Ruger 77 in 7X57

[Jeff.L]

I have an older model Ruger 77 in 7X57 have tryed loading 130gr cast boolits not sure of the rate of twist of the barrel. But it was kind of like shooting a shot gun at the target.. they where all over.. It was recommend by a friend that I try a heaver bullet I tried some old 7mm 162 gr BT I had laying around after sighting in the last three where in the same hole at 50 yds. Anyone recommend a heavy 7mm boolit mould.. Thanks Jeff:bigsmyl2:

[wildwilly]

I use a SAECO #073 bullet in my Remington 700, 7x57 (1-9 twist). The mould casts WW lead to 165gr w/gc. sized .285". I get consistent 1.5 MOA with 24.0gr./H4198.

[runfiverun]

i have been trying the rcbs 168 grain lately. the rcbs 140 silh has worked fairly well.
in my ruger 77 the 168 gr seated well out and 21.5 grs of 2400 done well the last outing.
iirc the rugers were 1-91/2, my ackley is 1-10 and my wifes charles daley is 1-91/2 also.
but in either case about 1800 to 1950 will be your best accuracy.

[Bret4207]

I lucked onto a cheap RCBS 28-168FN some years back. Works nicely in my ratty old '93 Mauser 7x57.

[Brother_Love]

I will be watching thias thread closely. I have a Ruger 77 7mm Mauser arriving next week. This has always been one of my favorite chamberings.
Regards, Malcolm

[Bret4207]

IMO if 95% of the deer hunters in the country were to use the 7x57 there'd be a lot less wounded deer, a lot less flinchers and lot less fat coyotes.

[NoDakJak]

You never spoke a truer word Bret! Neil

[9.3X62AL]

You never spoke a truer word Bret! Neil

Add the 6.5 x 55 or 260 Remington to that statement, and I'll sign right on.

[Junior1942]

IMO if 95% of the deer hunters in the country were to use the 7x57 there'd be a lot less wounded deer, a lot less flinchers and lot less fat coyotes.I'm in 100% agreement with that. If not the 7x57, then the plain ol' 30-30.

[Bret4207]

Proof we all have impeccable taste and common sense!

[StarMetal]

I'm in 100% agreement with that. If not the 7x57, then the plain ol' 30-30.

Junior,

I like the 30-30 magnum too...that is the 30-40 Krag.

Joe

[swheeler]

The 7x57 is only good for small deer, coyotes and gophers, or so I've been told. If you load a heavier bullet 160-175 gr it can be used for mule deer. But I never did listen to what I was told........

This elk was killed(not harvested) with one shot from a 7x57 Rem Mt Rifle, 140 Hornady(139 actually) and I 4350 powder reload, nobody told him it wouldn't work!

[StarMetal]

The 7x57 is only good for small deer, coyotes and gophers, or so I've been told. If you load a heavier bullet 160-175 gr it can be used for mule deer. But I never did listen to what I was told........

This elk was killed(not harvested) with one shot from a 7x57 Rem Mt Rifle, 140 Hornady(139 actually) and I 4350 powder reload, nobody told him it wouldn't work!

Scot,

Did you use a night vision scope? Looks awful dark there. :kidding:


Joe

[swheeler]

Scot,

Did you use a night vision scope? Looks awful dark there. :kidding:


Joe
You see us northerners can hunt 1/2 hr before sunup and 1/2 hr after sundown, add that to some timber and can be pretty dark, too dark for open sights many times. But in this case my oldest daughter was sent back to get a disposable camera from the vehicle and the elk was actually down a good 30 minutes before legal shooting was over.
Next thing you know I'll be shooting one hole groups......... just kiddin
Scot

[runfiverun]

dang it scott.
[telling about the 139 hornady at 2800 fps to kill elk.]
you know them bullets will just make him mad. unless they are doing at least 4,000 fps
and you can't shoot them at 800 yds across the county line. so nobody cares...
septin, those who know different...

[swheeler]

dang it scott.
[telling about the 139 hornady at 2800 fps to kill elk.]
you know them bullets will just make him mad. unless they are doing at least 4,000 fps
and you can't shoot them at 800 yds across the county line. so nobody cares...
septin, those who know different...

Yep that little Hornady bullet fed my family for years, speedgoats, mulies, whitetail and elk never knew I was undergunned! I still load it in the AI version too.

[MtGun44]

My only elk was a cow, didn't go far as the 160 partition exited. The
kudu went about 3 leaps, all the whitetails were down very close to
where shot.

My Ruger 7x57 seems to not know that it is underpowered.

A female friend of mine dropped 6 African plains game with one shot
each with my handloads of 175 Hornady RN in her R77 7x57.
None took more than a couple steps.

Did I mention that the lady can shoot? ;-)

Bill

[Gerry N.]

RE: 7x57 good only for varmints. Check out a fella name of Walter Dalrymple Maitland “Karamojo” Bell. Then tell the nay sayers to help themselves to a tall, frosty mug of STFU.

My most successful hunting rounds in order: 6.5x55 Swede, .30-40 Krag, .308 Win., and .30-30 Win. None have belts and none cause broken blood vessels in my eyes. All cause fatalities in game animals.

Gerry N.

[runfiverun]

i can't believe i missed this before there's your problem using i-4350.
for some reason all mine specially the 2 ackley's like the rl-19,
except my daughters 77 for some reason hers likes h-4831.sc.
i think it's her just being difficult [teenagers]

[atr]

+1 for Junior1942

my Mauser 7x57 likes 4350 with 120,140 gr and 160 gr jackets.....
kills everything efficiently from coyote to deer to elk,,,,never have shot a bear...bear never has appealed to me

[swheeler]

i can't believe i missed this before there's your problem using i-4350.
for some reason all mine specially the 2 ackley's like the rl-19,
except my daughters 77 for some reason hers likes h-4831.sc.
i think it's her just being difficult [teenagers]

Lamar; actually my AI version likes 4831 speed, any flavor works but the I is more accurate.

[Marlin Junky]

Does the M77 in 7x57 use the same action as the .308 or '06?

MJ

[StarMetal]

Does the M77 in 7x57 use the same action as the .308 or '06?

MJ


The 308 action is too short. It's on the 06 action.

Joe

[Marlin Junky]

The 308 action is too short. It's on the 06 action.

Joe

Thank you for the reply but 2.9"-2.24"=.66" remaining for the bullet. I suppose the action would be too short for some bullets but if I was going with an '06 length action I suppose I'd pick the .270 instead of the 7x57. Maybe that's why the 7mm-08 is easier to find in a modern bolt gun than a 7x57.

MJ

[StarMetal]

Thank you for the reply but 2.9"-2.24"=.66" remaining for the bullet. I suppose the action would be too short for some bullets but if I was going with an '06 length action I suppose I'd pick the .270 instead of the 7x57. Maybe that's why the 7mm-08 is easier to find in a modern bolt gun than a 7x57.

MJ

I believe the Mauser actions made in 7x57 were not 30-06 length. Many in 8x57 are not too. The 7x57 is kind of an odd ball in length. I'll name another that is still made today that is fairly young cartridge and that's the 6mm Remington. Neighbor down the road has one and dang if Remington didn't put it on too short an action. The only reason it works is the bullet is loaded deep, or you'd have a hard time ejecting a loaded round. You can take full advantage of the 7x57 on an 06 action because you could load your bullets totally out of the powder space of the case. They also have very generous freebore. Both the 270 Win and 7x57 are great rounds, but I prefer the 7x57 as it's always been one of my favorites. Load long for an 06 action I don't believe it would give up much to the 270 Win that the game animal would notice. It's a nice round to own a rifle for just for the nostalgia.

Joe

[runfiverun]

if the x57's came first how are they the oddballs?
it's the others that didn't get it right.
they shoulda just opened the neck to 30 caliber on the x 57 and the world woulda been a happier place.

[StarMetal]

if the x57's came first how are they the oddballs?
it's the others that didn't get it right.
they shoulda just opened the neck to 30 caliber on the x 57 and the world woulda been a happier place.

I was talking in overall length, too long for some actions and short for others.

They did open the neck, except to 8mm and a good portion of the world was happy with that caliber. Every bit as good as the 06. Some of the world was happy with Mauser's 308 too, the 7.65x54.

The 7x57 is a great round, sounds like you don't care for it much.

Joe

[MtGun44]

Sad to say, the 7x57 is near dead. I love it, but the fact that it was first means that
the .30-06 length actions are a bit excessive and the .308 length actions are too short.
The 7-08 has displaced the 7x57 pretty much, and works fine for deer with 140 gr
loads, but with heavy bullets the 7x57 is superior.

By the way - the reason the 6mm Rem is also an 'oddball' length is that the 6mm is
just a 7x57 necked to 6mm.

Bill

[Heavy lead]

Sad to say, the 7x57 is near dead. I love it, but the fact that it was first means that
the .30-06 length actions are a bit excessive and the .308 length actions are too short.
The 7-08 has displaced the 7x57 pretty much, and works fine for deer with 140 gr
loads, but with heavy bullets the 7x57 is superior.

By the way - the reason the 6mm Rem is also an 'oddball' length is that the 6mm is
just a 7x57 necked to 6mm.

Bill

The 7x57 is awesome, I don't have one anymore, I ought to be ashamed too. Sad too say the 6mm is dead too, even though it is the same case it works fine in a true short magazine and IMO is a much better cartridge than the 243 hands down.

[StarMetal]

Or was a 6mm Rem a necked down 257 Roberts which was a necked down 7X57?

The 6mm Rem is just a tad and hardly make a difference faster then the 243 Win. The 243 Win is truely a short action round where your bullets don't get loaded into the powder. I think the 243 Win being a necked down 308 Win makes it a more efficient cartridge then the 6mm Rem. My neighbor has a 6mm Rem that is on a short action and he comes up my place and we reload for it. He uses 100 grain bullets for deer hunting and we really have to seat them deep for two reasons. One the throat is really really short and two he can't eject a loaded round if loaded a tad long. Just my two cents.

Joe

[HABCAN]

I have a Brazilian '98 7x57 29" long-throat I bubbaed, and a pre-'64 Win. 70 Douglas rebarrelled 24" to 7x57 short-throat. I HAD a Rem. 700 Varminter in 6mm I was forced to sell. My daughter has my Rem. Classic 700 .257 Roberts. The long actions/magazines allow seating long jwords like the Hornady AMax or the RCBS 168-Sil boolits out where they should be and I prefer having that capability.

Anyone I know with a .243 experiences short case-life because the design promotes stretching, whereas the 7x57 family do not have that problem.

If I were buying new today I'd get a 7-08 Win. and a .260 Rem. but shucks, I guess I'm 'stuck' with what I have.................................

[StarMetal]

I've never ever heard stretch with the 243. I had to go back and read that again to make sure I read it right. That simply is not true. I can't even remember losing a case with my 243's. Why would the 243 lose casings to stretch when none of the rest of the 308 family doesn't? Fact is the 243 is THE best 6mm ever designed in my opinion.

Joe

[13Echo]

The .243, .244/6mm Rem controversy goes back to the birth of the two cartridges. No less a person than the "Daddy" of the .24 cals, Warren Page, weighed in on the side of the 6mm Rem. He thought it a better balanced cartridge and said it was easier to reload than the .243. As an admirer of the .257 Roberts and 7X57 Mauser I also have to come down on the side of the 6mm. Having said that, I don't think there is a thing wrong with the .243 Win.

Jerry Liles

[felix]

Jerry, the primary difference between the two is in the standard throating specs. The 243 has no freebore, while the 244/6 has. ... felix

[Heavy lead]

I've never ever heard stretch with the 243. I had to go back and read that again to make sure I read it right. That simply is not true. I can't even remember losing a case with my 243's. Why would the 243 lose casings to stretch when none of the rest of the 308 family doesn't? Fact is the 243 is THE best 6mm ever designed in my opinion.

Joe

Depends on what you want it for. I've never had a 243, and I'm sure it works great and is easy to reload and accurate. I just much prefer the long neck of the 6mm Remington not necessarily because you need it for reloading, but for throat erosion. In fact I have no 6mm Rem. anymore, all my 6mm shooting is done with a 6mm-06 as it is a dedicated long ranger and does a fine job. However if I were to buy a 24 caliber rifle it would definately be a 243 even though it is my least favorite 6mm cartridge because it is a good cartridge and is readily available.
Would like to build a 6-284 though and have lots of brass too.[smilie=w:

[Heavy lead]

Lamar; actually my AI version likes 4831 speed, any flavor works but the I is more accurate.

I is generally faster than H, both on paper and IME.
R-19 is a great powder for it as well, and bunches of others.

[13Echo]

Felix,

I'm just reporting what Warren Page said and he was pretty adamant about it. The .244/6mm has more powder capacity and a longer neck than the .243 both of which Page thought helped make the .244/6mm the better cartridge. He thought the reason the .243 outsold the .244 was due to the slower rifling twist on the .244 which would not let it stabilize the heavier (100gr) bullets used for deer hunting. I have no problems with the .243. It's an excellent cartridge. I just prefer the 6mm because of it's parentage that traces it back to the 8x57 via the 7x57, via the .257 Roberts. It is a distinguished lineage.

Jerry Liles

[MtGun44]

I think the 7x57 came before the 8x57.

Bill

[AkMike]

Just a little tid bit. The Ruger 77 serial number 77 was/is a 7X57.

[13Echo]

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

[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. :mrgreen:

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!:coffee:

[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:

http://www.castbullet.com/misc/photos/m9303.jpg

[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!:coffee:

[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...:castmine:

[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:Fire: