likely use my 270, but the 7X57 would work just as well.

Beautiful rifles, but they look too heavy for modern men to hunt with.

and definitely more resolving power on top....

Jack wanted his rifles 8 pounds scoped so I'm sure these are about that weight.

My newest and last 7x57...

Very Nice!

Wow, pretty awesome.. But since the .460 is a jackrabbit gun, what would you use this tiny rifle for??? Field mice...

A classic beauty of a rifle, chambered for a classic cartridge. If it shoots as well as it looks, you have a winner!

Never say last 7x57 or anything else for that matter. My first 7X57 was a Ruger #1 AB over 30 years ago. I knew nothing about the cartridge at the time and bought the gun because it had nice wood. I later bought a custom 7X51AI from a friend and figured why have to and sold the #1. I still regret that decision and now have no less than 4 rifles for the 7X57

Joe,

Actually, O'Connor wanted his rifles in 7x57 (or .270, or .30-06) around 8 pounds with scope, sling and ammo. Which with a leather sling means around 7-1/2 with scope. I've handled some of his rifles, along with some built for others in the family, including Eleanor and his son Bradford. They're pretty nice in both weight and balance--which is why some of my own walnut-stocked rifles are pretty similar.

Elkhunternm, that is a very nice looking rifle sir, thank you for sharing the pictures.

Ken - gopher gitter?

Alright, Ken. Details!!

Thanks John, I should have written ready to hunt instead of scoped.

It's the last as there is no more space in the gunsafe......

MD, curious so weighed a (nylon) sling and 4rds of 280 140g last nite at a touch over a half pound.

Guessing that would require some thought to blank selection and stockmaker's effort to keep it all up at 8#, eh?

Granted, the shells were loaded to the gills...:)

Leupold 6x36 in Talley rings.

Shilen barrel cut to 22" with a 1-11" twist. Going to use either a 140 gr TBT or Nosler Partition in it and NOTHING HEAVIER!

13 5/8" L.O.P.

Black Walnut stock with wrap around Fluer De Lis with ribbons checkering.

Herestal Dumoulin Safari Action standard length.

Red recoil pad.

Winchester Super Grade style sling studs.

That is outstanding! May I ask who did the stock work?

That is a beauty, Ken.

Did you specify that 1-11" ROT or did it come that way?

Wayne

tomk,

Yeah, the wood makes a difference, along with stock dimensions and barrel contour. Back when the standard custom rifle, like Jack's, was built on a 98 Mauser or pre-'64 M70 action weighing close to 3 pounds, it was a trick, but could be done.

It's a lot easier with some of today's actions!

Roy Bedeaux did the inletting,finish and bedding,while Dale Goens did the checkering.

Roundoak,I did specify a 1-11" twist. Only want to use 140's in this one. The two other 7mm Mausers I own can shoot the heavier bullets.

Ken, if I had a rifle that looked that good I'd sleep with it.

Who says I don't.

I have had the pleasure of fondling it, but he probably is not going to let me shoot it!

Fixed it.

Haha. I have an attachment to my 270 that is hard to explain. Nothing wrong with the 7X57, and I doubt that either me or the elk would notice any difference.

You can shoot it,but you have to wash your hands first.

OR NOTHING LONGER such as a 140 gr TTSX, correct?

Re Cactus Jack’s last two 7x57 rifles.
The first of the two was a small ring 98 type action identical to the G33/40 except they had different markings and there were fewer available for use. Tom Burgess did basic metal work. His later jobs were much more elaborate. The stock was made by Russ Leonard who made his living as a sales rep for, I believe, Leupold and perhaps other companies. Leonard’s stock styling was a very big influence on Earl Milliron’s “racy classic” design. Earl told me so. I believe Leonard built a rifle stock for Joyce Hornady. Mr. O’Connor used it for a short time until it was claimed by his bride. The stock was shortened. She being 5’3” or so and him standing over 6’.

The second rifle was a pre64 M70 which was remodeled by Al Biesen. The wood is pretty plain. But that was not unusual at that time. Biesen recontoured the standard weight barrel and cut it to 22”. I have handled both and prefer the 7x57. Mr O’Connor let me fondle all of them while visiting him in his home. I was 21 and thought I was in heaven.

I have weighted quite a few of the wood stocked rifles which were being built by the top makers of the time. Most of those stocks weigh 2 1/2 pounds.

I have owned and weighed stocks by Fisher, Milliron, Kennedy, Goens, and Brownell. Weight could vary by plus or minus 2 oz depending upon wood density. M70’s and 98’s were pretty close with a 98 being about 2 oz less. Of course that depends on the barrel and sights.

My lightest rifle of that period was completed in 1977 and is a G33/40 270 blind magazine Burgess metal with a slim barrel e.g. .535” at 23”. The stock was made by Monte Kennedy from a blank that came from Purdey’s wood pile.

The “formula” for a custom was pretty well established so 270 class rifle went 7.5-8 with a 4x Leupold and no iron sights. In those days 90% of the “mountain rifles” being built by the top makers were 270 Wins. The rest were 7 RM.
Milliron built one stock with a very light blank that was 2# because he hollowed the butt and fore end.

The 7-57 has the digit 7 in it's name twice. Other than than it's just an old cartridge that some folks talk about.

I just looked to see that I have one. It's an old ZB Brno 22 H with a 20" bbl, m70 type 3 position safety, scoped with a Vari X 3-9 Compact in a zb slide off top mount.

Correct.

Even if I never intended to shoot anything over 140 grain I would still go with a 1 in 9 twist. No down side to extra twist, unless the jacket is too weak and that’s not the case I a 7X57 with hunting Bullets at its top velocity.

Interesting stuff RinB.

At one time did put some effort and mostly dollars into the lighter weight M-70s--barrel, bottom metal and stock of course, being combinated for outcomes. But as John inferred, the fastest road to lighter is to change the action....

Am neither an evangelist nor claim any particular insight--just personal preferences...do like the M-70 for the 7mm RM and the small ring mausers for those 57mm cases.

Ken,

Interesting about the 1-11" twist. I had a custom 7x57 with a 1-11.5 twist, which was not my choice but the gunmaker's. He asked me what bullet I'd be mostly shooting, and I specified the 140 Partition--but didn't tell me about the twist, which turned out to be quite a surprise when I tried 140-grain Barnes X's. That's when I measured it.

The other interesting thing is that while the rifle shot 140 Partitions well, the 7x57 that shot them best (as in five, not three, in 1/2" to 3/4" at 100 yards) was one I stocked myself in New Zealand-grown Juglans regia, on a VZ24 action with a 21" Shilen barrel with a 1-9 twist.

All of which is just one of many examples of why I ceased trying to "match" the twist to the bullet many years ago.

John and Ken,

When you built your rifles did you consider throat dimensions?

Roundoak,no,I did not consider throat dimensions when building the 7x57. I have a CZ 550 that has a long throat and a Featherweight with a much shorter throat. Figure the one pictured will be closer to the Featherweight,but will find out this weekend. All I've done so far is get it on paper at 25 yards,will take it out to 100 this weekend sometime.

MD,I have two other 7x57's that will shoot 140-175 grain bullets,just wanted one that'll handle the 140 grain class bullets. No logic behind the decision,just wanting a 7x57 that'll shoot a 140 grain bullet.

Sounds like you have a nice 'selection' of 7x57s, Ken. If a guy was to look for one reasonably priced 7mm Mauser for use with 140-160gr bullets, what would you recommend?

You probably already know this you can get an idea of the throat length by inverting a flat base bullet into a case trimmed to 2.225" then insert into the rifle and close the bolt.

I did consider throat dimensions on my 7x57. It had a modern "short" throat, as does my present 7x57, made by what was then Serengeti Rifles and is now Kilimanjaro Rifles, with a Pacific Tool & Gauge with what I recall they term the "USA Match" reamer.

Thanks for info, John. I rescued a VZ-24 7x57 Mauser with a 24" McGowen barrel and Fajen stock a few years ago. Barrel and stock is in pretty bad shape so I am going to scrap them and build on the action.

Look for a used Interterms Mark X 7x57.

That's good advice. One of my 7x57s is a Zastava M98, basically the same thing as the Mark X, with a 1:220mm/1:866" twist. It handles long 175-grain bullets very, very well. You can also find some pretty good deals on older XTRs. As mentioned all over the 'fire, they are about the most underrated M70 there is.

I had mine built on a VZ24 action as well. It's a 1;10 twist for the 140gr bullet. I don't know what the throat measurements are however I havent found a 140gr bullet it doesn't like. I wish I could figure out how to post pics of it.

I bought a 7x57 on a mauser action from a Gent who speced a 1:10 twist, throated for a 139 Hornady to touch the lands when seated to the cannelure.

It has a bit more free-bore than specified, which is probably a reflection of the reamer the smith had on hand.

None the less, it is capable of touching holes in 4 shot groups, which is better than I am on the average day around here...

As I posted previously in this thread you can do a simple test to determine approximate throat length. Invert a flat base bullet in a 2.225 inch trimmed case, chamber it and close bolt. Some guns I have sampled for comparison.

.325 inches VZ24 action, McGowen barrel

.420 inches 1895 Chilean
.420 inches M98/08 Brazilian
.438 inches " "
.442 inches " "

Other measurements I have collected from gun writers. I do not know trimmed case lengths.

.250 inches Ruger MKII (circa mid 2000s) Dave Scovill
.289 inches Rem, BDL Classic Mike Venturino
.290 inches Winchester M70 Bob Hagel
.267 inches Rem. 700 Ken Waters

.Friends and 24HR Campfire member measurements. 2.225 inch trimmed case.

.275 inches Rem. 700 BDL
.290 inches Winchester M 70
.292 inches Win. M70 action, Buhmiller barrel
.305 inches Winchester M 70
.337 inches Ruger M77
.350 inches M98 (1935) SIG barrel
.353 inches Ruger M77
.395 inches Ruger M77

Just checked my 1982 M.70 FTW and it measures .277". The longest free bore I've seen is on my CZ-550 7x64 yet that hasn't hurt it at all in the accuracy department.

A long throat doesn't hurt accuracy (at least in benchrest terms) as long as it's close to bullet diameter--which prevents the bullet from tilting as it starts down the bore. But if the throat is considerably above bullet diameter, it sure can. The first Ruger No. 1A 7x57 owned, a red-pad obtained in a trade from a friend in the late 1980's, wouldn't shoot any bullet that wasn't seated very close to the lands, and no lead-core bullet under 160 grains would do that. It shot REALLY well with 160 Partitions and RL-22, but the case neck wasn't holding much of the bullet.

Ken,
Thanks. I will do that.

We have been blessed with a lot of great writers over the years and Jack O'Connor was one of the finest. I liked his style and thought he made a lot of sense. He worked in a competitive environment and had a very long and successful career but not without it's hardships.

I don't see him championing the .270 so much as defending it. It was probably his favorite cartridge but he used a lot of others as well. Eleanor's exploits with the 7mm prompted me to try it and I have owned several. It is a fine cartridge as is the 7-08.

We enjoy the benefits of good reamer manufacturers and barrel makers that Jack O'Connor never had. The scopes we have access to today are much more reliable and with better optical properties. Todays hunters enjoy many benefits earlier generations did not have but a lot of habitat has been lost. If success is your ambition then a good guide is truly beneficial. Some things never change.

Another good semi-traditional 7x57 to look for is a Ruger Mark II or Hawkeye. They shortened the throat in those considerably over the original Model 77 7x57's, and the hammer-forged barrels are usually really good as well. back when I tend to have several rifles chambered for the same cartridge, one of my 7x57's was a Mark II, and it shot very well, and was considerably lighter than the Mark X's I've owned.

I've turned back to working with a 700 Mtn Rifle, so chambered. It shoots Federal 175's and S+B 173's really well, but is cantankerous with other loads. I've gotten great accuracy with 154 Hornady SP's, but pitifully slow velocities. As of yesterday, 46.0 grains of H4350 would only get 'em to 2,425 fps. I'm tiptoeing upward to see if I can get 'em to the 2,700 fps range. The Gun Gack tome assures me this still oughta be safe territory in a strong "sucks" action.

Granted, a load with R15 that pushed this bullet to a scant 2,350 fps dropped a Dall ram quite neatly, but that was before I'd run 'em across a chronograph. It's a wonder he hasn't climbed out of the freezer to go resume his place on the mountain.

Perhaps he figured 'twas easier to just lay down, rather than face Ready's back-up shot...

FC

Have you given H 414 a try? It works well for me.

FC, that H4350 load is somewhat anemic when I look at the results I got in three different 7x57 rifle with the 154 gr Hornady InterLock. Let us know how it comes out when you give it a little more gas..

I picked up a used tang safety M77 7x57 recently at a LGS that had the stock butchered. Rather than locate a replacement stock, I want to put it in a synthetic stock. Any suggestions?

I gave that one a whirl a while back, but got poor groups and velocity.




Will do. I wanted to start cautiously, and even there I had a hard time trying to reconcile Hornady 10th, Lyman's 50th, Barnes #4, and some other sources. MD writes in Gack that, what with the throating being all over the board, different rifles may need up to 3 grains different amounts of powder to produce like velocities with a given bullet. I figured I'd start at a "consensus" safe charge, and work up. To this point, the groups, at least, are encouraging.

I've got loads prepped up to 48.5 grains H4350, and I'll get 'em downrange once my new glasses arrive, and weather permits. Results to follow.

Thanks,

FC

FC, that 48,5 grs H4350 is about where the loads in my three rifles ended up. 48-49 grains. Velocity range is 2750 fps to 2800 fps. Two rifles have 24" barrels and the other 22" barrel.

I saw that in one of your posts a while back, and that's what I used as a rough guide as I made this last batch. Many Thanks.

Once I get this rifle squared-away, this will be my next 7x57 load work-up project:





The traditionalist in me demands I stick with 175's. For now, the Federal Blue Box load prints well enough. Hopefully I can bloody it on a hog come March.

FC

What model is that rifle?

I really don't know.
















People have told me it's a "98" of some persuasion. I measure 42" overall, which I'm told is short for a mauser. The barrel measures 21 3/8" from the front of the receiver. Googling brings up terms like, "Standard Model" or, "Post Office Model", but I'm not sure it fits neatly into any of those boxes.

All I know is that Rockchucker trolled me past a pawn shop in '15, and I left there with the thing under my arm. I had a fella put a taller front blade on it, on account of it shot way high. It feels great in hand, and I still need to bloody it.

FC

That action would be a good beginning for a custom rifle.

It is obviously a German military large ring 98 Mauser. It has a Nazi eagle Waffenamt stamp on the root of the bolt handle, so the bolt appears to be WW2 vintage, but the lack of Waffenamt stamps elsewhere makes me wonder if the bolt isn't original to this rifle and if the bolt is newer than the rest of the parts with matching numbers.

German military Mausers were chambered in 8x57, so if this is your next 7x57 project, I assume that it either has been rebarreled or you are going to rebarrel it. It looks kind of rough, maybe stored under poor conditions after it was captured, I don't recall seeing another 98 with a divot like the one in the receiver bridge.

It's definitely chambered in 7x57. If the barrel was replaced, 'twas done long ago as the current one has external pitting nearly equal to that on the receiver, & the the blueing is gone from the muzzle. I've read some pieces that talk about Standard and/or Banner models that were originally chambered in 7x57, so I wonder if it might have gone to China, Bolivia, Ethiopia, etc. as an export gun?

The bore is probably a mess - I haven't looked. But, she shoots as well as I can see these days.

The extractor has definitely been replaced, as has the bolt release, and the bottom metal looks different than the rest of the receiver. It's not a total mutt, but I knew I wasn't getting a collector piece, either. I just wanted something that locked-up tightly, and could take a hog or 3.

FC

I believe you are correct about the bolt not being original as the rifle has crown over N proof mark.

A Nazi Mauser in 7x57? Odd.

All this 7X57 talk made me want to drag mine out and put it back as it was original. I have a Model 70 Lightweight, that came with iron sights. Years ago, I'd put a Winchester Featherweight synthetic stock on it, and removed the iron sights. It's been a good day to work in my gun room, so I put the rifle back in the original stock, and put the sights back on. One problem.....couldn't get the last screw out of the front base, and will have to have it removed by a gunsmith, or put the scope back on, which I'll probably do.

A few years ago someone was importing VZ24s in 7X57MM and most of them were rough, but they didnt last long at the prices they sold for, LGS in my area had them for $229 if I remember correctly. I havent seen a Mark X in 7X57MM in a long time and they used to be everywhere you looked.

Would like to see some pics of that ram if you have any. How far away was he?

Looks nice, always like those Lightweights...never seen one with factory irons. I’d keep it in its original furniture if it were mine.

He was pushing 300 yards, but the downhill angle was so steep that the drop was likely closer to 100.


If you download the Chrome or Safari add-on to let you see photobucket pics, he should be on these threads:


II
III

FC

Thanks FC.

It's possible that you have a Brazilian Model 1935 with a replacement bolt or, since it would have been made when the Nazi party was in power, the Waffenamt stamp was applied to the bolt on all Oberndorf Mausers, even the export guns. The odd things is that you'd expect an export military Mauser to have the country crest stamped on the receiver ring rather than the Mauser banner. The proof marks on your rifle look exactly like a picture of Brazilian 1935 that I found on the internet.

I s'pose if the bolt's been bubba'd to this extent, it makes sense that there was probably a rebarrel to .284 bore, as well. There seems to be no shortage of hermaphrodite mausers out there. Still, it shoots well enough to entertain me, and I didn't have to give collector-type $ for it.

FC

Hey John: you wrote this in January of 2006. After all these years do you still think the same?

Well Rev, a 150 will give total penetration on elk when started out at 2700 fps. I have 160 and 175 grains but, haven't noticed any more accuracy with them and the added penetration is moot unless shooting length wise.

Geez, I started this topic in Jan. of 2006! Carry-on...............................I should get one them Mousers one day.

Mike,

Pretty much.

Looked through my hunting notes after this thread started, and found I've taken 16 species of big game with the 7x57, from pronghorn through moose in North America and springbok through kudu and wildebeest in Africa. Never have used a bullet heavier than 160 grains, and none lighter than 139 grains. Wouldn't be surprised if the average was right around 150.