American Rifleman November 1986.

Great article Roundoak!

Thank you for sharing!

Thanks for sharing! I enjoy reading Finn a lot. Interestingly he draws the line for an all around cartridge at 7mm while only previously noting that the 6.5 might barely make it…wonder what he thought of the .270

If I remember correctly he grouped the 270 with 7mm.

"It is almost as good as O'Connor said it was, but I still have no need for one". (Hunting Rifles and Cartridges, page 121)

270 is superior at least for logistics in N. America. That means a lot to some.

It's pretty easy to find out, since Finn also wrote an article on the .270 that was republished in the same collection of NRA-magazine articles as the 7x57 article. I have a copy of that collection, and might copy and post the .270 article here too....

Probably the same as all of us…

After all, he was full of common sense

Thanks for posting it!

I bought two of his books from Brad and have really enjoyed them.

That would be another fun read!

I'll save John the trouble - I scanned it a few years back. Click on the images to make them larger:

Thanks for posting the 7x57 piece, always enjoy reading about the old round. Guess that’s why I have three of them.

"The true general purpose big-game cartridges used in this country come in but two calibers, 30 and 7mm (the .270 Win., is merely a slightly aberrant 7mm whose bullets are .007" under size}. (American Rifleman, December 1986).

"actually, the .270 is so close to being a 7mm that its .277" diameter bullets will not drop through the bore of some 7mm's" (Hunting Rifles & Cartridges)

Finn may not of heard the old saying " close only counts in horseshoes and hand grenades".

Well cited!

My initial comment singularly focused on the omission of a bore diameter that was well established and very popular at the time - I thought that was interesting but certainly wasn’t implying ulterior motives.

My first centerfire rifle was a 7X57 purchased at "Ye Old Hunter" on Prince Street along the the Potomac River in Alexandria, Va.
As I recall the Mauser model 95 carbine was made for Chile as a saddle gun with it's 19 inch barrel and nose cap. The price was $19.95 and full metal jacket ammo was $7.00 a hundred. I loved that rifle as a 12 year old and in later years I added two Ruger tangers in 7X57 to the herd.


Many members here will remember "Ye Old Hunter" ads on the back of the American Rifleman magazine until the 1968 gun control act was passed.

Yeah, Doc, a visit to "Ye Old Hunter" was almost a requirement for loonies in our neck of the woods wasn't it?

I always stopped and paid attention when a Finn Aagaard article popped up. He struck me as a guy with both feet firmly on the ground.

Since his persona has been popping up here of late, perhaps now is the time to ask if anyone knows the correct pronunciation of his name. I've always said "Ay-guard", but I've heard it pronounced a bunch of ways. I think it shows respect for a man to correctly use his name in conversation.

It's pronounced AH-gard, with a somewhat guttural G.

You sure it's not A-A-gard?

I have three of them too. Two 700's (Classic and Mountain) and a Mauser. The Classic has killed a few pronghorns mostly with 139 grain interlocks. The other two are recent acquisitions. Too many 7mm Mausers have come and gone though.

I liked Finn's articles, no BS just good informative writing.


(7mm = 0.2756")

Same here, was always turning to his articles in the Rifleman he wrote. He had a good elk hunting article write up as well. Very much enjoyed his stuff.

3 are as follows
1. CZ American 550 with beautiful wood
2. Ruger Hawkeye African.275 Rigby
3. Ruger #1

The 270 and 7x57 are both grand old hunting cartridges that do not have to answer to anyone. If one cannot get it done with either of these carridges, there is something seriously wrong with the nut squeezing the trigger.

I can’t go there on .007” bullet diameter! Same with the .257’s and the current crop of .264/6.5mm’s. Make your choice on these bores or just go with all of the above in true loony fashion. I’ve made my choice in several 7mm cartridges. Cheers

My preference is with the 7mm cartridges also. Probably partly due to several gun writers' influence. But as the first article shown in this thread, the diameter of the bullet wasn't so much the issue as the available bullets in the caliber - that's seems to be why the limit on 7mm being the smallest recommended. Today, it seems to me, the construction of bullets isn't as correlated with bullet diameter as it once was. Today you can find decent bullets in smaller calibers than previously available. I know that my search for appropriate bullets in 6mm and 25 caliber was particularly frustrating. Further I let go of my 264 Win Mag, thinking the 7mm RM had a much better selection of bullets.

I've always liked the 7x57, though my only rifle chambered for it was a Ruger 77 RSI I got sometime around 1990. Lovely little rifle, but not especially accurate. I used it as a deer stand rifle, and it work perfectly for that.

Not to be a spoil sport, but I suppose outside of a Mauser 98 sized action, I never found it fish nor foul. I'd sooner use a 270 in a LA, and a 7-08 (or better yet 308 ) in a SA. The 7x57 certainly shines in an M98 or similarly sized action though, and of course there's no law against one in a LA, except some unwritten rifle loony code.

I’ve kinda thought a 7x57 in a Kimber LA would be pretty slick for a fella wanting to shooting longer bullets. The 280’s in Kimbers are sorta limited in mag space. Probably not a concern to most but they’re fairly tight with long, pointy bullets. The 7x57 should be about right for that action.

Again, it’s a nitpick as my brother has a 280 SubAlpine 280 Ackley and it does fine for the most part but there isn’t much freedom for longer than SAAMI lengths.

It's good to know that you would have approved of my Czech VZ-24 7x57.

I am so far down the 270 rabbit hole, there is no hope for me. The 7x57's, 7-08's, 308's, 30-06's and all others have mostly gone down the road.

Had my Dad been not shooting one for 50 years, myself for 40, and been indoctrinated by JOC. Maybe I would have gotten stuck on another cartridge.

It has been a grand looney journey, but hand me a 22-250, 270, 338-06, and 416 Remington. I am set for the rest of my hunting days.

My hunting notes indicate I've hunted with seven 7x57's.

My first fascination with the cartridge was due to Jack O'Connor, though Finns article sure didn't hurt. Took my first animal with one around 1990, a pronghorn at around 375 yards, and since then have taken another 15 species of big game with the cartridge--perhaps not so oddly ranging from what O'Connor once noted it worked on, javelina to bull moose. Have used it North America in Old Mexico, several American states, Canada and Alaska, also used it considerably in Africa on animals from springbok and impala to kudu and wildebeest. (Have also used it both on a wild boar in the U.S. and warthogs on Africa.) A couple of the animals were large mule deer bucks, my favorite big game.

The rifles have been a pair of Ruger 1As (with which I took that first pronghorn), a walnut-stocked Remington 700 Mountain Rifle that was eventually turned into a "modern custom rifle" with a synthetic stock and Hart barrel, a Ruger 77 Mark II, a New Ultra Light Arms Model 20, and a rifle built built by Serengeti Rifles, on a Montana controlled-feed "short" action that was a sort of cross between a Mauser 98 and pre-'64 Model 70, then stocked in one of Serengeti's fancy-grade laminated stocks. The Serengeti is now owned by the Campfire's "RevMike," one of the first over a dozen rifles I started selling off 2-3 years ago to add to the retirement fund.

Dunno if I'll ever own another 7x57, but it sure does work!

"it sure does work". If I recall, you called it "magnificent" in an article. I'll have to go back in my Dad's boxes of magazines and verify that.

MD

I forgot that you had a write-up in Gack #3. I re-read it. Good stuff.

"Brad Approved"... has a nice ring but is of zero value

What, no respect for the sire of the .30/06 and grandfather of the .308?

I built a 7x57 on a Montana 84L and it was a perfect fit. Probably should have kept that one!

No, was speaking of my approval having zero value...

Yaeh, but you've got an 84M MT in 7-08... I prefer the 7-08 over the 7x57, and the 84M over the 84L!

Having that 7-08 is why I was ok selling the x57.
It's certainly my favorite!

That 7x57 from Teeder sure has been a hammer with 162s. Never had much luck with 7mm-08s.

Great article. Reminiscing,,, 50 years ago, this year, I killed my first deer here on the ranch where I now live with an old Spanish Ovideo M1916 “sporter" in 7x 57. Sporting a weaver K4 I received for Christmas the year before. Shooting Norma factory 150 grain ammo. $4.50 a box from Gibsons discount store!

I still have the rifle!

Very good!

Yep, found it. GUNS May 2015, THE MAGNIFICIENT 7x57 MAUSER (Reloading a Classic with Current Bullets and Powders)

Thanks. I remember that excellent article from 1986 - read it while on a Mule Deer hunt up past Camp Wood on the mesa with a 7x57. Aagard's piece was bountiful for me and I wondered at the time "Why didn't I have all of this good info back in 1962"?

62 was when I bought my first center fire rifle ever - 7x57 Chilean Mauser rifle from a Sears mail ad - $13.99 shipped plus 2 boxes of that Win 175 gr. round nose stuff. I won't bore you here, but have written quite a bit in the past about how I worked that rifle into a sporter and used it forever on a wide variety of game. Three others since then - all Mausers, one a Mark X.

It's all been said above - fab cartridge - an exquisite design well more than 100 years old.

Which is it, a real lady or a real gentleman of a cartridge? In any case, in a proper rifle it has panache.

Glad you still have it!

Don't know about panache, but my 7x57 flattened deer and elk like a pancake.

My 7x57 affliction was actually started by Ross Seyfreid’s G&A article about an old Rigby Sporter around 1990.
I’ve owned a FN in straight military guise, a Chilean DWM in a Fajen California style stock (that was very well done, shot great, and I should’ve kept), had a chance to buy a push-feed FWT for $300 back around ‘99 and didn’t (still kicking myself over that one).
Then around ‘01 or so Mule Deer had an article with a pic of his #1 7x57 leaned against his pack and I had to have one.
It’s only claimed one groundhog, one pig, and two deer (my smallest bodied and largest bodied, oddly), but I love the rifle.
She currently eats 175 SGK’s and 175 HRN’s over RL-22. I just laid in a lifetime supply of older 175 pointed Interlocks. Gonna try them over the same 49 grains of RL-22 and see what happens…..

Perhaps the one 7x57 that has more published reloading data than just about any other.

BTW, I thought you picked up one of the Lipsey Rugers.

I wish we still had Gibson's, I bought a Stoeger "Luger" and a friend bought an unaltered 98k from one in the mid-70s. Can't recall the price of the .22, but the Mauser was $40.

The article was in Guns & Ammo, November 1991. Title: 7mm MAUSER...Smallbore Blockbuster.

Is the Serengeti the rifle that there was miscommunication about what the chamber and ROT should be? ROT was like 1"-11" and wouldn't stable bullet weights over 140 grains.

If all goes as planned , I will be the fourth generation to take a particular 7 x 57 up the mountain for a bighorn ram in 2023.

While my own capabilities may be in question, neither the rifle’s, nor that of the cartridge, will be.

Stay tuned for the write-up. 😎

FC

No. This rifle has standard twist (1:9.5 AFIK) and a match chamber. There is a lot of loading information in Gack I and Gack III, as well as some other publications.

Like John, my interest in the 7x57 was first sparked by reading JO'Cs thoughts on it. Mine came from his articles in ODL and later from his book THE HUNTING RIFLE, when that book came out in 1970. In chapter 8 of that book, titled "Big Punch In A Little Case", JO'C extoled the virtues of the 7x57 in detail and how it had become his wife's, Eleanor's, favorite hunting cartridge. The 7x57 was also Harvey Donaldson's favorite deer hunting cartridge, HAD's being a Winchester 54.

I had paid $38.50 for a sporterized FN-made Venezuelan 24/30 in 7x57 to hunt deer with before I was old enough to buy a firearm myself at Welch's Gun Shop in Lebanon, NH. I fed it a mix of Winchester brand 175 grain soft points and, when I could get them, 139 grain Dominion or Imperial brand ammo from CIL that we would bring back from visits to my uncle Tom in Bedford, PQ. That 24/30 is now a completely rebuilt rifle in 257 Roberts courtesy of Clayton Audette in Springfield, VT. That rifle, as I bought it, has been my only "Kaboom" in over 55 years of hunting, shooting, and reloading. I am hoping that it will always be my only "Kaboom".

I still have a few 7x57s around, 7 bolt guns and a sporterized Venezuelan FN-49. All gathering dust or boxed up and stacked on a shelf somewhere.

Due to its "from the beginning" history with me, the 7x57 probably will persist as my own all time best hunting cartridge.

The discussions here remind me of what, no doubt, will be my second best, its cousin the 6.5x55. Mine have proven themselves to work as effectively as any 6.5 of its general capacity. Never ceases to cause smiles about all the praise and fuss with the wonderful "Creed".

Tell me more about the standard twist you stated, I thought it was 1:866 or 1:875, or something like that.

Correct. The standard twist in European rifles is 1:220mm (1:866 inches). In the US the twist is generally 1:9.5 inches, although occasionally something a little faster is used. I believe the M70 XTR was 1:8.5 or something along those lines. I'd have to measure one to see. John (MD) can speak to the twist on the Serengeti, but I'm pretty sure it is either 1:9 or 1:9.5. I ought to measure it sometime just to be sure.

I have one of the XTR's and man, what a great shooting rifle! I have neglected it a bit for a few years. Need to break it out and warm it up one of these days.

I should measure the twist for the heckuva it as well.

That might be why the old Ingwe Special shot 175s as well as it did. It certainly shoots 158 Prvi Groms into a tight cluster.

I noticed the comment on the 175 gr. Winchester round. It does gripe me that Big W dropped that loading. I always thought their bullet with that "big blue nose" would be a better killer than Federal's 175 bullet. Both in round nose of course. Never did get a chance to find out as I never could find any to buy when I was looking.
PJ

On the first few hunts with the 7x57, those old Win loads with the 175 gr RN were all I could get - and were deadly on deer/elk. But, once started reloading and testing loads, I found that weight/shape bullet to be quite less than optimal for overall performance. Eventually figured out that, in my 7x57s, the bullets designed for hunting and weighing it at or near 140 gr, were optimal. YMMV.

Interesting that you say this. When I got my FN 24/30, the "common knowledge" around the Upper Connecticut River Valley was that the "big blue nose" Winchester 175 grains openned up more quickly than either the Federals or Remingtons with the smaller amount of exposed lead. The 139 grain CIL ammo that I occasionally got to shoot openned up very quickly and would disintegrate inside of a whitetail, no through and through penetration and just bits and pieces of bullet at the bottom of the pool of blood from the disintegrated lungs.

Just to be clear, you purchased Ingwe and Mule Deer's 7x57?

Guilty.

FC, great tradition going on there, I will be all ears.

While you are at, bump the mouth of a case and invert a bullet, chamber, measure the exposed bullet and advise. I collect those measurements. Thanks in advance.

You all are wonderfully terrible influences as were the gun writers mentioned along the way.

Just bought my first 7x57 tonight - from a fellow ‘Fire member. Lots of rifles are neatly organized in my rifle closet - this one is perhaps the most anticipated in a very long while.

The next time I'm using comparator to measure base to ogive I'll check throat length as well on both of those rifles. I know that my newer M70s, as well as my Montana ASR, have throats just shy of .25 inches.

I know that three-shot groups mean nothing, but this is pretty standard from my M1909 Argentine, 24 inch barrel of unknown make, bedded in an old B&C Carbelite stock. The bullets were pulled bullets from Rocky Mountain Reloading, 175-grain Interlocks. The load is:

Case: Prvi
Primer: WLR
Powder: 43.5 gr. IMR4350
CBTO: 2.635"
Vel: about 2500 (never chronographed it)

It blows through pigs and leaves an exit wound about the size of a silver dollar (if you remember what they look like). Unfortunately I'm running low on that bullet and only the Good Lord knows when RMR will ever get caught up to the point of having any more for sale. So what I will probably do is work up a load using something in the 160-grain class. I have a bunch of Partitions, Grand Slams, Hot Cors, and four or five boxes of the old Speer Deep Curls (which, by the way, in the 175-grain version shoot really well in my Zastava). JB seems to like 160-grain bullets, and JOC said it was all his wife ever used in her 7x57, and in my mind those are pretty good endorsements.

Gun loonies like the 7x57. It offers nothing over the 270, except a bit more cool and a few minor ammo hassles.

Correction: a lot more cool!

I have been wondering why the 8x57 came about?

Why the 7x57 wasn’t used in WW2? Or was it?

In 1969 I was 14 and traded a wore out Remington pump 22 and $11 for a 1893 (M93) Ovideo mauser in 7x57 sporterized by Century Arms. Then bought a 50 rd box fmj spitzers that had berdan priming. By the time that surplus ammo was gone I bought 2 boxes of Remington 175 gr rn loads.At that point a RCBS JR. Press and dies which were followed in by everything else to cover the very basics of reloading cf ammo. I had the rifle drilled and tapped for weaver bases, bolt handle modified, Dayton Traister low swing safety installed and all polished with it reblued. That winter of 70 found me fitting the barreled action to an ECBishop 80% sporter blank ,glass bedding it and finishing with G66 linspeed oil.
I worked up my 1st loads with imr 4350 and 139 gr Hornady spire points then backed off a little and subbed in 140 npt's. They shot good 5 in 1 1/4" to 1 1/2" pretty regular. It took 2-3years to draw a tag for deer back then. Finally drawing a Clay Co. Any deer tag in 1972. 50 years ago this fall. I have a whitetail any deer tag for the west half of Sully Co for this fall I am betting I can shoot another whitetail buck with it again.50 years later. You know I still have some of the red box federal brass I bought from Gibson's in Yankton ,SD back then I am sure it will still work...mb
JOC influenced my early years also.

7.92x57 came first, by about 4 years. Nations using the 7mm were largely neutral in the World Wars.

So the 8x57 is pre 7x57?

And when did the 8 x 57 become a larger diameter?

Thanks

Yes, 8x57 came first. The original version of the cartridge, the Patrone 88/8x57I (the I stood for Infantry), appeared in 1888. The final version with .323" diameter bullets, the "S" diameter, appeared in 1905, when the bullet was also changed from a 225-grain roundnose to a 154-grain spitzer. The chamber throat was also shortened to better accommodate the lighter, sleeker bullet. (The next year the U.S. military changed the standard 1903 Springfield's load from a roundnose 220-grain to a 150-grain spitzer. The chamber throat was also similarly shortened.)

However, some commercial 8x57s retained the .318 bullet/groove diameter after 1905, notably break-action guns chambered for the 8x57 rimmed.

Ballistic wise how does the modern 8x57 compare to a modern 7x57 ?

I hear you. The only animal I shot with the federal 175 gr. round nose was lost; found the next day after what the coyotes left. Wasn't much. Years later later I chronographed that load and it gave velocity well under what was advertised. I figure that bullet just zipped thought the deer and never opened up. I shot the deer right about 8 in the morning and the wife and I looked for that deer until the sun went down.

One 160 gr. bullets, I believe JOC also was quite fond of them. I do have a load using the 150 gr, Nosler Partition that shoots very nicely at 2800+ FPS from my M70 FWT and Ruger #1. The custom Mauser I had built has problems with hot loads. It hates them. I think that I have figured out what went wrong. I got the rifle, a commercial FN Mauser chambered to the .270. For some reason I quit shooting it very early on and just set it aside until it came time for the custom build. With factory level loads it shot OK but when they were getting into the warmish side that when thing went to hell. Got to thinking about it the other day and I'm thinking there is set back in the slots for the locking lugs and when the loads reach a certain level, the gun locks up tighter than a tick on a hound dpg. It take quite a bit of force to get the bolt open. What happened was as I was thinking on this, it came to me why I'd put the rifle aside. I was hunting deer close to home and got a shot at a deer. Missed and when I went to chamber a round I could not open the bolt. It had locked up with a factory load. Guess I'll take it to my gunsmith and see what he says but methinks a new receiver is what it will take to fix the problem. I hate to sacrifice one of my rifles to get another receiver for the gun. I have FN rifles in .270 and 30-06 so it can be done. I got that bad .270 as part of a trade. Too bad that brother in law is long time dead. I'd love to have a little discussion with him about the the rifle.
PJ

Comparison about what one would expect with the same case volume/powder charge driving a .311 diameter slug instead of a .284. Not much difference if bullet weight is the same.

CCCC,

Actually, according to some basic rules of internal ballistics, the 8x57 is capable of about 7% more velocity than the 7x57 when using bullets of the same weight, everything else being equal--which means the same pressure, the same barrel length, etc. This may not sound like much but amounts to around 200 fps in loads using 150 to 175/180 grain bullets.

Have published a lot of information on this subject, and other basic rules. In fact, a chapter on it titled "The Rules" has appeared in two of my previous books, and will also appear in the soon-to-appear GUN GACK 1V, THE LITTLE BOOK OF RIFLE LOADS THAT WORK--partly due to reader requesting it be reprinted again.

The 8 x57 cases I own look waaay different than the 7 x 57 cases I own.

Makes me ponder if there isn’t some German skullduggery development of the modern 8x57.

My uncle told me years ago not to bother ackley improving my dads 8 x57 model 98 Mauser because them Germans must have known sumthin

Angus,

You must have a different definition of "waay" different.

The only differences between the 8x57 and 7x57 cases that would be obvious to the naked eye are the length the diameter of the neck (which is obvious from their names), and the length of case body from the head of the case to the rear of the shoulder, which is about .1 inch longer in the 8x57.

The diameter at the rear of the shoulder in both cases is within .001 of .43 inch/ The shoulder angles are both just about 20 degrees, and the overall case length differs by about .01.

No, the 7x57 is NOT exactly the 8x57 necked down, like the .270 Winchester is the .30-06 necked down. But the dimensions are so close any difference in powder room would be due to the heaviness of the brand of brass, not case dimensions.

Wiki pedia states the 7 x 57 holds 60 grains ?water has no parent case.

The 8 x 57 holds 63 grains
It’s parent case is the 88 patrone? Kinda like tequila.

It says Paul Mauser development of the 7 x 57 was 1893.

I will post pictures when I get home.

They look different to me.

You might be smoking something.... A "gram" is 15.4 grains.

Plus, Wikipedia is often FOS. Am sure whoever posted that "measured" capacity by filling the cases to the mouth--which is NOT the most accurate way to measure capacity. Instead it should be done with a bullet seated. Even then, in different brands of specific 7x57 and 8x57 cases (or .270 or .30-06 cases) powder capacity will often vary 3 grains.

And three grains difference in powder capacity in that size case means just about zip, since as I've explained before, any difference in powder room results in about 1/4 as much in velocity, when both cases are loaded to the same pressure. 63 grains is 5% more than 60 grains, which means a 1.25% difference in potential velocity. This means a 35 fps difference in velocity with loads around 2800 fps. Most handloads will vary around 35 fps when firing 5-shot strings.

No I changed it to grains.

The neck length on the 7 x 57 appears much longer.

I will post photos in a couple of weeks when I get home.

I don’t believe they are the same parentage of case.

Then you don't know what you're talking about.

I have a 7x57 and 8x57 case sitting right next to me, and yes the 7x57's neck is longer--by .066 inch.

You also might want to do some actual research on the history of the two rounds, instead of jumping to conclusions on the basis of your "eyeballing".....

So they are the same case?

I thought the 270 was a necked down 3003?

I was just fixing to say them .270 cases make dandy 30Govt 1903 ctgs! 😁

That’s how I make mine also!

👍👍👍👍

I think that MD said that the cases have the same OAL, but that the body of the 8x57 is longer from the bottom of the case to the bottom of the shoulder, and the neck is correspondingly shorter than the 7x57 case

When I compare the 7x57 to 8x57 case dimensions, the overall length of the cases is the same, 57mm, but the length from the bottom of the base to the bottom of the shoulder is 43.84mm for the 7x57 and 46.2mm for the 8x57, a difference of 2.36mm. Since the overall case lengths are the same, 57mm, the difference of 2.36mm is accounted for my different shoulder angles and lengths of the shoulder and neck. The 7x57 has a shoulder length of 3.57mm and a neck length of 9.59mm, while the 8x57's measurements for those portions of the case are 2.7mm and 8.1mm respectively.

Same basic parent case, but after being run through different dies they have different dimensional specs within the shared overall length. IOW, you could make shootable 7x57 cases from 8x57 donor brass or shootable 8x57 cases from 7x57 donor brass.

I'll save Angus the trouble of posting a photo: On the left is the 8x57, and on the right the 7x57. As noted earlier, all but two of their case dimensions are just about identical. The 8x57's body from the case head to the shoulder is about .1 inch longer, and the case necks obviously have different diameters. But the head and body diameters are just about identical, as is the shoulder angle.

I took two other fired 8x57 and 7x57 cases and weighed them, then filled them with water to the mouth and weighed them again. The 8x57 case held 61.0 grains of water, and the 7x57 case 59.8 grains.

Anybody who's done much research on the two cases knows that Paul Mauser was involved in the development, along with other folks, of the original version of the 8x57, designed for the Gewehr 1888--and the 7x57 was developed by his own Mauser company in 1892. It's not a vast coincidence that they're so similar.

Thanks mule deer.

But to my eye ballz they look waaay different.

Angus,

Here are two cartridges that look waaay different:

Itz all in dem eye ballz 👁

In a situation where differences are so slight, it is not my style to tell someone that "they are smoking something" or "you don't know what you're talking about". The memory says that the 8x57 case affords about 1% more capacity than the 7x57 and that past shooting/chron experience has shown that little difference in velocity with the same bullet weights. If your basic rules of internal ballistics say that the "capabilty" of the 8x7 yields 200 fps more velocity, so be it. My old chrono did not measure capability.

CCCC

Getting scolded last night got me re reading the 8 x57 on the terminal ballistics research site.

I found it fascinating.

What’s interesting about these two cartridges is the 7 x 57 ( which is an original cartridge design) wildcatted into the 257 roberts.

The 8 x 57 (whose parent cartridge is the original rim less cartridge invented ) wildcatted to bigger diameter bores.

It’s fascinating also how the actual diameter of the 8 x 57 changed over time and the variation in performance between the Mauser model 98 s used.

Now I gotta study the 7 x 57 more.

But I believe the more a column of powder is bottlenecked before the bullet. The less efficient that column of powder becomes.

well in this small disagreement there was a positive side for me and maybe some others ,i learned a little more history on these two fine old cartridges . the bad thing about these 2 grand old cartridges is the world of gun and ammo manufacturing these 2 cartridges are almost lost for good.

You're correct.

Good point!

Good hunting,
John

They are not exactly "my" rules, though I did come up with the basic formula after analyzing published, pressure-tested data. Instead they're a basic reflection of internal-ballistic physics, analyzed by crunching the numbers published in dozens of sources of pressure-tested handloading data.

That said, one of the nifty things about handloading is we can put together cartridges that result in whatever velocity we want. And chronographs are useful in that quest, as part of the big picture--if you know how to use them in that role. Which I have also explained (and demonstrated) in a lot of my published writing.

If bullet/bore diameter didn't matter in rifle cartridges of the same size, then the .243 Winchester would be capable of getting the same velocities as the 7mm-08 with the same bullet weights, when loaded to the same pressure. It isn't--and the difference in bore area (not diameter) between the .243 and 7mm-08 is similar to the difference in bore area between the 7x57 and 8x57.

My off the cuff calc with 28" bbl is that the 8x57 gives about .085 (%) more bore area than same length bbl in 7x57. Maybe some day maybe I will calc if that actually yields the additional 200 ft/sec.

For those who asked/wondered: John's old Serengeti weighs 8lbs, 0.5 oz, including M8 4x in Talley LWs, on my postal scale. The barrel length is 21 inches, as he's mentioned before. I didn't measure the twist but he's mentioned as well that it is 1:9. I put an inverted Hornady Interlock FB in a Hornady modified case and measured the OAL: 2.290 inches. Below is a picture. If standard case length is 2.235 and the SAAMI chamber length is 2.255, then the throat is either .055 or .035 inches, depending on which measurement one uses. That's considerably than the .250 inch throat in my Featherweight or the almost .5 inch throat in my M98.

Serengeti weight:


OAL w/Interlock FB:


Inverted Interlock w/case: