quote:

Originally posted by Monastery-Forester:

quote:

Ah the 8X64s and it's wildcat (ballistic) twin 8mm-06.

Try Vv N560, you'll get another 100-200fps with 3-4grs more than N160 @ the same pressure.

Life is more excitin' when yer stickin' suppositories inta a wildcats behind!

Try VV 550 with the 196grs Woodleigh, you will get 2875 fps with a pressure 15% under Pmax. This load is pressure-tested by the laboratory of the DEVA

. It does fine on the european red stags und on the european wild boars. Reformed nickel-.35 Whelen cases und CCI BR primers are used.

Gruess Gott, Herr Forster! Welcome aboard. You will enjoy it here.

quote:

Originally posted by wildcat junkie:

quote:

Most people discount the 8mm bore because they have never had a rifle chambered for it.

The only experience most Americans have with 8mm cartridges is the pathetic, corporate lawyer inspired, 8X57 loads foisted off on the american shooter by product liability paranoid American ammo companies.

What is it? 170grs @ 2400fps?

Breneke loads 198gr bullets to 2740fps. Norma a 196 @ 2600+fps.

Those are pretty darned potent loads, equal to the 338-06 for all intents and puoposes. Now the 8X68S, there is an awsome cartridge, AND it fits nicely into a standard M98 Mauser!

3100+fps from a 26" barrel with a 200gr bullet?

2900fps with a 220?

What more do you need for the largest N American game?

Wildcat,

Now you mention the 338/06. See that is why I don't have the fondness for the 8mm/06 Ackley, as I also shoot a 338/06. Stateside at least, I have better bullet selection, etc. So I went that route.

I do love the 8 x 57 as I don't feel that one needs as much punch to take game as a lot of other hunters feel. The 8 x 57 with a 170 grain Speer, is a fine cartridge, even at velocities at 2000 fps. All you limit is your point blank range.

I have not played with the 8mm/06, but I have played with the 8 x 57 in several CZ and one Mauser action, along with Two Turkish Mausers.

I have pushed it to the limit by handloading it to 3100 FPS plus out of a 24 inch CZ barrel. ( and before this draws the usual flies ( critics) YEAH this load is hot, way hot. But this load was reloadable 4 times before I had a loose primer pocket. One grain more and it blew primers all day! The powder was RL 7 for anyone that wants to know, but you are going to have to work up your own loads for that one. bullets were seated only to magazine length, meaning not very deep, but the throat swallowed them all day long)

Naw, the 8 mm with heavier bullets and faster velocity does not turn me on. However, I was looking thru a Speer manual from 1966, and it made me cry to see they once upon a time sold a 225 grain Round Nose for the 8 x 57!

Why do they "can" all the really neat old bullets???? Because everyone wants velocity! Give me slower and heavier anyday! So I have to get closer... big deal! That is why they call it hunting instead of sniping.

Naw no 8 mm will ever replace my 30/06s, but then again, I own five 30/06s and 5 different 8 x 57s, so what does that tell ya??? Like Rodney King said "Can't we all just get along??"


Cheers
seafire

Hallo El Deguello, where have you got my passport-picture? Thank you for your welcome, pardon my bad english!
This says monastery-forester, who thinks, that the .300 H&H. Mag., the 8x64S and the .350 Rem.Mag are for him the most usefull calibers!

quote:

Originally posted by snowman:
There is a lot of truth to what denton has said. You need a little more case capacity to push those 8mm 200-225 gr bullets (with a decent BC) to 2900 to 3100 fps.

True indeed. That's why such medium machinegun cartridges as the 7,92x61 Norwegian, 8x63 Swedish and 8x59 RB Breda were developed.

quote:

You pay for that in extra recoil.

And that's one of the reasons why the Germany army refused Brennecke's 8x64 as new infantry rifle cartridge :-).

Carcano

Something not to be overlooked is the fact that the Wermacht went from .318 bore to .323 with the new spitzer bullets. That bore change was an attempt to control breach pressure not unlike what the Swedish did with the outsized case on the 6.5X55.
I like 8X57 and the 6.5X55, got a bunch of them, but the 8X57 is not the equal of the .30-06. It is what it is: one of the best battle rifle/machinegun cartridges ever to come along. To pay it the best compliment would be to say that the 7.62X51 was invented because of it.

naw, the most versitile is the 300 rum! i am not stuck on it and there are many close to it e.g. 338 and 300 wind bag. but i am with sea fire on the 338-06

quote:

Originally posted by buckshot:
Something not to be overlooked is the fact that the Wermacht went from .318 bore to .323 with the new spitzer bullets.

They did not. Barrel dimensions remained unchanged; since 1894/95, they all had the ".323" grooves. Only the chamber neck of the rifles was reamed out a bit.

Carcano

Heck, guys,

You've almost convinced me to buy one of these new Remington M700s in 8x57mm, like I need another deer rifle! [.30-06, .308, .300 H&H, .257 WBY, .240WBY, .270, .30-30, 6.5x54, 6.5x55, 6.5x57, 7x57, 7x64, 8x56, 5.6x57, .243, .22-250, .223, 222 Rem Mag] Then we have th largeer bores, Yeah, I guess having an 8x57mm is okay too

LLS

quote:

To pay it the best compliment would be to say that the 7.62X51 was invented because of it.

7,62X51 is more or less a copy of 8X51

Cheers
/JOHAN

I have a couple of 8x57s, a Husqvarna sporting rifle built on a commercial 96 action and a Remington 700 Classic. I think that it is a fine cartridge, particularly when load to its potential in a strong action. I believe that the reason for US ammo makers loading their factory loads at low pressure is because of the number of pre-98 style Mauser actions and the occasional .318 bore that is around. Since they can't control what sort of firearm people use their ammo in, they are prudent to load to the lowest common denominator. I believe that, prior to WWII, the 8x57 was loaded with a soft bullet that would work in both .318 and .323 bores without excess pressure. Despite the slow speed of the current Federal factory loads, none of the deer that I have shot with the 170 grain bullets have survived the encounter.

Jeff

My own personal view of the 8mm bore is that it is the largest bore in its class, I consider the 338 bore to be in another class due to the type of bullets available for the two. And as such I would consider an 8mm-06 with an optimum bullet of 200+ gns to be somewhat superior to the 30-06 with a 180 for such things as elk and plainsgame.

And for those same reasons I think the 325 WSM is a good and purposefull design. Granted it isnt going to give much more than a 300 wsm. Still Ill take the bit of extra frontal area and efficency that Sabot mentioned over the ever so slight BC edge of the 30 cal.

As for most versatile the answer is no, the 30-06 still gets the nod in that category because it has some legitimate varmint bullets available.

The 8X57? It is plenty for the majority of NA hunting even with the 196-200 gn bullets. A lot of guys see 200 gns @ 2500 fs on a ballistic table and shun it, but seeing it go to work in the field makes one realize just how underrated that little Rodney Dangerfield of a round is. I would be willing to wager a good 8X57 barrel that a guy could get some of that 8X57 196 gn millsurp ammo to punch a hole in an engine block @ 250 yds, and I dont think that Elk have that good of kevlar yet.

I will have to say for the little experience I have outside of my .300 wm, which is my main and favorite rifle I own, I do like the 8mm Rem Mag.

A good friend of mine who has quite a few custom guns for his hunting adventures let me shoot his 8mm Rem Mag and .340 Weatherby right next to each other with my .300 Win Mag accompanying them also at the bench one day.

All of these guns were superb rifles but I will have to say that the 8mm Rem Mag should have its day in America. Even though all of these guns were very similar and shot accurately, the "8" was a nice rifle. It was flat shooting, hard hitting, and "relatively" non-violent recoil compared to the 250's out of the .340.

For the life of me, IMHO, I don't understand why the 7mm Rem Mag caught on and not the 8mm.
Some have told me that he "7" was just to answer the few cry's of the .270 fan club than wanted just a little more from a gun but not much more. But that wasn't quoted through this person.

I agree about the 8 Mag but for the public at large I think Remington went too far with the long magnum case. If they used the 7 Mag case and trumpeted the energy figures of full house 220 gr loads they would have had a great competitor for the .338 Win Mag.

More custom guns would have been built on standard magnum actions too. The popularity or lack therof for the 325 WSM may tell me if I'm right or wrong.