Ruger 77 in 7X57

[StarMetal]

[quote=13Echo;543652]The 8x57 came out for the German Mod 88 in 1888. The 7x57 was introduced in 1892 and had it's first big use in the Mod 93 Mauser. The 8x57 (7.92x57, 8mm Mauser) is the Daddy and Granddaddy of them all including the .30-06 and all its derivatives.

Jerry Liles[/quote

Don't forget the 8x57 (which is an American name and doe not correctly identify the military round, but a German sporting round) had a different groove size. Let us not forget the 7.65x53/7.65x54 which is usually identified as the first mass produced Mauser smokeless powder cartridge. Notice I did not say first German smokeless powder cartridge, that goes to the 7.92x57.

Little side note. I see a lot talked about how efficient the 7x57 is. So you mean to tell me in all the time since 1892 that a more efficient case hasn't been designed? I hardly think so. I'll still put my money on the 243 Win being more efficient case then the 6mm Rem.

Joe

[felix]

Joe, the most common efficiency rating of a cartridge is based upon the generated velocity per weight of powder. My personal efficiency rating is based upon the differential in the ES's per the differential of powder speeds. In other words, I prefer a case configuration that supports a very wide powder spec for the singular velocity I want to maintain, given boolit diameter and weight. An example of a case design I do NOT like for the 243 bore is the 6 PPC because of its lack in producing a flexible acceleration curve for its intended accuracy. This is in contrast to the 222 case design for its bore size. If you can't be flexible in dropping powder of a certain speed for a given accuracy, that case design is very suspect for our silver stream purposes on this board. ... felix

[StarMetal]

Joe, the most common efficiency rating of a cartridge is based upon the generated velocity per weight of powder. My personal efficiency rating is based upon the differential in the ES's per the differential of powder speeds. In other words, I prefer a case configuration that supports a very wide powder spec for the singular velocity I want to maintain, given boolit diameter and weight. An example of a case design I do NOT like for the 243 bore is the 6 PPC because of its lack in producing a flexible acceleration curve for its intended accuracy. This is in contrast to the 222 case design for its bore size. If you can't be flexible in dropping powder of a certain speed for a given accuracy, that case design is very suspect for our silver stream purposes on this board. ... felix

I believe your assumptions are correct Felix. Look at a so so recent development for long range target shooting and silhouette shooting.....the 260 Remington. Too bad this fine round isn't getting more attention, but I hear it's picking up. What's that have to do with this thread? Well you noticed when they came out with the 260 that it wasn't something developed from a necked down 7x57. Do you think there's a reason for that? I do. The 308 class of cartridges are more efficient and work on a shorter more stiff action. Even a new 6.5 was created by Hornady that is the 6.5 Creedmore, which is basically the 260 Rem ever so shorter. Did then decide to shorten a 6.5 Swede? No. Did then neck down a 7x57 and shorten it? No. Why? Well they probably felt their case was more efficient. The also wanted it to work in an AR15 which are the craze of rifles at the moment.

Don't get me wrong. I love the 7x57 and have been shooting it for many years. The difference between the 243 and 6mm don't amount to a hill of beans.

Joe

[13Echo]

Well since the 7.62 (308) was developed off the .30-06 and has the same head size but a bit different extractor cut, you could still say it is a great grandson of the the 8x57 and, therefore the .260 and 7-08 are still in the path of descent. As for why make the .260 and 7-08 instead of heating up the 6.5 Swede and 7x57? Well there are an awful lot of very old rifles, some of doubtful strength, chambered for those cartridges. The .260 and 7-08 are excellent cartridges but, except for feeding through short actions, really don't improve on their ancestors. Their reason to exist is to provide 6.5x55 and 7x57 potential performance in modern rifles without having to worry about blowing up an ancient Krag or Mauser. So called case efficiency has more to do with case volume and caliber than case shape.

Jerry Liles

[StarMetal]

Well since the 7.62 (308) was developed off the .30-06 and has the same head size but a bit different extractor cut, you could still say it is a great grandson of the the 8x57 and, therefore the .260 and 7-08 are still in the path of descent. As for why make the .260 and 7-08 instead of heating up the 6.5 Swede and 7x57? Well there are an awful lot of very old rifles, some of doubtful strength, chambered for those cartridges. The .260 and 7-08 are excellent cartridges but, except for feeding through short actions, really don't improve on their ancestors. Their reason to exist is to provide 6.5x55 and 7x57 potential performance in modern rifles without having to worry about blowing up an ancient Krag or Mauser. So called case efficiency has more to do with case volume and caliber than case shape.

Jerry Liles

Close but no cigar. Modern rifles have been produced by many in old cartridges. In fact the rifle mentioned in this topic is one of them. Those fellows in competition aren't going to be taking an old military rifle to the matches. They will be using a state of the art modern rifle so that negates blowing up an ancient military rifle. Give it up, cartridges have advanced, not gone backwards. Look even to muzzle loading the changes there. I'd say a 308 Win is more close to a 7.65 Argentine round then the 8x57.

Joe

[felix]

True, Jerry. A more square case will increase the burn speed of any one powder and that is about all. The problem enters the picture when a specific application calls for many samples of powder (various lots, for example) to come up with the best one for whatever reason chosen (accuracy versus performance). If H322 is the optimum, and the powder accidently produced is really a fast H335 for example, we are OK with a more square case. A more sloping case would not work because the powder will never approach H322 specs. Note: this comment does not work when the case length is too long for the primer. In other words, a Weatherby case would not see one iota of difference in case design. Straight out capacity as you suggested becomes king. ... felix

[13Echo]

Cartridges have advanced but the "advancement" of the .308 is relatively minimal as it is about equivalent to the 7.65 in design. As for the .243 being advanced it has a long, sloping shoulder of 20 deg and a very short neck. Some chambers have short throats which may require seating bullets with the base protruding into the powder chamber as will a really short action. The advantage of the 308 and it's family of cartridges is being able to work through a "short" action. That can be a distinct advantage for some, but it isn't magic. I love the 7.62 (.308) as I once shot National Match for the 4th AD with an M14. I think the .243 is an excellent cartridge but I don't think it is inherently superior to its competition. I'm also a bit of a curmudgeon and I really love the old timers. If you think the .243, .260, 7-08 are world beaters then great. They really are excellent cartridges, and with factory ammo do have it all over the old timers.

Jerry Liles

[runfiverun]

wow this one took off while i wasn't looking.
i don't care for it too much i only have 2 ackley's 3 regular rifles 2 in 8mm not german made either.
and i am in thr process of bulding another onebut am thinking of doing it in the 30 sized neck.
i also have 2 of the 25 cal sized ones and one 6mm sized one.
i ,rather the wife has an 0-6.
the youngest daughter thinks the world revolves around the 7.65x54 and 53 case.
but she did willingly swap me her 6x57 for my ruger tang safety77 in 7x57.

[1Shirt]

Have watched this thread develop, and guess it is time to add my little bit. Have 77 Ruger 7x57, early one. Has taken deer, elk, 2 Gemsbuck, 2 Springbuck, 2 red heartabeast, one Hartmans Zebra, one Kudu, and one warthog. The gemsbuck were in the 500-600 lb range, the heartabeast a bit less probably in the 450-500 area, the Kudu probably around 700 lb, and the Zebra over 600. Ranges were from a little over 125 to the longest (measured) 438 yds on heartabeast, (one shot kill). Most were one shot kills when I did my part, and when I didn't it took a second. Shot all with 160 gr. Hor. If I had to choose only one rifle in my rack for anything above varmint size critters it would be 7x57. Mine shoots cast quite well also, and will stay under 2" consistantly at 100 with my old eyes if I do my part.
1Shirt!

[Junior1942]

+1 to what 1shirt said. If I could only keep one non-varmint rifle I'd keep my ugly ol' Spanish Mauser 7x57. (1) it's lightweight; (2) it's a sub-MOA shooter; (3) it's a 300 yard rifle if I so desired. All that for $50!!!!

Heck, here's a picture:

[Three44s]

It would be fun to be a mouse and follow Junior around and take notes!!!

VIVA Junior!

Three 44s

[1Shirt]

3-44's Yep, would like to meet Jr., sit around a campfire with him, pass a jug, and swap lies and yarns. He is real people!
1Shirt!

[MtGun44]

Well, thanks for the update on German firearms history! I thought the first use of the
7.92x57 Mauser was in the Model 98. I did not realize the 1888 was an 8 mm, never had
one and thought they were BP in a larger caliber.

As to 'efficient' designs, I don't think small changes in the powder space shape has
much effect at all. I think this is just hype to sell the short fat designs that they
are pushing now. Changes in the case volume under the seated bullet are significant,
but I doubt the shape only or shoulder angle, body taper, whatever, within the normal
range of designs, makes any measurable difference on the ballistics.
Feeding, case life, etc - sure. Velocity with a partcular quantity of powder, I seriously
doubt it, within some reasonable range of 'normal' shapes.


Bill

[13Echo]

MtGun44,

The original German issue bolt action rifles were the Mauser 1871 (single shot) and 71/84 (tubular magazine repeater). Both chambered for an 11mm, centerfire BP cartridge. They were replaced by the Mod 88 which is mostly a Manlicher type action with a single column, clip fed magazine. The 88 was chamber for the 7.92x57 (8x57) and had a .318" bore. The 88 was replaced by the Mauser Mod98 also chambered for the 7.92x57. The bore was, at first .318 but later, pre WWI, changed to .323".

Jerry Liles

[StarMetal]

MtGun44,

The original German issue bolt action rifles were the Mauser 1871 (single shot) and 71/84 (tubular magazine repeater). Both chambered for an 11mm, centerfire BP cartridge. They were replaced by the Mod 88 which is mostly a Manlicher type action with a single column, clip fed magazine. The 88 was chamber for the 7.92x57 (8x57) and had a .318" bore. The 88 was replaced by the Mauser Mod98 also chambered for the 7.92x57. The bore was, at first .318 but later, pre WWI, changed to .323".

Jerry Liles

I believe I have read that some 88's later on did have .323 grooves and this was before the 98 came along. Something about the bullet causing enough friction to wear the lands pretty bad and also I think about powder carbon filling up the grooves. I believe the article was trying to say don't shoot the more modern powerful 8x57, that came along later, meant for the .323 groove in them.

Joe

[Jeff.L]

Had a friend give me some 7mm 145gr cast and 168gr cast.. Still shooting all over
They are on the target just all over... Need to know the proper procedure to slug my barrel....Had a friend give me a 284 sizing die thats what I have been using may need to go 285 or ?? Jeff

[StarMetal]

Had a friend give me some 7mm 145gr cast and 168gr cast.. Still shooting all over
They are on the target just all over... Need to know the proper procedure to slug my barrel....Had a friend give me a 284 sizing die thats what I have been using may need to go 285 or ?? Jeff

I would almost guarantee you your Ruger barrel groove for all practical purposes is .284". Now I've had a 7x57 Mark X Mauser, 1908 Brazilian, a Win Model 70 feather weigh, and 7mm-08 Sako. I sized with a .284 sizing die and all those rifles shot 3/4" 100 yards groups or less. They more then likely would have done the same had I sized them to .285". Now you'll get a tremendous influx of suggestions to size to fit the throat. Yup, that works...but in my case and four rifles it wasn't. Hard to tell how you're loading your bullets. Do you have them loaded long enough to touch the leade or engrave the rifling? That will make a difference if you don't. If you have the .285" sizer try it. Type and speed of the powder makes a big difference too. Who knows maybe your barrel heats up and walks.

Joe

[runfiverun]

in my girls 77 i went to 286 with the 168 grainer.
i have noticed that the ruger and my true ackley have larger bore diameters.
a tad over 281, and my icl ackley and wifes daley have true 280's.
your problem might be nose fit on those bore riders,not body size.

[Jeff.L]

borrowed a 285 sizing die hope to be able to get to the range on saturday..
Also got my new RCBS 168 gr 7mm mould in will have to get bussy and make some don't know if I will make it by Saturday though...

[Jeff.L]

Went to the range saturday shot my Ruger 7x57 shot both 130 gr and 150gr sized to 285. seated the boolits out farther than last time . They acutually started to group... woohoo. Just cased some of my new 168s this morning and will try next week.. Thanks guys