Home Forums Hunting & Shooting Ask The Gunwriters 7x57 vs 280

Well, maybe, But doesn't that wasted long action and long action magazine let you seat longer bullets shallower for a little more powder capacity and give more seating depth options for accuracy? (properly throated for said bullets of coarse) ... Regardless of that, I must have arms like "Clyde" because a lot of the short action rifles are too short for me (LOP)... Oh, By the way, There is one thing it does better for sure ... The 7 Mouser scares the Schit out of Elephants... You cant say that about the 7-08...

Well, my three 7x57s all seem to have the same length throats. No problem with accuracy and yes, I'm a hand loader. Been one since 1954. I have absolutely no use for the 7-08. A long action mean I have room to seat bullets where they should be. Also, If the 7x57 had been loaded to its proper potential in the first place, then never would have been a need do the 7-08.
PJ

Well, no matter what you like, that right there is damn funny.

MM

Fightin’ words!

Maybe so. But the truth nevertheless.
PJ

I’m with Clark! Don’t need no head to head battles in these calibers…just own multiples and enjoy them all. I have two 7 x 57’s, two .280’s, a 7 Mag and a 7 STW. What makes me grab one before the other? My mood, and the terrain and distances of hunting areas and possible shots. Mag and STW for longer possible shots, other 2 calibers for closer pokes. Nothing more, nothing less. If you can’t own multiples in 7mm, pick the one you like best and you’ll have no issues rocking some critters to sleep with it.

Doc_Holidude

How long are those shots?

MM

This thread will be 16 y/o in December.

Happy Birthday.

16 candles--and far more guessing per candle!

MontanaMan,

Shot my biggest bull at 426 yards, and two biggest mulie bucks at 375 and 376. Maybe not the longest shots for some, but definitely loooong for an old hillbilly redneck from the sticks of PA. 😎

Doc_Holidude

Well, regardless of what some may think, those are not exactly chip shot gimmes, but the standard calibers will work just fine at those ranges...............nothing wrong with the magnums for sure but not really needed either.

JMHO

MM

Been following this out of curiosity, I looked in an old Sierra Manual, using SAAMI pressure max's, real world barrel lengths, a 160 spitzer boat tail, in point blank range, the 7x57 pbr is 270 yards. The mighty .280 crushes the Mauser with a pbr of 280 yards. Wow...that's a serious step up in horse power. 10 yards. Who knew?
Montana Man...since we are splitting hairs, let's be more precise. The 7x57 as invented, designed and built by Mauser was NOT a long action. Paul's engineers designed and built the action for the cartridge ('93's, 95's and 98's)...it could be called a medium action I suppose. Every wannabe copycat that built 7x57's later used whatever action was available that would work, it just happened that the most numerous and cheapest actions were the long 8x57 and most of the tooling in the world was built to produce the longer action. I think even a few of the great British gunmakers went with the cheaper and plentiful so called long action, ditching the purpose designed medium action for economy.

Yes, you are right, but obviously, modern bulk manufacturers are not going to build an action for a specific cartridge w/o enough demand to justify the cost even though it might be beneficial for more than just the one round.

MM

The very first 7x57 I ever tried was back in early 90's. I just could not get that Mod 70 Fwt to shoot under 2", with bullets from 130 to 175! After pulling my hair real hard, I made the decision to have it rebarreled. I called/discussed with the now deceased Gary Stiles. I "thought" the mod 70s action was a "medium" length, but when I measured the magazine, it would take a 30-06. So I had him put a 23" Douglas in 30-06 on it.

Years and 4 more 7x57s that would not shoot "for me", I am having another Mod 70 Fwt rebarreled to 7x57. By golly, I will find something to shoot in it! ha I have used/enjoyed the 7-30 Waters, 280, 280 AI, 7mm-08, 7mm Rem Mag, 7mm STW, 7mm RUM. Life is short, and being somewhat nostalgic, I "still" want an accurate, slim/trim hunting rifle in 7x57! ha I did get the twist sorted out ( I ordered a 9", they sent an 8", so reordered) I'm on my way. BTW I just got some Hornady 150 ELDx and these babies look like rockets!

PS Over the years, I have spoken with many older guys who have used the 7mm Mauser on deer and elk regularly at 400+ yards. That surprised me, really. I myself do not like to shoot over about 250, though I have shot out to 370-380 on several occasions. 75yds is my "favorite" Kill Zone, ha.

i'm quite surprised that you've had such bad luck with the 7x57. Every one of mine, I have three BTW, have been one inch or better shooters from the get go. Rifles in question are a Winchester M70 Featherweight, Ruger #1 and a custom Mauser that I have to do some work in regarding a new receiver. Still shoots tight groups though. The powder I have had the best results with is Rl17. I have worked up to 48.5 gr. of Rl17, 150 gr. Nosler Partition, Winchester brass and WLR primer. The last group I shot with that load did .50" for three shots. Velocity 2847 FPS. Bolt lift in the M70 was starting to feel a bit sticky which didn't surprise me. It was about 105 in the shade at the time I shot that group. I dropped back to an ever 2800 FPS and called it good.

Another load the proved quite accurate in the M70 was 47.0 gr. W760 and the 140 gr. Nosler Ballistic tip. Brass was Remington (R/P) brass and WLR primer. Velocity right at 2800 on the nose. Average groups ran .75".

I ran a couple of groups with the long discontinued Sierra 170 gr. round nose loaded to duplicate the average velocity of the original 1893 load. Three three shot groups averaged slightly under a half inch. I do regret not writing that load down. I wish Sierra would bring that bullet back as it's been gone for well over 30+ years. However, when I asked if they would ever consider running a few for those of us that want it, their answer was a polite FU!

All I can add is the loads I mentioned were all accurate in my rifles. All loads are in my estimation the absolute maximum for my rifles and should be approached with caution. I accept no responsibility should you use them.
PJ

My experiences have more or less mirrored Jim Knight's. Out of 3 rifles, a Ruger 77 (possibly one of the most inaccurate rifles I'd ever owned), a '95 sporter, and a BRNO 21H...I just gave up on the first 2 and eventually accepted the BRNO for what it was, a good hunting rifle, but never getting much better than 1.4 moa 5 shot grps. I just ran out of patience with the old 7, endless experiments in bedding, loading, scope swapping, case prep, recut crowns yadda yadda. Eventually, the BRNO used 46gr of 760 and any 160 gr cup and core. Then, the great copper bullet edict came down from the Gods ruling the land of fruits and nuts...and it was back to square one...where it remains, doomed to mediocrity. In these times of component drought, my battery of bubba beaters and pawnshop rejects in 6.5 Swede to 8x57 that were so much easier to tune and feed with easy peasy 1 moa occupy my front row in the safe. I wonder if Bell used the old 7 on elephant because it was too inaccurate for dik-dik.

I have been killing deer since 1963 and elk since 1967. I have used a LOT of different calibers and rifles and in the past I among them have owned a 7X57, a 280 Remington a 7MM Rem Mag and a 7MM Weatherby mag. I have killed elk with all 4 of them.
None had any more dramatic effect or was appreciably faster in dropping elk or deer then any other.

So my best advice is 'Get the one you like the most"

Steve,

This is pretty much my experience as well, having used all four cartridges--along with the .280 Ackley Improved--on wide variety of big game, along with being alongside other hunters who use 'em. Oh, and also have some experience with the 7mm STW.

Mentioned this in another post on this thread in late September: "Have hunted a LOT with both the 7x57 and .280. In the 7x57 I mostly (but not always) have used bullets in the 160-grain range at around 2700 fps, from various 21-22" barrels. In the .280 I've also used 160s a lot, at 2900+ fps. Just looked at my hunting notes, and the longest kills with both cartridges were 350-400 yards with 160-grain bullets. Both worked fine, because they put a hole all the way through the vitals."

This is also what a LOT of experienced hunters have noted with a wider range of cartridges: As long as the bullet penetrates and expands sufficiently, there's relatively little difference on how the bullet (not the cartridge) kills big game.

But many hunters still make a big deal about minor differences muzzle velocity (even 50 fps), bullet weight and diameter.

Every time I think I want a .280 or .280AI I pull out a trajectory differential chart that I worked out several years ago using one of the online ballistic calculators. Plugging in the highest velocity from Nosler's data for all three, and NOT adjustment for the different barrel lengths Nosler used when compiling that data, I generally find that MPBR (four inches) of both the .280 and AI version is within about twenty yards or so of the 7x57. When I adjust for the different barrel lengths (22 for 7x57, 26 for the other two), I come up with the same thing you do: about ten or twelve yards advantage, but with a lot more powder burned to get there. For me it's just not worth it. Now, if I find a .280 or AI that I actually want, that's a different story, but I certainly can't justify using either over the 7x57 ballistically. There just isn't enough difference.