Ray,
you are correct, i don't have first hand experience with your 7x57 loads -- nor would I remain in the same county of someone trying to get 2700fps from a 7x57 with 175gr bullets -- especially when i KNOW their 8x57 loads are grossly over pressure.

physics doesn't lie -- to drastically beat sammi/CIP loads, one must be grossly over SOMETHING --

last time i checked, BS seems to be the propellant of choice for overloaders.

out of a magazine? yep.. roughly 30 years ago, back when i was starting --parker ackley added to my knowledge as well, again, more than a week or two ago ... and i DO read the journals to understand advances in tech - and bought myself an RSI pressuretrace to have a CLUE what was going on, past "my chrono says,,,,"

you aren't one of those "feelings trumps actual experience and knowledge" liberals, are ya, rayray?

aLF,
I recall most loading books underload the 7x57 because of the bad actions floating around, add to that the later Reloading books are very aware of frivolous law suits..I recall that most 175 gr loads in the books show about two to three, some even more grs. of H414 and most other powders. So many folks normally load a good Mauser or Mod. 70 two grs over book max, not with just the 7x57 but many other calibers. So the book says 40 grs., most I have know as well as myself have loaded 42 grs. in a std. throat and short magazine. that's 2grs. over book max, and its easy to go a little more..add my long throat, with a 175 seated .284 or less into the case (actually as long as the 06 mag. will allow and that varies a bit) and your loads will for all practical purposes duplicate the 7x57 Ackley depending on bore length and my additional powder space is actually not all that much, vel. ranges depending on barrel from 2600 to 2700 rounded off, mostly dependent on barrel length, but LW barrels have given me additional velocity, and barrel length between 22 and 26 inches is a factor, the 22" at 2600 FPS.

I don't suggest or care if anyone wants to try this, but it might be an interesting experience. I have used it for many years and will of course continue to do so.

Based on the nature of this forum, I won't quote loads, but they are available to you at your request, and would be perfect for one of your Brno 21s as that is the gun that started it all....

Ray:
I am still intrigued by the "long throat" description?

So here is a small but significant "experiment" to show my point.

Bullet in centre is seated to a COL of 85mm ie just inside the mouth of the case without actually falling out. This will fit the standard leade 7x57 of 19.2mm Anything loaded longer than this means the bullet is not actually in the mouth of the case.

the bullet on the right is the MAX COL that a "america spec" SAAMI described 7x57 will accept. COL = 79mm ( I tried this in my Ruger 7x57)

Bullet on left is a old dominion offering



So given this what exactly is meant by a "long throat 7x57" and how is that achieved in a Lothar Walther barrel.

I too am fond of the LT barrels and here again I have questions ?

LT offer two systems for the barrel options. Euro and American.

If the barrel is Euro system it complies with CIP specs with a 8.7 twist and not only that if LT cut the chamber it would have to by law be a 7x57 with a 19.2mm Leade. Exactly the spec as currently in use by Rigby for their 275's

this spec will take the 85mm Col I just showed and loaded at cal depth the cartridge would be some ways off lands

The standard CIP spec chamber, Leade and throat will accommodate any long loaded 175 gr bullet !

Now if your barrel is America spec LT barrel then its a 284 and you have a 6 groove barrel with a choice in twist, ( 9, 10 and 12 ) but here lies the rub. Who cut the chamber and with what reamer to give you this "long throat " ?

With respect to old age .... and Ray

Something to be said for old timers.... they either had balls or perhaps they were un knowingly dancing on the edge of a precipice

Hornady No 1 of 1967 and No 2 of 1971 pushed the 7x57 to the 2600 fps zone using Surplus IMR 4831. and they did it with bullet loaded
to 1.3 cal depths which would put the 175 gr Hornady RN within the original 78mm COL limit for this cartridge

Speer No 7 1966 shows a similar scenario albeit with a 160 gr bullet ( 15gr less than the Hornday 175)



Then comes Hornady No 3 in 1980 and sudddenly the old men get cold feet ! Gone is the 2600 range and now its 2500 range high mark ?

For one CIP are now in the mix and their measuring of pressure becomes a standard for many Countries.




Seating depth: .383 inch ( 9.73mm ) 1.3 cal depth

The question is why ? Well for one between HH no 2 and HH no 3 Hornady moved to new premises and we have to assume improved testing or perhaps calculation of loads ( yes the dreaded mathematical derivation word) because it is abundantly clear that most load manuals are actually derived from mathematical calculation based on baseline testing and then extrapolation)

it also becomes clear that companies employ improved pressure measuring standards and techniques and thus move back from the precipice !




Seating depth .3015 inch (7.65mm ) 1.05 cal depth

And just for good measure Nick Harvey who does push the envelope so to speak



More modern mathematical methods such as quickload show that Hornady's pre 1980 4831 loads were definitely dancing on the edge

One wonders in this conversation of old vs new metallurgy and long and short throats, would not the brass be the weaker link in this equation.

Brass is indeed the weak link in the equation and it is the one component that garners the least attention in both manufacture and later handeling after reloading. Whilst some will anneal necks no attention is paid to the case which undergoes stress hardening.

Back in the day when gun magazines still had professional ballistics experts and engineers contributing some interesting articles appeared in print. I have copy of a study done on the metallurgy of DWM brass. Very interesting indeed.

Handloaders digest 6th ed 1971

Some more stuff on the "super velocity 7x57 loads:

Handloader March-April 1977 by Hall.
Pushed his loads all the way to head separations and popped primers

Cerosafe casting of the m77 chamber / leade / throat dimension

Personally I have had very good results with normal 7x57 velocities. No need to push it.

btw, I am a HUGE fan of 175 at 2700ish ... which is why my favorite "classic" hunting medium bore is a 7x64 ...

Im tempted to publish my load data, but fear the gates of hell would fall on me..

Never the less Jeffee we been at this crap way too long, so Im laying out an olive branch and suggesting we put the past aside and start all over, discuss the issues and treat each other with respect? agree to disagree when the conversations get hot and heavy..Whatca say, the ball is in your court.

Sure thing, Ray .. let's try that

Your on!

With a 175 and 48grs of 4350 Ackley claimed 2635.

I CERTAINLY ENJOYED THIS THREAD !!
Glad it had a happy ending roger

All the "opinions" aside I have thoroughly enjoyed this discussion on the 175 gr 7x57. Especially ALF's usual comprehensive history of it.

My first rifle that I paid all of $40 for was a sporterized 93 Mauser in which I shot only the 175 grain factory loads while hunting. I took my first deer, elk and blackbear with it. I spent summers in the mountains where I live working, with this rifle always at my side. I have a lot of fond memories of that rifle and times. Thanks for the info on a very good cartridge.

In my younger years I also used a mod. 95 Mauser and factory ammo, which balistically equaled a 30-30, but like the 30-30 that long bullet with lots of lead blew big holes in deer and killed very well..

As per Alfs post and the older reloading books, that's where it all began, then Jack O'Connor upped and listed some awesome loads with old WW2 data powder we named 4831 but it was actually 4350 DATA?? an it took up a bit less space, and got a good deal more velocity and in my case 2650 to 2700 FPS in a 26 inch mauser barrel and also picked up a 100 to 150 FPS in a .270, Jacks load being 62 grs. of that 4831 and velocity to almost 3300 FPS in a std mod 70 of the time with a 26 inch tube..The same 62 grs load in a 24" barrel was about 3200FPS and cases lasted forever..Still a great load in a .270 and I still have 40 pounds of that old stuff...

Along about that time I found a very similar powder called H414, and with my long throated 7x57s I got from 2600 to a tad over 2700 FPS, and that's the only powder I can do this with. It is definitely a max load but I loaded my load 3 grs. heavier than my final accepted load and my two chronographs gave me 2600 to 2700 with the 175 gr. Nosler. At the 3 gr. overload for lack of a better word, I got flat primers and a extractor mark, but no other signs of pressure and those cases when reloaded had tight primers up to 4 reloadings then a few showed up loose, and I cut back the 3 grs. Never had a sticky bolt, a different sound, and cases miked .005 according go my records. I used WW brass, Rem brass both nickel and brass; RWS, and lately I use only PPU brass that seems to last forever, I used Fed 210 primers. Ive used this load for 40 years best I recall. I used the same loads in the nickel cases as the brass cases with no change at all which was unexpected btw.

Additionally, and I believe it applies to the 7x57 or any other caliber as well...I went back ions in my load data for my 9.3x62, 14 of them were tested over about a 16 year period to be exact, all using the same favorite load among other loads as well, and to my surprise I found a variation in velocity of up to a 150 FPS. some showed the same velocity, others a difference of from 47 to as much as 150 FPS,between guns, without showing any signs of pressure..The load is 58 grs of RL-15 as well as RL-17 but to a much lesser degree as I have only tested to rifles with RL-17 and no variation to be worthwhile between them as yet, wondering what testing another 10 would produce...Not a real scientific test, just an accidental oberservation, that tweaked my interest..

As a result of this thread I screwed in a long throated ruined barrel to a Mauser 98 action (1909) I use it in a vise to fire form wildcat cases or improved cases. I loaded all the H414 I could get in it and a 175 gr. Sierra. using a string from behind a door just to be safe and pulled the trigger...the primer was flat, it had a definated extractor mark, micked .007 at the base and a new primer was loose (new brass case)bolt was sticky but hard to feel, call it just barely sticky..not a load Id use but does make me feel much better about the hunting load I use. I have not worked much at all with the 8x57 and I do have a nice early Brno mod. 21 large ring, the first Ive seen in a large ring, first year of production Im told and they used the left over LR then went to the German custom Svce carbines in G33-40 unmarked, then to their double square bridges..I suspect this whole thread could very well apply to those guns as well, including the 21 and 22F...
For what its worth.

So here's a question that I've often wondered about. I have 2 loads for my 7x57 that are equal in accuracy and equal in velocity. One is a 4064 load the other a 4350. Is there any benefit to using one over the other? Does burn rate effect recoil or throat erosion, etc...
Both are within spec, 2,800 fps with 140gr bullets.

Perry

Powder charge affects recoil a small amount, so the 4064 load probably recoils a few ounces less. Certainly not noticeable.

Burn rate might affect throat erosion IF it means the powder burns at a higher temp. Not always the case and I have no idea if that data is published anywhere for non-military powders.

I've never heard anyone claim speedy throat erosion with either of your two powder choices, and the 7X57 isn't a barrel burner by any means.

Your 4350 load sounds just like mine. With a 140gr Nosler Balistic Tip, it is a fantastic deer and antelope swatter.

Jeremy

Probably the only difference is 4064 is supposed to spike faster but Ive never been able to verify that. Both work fine in a 7x57, 4350 being the slowest burning rate, and would be my preference..I use H414 as the burning rate is about the same as 4350 but its a ball powder and a 7x57 case will hold more, its easier to throw more accurate charges out of the powder measure, I seldom weigh H414, say about every 10th round, just look at its powder level..

In case some one is interested These are the last in a series of loads to determine a MAX. load for a certain powder in my 7X41 long throat, 16 " Douglas barrel ; two different 154 gr. bullets and a 162gr. bullet.
At the range today. Light breeze, 92 degrees in the shade. Continued sustained firing even when barrel was hot. Allowed barrel to cool between groups

Since I feel I am the only one who owns my 7X41 wildcat, I'll give you the data.
The powder was 33.2 gr. of wcc 846. Primers WLR

154gr. psp Speer. Case WCC 54 06.OAL= 2.645 That's more than an inch longer than the case.
Looks clean, the primers are a little flat, might detect a little bolt handle resistance to lift. 10 shot 1.5" group at 50 yd. 3" group at 200yd. Considered the load at least max. for hot weather. The 10 shot sustained fire group was was almost a straight line ascending.I think the cases were gradually cooking more and more from the first shot to the tenth.

162gr. bt. sp. Interlock,Case RP .308. OAL= 2.575" That's .050" less than an inch longer than the case.Bolt lift a little sticky, primers a little flat , one case had a carbon hallow around primer. 8 shot 3/4" group at 50 yd.considered a little over MAX.

154gr. RN unknown manufacturer. FC .308 Cases, OAL= 2.526 that's .900" over case length. Sooty Primers a little flat good accuracy at 300 yd.
Again, considered the load at least Max. for sustained firing on a hot day.

All ammo was kept in the shade prior to firing.
Perhaps some may consider this action as a step beyond. I, however, really think it has value in understanding what's going on rather than guessing.The brass case can be considered much like a fuse in an electrical circuit only better.
roger

A little more info on the 7x41 loads to arrive at that step beyond
.
Case weight:
WCC54- 150.6 to 155.1 grains.
RP---- 156.2 to 158.2 grains
FC---- 165.9 to 167.4 grains

Head dia.avg.
WCC54- .465"
RP---- .467"
FC---- .466"

Firing Pin avg. crater dia.
WCC54- .087"
RP---- .081"
FC---- .086"

Extrusion around primer dimple.
WCC54- None
RP---- Noticeable but not heavy
FC---- Hard to tell. Hint at best.

Ejector groove extrusion marks.
WCC54- None
RP---- 3 0ut of 15
FC---- 2 out of 10

Flat primers.
WCC54- Not bad.
RP---- High degree!!
FC---- Not as flat as the RPs

Note: During the tumbling the haloed primer fell out.That case would not hold another primer as the primer pocket had expanded greatly and had a heavy extraction groove extrusion.

I think I'm safe in saying that this experiment truly indicates that when you are working in the step beyond you should observe all the data and know what you're doing.

These short low capacity cartridges are truly sensitive with regard to case selection and bullet weight just to mention a few variables.

If I were selecting a load to use in the field the only one would be the 154 gr. in the WCC54,and that I would consider max.!! based on all the information here in.

roger

I have the greatest respect for those , especially those of more senior disposition who have mastered the art of precision reloading and specifically that part of reloading that falls within the realm of tea leaf reading

It is indeed a art because there is in a process that can be categorized as a wholly stochastic event ( to quote Larry Sturdevain formerly of the Abedeen Proving ground), a acquired skill to predict certain physical attributes of the event such as pressure.

Reading pressure from the reaction of the least precise component in the firing chain namely the brass case most certainly falls within this category.

I do have questions regarding this though ?

As art appreciation is very much a subjective endeavour how does it stand up to objective observation and specifically the veracity of this process as a universal skill to be applied by all reloaders novice through expert ?

In simple terms if we hand 100 random reloaders chosen from a cohort of novice through expert a batch of cases fired and ask then to read what the pressure was at which the firing took place what would the results be? would this process of pressure estimation stand as a valid measure or would it fall into the realm of tea leaf reading reserved to those who have mastered the "art"

quote:

Originally posted by ALF:
I have the greatest respect for those , especially those of more senior disposition this process as a universal skill to be applied by all reloaders novice through expert ?

fall into the realm of tea leaf reading reserved to those who have mastered the "art"

Alf you called the shot. Personally I really think you let your Ego get the best of you with this type of shit stirring. I trust that you forget that you are dealing with us mere mortals.
I worked with many CAL.Tech,MIT and Case Western Reserve masters and doctors and More than a few displayed the same haughty attitude that you're so handy at achieving. Most could not make a sandwich or cleanly wipe their butt.
I'll bet it's hard for you to admit when you're out of line or just plain wrong!
roger

All in jest my friend all in jest ! and I stand by my assertion that I respect those my senior who have been at this game a long time !

There is certainly no fault to be found in the experience of those who carefully look at tell tale signs of pressure. No substitute for diligent observation and recording of data.

if a primer falls out or a head separates you know you are in way deep problem though you have no idea as to the exact depth !

!0-4. We are again singing from the same hymnal!!! roger

I personally am always amazed and made very happy that we have such a legion of Masters in our past in the fields of Science, Ballistics, internal, external, and terminal, and gun things otherwise, along with craftsman and engineers like Mr. Mauser and JM Browning, who have created for us wide highways with bright lines that we can safely drive away on as we enjoy this hobby. As long as we stay in the lanes, between the lines and don't do anything really stupid with the Controls, we have such freedom to travel this road. Sometimes it just pays to be appreciative yes?
Speaking for myself only, I then appreciate when one of real knowledge can turn that light on for a moment with the depth of facts that support this wide highway. That makes me even more appreciative of how easy I have it behind the trigger.

I love it!and I be guilty of such skulldrudgery but I only apply such miracles to myself, the ability to read pressure is a self taught ability to wit only a few are blessed, the rest are nothing more than squimish observers with peranoid personalities, who wiggle and wet their pants at the idea of a grain over book max..A pox on all naysayers..

A sense of humour dealing with a serious subject is very entertaining and instructive to the rest of us on the sidelines of the "great debate".

Dear old dpcd is making me the first of his "Duke of Marlborough" 7x57 barrels for my LH Zastava project. I was hoping for a general use 160 gr NP at whatever velocity gives the best accuracy.

quote:

Originally posted by bartsche:
[QUOTE]Originally posted by ALF:
I worked with many CAL.Tech,MIT and Case Western Reserve masters and doctors and More than a few displayed the same haughty attitude that you're so handy at achieving. Most could not make a sandwich or cleanly wipe their butt.
roger

Roger, I can understand the not making a sandwich but, how in the world do you know about the wiping part?

quote:

Originally posted by Joe Dean:

quote:

Originally posted by bartsche:
[QUOTE]Originally posted by ALF:
I worked with many CAL.Tech,MIT and Case Western Reserve masters and doctors and More than a few displayed the same haughty attitude that you're so handy at achieving. Most could not make a sandwich or cleanly wipe their butt.
roger

Roger, I can understand the not making a sandwich but, how in the world do you know about the wiping part?

Keen sense of smell ? My knick name is bear. roger

As one can see in one of the above posts showing copies of the the old Speer and HOrnady reloading manuals the 7x57 with 175 gr. bullets gets ya 2600 FPS with several powders..

End of my story, I get 2700 FPS but in some 24 inch barrels and always in a 26 inch Lothar Walthar..I get 2650 in my 20 and 22 inch barrels. plus Hornady and Speer got that in standard chambers, not my long throated chambers that get you even more velocity than standard chambers..

One also wonders, since more than a few long time well experienced reloaders seem to load a grain or two over any books max most of the time, it indicates one might even get more than I!!

To me loading a good Mauser or Win. 7x57 to 30-30 ballistics is shameful, and an insult to a great cartridge that is capable of killing any animal on this earth without a ton of recoil.

I have loaded the 7x57 over book maximums..414 also works well in my gun but 51 grains of N160 is my favorite. I also load my 7x57R WELL beyond recommended...but it is a Merkel K3 single shot, the same action being available in 257 Weatherby.

quote:

Originally posted by Atkinson:


To me loading a good Mauser or Win. 7x57 to 30-30 ballistics is shameful, and an insult to a great cartridge that is capable of killing any animal on this earth without a ton of recoil.

Almost as bad as loading the 8x57 to .32 Special ballistics as S.A.A.M.I specs dictate..

quote:

Originally posted by wildcat junkie:


Almost as bad as loading the 8x57 to .32 Special ballistics as S.A.A.M.I specs dictate..

I love the Rem 170 Grain Corelokts. I don't always need a 200 at 2600 fps. Never had the .30-30 equivalent fail to put meat on the table.

For me the optimum cartridge for roe deer, fallow deer or mouflon has been for years the 150 grain Nosler Partition.
For black bear I would use larger bullet diameter...

Hello Randy,

I have killed over 50 deer here in Wisconsin over the last 45 years of hunting. All with the 7mm - using the 175g Nosler Partitions.

The deer were shot at ranges from as close as 17 feet, to as far as 350 yards.

The dead-soft lead nose fully expands, and the encased back core pushes through - no matter how far, or how close.

In addition, the high B.C. makes it very flat shooting over long range.

I aim at the heart from ZERO to 300 yds.

I sight 4" high at 100 yds (hits top of heart)

which makes it 4-1/2" high at 150 yds (hits top of heart)

which makes it 3" high at 200 yds (hits top of heart)

which makes it ZERO at 250 yds (hits heart)

which makes it 5" low at 300 yds (hits bottom of heart)

If the range finder says 350 yds. I aim at the spine - and the bullet drops 12" into the heart.

And the 175g Noslers shoot great - about 1" groups at 100 yds in several of my guns, at a respectable velocity of 2500 fps.

ALF:

in your post of 16July, your refer to "surplus IMR4831" in the '67 Hornady manual. Please note that the manual only says "4831". That's because the IMR version had not been introduced at that time. The 1980 manual you posted shows "IMR4831", not just "4831"

Not trying to be argumentative, just pointing this out so that someone doesn't take 1960's data developed with surplus 4841 supplied by Hodgdon, and load using the more recent, and faster burning, IMR4831.

I did not get the "Surplus" from the manual I got it from a article that referred to it as "surplus" I will go back to my archived notes and find the exact reference for you.

BTW I usually dont make stuff up I can reference every statement. I may misspeak that happens !

Not accusing you of making stuff up, at all.


Original 4831, sold by Hodgdon, was surplus military powder. When that supply was depleted, Hodgdon introduced a similar replacement: H4831. From what I have read, the new 4831 is slightly faster than the original surplus military powder.

IIRC, DuPont introduced IMR4831 sometime on the 70s. It is between H4831 and IMR4350 in burning rate, but it was never "surplus".

This has been an interesting discussion to follow, as the 7x57 is one of my favorite calibers. My first center-fire rifle was a Model 93 Mauser. I moved on to a Ruger 77 and a Ruger #1, both in 7x57. Used them for lots of whitetails and feral hogs in Texas, javelina in Arizona, mule deer here in Utah, and in May for bushbuck in South Africa. I have always been satisfied sticking with book maximum or lower loads. In Texas I used 139 gr. Harnadys and 145 gr. Speers with 52 to 53 gr. of H4831. Also used a few 130 gr. Speers with Win. 760 but that load destroyed a lot more meat. Used 140 gr. Barnes TSX and 160 gr. Accubonds since then with IMR-4350. I doubt if adding 100 fps. by going over the book maximums would have made any difference to all the critters I have killed with the 7x57. The 7x57 is just a pleasant, efficient rifle to shoot. If I need more velocity, I can go to my 7mm. Rem. or lots of other rifles. I have no problem with others wanting to push the 7x57 to find its limits. Maybe I am just turning into an old fart.