I asked this elsewhere, but don't want to hijack the thread and it may get more traffic here .........


Everything else being equal, what is the velocity differential between the 280 and 7x57 using reasonable maximum loads in a modern action?

7x57 just because it says 7x57.DK

I have two 7x57 loads that both test near 55 KPSI, and which both put a 160/162 grain bullet at a trifle under 2750 FPS.

Maybe someone can chime in with an equivalent 280 load, so you can get a basis for comparison.

I would not expect much difference at equal peak pressures. The 7x57 is about perfectly balanced, case size vs. bore. The 280 should beat it by a bit, but not much.

EDIT: Also found a 7x57 test that I did on 150 grain bullets. Those were right around 50 KPSI and 2800 FPS. Both the 7x57 and 280 are capable of somewhat higher pressures than this.

as a benchmark, according to the Remington website for same bullet factory load.

280 figures are listed above the 7x57.

Cartridge Type Bullet Muzzle 100 200 300 400 500
Remington� Express� 140 PSP CL 3000 2758 2528 2309 2102 1905
Remington� Express� 140 PSP CL 2660 2435 2221 2018 1827 1648


Energy (ft-lbs)
Cartridge Type Bullet Muzzle 100 200 300 400 500
Remington� Express� 140 PSP CL 2797 2363 1986 1657 1373 1128
Remington� Express� 140 PSP CL 2199 1843 1533 1266 1037 844


Short-Range Trajectory
Cartridge Type Bullet 50 100 150 200 250 300
Remington� Express� 140 PSP CL 0.1 0.6 zero -1.9 -5.1 -9.8
Remington� Express� 140 PSP CL 0.0 zero -1.4 -4.4 -9.1 -15.8


Long-Range Trajectory
Cartridge Type Bullet 100 150 200 250 300 400 500
Remington� Express� 140 PSP CL 1.5 1.4 zero -2.8 -7.0 -20.5 -42.0
Remington� Express� 140 PSP CL 2.2 1.9 zero -3.6 -9.2 -27.4 -55.3

This help at all?

.280 holds about 10 gr more powder whiich I would say equates to 140-150 fps.

Lou

Factory specifications for a 7mm MAuser are worthless comparisons to the handloader who is the only person to realize the potentioal of this case size. A modern rifle in good condition being the only rider.

AGW

AGW- duh!!! Of course you are right on the money. I am an idiot who needs sleep. Apologies. Still- kind of surprised the differences aren't even greater.

Well, I run a .280 with 139s/140s at 3100-3150. With slower powders the on paper data suggest thats possible at 65Kpsi.

My dad used to run a Ruger 77 in 7x57 in a 22" bbl with 140s just at or under 3000fps. Shot it for years with great results.

Id say on paper the difference is about 200fps...in the field, no practical difference.

I would have to say tha as a hunting rifle, either will do about the same. As I pointed out on another thread , I have never been able to a .280 to shoot unless i loaded down quite abit.
But I have owned 3 7X57s and they work great for me.
I know my .280 experence is a fluke but I have had about 3 or 4 280d and a 280 AI and none of them worked for me...tj3006

My guesstimate is in a 22" barrel they are pretty much one in the same. In a longer tube the extra case capacity of the 280 allows more of the slow burning stuff. Both great cartridges imo.

Can run 280/160's at 3,000 fps when taken to AI pressure level.
That's 300 fps faster than the 57.

Also why would I want a 7x57 when the 708 is available in more rifles?

And yes I read the long thread about the 7x57 and also read back in the mid 70's a Rifle magazine article about how to hot rod the round.

I have no reason to buy or build one.

I can load down the 280 if I want milder recoil.

I remain unimpressed.

Sing it Bob. Hope you had a good Christmas. Steve

Maybe the best way to really determine the difference in velocity potential between two cartridges is to perform tests including multiple rifles and loads loaded to the same pressure as determined by the latest test equipment. Since I don't have access to such resources, I would tend to use an approximation.

Experienced folks have stated many times, both here on the campfire and in print, that the velocity increase of a somewhat larger cartridge is approximately one-fourth of the case capacity increase. So, if the 280 case has about 10% more capacity than the 7x57, then by the rule stated above it will shoot about 2.5% faster than the 7x57. So, then, if we have a 7x57 load that shoots a bullet 2700 fps, according to the rule the 280 will shoot the same bullet 2768 fps with the same pressure. The real difference may be a little more or a little less, but that's not really important to me. To say the difference is "about 100 fps" is close enough for me. Incidentally, that's about the same difference between the 308 and 30-06.

-

Around 100 to 150 fps difference.

Can you can get a 7x57 160 loaded 2,850 to 2,900 fps?

Anybody?

I've loaded the 175 in the 280 using 58 grains of 7828 for
2,800 fps.

What can 7x57 users get?

Another 10K of psi and you should get be able to get 2,850.

What are you 7x57 owners using for actions? Long or short?

If not short then I don't see the need.

SAAMI for the 7x57 is 51Kpsi. Pitiful. But, a handloader and a modern rifle can run it at modern pressures up to 58-60K psi safely . At that, in the long action, the 7x57 isn't a .280...assuming the .280 is loaded to it's potential like the .270...the difference being case capacity.

One should look at my screen name when I say this to understand the gravity of it: "The 7x57 has it all over every 7mm in terms of nostalgia, long standing game experience, and cool factor." Short action be damned...the 7x57 is cool.

Depends on how much pressure you are willing to run. Back of the napkin calculations say that those velocities are attainable in the 7x57, if you're willing to run pressures in the low to mid 60Ks. I'm not.

Alliant does list 2750 and 2800 FPS 280 loads at 58 KPSI for the 280 with 160 grain bullets. On average, that's a bit better than my 2750 FPS 55KPSI 7x57 load. My load is actually 2747 FPS, and that puts the difference at 53 FPS. IRL, the difference may even be a bit more than that.

The 7mm and 270 bores are not well matched to 30-06 size cases. When the bullet exits the muzzle, the pressure in the barrel is still high, and more of the energy stored in the compressed gas is wasted into the atmosphere. So the efficiency of such cartridges is lower. A 270 bullet in a 308 case will almost match the MV of a 270...the difference is much less than 308 vs 30-06, and that's why.

None of this matters much. The 280, 270, and 7x57 are all very fine cartridges. Minor differences in efficiency are mostly academic.

Why would I prefer a 7x57 over a 7mm-08? Good question. The 7mm-08 is also a fine cartridge, and commercial ammo is plentiful. I have a 7x57 because that's the barrel I got a good deal on. And it's more cool. If I had gotten the same deal on a 7mm-08 or 280 barrel, I'd probably be shooting that and liking it as much.

I've loaded for both and have owned several 280's, 3-4 7x57, but have only worked with 140's in each because there was no requirement for a 160 for my hunting.All these rifles had 22" barrels and ran the gamut from Remington Mountain rifles to full blown customs.

Bottom line was 2800-2850 from the 7x57;3000-3100 with 140's from the 280 Rem.Back then,only RL22 gave the velocities I liked with great accuracy from the 280.I have not messed with either cartridge in over a decade because they do nothing that can't be done with a 270.

Back in the 80's there were a few gungacks running around getting over 3000 from 140's in the 7x57 using Norma 205. I would not want a steady diet of those loads, even today.This is the same old story of the smaller case coming close to the larger case with light bullets, but the spread increases when bullet weight goes up.

I would say the chances of safely hitting 2900 with a 160 in the 7x57 are grim from sporter barrels.Only one load in the new Nosler manual hits that from the 280 Rem.

Much as I admire it,and setting "cool" factor aside,the 7x57 cannot deliver the velocities of a 280 because it holds less powder.If you desire 2900 from a 160 gr bullet, get the 280; even then, you'll be lucky to get it from 22" barrels at safe pressures IMO.

Yeah, I think that is reasonable.



7x57 is kind of an awkward length. It's just a little too long to really work well in a short action, and not long enough to really require a long action. Yugo Mausers just right for that length cartridge.

My particular 7x57 is on a Zastava long commercial Mauser action. It happens to be the chambering that I got a good deal on. I like the rifle, and it shoots well. If the barrel had been 7mm-08 or 280, I'm sure that's what I would have ended up shooting.

Well put!

My 7x57 Ruger #1 has a short action and it works beautifully.

There's no need for 280 lovers to get defensive. I didn't see anyone post that their 7x57 is faster than a 280, or even as fast. We all know the 280 is faster. Take a deep breath and a sip of your drink. It's all good.

-

I kinda feel sorry for the guys who worship at the alter of velocity.

I go out of my way to shoot a 7x57 and it's offspring,simply because I like them,and they work.

Being the weirdo that I am,I really like conventional bullets too.
Reckon it has anything to do with the fact that I shoot them at the speed they're designed for.

If you prefer a 280,enjoy it,that's the main thang.
Mike

Thanks,280!......

I was the person who crunched the numbers and came up with the formula (approximate) that any increase or decrease in powder capacity results in 1/4 that increase in potential muzzle velocity, at the same pressure in the same bore size.

It is gratifying to see it quoted so much. Once I even saw it quoted as "the old 1/4 rule." I first published it in RIFLE or HANDLOADER (can't remember which) at most 10 years ago, which I guess qualifies as "old" in this era of the Internet.

I worked out the formula partly because of discussions like this. I had also grown weary of gun writers guessing how much "Ackley Improving" a round would increase the velocity.

The formula was developed by crunching the numbers from a bunch of handloading manuals. If you want to argue about it, feel free. But first spend a few days crunching numbers so we have something realistic to argue about.

The .280 has about 20% more powder capacity than the 7x57, with the same bullet seated to factory overall length (about 3.1" in the 7x57 and 3.35" in the .280). Exactly how much depends on
brass weight, but 20% is pretty close.

Thus the .280 can drive bullets about 5% faster when loaded to the same pressure, in the same barrel length. If the 7x57 is capable of 2700 fps with a 160-grain bullet, then the .280 will drive the same 160 to 2835. If the 7x57 is capable of 2900 with a 140, then the .280 can drive the same bullet to 3045, again everything else being equal.

I see that somebody has brought up the old myth about needing a longer barrel in the .280, to burn up all that slow powder. This is indeed an old one, but the truth is that just about all the smokeless powder that's going to burn in a rifle round (99%+) burns by the time the bullet has traveled maybe 2 inches in front of the chamber, exactly how far depending on various factors. The bullet continues to accelerate because the gas produced by the powder continues to expand, not because the powder is still burning.

In reality, the powder that produces the most velocity in a 26" barrel also produces the highest velocity in an 18" barrel.
This has been proven over and over again. In fact, the LEAST loss of any load's velocity in shorter barrels generally comes from a combination of slow-burning powder and heavy bullets.

There sure are a lot of loud 280 afficianado's but at our local Academy stores you can't get 280 ammo of any kind. One brand of 7MM-08 and twice as much 7x57 ammo of the same Brand (Rem.) are what is on the shelves. And locally this store has the biggest variety of factory ammo.

I have had a bunch of custom 280's & have NEVER got better than 2,725 fps with a 160gr bullet. I have never fired a heaver bullet than 154 in a 7x57.. They both kill deer & hogs with the loads i use however.

If you want 280 factory ammo in Atlanta Bass Pro is the only source I could find a few years ago. If you want to shoot a .284 bullet in a factory round get a 7 Rem mag

I guess I qualify as a "Pan lil 7" looney.

Have a 7mm-08, 3 7x57's, and a 280 in the safe. At least I don't need to stock bullets of the 270 ilk on the loading bench.

The 7x57's are milsurp mauser actions. My mannlicher FN Venezuelan "woods gun", another FN Venezuelan "parts gun", and an 1896 Vintage M93 Spanish made in Berlin. Still trying to figure out what to do with it, but there is merit to an "antique" action sitting in the safe.

Of the three cartridges the lil 7mm-08 makes the most sense. Does a right regular 2875 with 139 Hornady's out of a 20" barrel when pushed by 50gr of H4350. But that's Doecamper's gun. I CLEAN it at my own peril ;-)

GE

I think you would find that most .280 users handload and thus why you don't see it in every Academy, Dicks etc., My local Academy has .280 and I have bought some recently to get my .280's on paper.

Not that it proves anything, but a decent indicator of what the potential of two cartridges is the ballistics of Hornady's light magnum. They tend to be about the fastest MV you will find in commercial loads.

Both use 139 gr SST:

7x57 - 2830 fps
.280 - 3110 fps

280 fps difference.

The 7x57 is what it is. A step above a 7/08 and step below a .280 which is a step below a 7RM. Nothing wrong with that. Each one is a great round. All depends on what you are using it for and how much recoil/noise you want to deal with.

Exactly. Well said too.
I have a 7x57 (Plus two that my kids have that I load for), a Win 284 custom on a Mauser 98 action, plus a 7mm Mag. Each one has it's place in my line up. And, I got into 7x57's long before the 7-08 was a dream, so I'll stay with the 7x57, which incidentally, is a better chambering than the 7-08. The Win 284 is as close to the 280 Rem as you can get in terms of velocity, and the 7mm Mag is as much 7mm velocity that I want, or need. Each chambering I mention here has a different level of velocity, and recoil, for a given bullet weight.

Don

Why do you say that?

That is a classic example of the oxymoron "false logic."

Hornady Light Magnums (and any other U.S. commercial ammo made by a member of SAAMI) still has to conform to SAAMI maximum pressures. SAAMI maximum pressures for the 7x57 are lower than for the .280, even in "Light Magnum" ammo. I don't have the numbers at hand, but believe the 7x57 maximum is around 50,000 psi, and the .280 maximum 60,000.

In fact, handloaders can safely exceed the muzzle velocity of Hornady Light Magnum 7x57 ammo with "modern" pressures of 60,000 psi or so, even in a 22" barrel. Look it up in Nosler's manual. The top muzzle velocity listed for 140-grain bullets in the 7x57 is 2892 fps. With the 139 Hornady (which has a shorter bearing surface than any 140-grain Nosler 7mm bullet) you can safely go up to 2950 or so.

I have owned a pile of 7x57's and .280's, and tested them in pressure lads. The difference is about what's indicated with the 1/4 formula, 5%. This is admittedly hard to pin down from most manual and factory data, because of the pressure differences between the rounds. Or even barrel length differences. Nosler's manual would be much more useful in this comparison (since they load both rounds to about the same pressure) except for the fact that they tested the 7x57 in a 22" barrel and the .280 in a 26" barrel.

The 5% difference does come out to around 150 fps for most bullet weights. This amounts to about what bullets from the .280 lose 50 yards from the muzzle. So in theory the .280 has about a 50-yard advantage over the 7x57.

In something like a quarter of a century of handloading and hunting with both rounds, however, I can generally say that the 7x57's bullets will get to whatever animal is being aimed at, and kill. As will the .280's.

Naturally, this is only if the hunter in question is familiar with the rifle in hand, an ideal I know we all strive for.

MD ....... thanks for this info. I've never read this before.

This has been an interesting thread.

San Juan Hill is where it started and the old 7x57 is what sent the USA back to the drawing board to come up with somthing new to compete with that new little round that spanish were using on us,ive been hunting and shooting from a kid on up to 50 years,And in the circles of hunters and shooters I ran with in say the last 35 years,I have never known a 280 rem shooter,but I have known many a 7x57 shooter,Id be willing to bet cha that with a good rifle set up for me in the old 7mm mauser,that I can kill anything you guys can with your 270-280 class rifles,Dont get me wrong Im not knockin the 270-280 class rifles,Ive never owned a 270 win but Ive some buddies who do and Ive fired a few of them and I will say there is one thing that a 270 win. surley has on a 7x57 and that is felt recoil,the 270 win. is a fine performer,I wont argue that and I have a tendancy to like most cartridges built on the old 06 case,have had many,But I am a definate fan of the old 7x57mm mauser,what was the name of the man who killed over a thousand elephants with the old mauser in the early 1900s,lots of history and nostalgia come along with this fine round and it like the others have spawned a couple of very nice factory rounds,then again my attitude has always been shot placement is the key to it all,what is all the power in the world if you dont hit the mark,Id be much more concerned about my rifle hitting a dime a 100 yds than a bullet flying along a say 500 fps faster that couldnt hit the dime at 100yds,Ive had several 7x57mm mausers and never been disappointed in any of them,some like fords and some chevys and Dodges,they all get the work done,but we all see different things in them that suit us individually,I love guns and ballistics,yipper Ive been bitten by the bug,many good uns abound,but in my heart the old 7x57 will always be at the top of the list..................

That sounded like a eulogy. After looking for 7x57 factory fodder I might agree a eulogy is appropriate.

No where did I imply that referring to Hornady's light magnums was an arbiter of handloading potential. In fact I quite specifically stated that is was merely a decent comparison of commercial loads and really proved nothing. As they utilize the same bullet and maximum safe pressures under SAAMI, it is better than trying to compare an arbitrary Remington load to a Winchester load or even two Remington loads which are often all over the map as far as pressure.

Not everyone handloads, so this would be a fair comparison for someone forced to buy commercial cartridges.

I understand that you can safely exceed SAAMI for the 7x57 through handloading, of course you can safely exceed 60k psi with the .280 as well, unless one thinks there is some magic to the brass that has a headstamp with .270 win on it. But again, my point was merely to provide an apples to apples comparison for maximum commercial loads.

Your previous post was a home run, I just think you may have misread mine. Perhaps I could have been clearer with where I was going with it.

The 7x57 is really about light recoil, and it's about the enjoyment of using a classic traditional cartridge. I don't see any point at all in trying to load it to 280 Rem. levels. In fact, I know some die-hard 280 fans who are also real fans of the 7x57, and simply becuase it burns less powder and is a joy to shoot, plus it's a classic cartridge with a rich history.

One of my friends hunts quite a bit with a lightweight Biesen 7mm Mauser, and that rifle's like a whisp in the hand, and it seems to point itself. As light and petite as it is, it still doesn't kick all that much, but it would buck a bit harder if it was a 280 Rem. That's why my friend loves it.

If I ever order a NULA rifle from Melvin Forbes, I'd be very much inclined to order it in 7x57. That seems like a good marriage to me........

AD

Like trying to prove that 947 angels instead of 946 angels can dance on the head of a pin. I've got em both, and it's a clear-cut case of "Whatever floats your boat".

Wayne

Increasing the case capacity of a 7x57 to that of a 280 does not yield as much MV increase as moving from a 308 case to a 30-06 case in a 30 caliber round. The expansion ratio just isn't as favorable.

Just for grins, we can compare the 7x57 shooting a 150 grain bullet at 2850 FPS to a 280 shooting the same bullet at 3000 FPS.

One way to set a maximum range is to compare the ranges at which the bullet drops 24". Past that, you have to be a very good range estimater to get your elevation right. At 2850 FPS, the 7x57 reaches this point at 415 yards. The 280 is good to 425. Advantage, 280 by 10 yards.

Another way to set a maximum range is to compare the distances at which the bullet drops below 2100 FPS. This is the range where conventional bullets stop opening reliably. For the 7x57, the range is 400 yards. For the 280, it's 465. Advantage 280, by 65 yards.

If you're using Partitions, the magic impact speed is 1700 FPS or more. 7x57, 635 yards, 280 715 yards. Advantage 280, by 80 yards.

There is another side to the speed argument: If you're shooting at 3000 FPS with standard bullets, you might want to consider whether you want to take shots within 100 yards. That's the distance where the bullet drops to 2800 FPS. Above that, standard bullets open too much and too quickly, producing shorter wound channels. For the 7x57, this distance is 25 yards. Advantage 7x57, by 75 yards. Of course, if you're shooting premium bullets, this probably won't be an issue.

If there is any great lesson from the 10,000 moose thread, it is that there are many combinations that work very well.

Understand what your favorite rifle and load will do, and enjoy using it within those limits. Barring unusual situations, the one and only purpose of a firearm is to bring enjoyment to its owner. If it does that, it's successful.

A quick look at some data from Alliant on the 7-08, 7x57, and .280

139 Hornady Bullet, 24" bbl for each.

7-08 - 52grs R-19 give 2850 at 57,900psi

7x57 - 51.8grs R-19 gives 2835 at 49,000psi

.280 - 57grs R-19 gives 2970 at 58,000psi

The 7x57 appears to be a very efficient cartidge. And if loaded to modern pressures of 58K-60Kpsi, in modern firearms, would seem to rival the .280 at like pressure. While the 7-08 is at or near max SAAMI pressure of 61,000psi running that speed. The difference being only that the .280 can be safely loaded to 65Kpsi like its cousin the .270...for a gain of @ 150fps, and of course the selling point of the 7-08 is the short action. All in all the 7x57 appears by far to be the most efficient of the 3, and only takes a back seat to the .280 by 150fps, or the 7-08 by a few extra ounces of action legnth.

I have a jones in a big way for a 7x57, but I'll always love my .280Rem, and can't ever forsee a use or need in my life for a 7-08. YMMV.

According to the above paragraph from Mule Deer (who I have great respect for) by handloading a 7x57 you might achieve a MV of 2950, or 120 fps faster than a Hornady LM 7x57. What I don't understand is why the 7mm-08 is considered lessor than the 7x57 by people on this forum, when the Hornady LM in 7mm-08 is already at 3000fps, only 110fps slower than a .280.

I'm just curious, I really have no axe to grind either way, as I shoot a .308 and at the MV's we're talking about, I'm sure a deer would never know the difference.

Patrick

.280 Remington posted before me and answered my question.

I agree. As much as I like the .280. I would actually love to have a 7x57 mountain rifle. Each of the .284's is just a different tool and each has their place and use.

I was the person who crunched the numbers and came up with the formula (approximate) that any increase or decrease in powder capacity results in 1/4 that increase in potential muzzle velocity, at the same pressure in the same bore size

Ok then, not to hi-jack the original intent of the thread. My 35Whelen, because of a long throat has a calculated 11% increase in effective case capacity. barnes #3 states a 250FXB top load runs 2578fps with 57gr RL-15. If I take 1/4 of 11 = 2.5 and X by 2578 , 2578fps x 102.5 = 2642 fps. I average 2684fps with the 250gr bullet, 61gr varget, and a 22" bbl as opposed to a 24"bbl in the barnes #3 book. This load is higher pressure and /or has more area under the curve thus improving velocity. Am i on the right track here? Used this hunting load since varget became available ,10-11 yrs ago.

Loaded to like pressures...the 7-08 is "lesser" than the 7x57.

My father had loaded for my brother's Ruger 77 7x57 for years...and was running right at 3000fps with 139 Hornadys in a 22" bbl. Never a moments worry from it either.

As to Hornady's light mag ammo...I don't know about the 7x57, but their .280 ammo is the real deal! The only box I ever bought ran the moly'd 139s at 3200fps (Three Two Zero Zero) in my 24" gun, and yeah, I checked the chrony with 2 other known loads that same day. And yeah, Hornady claims that still running at SAAMI 60K psi not 65Kpsi. As well, Nosler claims its .280 data with 57grs of R-19 at 3150fps in a 26" tube is at 60K psi.

And all the gun nuts said "AMEN"

The 7mm-08 only has slightly less powder capacity than the 7x57--about a couple of grains, which amounts to about 4% less. This means the 7x57 is (at least theoretically) capable of about 1% more muzzle velocity with the same bullet at the same pressure.

This is pretty much what different rounds of the same load will vary in velocity--so the 7mm-08 and 7x57 are pretty much the same thing. I have owned a couple of 7mm-08's and, using published data, really couldn't see any difference between the 7mm-08 and the 7x57. One load that really shot well--50 grains of IMR4350 and the 139 Hornady Spire Point--got over 2900 from a 22" barrel, right in line with Hodgdon's data, where I got the load. It is also no trick to get well over 2500 with a 175 from the 7mm-08, so anybody claiming it is less cartridge than the 7x57 is cuting things pretty fine.

Actually, even with factory loads the 7x57 doesn't come off too badly in comparison with the 7mm-08. A few years ago I chronographed several 7mm-08 140-grain factory loads in a 22" barreled Remington Mountain Rifle and none ran any faster than 2750 fps. More recently I chronographed 3 different 140-145 grain 7x57 factory loads in the 21" barrel of my 7x57 Serengeti, all advertised at 2650 fps or so. All at least matched that, and the Federal Premium load with 140 Partitiions broke 2700. So there isn't as much difference as the ammo catalogs would have us believe. Plus, there is still a 175-grain RN factory load available for the 7x57 (Federal), and nothing like that for the 7mm-08.

The fastest factory load I've ever chronographed in the 7x57 was indeed the Hornady Light Magnum, when they loaded it with the 139 Spire Point boattail (now it uses the 139 SST). In the 24" barrel of another custom rifle with a short throat, it went around 2950! Accuracy was very good too. But in most 22" barrels, with more normal throats, it doesn't beat the "standard" 140-145 grain stuff from Remington, Federal or Winchester by much.

I see somebody brought up the 10,000 mooses thread. Well, the biggest animal I have ever taken with the 7x57 was a bull moose in Alberta, with a 41" spread. Not the biggest moose in the world, but not the smallest either! it has also worked fine on wildebeest in Africa, and out to almost 400 yards on springbok and pronghorn. Not bad for a 115-year-old cartridge!

I have changed my thinking when comparing cartridges as "knit picking" is futile and manipulatable, if there is such a word.

The way I compare cartridges is to decide what animals can be taken with one cartridge or load, that the other cartridge cannot take with equal efficency.

This eliminates the borderline capabilities from "light on" but capable under the right conditions, to the comfortable capabilities of the heavier options.

When comparing any 7mm's over usual hunting ranges which generally means under 300yards or so, forget it, and buy the rifle you like most in whatever is availble.

The simple reality is that most 7mm users will hunt deer sized game and the 7's are all very capable. The bullet you choose and where you place it, will show up more difference that the cartridge case which is just the launching pad.

AGW

Boy! Interesting thread!......I haven't seen such lively debate since the OJ Simpson trial.You guys ARE GOOD!!

If you're "in love" with a certain cartridge,you will have confidence in said cartridge,and shoot it well.
You will place your shots better,and bring home more meat.
Us 7luvrs are strange birds indeed
Mike

Mike: I'm one of "youse guys". But I shoot the "original 7mm"...................................the 270



Well, ok the "second 7mm".......

I said that because the 7x57 has a larger case capacity than the 7-08.

Don

I chose the 7x57 caliber over the 270 for oklahoma because of the mild recoil. I use the hornady custom load in 140 spire point boat tail (not the SST). Five rounds routinely in one hole at 2700 ft per second which is downloaded. I do not need any more velocity than that. Kills deer fine. I am thinking about a change though to the 260 remington in the kimber 84m action simply because it is a lighter rifle. I would go with a 25x08 but it is only a handloading proposition.
I am not concerned about barrel life, but I think that the longer
case and neck of the 7x57 would promote longer barrel life ie.
the .243 vs. the 6mm remington.
The 7mm08 & the 7x57 can be chambered in the remington short actions, but the 7x57 cannot be chambered in some short actions. I have asked many handloaders if they find any problems loading the heavier bullets in the 7mm08 vs.the 7x57
and everyone says there is no problem.

So, the choice in either the 7mm08 or 7x57 seems to be just a matter of what action you choose.

My understanding is that the ammunition availability in foreign
countries for the 7mm mauser is better though.

The 7x57 will shoot higher sectional density bullets at a higher
velocity than a .308 and roughly the same as a 30-06. So, it
kicks less & makes less noise than the 30-06 and does about the same thing.

I have both! A fairly light Comercial FN 7x57 that I use when my shots will probably be 200yds are so and a 280 Heavy 26" Shaw barrelled Zastava Mauser that I use when the shots might exceede 200yds. The Fn is not loaded all that hot, the 280 is. Both are great for what I use them for. I can't imagine why anyone would buy a 7x57 and stoke it to the max, it's simply not what its ment for IMHO. capt david

Academy by my house carries a lot of 280 Remington Express ammo in 150 gr which is what I shoot in my 280's. I have never had a dry run when I went there to get some.

Last year they had 35 Whelen ammo but not this one either. I have to admit the manager at my local Academy could not understand the difference between standard velocity and high velocity 22 rimfire shells.

If I was in the market for a nice mild manerd deer cartridge, And i went shopping, and had narroed my choice to a 7mm08 7X57 and a .280, I,d just pick the rifle i liked best. Nothing in the deer woods you can do with one you cant to with the other.
Mule deer , mentions loading both to standard length , and I guess that gives you a good place to start, but most 7X57s have prety long throats, If your mag box is long enough, say on a CZ or a MDL 77 you can seat the bullet out and relly push the speeds up quite a bit.
I have never really seen the need to do this as I have an STW if I need more speed.
But I have seated out to iprove acuracy.
I think This gives 7X57 has an atribute not every body apreciates.
I like the extra room in the mag You can do alot of things till you finaly find a load your rifle likes.
I am going to try a cool little small ring 1936 mexican mauser out tommorow.
here the mag is short but the throat is long.
Its gonna be interesting to see how it shoots. I almost hope it won't.
It is a cool action to build a 6mm rem or a .257 Bob on...tj3006

If the rifle has a long throat, and is loaded to 60000 psi, the 7x57 will do just what a .280 normally will. That means right at 3000 with 140's, 2750-2800 fps with 160's and 2600 fps with 175's. That two-letter word 'if' is a big one however. I shoot one of these more than any rifle I own and have for thirty years or so, including elk, African game up to kudu, and the 160's at 2750 fps are a great easy shooting game killer. I have also seen the velocities vary as much as 200 fps between two rifles of varying throat lengths with the same ammo, so you have to watch what you're doing. It's just one of those cartridges that takes a little extra work but is worth it IMO. The 7mm-08 is virtually identical, or close enough no animal would notice, but the history of th e7x57 makes it far more interesting. It is my long-time favorite hunting cartridge and I will always have at least a couple of them.

I agree 100% even if I don't have your experience. I wanted a 7X57 for a long time but I also wanted a stainless/synthetic gun for all weather purposes. Well, being that I can't afford all the rifles that I want, I got a stainless 280 Remington. It'll darn sure match/exceed what I'd want a 7X57 to do and since I couldn't get an over the counter factory 7X57 in stainless, I went with the 280. I still have a soft spot for the old cartridge but...I went with what I could get for the money at the time. Hopefully, Mule Deer will get a moment of insanity and sell me his Serengeti Walkabout in 7X57 for a Stevens 200 price....but I'm not holding my breath

[quote=High_Brass
Hopefully, Mule Deer will get a moment of insanity and sell me his Serengeti Walkabout in 7X57 for a Stevens 200 price....but I'm not holding my breath [/quote]

"Dream along with me....."

Probably not, partly because I was lucky enough to obtain it when the prices at Serengeti were a lot lower than they are now!

I must say I'm a little surprised that an innocent little thread like this contains so many fierce defenses of one cartridge against another. Personally, I have alwasy thought the whole point was to use them all, and maybe own them all the same time!

Man oh man what a bunch of gun gack, are we already that bored gang...

Hope Sept. comes quick.

This stuff if pretty darn simple unless someone chooses to make it tough.

Here's how I see it and my way of thinking has to be the right way right....<g>

7/08 case is smaller than the 280 so given equal pressures the 280's gonna run faster. I believe that Brad and JB said 150 fps or so and that I believe.

The 7/08 is a good short action round and is super for the ladies and youth. The 280 is a good one for the long action.

Now the 275 Rigby, for me that would come into play if for some reason one wanted to build a cute lil small ring or something of that effect.

Just my thoughts and have a great new year.

And for petes sake use a 270 not one of those wanna be 7's...gack gack gack.

Dober

If you can't get it done with 7x57 yor prolly not gona get it done with a 280

Preecisely.

Or!!! The .280 gets another 150 fps, which means another 300 foot-pounds, which makes all the difference in the world. After all, that's almost as much as the .22 Magnum produces at the muzzle. Add a .22 Magnum to a 7x57 and....

I wish Elk would log on and tell us how many elk his kid's 7mm-08 has killed now. I believe it is somewhere around 30.

making excuses for less is not very attractive

woofer

three reasons to own a 280.....

1. it isn't a 270

2. it is better than a 7-08

3. you can make a 280AI and have the sexiest cartridge on earth

woofer..like your thinking

Too bad no one currently offers an affordable 7X57.
That would be much more interesting to me than a 280Rem, despite the fact of their near identical capabilities.

My new custom lefty SS M70 chambered in 7X57 is making it's maiden voyage to the range today!! I can't wait! Oh, the custom 280 AI is also going! grin

Huntr,
You will let us know how they shoot?

I'm safely getting right at 3000 f.p.s. with the 139 grain Hornady bullet out of my Remington Mountain Rifle.

What powder/charge are you using? Brass? I would love to get that out of mine.

I forgot to say my Mountain rifle is chambered for 280 Rem.

A classic old thread, with some old timers sorely missed.

Glad you revived it, I really enjoyed reading it.

+1

15 years later ...... I've had both the 7x57 (275 Rigby) and 280 in the years since the OP asked that dumb question.

The 7x57 ended up being the keeper during downsizing.

I gifted my 7x57 to my son - it is his lucky deer rifle. I still have my 280...

I've had a few .280's and 7X57's through the years, but end up just keeping my 7mm-08's. They suit what I need a 7mm to do perfectly, while burning less powder and fitting in a smaller package.

"You dance with the one who brung ya" After starting hunting whitetail deer with a Savage 99 250-3000 I wanted a cartridge to hunt Mule deer, Moose, Mountain goat, Elk and Black bear. I purchased a used pre-64 Model 70 that started life as a .270 Winchester but was converted to a 7x57 by Emil Koshollek with a Buhmiller 24" barrel. 1-9" ROT.

There have been other 7x57's since that rifle and probably more in the future.

Some great characters on this old one! Enjoyed the trip down memory lane.

Nice thread to revive. Solid info and no petty name calling.

Jerk! ..........

I have no need.for.the 280 where I live because i cannot take.advantage.of.its speed.

Oh yeah, well let your pretend fantasies of your broke smoochies, know that I shoot it all so you can keep your lazy
[bleep] on the couch.

You've been led to water.....

Laughin.....

<LOL>

I just spent about an hour reading through this thread and it's living proof of life after death.

I remember Allen Day and always thought he made sense. I may not have always agreed with him but I always paid attention.

The last few years before my accident, I was doing some serious work with the 7x57 and .280 Re. I did get the .280 close to 2900 FPS with a 160 gr. Speer Grand Slam. 2880 FPS to be exact. Rifle is an Argentine Mauser by DWM with a 24" barrel. Nice gun, a nice shooter but too damn heavy.

With the 7x57 I dinked around with it off and from 1973 to date with a lot of blank time in between. The gun from 1974 was traded off too early and I'm still kicking myself for letting that one go. Didn't pick up another until around 1982 or 3. Fellow offered way more than I paid for it a year later and it was gone.

Then about 7 0r so years ago I acquired a Ruger #1A in 7x57. Accuracy sucked big time and I never could reach the rifling. The rifle had a Wilson barrel with a 2.5" throat as determined by chamber cast. The rifle was sent back to Ruger who replaced the barrel and now I could at least have fairly decent hunting accuracy. Proper hand loads made a big difference in groups which now hover at of very close to one inch.
I found a Winchester M70 at a gun show in 7x57 for a reasonable price and it came home with me.

Most load work up has been done with the M70 and Ruger. I also have a custom Mauser that is in need of of a new receiver. Just have to drop it off at my local gunsmith. The receiver used to be barreled to .270 and would lock up with hot ammo and even with factory at times. I'd put it away way back in the mid 70's and forgot about the problem. Probably gonna get expensive.

All this leads up to what Mr. Day said in his post. Fighting cancer with a port in my right shoulder, I'm faced with either no shooting at all or the weaker factory level loads and ammo reloaded to same.

I do have 150 gr. Noslers loaded to 2880 FPS with RL17, and was planning to use that on a cow elk hunt. Hunt didn't happen due to a wreck. I also have a load with the 140 gr. Ballistic Tip that does 2800 FPS using W760. I'm thinking of breaking those down and going with factory level rounds.

Have to check with the doc this Wednesday and see if this will be feasible.
PJ

After shooting sta-ball in the 7-08 I think it should be thrown in the mix. I’ve safely pushed 160s over 2830fps in two different rifles chambered in it.

I enjoy my M77 7x57. It’s an old hollow bolt and it shoots 160 partitions well with 45 grains of H4350. I also have a 280 700 mountain rifle. It does really well with 54 grains of Ramshot Hunter and a 140. Darn thing is real snappy. The Ruger is a mild thump and the Remington is a sharp whack.

If I had to keep one or the other I’d keep the 7x57

With a 140gn bullet I get 2870 fps in my 7x57 (H4350) and 2919fps in my 280 (Re19), both with 22 inch barrels.

I would agree with you. I used StaBALL in my 7-08 as well. While I do have a .280 Rem, I still want a .280 AI and have for several years now. Too many wants and not enough funds.

Uh oh eating ramen noodle

I saw a Cooper 280AI a few days ago. Damn near bought it, but it was $1,800.00. And it was on sale!!!! They lowered the price by $300. The test target was 1 hole.

I think we are going to see the market in firearms bottom out. My buddy won a pre64 westerner in a 264 off gun broker for $1000 bucks. Only thing wrong with different recoil pad. People don’t have the money like they used too. I know where nib extreme weather in a 264 made in South Carolina selling for $1000 bucks. Not the best deal around, but selling less than what usually sell for.

I use StaBall 6.5 in my 7x57 with a 22" barrel-Hornady cases-210 primers-3.1"ol.
I watched the chronograph and worked up close to published 7-08 velocity.
145 LRX at 2930
150 NBT at 2840

I agree. Even though the current administration thinks we are not in a recession and at 0% inflation. Things are going to get worse before it gets better. On the subject of EW's though. I almost bought a 325Wizzum for $600 last year. In like new condition. I remembered you have and like that cartridge. I probably should have bought it, I was talking to a guy at the range a couple weeks ago that was looking for a good 325 for some damn reason..

Yeah man, I like reading these ol gems myself.

Yep I have a South Carolina made one.. Made in 09 I think, bought it new in 2013 at sportsman’s warehouse for $980 I think. I bought it 2 days before a moose/caribou hunt. Only bullets I could find were 200gr Speer hot-cor and imr 4007. I loaded some ammo headed to the range hoping for the best. After on paper I shot couple groups and I will be damned. Shot around an inch or less. Couple days later shot a caribou at 400yds with it.

I just compared 150 grain Nosler Partition hitting 2.5” above point of aim @ 100 meters with velocities at 2,865 FPS vs. 2,700 FPS (my 280 loads vs my 7x57 loads in Remington 700’s)
According to the application I have on my phone and the identical environment (pressure, humidity, etc.) I loaded in:
The POI at 300 yards is 4.6” low vs 6.5” below point of aim.
Velocity 2,332 FPS vs 2,186 FPS at 300 yards
Energy 1,811 ft-lb vs 1,592 ft-lb. at 300 yards also.

If that data is accurate - I think it’s close at any rate, you might draw your own conclusion regarding the 280 vs the 7x57.

If components were available and at reasonable prices it would be fun to run tests - throwing in the 7-08, 280 AI and the 7mm RM for further comparison. But it would be better if actual pressure testing was included and at the same pressure for each cartridge.

Superformance in the 280 Rem with 120gr NBT bullets is both faster and more accurate over standard powders in my tests. 60.0grs Superformance pushed the little 120's to 3173 fps. Data is from Hodgdon 2020 Annual Manual for loads. Three shots of the 120gr NBT grouped less than an inch at 100 yds which is excellent for my mountain contour 22" barrel. I need to try this powder in 140gr loads.

Well I must confess to never really caring about which bullet is faster than the other one. As long as it shoots accurately I'm good with it. I load all my own ammo and let the rifle tell me when it's had enough.
I have at the present time 2 270's, 2 7MM-08, 1 280 and 3 7X57's. Some of these are factory rifles some custom. IF I had to keep only one of them it would be one of the 7X57's. Which one would be a hard choice.
I like the classic's and the 7X57 is the epitome of classic IMHO.

280 Rem 700
Nosler manual #4 load
160-162g
IMR 7828
Fed 210* very, very important for bug hole groups
Rem /Win Cases
2930 fps on a 24" factory barrels, brothers shoot the same load.
No paper between the bullet holes, 3/8" and less

I just sold my Husquavarna Carbine in 7.x57

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.

I like IMR-7828SSC with 160gr bullet weights in the 280 Remington as well. Except I've decided that my stock needs some bedding work before resuming accuracy tests

When I started loading for my custom .280 Rem. I was looking for RL22 to try. Checked in a load manual that IMR 7828 SSC was only about 14 FPS slower that RL22 so bought some. Bullet I was working with was the 160 gr. Speer Grand Slam, the older two core version. I got the velocity all right but accuracy sucked big time. I just could not find a happy place with 7828. Decided to try some WMR that I have on hand and hit the jackpot with velocity just shy of 2900 FPS and accuracy in the .50" to .80" depending on how well I'm shooting on any particular day. Never loked any further with any other bullet.
PJ

John, any commonly available cup and core bullets in particular you liked in that 160 grain weight category? I have a 280 project I will be working on this winter. A good C&C in that weight range that covers deer/black bear/average moose (if I can draw a tag) would make life simpler!

Not John but I do like the Speer 160 gr. Grand Slam in my .280. It's the older two core version and it shoots very nicely. I have used the 160 gr. Speer Hot Core in my 7x57 Mauser with excellent results. Last load I worked up for the 7x57 was for the 150 gr. Nosler Partition. Planned on using it on elk. I am considering trying the 160 gr. Hot Cores in the 7x57 which should be excellent if the rifle likes the load. I have used that 160 gr. Speer HC in the .280 and accuracy was good. JMHO, but I think the Speer HC and GS are very good hunting bullets. I also like the Speer 165 gr. HC in the .308. I must have shot better than a dozen deer with that bullet and the only one I ever recovered was from a Mule Deer 250 yards out. Deer was facing me and the bullet traveled all the way through coming to a stop in the rear leg. I like Speer's bullets.
PJ

John: as a follow up to patbrennan's question, aside from the fact that they shoot well in several of your rifles, what is it about 160-gr bullets that you particularly like? I notice that you refer to them a lot in your writings, especially your articles on the 7x57.

I suspect the friend Allen is referring to here is Jim Carmichel.

[/quote] John: as a follow up to patbrennan's question, aside from the fact that they shoot well in several of your rifles, what is it about 160-gr bullets that you particularly like? I notice that you refer to them a lot in your writings, especially your articles on the 7x57.[/quote]

The 7x57 I used for more hunting than any other the Serengeti Rifles custom you now own--on the Montana "short action"--which was really a medium-length action, similar in length to Mauser actions for the 7x57, with a 21" barrel and one of Serengeti's laminated stocks that you can't tell was laminated unless you look REALLY closely.

I was doing a LOT of hunting back then, especially culls in Africa, and wanted to field-test various bullets to find out how they worked on game. As it turned out, the only bullet weight the rifle would shoot to the same point of impact was those around 160 grains, so that's what I used, with enough H4350 to get around 2675-2750 fps, depending on the bullet.

The bullet I used for most hunting was the 160-grain Sierra GameKing, which as mentioned earlier worked fine on "deer-sized" game from up close to 350+ yards. But also used the 160 Barnes TSX, 156 Norma Oryx (which was particularly accurate in that rifle), 160 Nosler Partition, and 160 North Fork softpoint. (May have used others as well, but those I particularly remember.) Didn't have to fiddle with the scope adjustments with any of them, just changed ammo and shot stuff, which ranged in size from African springboks to Canada moose.

Mule Deer,
How did the 160 Gamekings work on elk sized critters out of the 7x57?

Meant to make it plain that I ONLY used the 160 GameKing on deer-sized game, but can see how I failed.

On the other hand, have never recovered one so they might work very well on larger game.....

Thanks for the reply. I’ll just have to do my own testing if the opportunity presents itself.

Someone usually gets pissy about a thread resurrection,
I enjoy them.

Love seeing and reading the words of now missing members.

Have you ever wondered why the .280 Remington was ever developed since Wilhelm Brenneke invented the 7x64 a half century before?

Marketing.

years ago, I had a love affair with the 7x57's. Then a gunsmith friend met me at the rifle range to chronograph his Rem 700 in 280. He had a load right out of the NEW nosler manual #4, with 160g Partition, Rem brass, Fed 210 primer, and IMR 7828, bullet .010 off the lands. He shot clover leaf groups, 2930 fps. DANG! The load is in the Nosler manual #4 for bolt guns only. Family has 3 of these rifles at this time, same load, same powder...160g Sierra BTSP, 160g Partition, 162g ELDX and M, just gets the job done.

Then I put a 8.75T krieger on a 700 and shoot the 180g ELD-M with R#17, holy cow, smig of powder, unreal ballistics on this bullet that has right at a .800 bc, and it has killed hogs very well so far. I made some brass out of the Lapua 30/06 cases that end up with a slightly shorter neck, but you can not kill the primer pockets. This combo is worth building a rifle around. RWS makes 270 brass that is extremely tough also to make 280 and AI brass out of.

What does this even mean?

I'm guessing that the 7x64, back then, sounded "too exotic" for the American Market. The .280 ( loaded down for the Mod 740 Auto), was "marketed" as being better than the 270/30-06. It even "sounds" like its halfway between the two rounds! It wasn't, not with those factory loads, but still a good round!

There are several factors at work here:

1) The 7x57 was never "marketed" as a commercial round until some years after it appeared in the early 1890s as a military round. Even then the "marketing" was confused by Rigby calling it the .275.

2) As the 7x57 was chambered in more commercial hunting rifles, the throat lengths varied. This caused problems with hunting ammunition, especially after lighter spitzers were loaded. Even so, it was considered one of the better "hunting" rounds in the U.S. before WWII--when Winchester chambered it in the Model 70. Many gun writers suggested it as a very good hunting round--especially for the typical "women and kids" category. (Even then they evidently couldn't comprehend how women and kids could kill the same big game with the 7x57, when most men considered at LEAST the .30-06 minimal for the same animals.)

3) After the war, many Americans avoided anything "German."

4) The .280 was indeed marketed more than the 7x57 when it appeared in 1957, but Remington apparently was one of several companies that failed to recognize the trend toward bolt-action rifles, instead "marketing" it as a pump/semiauto round which "approximated" the .270. This is one reason it never became particularly popular. (Then there was the 7mm Express Remington debacle....)

5) Some gun writers claimed the handloaded .280 was superior to the .270 when chambered in a bolt-action, due to a wider "bullet selection" in 7mm--which meant a wider range of bullet weights, back when almost all bullets were cup-and-cores. This mattered a little back then, because heavier 160-175-grain 7mm bullets could (at least theoretically) penetrate deeper than 150-grain cup-and-core .270s.

But in the decades I've been a gun writer, have only met one who used 175s for hunting. All the others (including two of the .280's most famous gun-writer fans) used bullets in the 140-150 grain range. If this made any difference in the "killing power" of the .280 over the .270 I failed to see it, after hunting a LOT with the .280 and various bullets throughout the 1990s.

6) The .280 Ackley Improved became far more popular than the standard .280, especially after it became a factory round--partly because of higher-BC bullets, and the added mystique of the Ackley name. This WAS due to marketing, especially the much-quicker marketing of the Internet, and the 21st-century fascination with higher-BC bullets for longer-range shooting. In fact, today it's far easier to find and purchase .280 AI brass, ammo and rifles these days than standard .280s.

Killed a lot of animals with a 7x57 130, 140 and 154 gr, never thought I
needed a 280 as well as that worked.

Killed a lot of animals with a 7x57 130, 140 and 154 gr, never thought I
needed a 280 as well as that worked.

Does the deer/elk care if the 150-160gr. bullet comes out of a 7x57 or a .280? That's pretty doubtful. Both will kill them with ease. Pick the rifle you want to use, and don't worry about it. I can't think it makes any difference if the bullet hits at 2700fps or 2800fps, either.

No they probably don't give a dam BUT whats the fun in that?? Loonies care if it's 150 vs 160 and 2700 fps vs 2800fps

I love a 7x57 like Burns loves NyQuil.

I would split the difference and use a 7x64 Brenneke.......has classic appeal and is close to .280

Why don't you learn how pre-test bullets in different kinds of media, rather than testing them on big game "if the opportunity presents itself"?

There are various things at work here--including the fact that cup-and-core bullets tend to expand and penetrate more reliably at moderate muzzle velocities--which has been widely know for a LONG time.

I have published a bunch of articles, and book chapters, on the various aspects of this subject. You might want to read some of them, rather than expect field results for every bullet from every cartridge on every kind of big game.

Maybe I'm little testy tonight, but there it is....

Thats fine if you're a little testy, I'm not going to lose any sleep over it.
I guess my original question about elk sized game with the 160 Gameking was more making conversation than anything. I have used a lot of gamekings out of different cartridges over the years, they are one of my favorite bullets. I am quite certain the 160 will work on the cow elk and small bulls I usually harvest. I think I was just looking for somebody else to tell me what I already knew.
And yes, I am aware of the fact that cup and core bullets work great at moderate velocity. It's been my experience that medium size bullets at medium velocities kill game well.

I haven't purchased any of your books, but I did get a copy of Handloader 320 with your article on modern 7x57. I enjoyed the read.

The Algo will get an adjustment but the fact I live rent free in you head is pretty funny.

" I am quite certain the 160 will work on the cow elk and small bulls I usually harvest."

You're quite right. I've used the 150 gr. Game King in my .270 for years. Many deer and the las animal was my antelope back in 2009. I usually use the .35 Whelen with 225 gr. TSX for elk but would have no qualms using it on elk. One of my hunting pards uses the .270 almost exclusively and I've seen him do a few one shot kill, DRT on elk with the Game Kings.

Currently I'm running the 160 gr. Speer Grand Slams, older two core version in my .280 Rem. Using the 150 gr. Partition in the 7x57. Both loads run under MOA at 100 yards. Might have to try the Sierras if I can find some.

PJ

There're always opinions. My first center fire was a 6mm (albeit a 7.92x57 for a few rounds before it was re-barreled.) My opinion was that the 6mm was a better cartridge than a 243. Mainly because the 6mm I owned was a 1/4 MOA shooter. I never saw a 243 that shot that well. Clear bias towards the 6mm here.
Getting past the bias on these other cartridges, what's the real differences?
Others have stated the issues with the 7x57 such as the military throating etc. Others have stated the 280 problems were mainly with the low-pressure factory loads.
If you buy factory ammo for these two it gets complicated. European ammo for the 7x57 is more powerful than USA ammo I guess, IDK though as I never bought European ammo for the 7x57. The USA ammo for either seems like a 'rather not an excellent' option but maybe the 280 wins here. I rarely shoot factory ammo, so factory ammo really has little bearing on my choice. I consider factory ammo as a source of brass in most cases with some exceptions (17 Hornet for instance).
I've had a few 7x57's in my lifetime most were Mauser 98's. I have had many more 280's, A heavy varmint barreled Ruger 77 was the first one I owned, and it was accurate. The rest were mainly 700 Remington's and I have yet to find one that wasn't accurate. I had one 280 on a Mauser action and it was OK but only with some loads. Based on my past experiences the 280 was a clear winner over the 7x57. Now, I have a couple 700's in 7x57 - a Classic and a mountain rifle. They are both quite accurate. The difference as I see it is marginal differences in power, recoil and powder usage. I'd take either a 7x57 or a 280 on a deer, pronghorn or elk hunt.
The same goes with the 270 vs. 280. The 270 factory ammo seems better than the 280's, IDK as I don't shoot factory ammo in either. My three each 270's I own now are all 700's as are the three each 280's. I only shoot handloads in them. They are all accurate. So, what's the differences for me?
The 280 has a marginally larger case and bullet diameter. Therefore, loaded to the same pressure the 280 has marginally more power. The 270 kicks less. Both seem to do well on game.
Is one a clear winner? I don't see it that way. But I see people that have had one or the other and like my experience with the 6mm and they seem to feel their choice is clearly the best.
Since I have more rifles in the 7mm caliber I have more variety of bullets on my shelf that are 7mm, that tips the scale for me to 280. But lately SPS has had many 270 partitions on sale, so the scale isn't tipped by much.
Basically, then if my reasoning is correct, the differences are mainly in one's head. Also, the differences for other cartridges such as the 257 vs. the 25-06 or the 7mm RM vs the 280AI or the 300 WSM and the 300 WM, the 6.5's and the list goes on. Everyone has their opinions. Often the differences are not as much as what's in one's head.

Fug me, I fail to see the problem you just load your 7mm rem down to what you want. Not good enough? Well there is another easy fix buy a 7x57 , then buy a 7-08, find and buy a 280, then a 7 mag. Load and shoot all of them instead of tearing out your hair over it come to your own conclusions.. sure you know I wouldn't shet you none. Experience them all life is short...mb

Interesting thread....................

I couldn't agree more about John's comments about the relative "killing power" of the 270 vs the 280.

And though I'm not a gun writer nor did I sleep in a Holiday Inn last night, I've killed more animals with a 270 (up to & including moose) than with any other caliber.

But I've had 5 280's over the years too, 3 with 24" barrels & 2 with 22" barrels, & while, theoretically, given the same weight bullets up to 150 grains, the 280 should also get more velocity; in reality, I've never found that to be the case in my testing..........in every single case the top velocity I've been able to make myself comfortable with has been the same..................for instance, the 150 NPT & NBT at 2950 FPS for both rounds.

And while I do love the 280, with 2 custom rifles being built in that chambering, in real world effectiveness, it does nothing better than the venerable 270.

I've never had a reason to want to load 160's for a 270, so I can't say what velocity might be had with 160's, but I could get 2850'ish with the 280's so that might be a push to get to in the 270, I dunno.

Never owned a 7x57, but the similar round that belongs in this conversation, is the 7-08............Much as I love the 270 & the 280, the 7-08 is close enough to the performance of both, that it's pretty much ousted the 270 & 280 for me, except that some of my favorite rifles are still in the 270 & 280's..................but I also love my 7-08 lightweight rifle.

Pick the rifle you like best in any of the mentioned chamberings, & with the same bullets, there won't be any real world performance difference.

MM

Based on my vast ( ) experience, I've not seen a bunch of difference among any of my rifles, from .250-3000 to .30/06 as far as "killing power". DRTs with the various 25s, 6.5s, , .270s, 7x57s, and '06s. And tracking jobs with all, all with similar shot placement. I have the different rifles because I like them. I harbor no cherished illusions about their capabilities. That having been stated, all my experience has been with deer, with few pronghorn thrown in. Larger game has just not been in the cards, but I'm only 70, so there's time.

I have had such stellar performance out of the 7x57 hunting Texas deer and hogs I hardly understand why I came up with a 280 AI. The AI is a bit more accurate and does add 200 fps at least. It weighs the same almost, is prettier but darned if I can honestly see a difference in killing power. Not damning it in fact giving it credit. That 7x57 has a lot of one shot kills to remember. The 280AI is easier to get brass for since I use 30-06 cases to make it. The 7x57 though is a bit harder to come by but it seems to last a long time. Sadly my 7x57 has been superseded by my 7-08, a much lighter rifle that gets similar ballistics and is a very good shooter. The old M98 7x57 has been sitting in the safe for 3 years now. Sad.

I had a real soft spot for the 7x57 and always wanted to have one. I have all kinds of reloading data and articles on it. During that time I was usually broke raising kids, so it never happened. A few years ago I guess, Mule Deer wrote yet another article on it and I finally gave up on building one. If I came across a nice one I might buy it, but if I'm going to build a long action 7mm it's going to be the .280AI. The 7mm-08 is almost exactly the same and weighs nothing.

"The 7mm-08 is almost exactly the same and weighs nothing."

Maybe so but the 7x57 has history and panache.
PJ

I have 7x57, 280AI, 7mmRM, and 7mmSTW.

They all work with my handloads.

Well, maybe, if that spins yer prop; you can add nostalgia too.

But why waste a long action on a round as short as the 7x57 that does nothing better than a 7-08. Nothing.

And there is a fair amount of decent factory ammo for the 7-08 if'n yer not a dyed-i-the-wool handloader.

Not so for the 7x57 as that's pretty much a handloading proposition especially given the variety of throats.

MM

Exactly!

How many 7x57's have you owned that had a "variety of throats"?

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.

Flint,

I've posted this a bunch of times since I've been on the campfire, when this subject comes up. One of the most, if NOT THE MOST, inaccurate rifle I've ever owned was also a Ruger 7 x 57, Model 77 Mk 2. And I ended up with two of them, brand new. Could get either one to shoot ANYTHING that I tried. Literally 5 inch groups at 100 yds was the best EITHER one of those rifles would do...

Finally got to the point, the two options I was considering, was either:
1. Throw the damn rifle in the river.. ( ala Schtick, the way he cleans his barrels)
2. Rebarrel the rifle to 6mm Rem with a 1 in 7 twist.

For some reason, seeing a load of 40 grains of 3031, from an older Hornady manual, with a 175 grain SP, grabbed my attention.
Something in me possessed me to give the rifle ONE more try or chance. So I loaded up 5 rounds, and took it over to the range.
My expected 5 inch groups ( or larger) evaded me, and that load gave me a half inch group!

Wait a minute! I'd already had made sure everything else was tight on the rifle, every bolt and screw on that rifle... ( the other just lived in the back of the safe, waiting to figure out what was going to be done to it.) That 1/2 inch group, made no sense given the history on both rifles of their previous results.

So went home and loaded up some more... 5 with the 175 gr SP and 5 with the 175 gr RN. Back to the range. Same ol half inch groups again?
WTF? Tried some of the previous attempted loads... back to 5 inch plus groups... but using 40 grains of 3031 with the 175 grain bullets, the skies turned blue, the angels sang etc. Why look a gift horse in the mouth?

But typical with my mind... if that worked so well, what would the same load do with say, a 160 grain Speer? That gave a 1/2 inch group, once again!
Hell! I'm on a roll, maybe lets see what a 150 grain bullet with the same load give me? Once again, the clouds receded, the sky turned blue, the angels sang... and a 1/2 inch group appeared once again!

and the same thing happened over and over, with 140 grainers, 145 grainers, 139 grainers, 130 grainers, even 120 grainers..

The angels and that Ruger 7 x 57 evidently LOVED 3031, especially 40 grains of it...bullet weight didn't seem to matter...

Pulled that second 7 x 57 out of the back of the gun safe, and low and behold, so did it... Made no sense, but I'm a type of guy if something works, I don't need to question why it works... just STFU and keep on truckin'.

The second Ruger 7 x 57, ended up going to a new home with a campfire member in Pennsylvania, with the recommendation of using ONLY 3031 with a 40 grain Charge. The one I kept, never ended up with a 1 in 7 twist 6mm Remington Barrel on it...That ended up on a Rem 700, which turned out to be the most accurate rifle barrel I've ever had...Long Action of course.

The one other powder that did just like 3031 in that Ruger rifle, was SR 4759. That powder with a charge of 28 grains of it, and 115 grain HP bullets, dropped several decent sized Blacktails, in east coast style heavily wooded type hunting situations...short range, rifle having minimal recoil, and heart shots each time.. Bang flop...

ON the other end of the spectrum, I had a real nice Model 70 Featherweight fall into my hands up in Roseburg, at Cascade Ammunition. Three hundred bucks... had an aftermarket recoil pad put on it and came with Leupold Rings and Bases., looked brand new out of the box, but came with NO Box. Previous ( and original owner) put it on consignment, and over 90 days, the price had dropped to $300. It sat high on the wall on display.

I asked to see it when it caught my eye. Guy behind the counter, got kind of pissy when I asked to see it. First thing he said, its on sale because it is chambered in a 7 mm Mauser, and every customer I have climbed up and got that thing down for, has asked what is it chambered in? It Says 7 mm Mauser on the barrel.. What in the hell is that? I tell them what it is and they hand it back to me.....So Finding ammo is going to be a nightmare. So I'm not climbing up there and putting it back!

My response was " I know exactly what a 7 mm Mauser is.. and finding ammo is not going to be a problem, because I hand load ALL of my ammo."
He climbed up and got it, it was immaculate. I had $300 in my wallet, and as he finished with another customer on some ammo purchase, I had the $300 on the counter, and told him to write it up. "ARE YOU KIDDING me, you are going to buy it?"

Write it up! " HOT DAMN! we've been trying to sell that rifle for 3 months...plenty of lookers and no buyers... and if it don't shoot worth a damn there is no returns on it! You good with that?" NO problem, write it up....While he is handing me the paper work, he gets on the phone and calls the owner... I JUST FINALLY SOLD YOUR GUN! for $ 300 cash." I fill out the form and hand it to him, and he does the required 'damn' background check.

it came back approved in like 3 seconds...He takes my money, rings it up... " I'm so happy to see that gun have a new home, the background check is on us!".. then a " so long sweetheart!....oh, I was talking to the Rifle"....

I get this thing home, mount a scope on it, a 3 x 9 Nikon, ( from another purchase at Roseburg Gun Shop for cheap). Zeroed the scope in a couple of shots... Model 70 Featherweight, found out it had been bedded... 7 mm Mauser, but the rifle evidently thinks its a varmint rifle...Damn well shoots like one.. and still does to this day... WHATEVER I feed it...This will be one of the few guns that will still be in the gunsafe on the day I breathe my last...

Seafire, You have inspired me to try again, as soon as the sun hits the shop...out comes the 3031...I will report results in case it's too cold for the angels to sing. 36 deg here now in the land of fruits and nuts.

I can testify to the load Seafire recommends without hesitation! Way back last century, I bought a pile of Remington 150 grain Core-Lokt .284 bullets from Midway for 39.95/500. Tried every powder I had, 4350,4831,414,380,4064,4895,and 4320 with the BEST group of 3 MOA! They sat for several years then a fellow (Seafire) said to try 40 grains of IMR-3031 for any 7x57 that would not shoot. I decided there was nothing to lose in trying it but, had little faith it would work. Lo and behold groups shrank down to 1 to 1.5" and I'm grateful.

That's pretty much the way things work for me. 7x57 with 160s at 2750 or if using monos, TTSX 140s at 2900

Tag... good and interesting info , thanks Seafire

Well don't think I wont be trying the 40/3031 in my newly barreled 7x57 Seafire! ha I found some 3031 way back in my powder magazine...I will, of course, try some of the old standbys and some newer guys ( Staball, Hunter, etc) I'm one of those guys that think a cartridge should be loaded to the strength of the brass, safely of course, and action design. I did own one Model '93 that shot the S&B 173 Cutted Edge very well!

Haven't read the thread, but am wondering what the over/under is on the % of posts that advocate some other chambering than the two in the question.

Because opinions are like...

Navels?????

Maybe.

My personal experience with the 7x57 includes at least a dozen rifles, and only one or two refused to shoot sub-inch groups with basic hunting loads. And it didn't require a vast search for the "right" powder. Instead IMR4350 (or something very much like it) has worked great for bullet weights from 140-160 grains.

Well I tried the Seafire 'easy button' 40 gr 3031 with 160 gr Sierras yesterday, a schidtful 2 moa...dammit, just dammit all to hell...nothing is easy. There is something I'm overlooking with this BRNO 21H, some fundamental fault that I am not seeing. Rechecked barrel channel clearance, guard screw torque, scope mount integrity. I was frustrated enough after the test, I began to think it was my bench technique, so I fired off 5 rds with a .308 of known accuracy...bingo, got under 1 moa. Considering everything, cost and scarcity of components chasing the load, I'm about to the point of finding somebody to hog out the barrel and make a 7.65 Mauser or something out of it.

"I'm about to the point of finding somebody to hog out the barrel and make a 7.65 Mauser or something out of it."

You could always send it to me and let me be the one to be frustrated. I have a Ruger M77RSI that took a hair over two years just to find one load that was useable for hunting purposes. Best it'll do is 1.25 to 1.50" with the 165 gr. Speer Hot Core. The load while not spectacular, has accounted for IIRC, 16 deer at ranges from about 6 feet to 250 yards. I have rifles that are sub .50" but that RSI is probably one of my most favored deer rifles. Change any component, be it powder, primer, brass or bullet and accuracy goes straight to hell.That rifle is truly a one trick pony.
PJ

I couldn't agree more.

One of my first big game rifles was a 77RSI in 308, and I have had two others since then.

They are easily the best handling short-barreled rifle I have ever owned. A Remington Model 7MS (laminated Mannlicher stock) was just as good. I think the extra forward weight and slim forend both contribute to the exceptional handling.

PJ Gunner, Next time I'm visiting the BIL in Salome, I'll PM you...Gila Bend is halfway, there are worse rifles to own than BRNO 21's.

Ruger got it wrong by not making that RSI with a 20" bbl and a slimmer forend.

I wish they'd rectify that and sell a few in 35Remington or 358Winchester.

"I wish they'd rectify that and sell a few in 35Remington or 358Winchester."

They did make a very few RSI rifles in .358 Win, most likely a short list in single digits. I know of a fellow that has one. He showed pictures. I tried talking him out od it but he wasn't having any.

On another note, back in 1981 at the NRA convention in Phoenix I had a talk with the Ruger representative about doing a run of RSI's in .358 Win. To see his reaction, you'd have thought I'd just asked his mother into joining in on a gang bang. The string of four letter words was amazing. He sure knew a few.

I have three RSIs. One has a stock that it a little on the clubby side compared to the other two. I've given thought to taking one of the two M77s I have in .358 and seeing if it's feasible to cut the barrel to 18.5" and placing the .358 barreled action into the RSI stock? Then I would have to chase down another RSI stock for the .308 barreled action. Interesting thoughts I'm thinking.
PJ

Email a distributor that does Ruger special runs. You may just get your wish.

Ruger could sell in a hurry:

6.5x55-1500(quantity)
7x57-750
280 Rem-1500
35 Rem-1000
358 Win-750
338/06-750
35 Whelen-750


Ruger works off of distributor orders....plain and simple. If you wanted to order 500 of one of these in a SS Hawkeye, you may get some attention.

That's strange because Ruger was never afraid to chamber the 358 in a lot of other rifles including the BLR and the 77.

Isn't the BLR a Browning.

Oopsie ..... It is indeed. I knew that but posted pre-coffee infusion.

The BLR was also marketed about 40 years ago by the Miroku company that manufacturers them under their own name and model as the MLR. We saw them in Australia mostly as .308's but there were a few in .358 as I recall which is an uncommon cartridge in Aussie circles.