does anybody make a woodstocked rifle in these cartridges?

i would prefer an action with mauser claw extractor and fixed ejector, but its not an absolute must.
(the only reason for choosing a 7mm-08 as i see it, is if i cant find any 7x57's)

budget: 500-800$

I believe CZ does

quote:

Originally posted by hikerbum:
I believe CZ does

they do? i couldn't find any of them on the website or on the cz-usa.
only the 7x64

Rugre does stateside here..

I consider it Mauser style.. others do not...

Remington makes the Model 700 and Model 7 in 7mm/08. Ruger once made the Model 77 in 7x57. I don't know whether they still do so.

I prefer the 7x57, but I have to admit that the 7mm/08 is probably a better choice nowadays because a larger variety of factory loads is available for it, especially in the US. Also, factory loads in the US for the 7x57 have always been loaded to anemic velocities.

If you only handload, then there is no significant difference.

I don't know about Europe.

Everybody makes a wooden-stocked 7-08. Besides Rem, Ruger and Kimber have them. Winchester will probably offer them in the new rifle. These last three are all CRF.
.

Winchester will be making their M-70 in 7-08 when they start making them....should be any time now.....CRF and wood...the way you wanted it.

Retail is a grand and one should be able to get one delivered for $800 new.....there's also one in the classifieds now!

As fas as I know.....no one makes a 7 X 57....it's a custom proposition but shouldn't be hard to rebarrel just about most rifles for it.

Not sure as I'm at home now rather than in the store, but TIKKA may make them in their T3 model with wood! I know I have one in 308 in wood in the store and it is QUALITY from the outside looking in! And Sako/Tikka DOES NOT have a problem in the acurracy department! Best value out there along with the SAVAGE lineup! GHD

remington 700 makes a good looking rifle in 7mm-08 ,in the CDL.

I'm probably too easily pleased, but when it comes to 7mm/08 rifles especially suited to whitetails, I quit looking once Remington brought out the Model 7 in it, about 25 years ago.

It's short, light, handy, accurate, and relatively inexpensive. It's suited to about a jillion different scope mounts that are common everywhere to most American hunters. I find the push feed no problem at all in the 7mm/08, as I don't shoot dangerous game with one, don't shoot mine upside down (either it or me ), and so on.

Of course I wouldn't throw a Winchester M70 SA Classic 7mm/08 out the door either, just don't feel I need to pay that kind of money with all the used Model 7s there are around waiting to change owners..

As far as the 7x57 goes, I've always loved the cartridge (killed my first moose with one 40 years ago up near Ft. Assiniboine, Alberta, using Hornady 139 gr. spire points...penetrated all the way through it, both shots!)

Realistically speaking, these days I would just as soon go with the 7 mm/08 though, with any bullet weighing LESS than 154 grains. Not because of anything else other than the fact that .308 brass is everywhere and one pass through the die turns it into 7mm/08. For heavier bullets, I'd rather have the longer, sleeker 57 m/m cases, but that's just aesthetics, not ballistics.

quote:

Originally posted by Alberta Canuck:
For heavier bullets, I'd rather have the longer, sleeker 57 m/m cases, but that's just """aesthetics,""" not ballistics.

Now I feel like an orphan roger

quote:

Originally posted by Alberta Canuck:


Realistically speaking, these days I would just as soon go with the 7 mm/08 though, with any bullet weighing LESS than 154 grains. For heavier bullets, I'd rather have the longer, sleeker 57 m/m cases, but that's just aesthetics, not ballistics.

hmm...i was planning to use 2 loads: 175gr woodleigh(hopefully at 2500fs) and a 140gr nosler accubond

Just tested a moose load in my 7mm08 M700 stainless SPS (only barreled action is original now with all else after market). 20" barrel (plus moderator) and RL19 obtained 2,400fps with 175gr Swift A frame. Not sure if it's enough velocity to expand such a tough bullet so would probably go either to a partition of that weight or down to a 160gr a frame. What do you think?

Steffen-sounds to me like the Kimber is your baby!

Mark D

quote:

Originally posted by 1894mk2:
Just tested a moose load in my 7mm08 M700 stainless SPS (only barreled action is original now with all else after market). 20" barrel (plus moderator) and RL19 obtained 2,400fps with 175gr Swift A frame. Not sure if it's enough velocity to expand such a tough bullet so would probably go either to a partition of that weight or down to a 160gr a frame. What do you think?

Personally, I'd just load a 120 or 140 TSX with R15 and go forth and rock Marvin the Mooses world!

Absolutely no need for something like a 175 SAF or a 160 Noz for what you're doing, now want is another thing...<g>

Mark D

quote:

Originally posted by bartsche:
Now I feel like an orphan roger

Okay,Roger. I'm a little slow today, but I entirely missed your point in the above. Gawd knows, you know enough about and have enough experience with all kinds of rifles, I could never make you appear left out of the really knowledgable elite.

So whazzup? I would never step one one of your corns intentionally, my friend.

Best wishes,

AC

quote:

Originally posted by Mark Dobrenski:

quote:

Originally posted by 1894mk2:
Just tested a moose load in my 7mm08 M700 stainless SPS (only barreled action is original now with all else after market). 20" barrel (plus moderator) and RL19 obtained 2,400fps with 175gr Swift A frame. Not sure if it's enough velocity to expand such a tough bullet so would probably go either to a partition of that weight or down to a 160gr a frame. What do you think?

Personally, I'd just load a 120 or 140 TSX with R15 and go forth and rock Marvin the Mooses world!

Absolutely no need for something like a 175 SAF or a 160 Noz for what you're doing, now want is another thing...<g> Mark D

I suspect Mark is right on the money. If you'll re-read my comment about killing my first moose 40 years ago with a 7x57 (a 7mm/08 would have worked just as well), please note the bullet was a 139 grain cup 'n core plain vanilla Hornady, AND that both shots passed all the way through the moose...in one shoulder, out the other, destroying all kinds of lung and major vascular structure on the way through. One shot would have been plenty, and he never moved more than 3 feet. Took him about 30 seconds to fall down, but that's just a phlegmatic old moose taking a moment to figure out that he is dead.

No one could have asked for better, and I'm sure a light TSX would do at least as well. Moose don't wear body armour.

quote:

Originally posted by Alberta Canuck:

quote:

Originally posted by bartsche:
Now I feel like an orphan roger

Okay,Roger. ***So whazzup? I would never step one one of your corns intentionally, my friend.
Best wishes, AC

No brused corns, AC. My comment was a declaration that " I guess I'm the only one left who sees a REAL difference in these two cartridges."

To me the 7-08 without specialized bullets is only an also ran compared to the 7x57 when it comes to heavier game. Of course I have the same feeling about the .308 and all its clones. It was good marketing that offered nothing we did not already have.

Had our military in the earley 50s adopted a 6.5x55 guess what this thread would be about.

No offence taken at all AC. Not even close. roger

quote:

Originally posted by bartsche:
Had our military in the earley 50s adopted a 6.5x55 guess what this thread would be about.

not quite sure what you meant with that statement...

are you saying that the 6.5 are as good as the moderate 7mm's?
(lets say as an only gun between .22lr and .375H&H)

quote:

Had our military in the earley 50s adopted a 6.5x55 guess what this thread would be about.

I'm thinking this means the .308 and resulting short actions would have never been produced.

Possibly a short action would have been adopted to handle the 'X57 cartridges including the 6.5 X 55.....in this scenario we'd not be comparing the 7-08 to the 7 X 57 as the 7-08 would have never been!

I think it's interesting that looking closely at the performance numbers of the (adjusted for reloaded pressures) 7mm-08, the 7 X 57, and the .280 Remington we see very little real difference.....same for the age old argument of the .308 VS the 30-06......properly reloaded the difference is small.....and with the 7-08 class this includes the 175 grain bullets too

When one looks at the premium bullets available today.....the smaller cartridges shine a bit brighter as the advantage of large bullet handling of the larger cases is less important.

At least in the case of .284 bullets one has to go all the way to the big magnums to achieve significant improvements.......and some might argue that those are also less than marvelous.

I'm with Roger here.....the 7 X 57 died when the .308 was adopted!

The 7x57 dead
Never! It will live on as long as there are those who appreciate what it is, what it has done, and what it can still do.
Got me one of those Blaser K95 in 7x57R it's just a wonderful wee rifle and cartridge combination.
The R93 is offered in the rimless.
The 7-08 is a nifty little cartridge too.

quote:

Originally posted by oldun:
The 7-08 is a nifty little cartridge too.

Ahhh Ahhh not really roger

[/QUOTE]

Ahhh Ahhh not really roger[/QUOTE]
Admittedly it aint as good as the 6.5x55 but it aint a badun.

quote:

Originally posted by Steffen-9.3:

quote:

Originally posted by bartsche:
Had our military in the earley 50s adopted a 6.5x55 guess what this thread would be about.

not quite sure what you meant with that statement...

are you saying that the 6.5 are as good as the moderate 7mm's?
(lets say as an only gun between .22lr and .375H&H)

I'm saying that there never would have been a .308 or any of it's marginally designed clones.This thread would probably have been about comparing the 6.5x57 to the 6.5x55 and why did the Carcano get a bad rap?

Also the US would have adopted a time proven well designed military cartridge that would have precluded the advent of a .223 military weapon.

New thought What IF in the early 50s The US military would have used the 250-3000 ( IMP or not, necked to 6.5 or not ) instead of the 7.62 X 51? Just My Humble Speculation. roger

I have been shooting 7x57 in one form or another since I was 14 years old. I have never shot a 7-08. I think some of it may be because I am worried that I will like the round more than the 7x57. I deliberately shoot 175 grainers, partly so that people with a 7-08 that I know will shut up because that bullet makes it an apples to oranges comparison for the most part -- they will never want to shoot a 175 grainer. I also think that for shots 200 yards and in that it is hard to find a better combination on deer.

My 7-08 is a Kimber 84M

Great photograph Ted , it's good to get back on topic.
Pity the rifle wasn't a x57

quote:

Originally posted by bartsche:
New thought What IF in the early 50s The US military would have used the 250-3000 ( IMP or not, necked to 6.5 or not ) instead of the 7.62 X 51? Just My Humble Speculation. roger

Well Roger.....what about this thought.....

What if Mauser had come out with the 8 X 51 and the 7 X 51 as the basis for their rifles back in the 1890s? (call them a 8mm-08 and 7mm-08 if you will)

It then follows that the US would have developed the 7.62 X 57 (or something close to it).....standard 1903 actions to suit.....and spinoffs would include the 6mm Rem, the .257 Roberts, the 6.5 X 57, .270 X 57, 7.62-06, .338 X 57, .35 X 57.........all on the 1906 development the 7.62 X 57 in the 1903 Springfield.....

Such cartridges as the .458 Magnum series would never have happened.....all magnums would be .300 H&H length and by all other standards immensely powerful....

So.....would the European 'X 51 series prevail over the American 'X 57 series?

Ya see this is all merely mental masturbation.....fun maybe but purely academic bullcrap....it boils down to this:

1. Caliber
2. Bullet weight (and construction)
3. Velocity

all else is irrelevant!

Just to have it on the list, the Sako 85 is available in both calibers with a Walnut stock, and they are shooters always IME! The 85 is touted as a CRF rifle, I callit a push/control feed rifle, which is a term Charlie Sisk turned me onto.

I've got a 6.5 x 55 in the 85 wooden stocked and a 7.08, god they are unreal accurate, and they both just drop whitetails like magic!

I'm a 7x57 lover, and loony. My sons and I started using them in the early 1980's, and we still use them.
About 6 months ago, I saw a really neat Rem 700 CDL at the gun store in 35 Whelen, so I bought it. Has great wood. Since I don't shoot heavy recoiling rifles any longer, I sent it off to the gunsmith and had a 7x57 barrel installed.
Talk about a REAL sweet looking Walnut stocked 7x57, well I have it. I just love the lines of that 700 CDL stocked rifle. 47.0 grains of H-414 with 140 grain Nosler Partitions drop three shots into a little over 1/2" group at 100 yards, using a 20x scope for load developing. Have a Leupy FX-4x on it now.. Sweet..
Truth be know, there isn't enough difference between a 7-08 and a 7x57 to quibble over. I'm just attached to a 7x57. The 7-08 case holds 76 grains of water, and the 7x57 case holds 82 grains of water. Advantage=7x57 by 6 grains of water.

Don

I am pretty sure Winchester used to chamber the M70 in 7X57.

I am not sure if they were pre-64 or post 64. I dont believe they ever chambered them in the classic pre64 actions.

quote:

Originally posted by Duckear:

I am pretty sure Winchester used to chamber the M70 in 7X57.

Yes, that's correct.

The Hornady Handbook of Cartridge Reloading, Vol. II (copyright 1973) states "Unlike many other mauser military developments, the 7 x 57 was later chambered in bolt action American sporting arms..."

Their loading data for the 7 x 57 was derived using a Model 70 wih a 24 inch barrel.

quote:

Originally posted by LE270:

quote:

Originally posted by Duckear:

I am pretty sure Winchester used to chamber the M70 in 7X57.

Yes, that's correct.

The Hornady Handbook of Cartridge Reloading, Vol. II (copyright 1973) states "Unlike many other mauser military developments, the 7 x 57 was later chambered in bolt action American sporting arms..."

Their loading data for the 7 x 57 was derived using a Model 70 wih a 24 inch barrel.

Yes, the Model 70 was chambered in the pre-war, original Model 70's,but danged few were made. Right now, unless you don't mind putting off the next regularly-scheduled service on your Rolls-Royce, it is more financially feasible for most to look for them only in the post-1968 models if you want an all-factory original 7x57 Model 70.

I've owned a pre-war in 7x57, and after it had been used to the point where few would find it in attractive condition, I still traded it off for a brand new Stolle Panda action, a new Hart barrel, a new Jewell trigger, and a new Leupold 36X scope....and that was 13 years ago!!