Home Forums Hunting & Shooting Ask The Gunwriters The Modern 7x57 - MD

Nice article MD.

I own a beautifully made Swede based 7x57 that was metaled by Jim Wisner. I have hunted it running more that the "old" loads but less than the most modern ones. Thoughts?

I've seen pictures of that rifle, Ed, and it sure is a beauty. I don't remember the load, but I think part of it was a 160-grain Accubond. Is that right? Anyway, here's an interesting article by JB about the "perfect velocity." It's now 13 years old, and I don't know if he still feels the same way, maybe he could confirm, but it sounds reasonable.

Here is an example of the conundrum I always seem to run into. Speer's updated data is on their website. Matching identical components and loads between the 7-08 and 7x57 data, using a 130-grain Hot-Cor, and tested in 24 inch barrels, check this out:

Cartridge: 7-08
Powder: IMR4350
Primer: CCI200
Start Chg/Vel: 46.0/2766
Max Chg/Vel: 50.0/3006

Cartridge: 7x57
Powder: IMR4350
Primer: CCI200
Start Chg/Vel: 46.0/2614
Max Chg/Vel: 50.0C/2895

Everything is identical with the exception of seating depth. The 7-08 is seated .07 inches deeper. So here's what has me scratching my head. It sounds reasonable to me that the velocity of the 7x57 would be a bit lower for the same charge due to the fact that the 7x57 case is a bit bigger, so pressures would be lower. However, the max charge of 50.0 in the 7x57 is actually shown as a compressed charge, even though the COAL is actually longer than the 7-08. What the heck? That sounds totally backwards to me, since the case capacity of the 7-08 is (theoretically) less. Again, that makes no sense to me at all.

I'm thinking that whoever it was to suggest going back to the chronograph is dead on the money.

Finally read it last night, (been busy preparing for turkey season). Good read, and it rekindled my desire for a modern rifle in 7x57 as my only 7x57 is currently a 1908 Brazilian Mauser that occasionally sees some handloads. Long as I have dies, bullets, brass, etc. kicking around perhaps I could make better use of them.

I think they simply neglected to put the compressed label on the 7-08 load. Fifty grains of a long stick powder is a lot in that size case.

Mike...bottom line, there is no conundrum. As long as there are 7x57s in the world, why would anyone shoot a 7-08?

Yeah, 50 grains of H4350 (a "short-cut" powder) in the 7-08 case requires CONSIDERABLE compression with lead-core 140-grain bullets. Don't see how 50 grains of IMR4350 wouldn't require some compression with the 130 Hot-Cor, though it's a pretty short bullet.

I’m still dinking around with mine trying to get a 140 TTSX or NP to shoot sub moa at 2,700 fps or better with H4350 or Big Game or other than H414. Happy Trails

Ed,

Some rate the Swedish Mauser actions (whether 94 or 96) as weaker than 98 actions, even though the Swedish actions were made of excellent Swedish steel, whether the actions were made in Germany or Sweden. In an engineering sense, the 94/96 two-lug locking system is basically as strong as the 98's, and the steel was about as good as it got back then.

The reason some people down-rate the Swedish action is the lack of the 98's third "safety" locking lug toward the rear of the bolt.
This supposedly makes 98's safer, which some people interpret as stronger. But despite plenty of experience going back over 40 years with various military and commercial Mauser actions, have yet to encounter or even hear of one where the two primary locking lugs failed and the third lug saved the day.

Have heard of problems with "small-ring" Mauser actions converted to belted magnum rounds, because the receiver ring isn't quite as strong as on the large-ring actions. But that also applies to small-ring 98's, and has nothing to do with the locking lugs.

John wasn’t the bigger issue with the 94 or 96 actions the ability to handle gas in the event of a pierced primer?

Exactly!

Mike S,

Haven't encountered much mention of that when doing research, and if it was a big problem I doubt the Swedes would have continued to use the Model 96 as their military rifle until the 1950's. There have also been some far more popular bolt-actions that didn't provide much (if any protection from a blown primer or case, such as the pre-'64 Model 70 Winchester

Apparently the big problem early in the days of smokeless powder was cases splitting--which is why W.D.M. Bell switched from his absolute favorite elephant rifle, a customized Mannlicher-Schoenauer 6.5x54 (which Bell naturally called "the .256'). The Austrian ammo he used kept splitting its cases, so he returned to his 7x57.

But brass soon improved enough to make split cases a pretty rare problem. As somebody once pointed out, good brass is what made the pre-'64 Winchester possible!

+2

You guys really don't want an answer.

Now, now; I never ask if I don't want an answer. Ingwe just raised the existential and rhetorical question, that's all.

M.D's excellent article reminded me of another good 7x57 article from years ago and I came across it while doing something else.......... " Guns & Ammo" magazine; November 1991......... It's entitled : . "7mm MAUSER..... Smallbore Blockbuster! " By Ross Seyfried...... And leads off with: "While its exploits are legendary, today's shooters can take advantage of the great qualities offered by the 7x57 Mauser -- a proven, do-all game getter.".............. It was another interesting gun scribe treatise on a classic cartridge that was written about 18 years ago. Ross also had a lot of good things to say about it.

Short action?

Yep, short action and consistent chamber-throat lengths.

Have yet to understand why any cartridge thread on the Campfire results in such adamant anti-opinions of various cartridges. I have hunted with and own custom rifles in both 7x57 and 7mm-08. But then a lot of cartridge choice isn't based on actual reality, but emotion. To a certain extent I' m afflicted with the same syndrome, but try to retain enough semblance of objectivity--which may somewhat diminish my reputation as a rifle loony.

While I agree with mathman's comment, I also understand the lure of nostalgia and the 7 X 57 has a lot of lure. In a modern day M-70 the 7 X 57 is a truly excellent offering......but after owning a VZ-24 in 7 X 57 I discovered that the standardization of the cartridge isn't as precise as I could be. It can be remedied but one shouldn't have to do that.....even nostalgia has it limits!