Question to the colleagues:

Good old Paul Mauser in 1889 developed the 7,65x53 for Belgium. Thecartrdige was adopted by othercountries as well (Argentina, Turkey, a.so.).

Two years later Mauser developed the 7x57.

Can someone explain why in such a short timespan two cartridges with similar performances were designed?

Was the 7,65 less suitable to machine guns?
Some other reason?

The answer lies in timing and timeline.

It was like the first walk in space or the first heart transplant. Once the step was taken the development of technology took off.

It started with the Lebel, this was the "letting out of the genie from the lamp "

The Lebel was made possible by a series of inventions.

The first was Schonbein's invention called "guncotton" ( Nitro cellulose) (NC) in 1946, though it had the capacity to produce 6 times more gas than a equivalent mass of Black powder it had a propensity to destroy the firearm it was shot from.

Then followed Asciano Sobrero's invention of Nitroglicerine ( NG ) this too had issues , very unstable and propensity to detonate.

Alone these two propellants had serious side effects so to speak and was only in 1884 that Paul Emille Vielle synthesized his Poudre Blanche ( Poudre B)

This was the Genie !

The Lebel was number one in 1886 using a Necked down 11mm Gras BP round.

The 7.65x53 in the pattern 1889 Rifle was Mauser's submission to the Belgian military for their trails for a modern bolt action rifle
this was also the rifle and cartridge that Launched FN on its way as a modern armourer.

Once Accepted Mauser sold the rights of the Rifle to FN.

it is unlikely that Mauser himself designed the cartridge but it was designed from scratch using known mathematical principles that governed ballistics. The Ludwgig Loewe empire who had major control over Mauser , FN and the major ammo makers like DMK and later DWM employed ballistics engineers and they came up with the formula for the case, and the caliber.

The Military set the parameters in terms of their needs and the ballisticians came up with the solutions.

The caliber, charge size ( ie case dimension ) and bullet weight all matehmatically derived to give a solution that would meet the range requirement set by the military at that time.

The limiting factors were strength of the gun, amount of recoil, portability, reliability of the gun.

What followed was a improved solution to the same requirement set and that was the 7x57. Once the step was taken improvements naturally followed.

Thank you Alf,

Very interesting and clear.The development process you describe sounds very logical. Have you any suggestion about sources confirming it?

ofbiro:

Sources, good grief this would include every title ever published on the Mauser and off course the history of what we do as reloaders.

I believe that if one is to understand how a gun shoots and works then John Corners "Little book" on the internal ballistics of guns is essential reading because this is the foundation of everything we do.

The early history and timeline of gun acceptance commissions are so important because this where the rubber hit the road so to speak. Early gun makers submitted their work at the behest of the military establishments with the military setting the requirement and the gunmakers having to fulfill them. This was literally the make or break for what was to become the big names we know today.

Here are two graphs, both essentially give meaning to how we have come where we are today.
The first come form a Article that was published in the American Rifleman in 1964 and the second graph hails from Beat Kneubeuhl's Wound Ballistics textbook ( another essential read)

The period from 1886 to 1900 was literally the giant leap forward for mankind. This was the definitive jump out of the dark into the light.
Man could project firepower from a shoulder weapon effectively and accurately to 500 m and further. This projection of power over distance however was challenged however during WW2 when it was found that though infantryman had in their hands the ability to shoot accurately over long distances they failed to engage the enemy if they did not physically see them nor did they actually fire their weapons during major assaults.

The synthesis of modern smokeless powder allowed for this to happen.





The real jump in ability to project firepower to greater distances accurately and potentially more deadly is founded in the ability to increase sectional density of the projectile.

it is the fundamental basis off all we do ! and some right here on AR have tried to dismiss sectional density as some trivial mathematical derivation ! It is central to everything we are and do as rifleman !

There are some central mathematical and physical certainties that lead to the development and success of those first cartridges.

There was a really fast developement the first rifle with boxer primers the Swedish Jarmann m1884 were outdated 1887 then the 8mm Lebel came. The lebel were outdated 1891 then the 30 russian came. The 30-03 were outdated already then it came and replaced by 30-06.

quote:

Originally posted by Nordic2:
There was a really fast developement the first rifle with boxer primers the Swedish Jarmann m1884 were outdated 1887 then the 8mm Lebel came. The lebel were outdated 1891 then the 30 russian came. The 30-03 were outdated already then it came and replaced by 30-06.

And yet the 7x57 and 8x57IS aren't "outdated".

The cartridges followed the rifles!

Each rifle model was a fix for problems encountered with the last.

What is interesting is that the 6.5mm caliber preceded the 7mm as Paul Mauser designed the experimental Model 1892 around a 6.5 mm caliber prior to settling on the 7mm for the Spanish Rifle model 93.

The caliber range at the time 6mm to 8mm was not chosen by chance but was the result of mathematical ballistics principle.

The limitations for caliber and load was set by two important parameters, the first was the strength of the brass case / rifle and the second was the range requirement set by the military.

At the time the infantry doctrine was still massed volley fire at very long distances so we see rifles with long 30 inch plus barrels with battle sights up to 2000 m Short rifles were typical for cavalry and Navy.

This meant that a high SD was very important and is reflected in all of the cartridges of the time.

Powder charge weight fell in the range typically seen in the M88 and M93 case range. Anything more would blow the rifles.

The tendency was to reduce caliber first and then later using the same case volume the caliber was increased mostly for sporting purpose , 9mm 9.3mm and finally 10,75mm

Wildcat junkie:
They are not outdated because they are ballistically sound ! They follow the principles of ballistics theory and practice !

quote:

Originally posted by ALF:
Wildcat junkie:
They are not outdated because they are ballistically sound ! They follow the principles of ballistics theory and practice !

And the vast majority of medium bore non-magnum cartridges are derived from them.

There are certain fixed sometimes almost linear relationships between caliber, sectional density, pressure, ballistic efficiency, charge mass that govern internal ballistics and this we can not get away from.

The cartridges all started out with a range requirement within the pressure limits of the day.
this by necessity required a certain BC and given that large bore guns with the BC necessary to give the range requirement set down it would require to much powder to move the bullet, way more than the pressure and recoil limits of the day.

This meant they had to drop caliber and increase SD to give the desired BC.

Given this SD then it determined the maximum powder charge allowable for the SD to stay in the pressure limit.

The only thing they had room to maneuver on was powder force impetus ie whether it was single or double base powders.

quote:

Originally posted by ofbiro:
Question to the colleagues:

Good old Paul Mauser in 1889 developed the 7,65x53 for Belgium. Thecartrdige was adopted by othercountries as well (Argentina, Turkey, a.so.).

Two years later Mauser developed the 7x57.

Can someone explain why in such a short timespan two cartridges with similar performances were designed?

Was the 7,65 less suitable to machine guns?
Some other reason?

Different country, different customers. Belgium and Argentina wanted a 30 line bore. 7 mm vs. 7.65mm is about the same as a .30 vs a .338 in relative bore size. Considerable.

As fas as "so similar within two years" look at the two tears after the 8mm Lebel was introduced. Every country started equipping it's military with all kinds of "small bore" cartridges from 6.5mm to 8mm. This was pre NATO or Eastern BLOC and no one wanted their neighbor's cartridge.

Many thanks to all of you, but specially to Alf, for the answers.
I know that the US Army did a long series of terminal ballistics tests at the beginning of the '900. Ditto for France (Gen. Jurnée)
Is anybody aware of similar tests in Germany?

Keep the powder dry

Terminal ballistics testing ! Oh yes the good old boys at RWS and the like were champions at this and still are ! and they published it to text.... only problem is its all in German ! We must not forget that they were to some extent the kings of the castle when it came to guns and all things ballistics. IMHO the best modern collection on terminal ballistics is that of Wound ballistics and the scientific background There is now a second edition out as well

The original text was in German but has been translated.

Kneubuel also did a excellent book simply called Geschoss

Authors: Karl G Sellier; Beat P Kneubuehl; Ruth Rufer; John A Hawley

It can be downloaded for free as a E book

Over years there have been classic collections of text published in this field but sadly other than for historical importance most have over time been discounted and fallen prey to
scientific scrutiny.

As someone correctly pointed out. Science is not about the evidence, it all about the method. If the method is not scientifically sound then the evidence is invalid

This certainly applies to the field of terminal ballistics. The "80's movement" on both sides of the Atlantic basically overhauled much of what was published before and corrected sometimes in harsh critical form what was deemed wrong with terminal ballistics research.

The issue of what drove cartridge development ?

What came first Military doctrine or technology and science !

A difficult question to answer as it is the classic egg and chicken argument !

Military doctrine evolved to as a response to and to counter technological benefit, this in turn caused technology to responded to requests from the military to the same end.

Those who drove technology in turn sought market share in a very fast evolving world .... basically the industrial revolution at work.

Very informative and interesting Alf, thanks for the info.

"What came first Military doctrine or technology and science ! "

technology and science, the developement of metalurgi and smokeless powders. Krupp steel backloading canons, dynamite.
Warfare having a old rifle in against a modern opponent was a wakeup call for many countries.

The 8x57 Mauser is all the cartridge anyone could need from deer to moose.

Swedish military calibers in the late 1800s.
1867 12,7*44rimfire(.50), Remington rolling block.
1884 10,15*61r BP centerfire, paper jacketed bullet, Jarmann rifle
1889 8*58r BP for rem rolling block modified.
1894 6,5*55 smokeless for mauser 1894-1896.

http://www.gotavapen.se/gota/a...ington/remington.htm

quote:

Originally posted by wildcat junkie:

quote:

Originally posted by Nordic2:
There was a really fast developement the first rifle with boxer primers the Swedish Jarmann m1884 were outdated 1887 then the 8mm Lebel came. The lebel were outdated 1891 then the 30 russian came. The 30-03 were outdated already then it came and replaced by 30-06.

And yet the 7x57 and 8x57IS aren't "outdated".

quote:

Originally posted by ALF:
Wildcat junkie:
They are not outdated because they are ballistically sound ! They follow the principles of ballistics theory and practice !

Ballistically sound maybe but the 8x57 is a round that has had a fair few tweeks in the 130 years since the M/88 cartridge.
In addition to the shift from .318" to .323" S bore bullet weight went up and down like a brides night gown to ensure it wasnt "outdated" and met the needs of military doctrine and the all important penetration at 500 m. Whilst the WW2 load might have been "optimised" as a 196g at 2500, post war surplus ammo I've used chrony's closer to 2400 and there are still "8mm Mauser" loads that run all of 2100fps and tales that German manufacturers produced ammo underpowered so it could be shot in both S & older I bore rifles, presumably at the latter stages of the war. A de-evolution of ballistics to meet resource limitations.

The 7x57 also underwent changes in bullet weight to keep it in the game: 173 to 139 and then 162g.

quote:

Originally posted by ALF:
Terminal ballistics testing ! Oh yes the good old boys at RWS and the like were champions at this and still are ! and they published it to text.... only problem is its all in German ! We must not forget that they were to some extent the kings of the castle when it came to guns and all things ballistics. IMHO the best modern collection on terminal ballistics is that of Wound ballistics and the scientific background There is now a second edition out as well

The original text was in German but has been translated.

Kneubuel also did a excellent book simply called Geschoss

Authors: Karl G Sellier; Beat P Kneubuehl; Ruth Rufer; John A Hawley

It can be downloaded for free as a E book

Over years there have been classic collections of text published in this field but sadly other than for historical importance most have over time been discounted and fallen prey to scientific scrutiny.

As someone correctly pointed out. Science is not about the evidence, it all about the method. If the method is not scientifically sound then the evidence is invalid

This certainly applies to the field of terminal ballistics. The "80's movement" on both sides of the Atlantic basically overhauled much of what was published before and corrected sometimes in harsh critical form what was deemed wrong with terminal ballistics research.

Do you have a link to the e book?

As to caliber, let us not forget the British put the .303 with its .311 bullet into service in 1888, although black powder was still the propellant.

The history of the 303 and cordite is a fascinating history in itself !

I believe that the new 7X57 Mauser round was developed in 1892 and in early 1893 to appeal to the (sizable) Spanish military. Must have helped. Mauser won the Spanish contract.

Ludwig Olson's Mauser Bolt Rifles book will shed some light on that new cartridge. Well worth the cost if you don't already have one.

Let's consider the differences in those "early military" rounds. Maybe some basic specifications from Wikipedia will shed some light. Both rifle barrel lengths were about the same at 29".

7.65x53 = 211 grain round-nosed(ball) bullet, muzzle velocity of 2,133 ft/s, 2,127 ft⋅lb pressure, 1/11" twist.
7mm Mauser = 173 gr round nosed(ball) bullet, muzzle velocity of 2,300 ft/s, 2,025 ft lb pressure, 1/8.66" twist.

Looks like the 7X57 shot lighter bullets, had higher muzzle velocity(flatter trajectory), less pressure(recoil) and a change (correction to a mis-match) in the twist rate. The 7X57 performance gets even better as bullet shapes are improved.

Great question ofbiro.

quote:

Originally posted by ofbiro:
Question to the colleagues:

Can someone explain why in such a short timespan two cartridges with similar performances were designed?
Some other reason?

I suspect the bottom line was the developers found the 7x57 to be a flatter shooting faster bullet, with more penetration, I know the hunters of the world did, and that still applies today, the 7x57 is just a fantastically well balanced caliber with a wide range of bullet weights at good velocity with little recoil..and has competed against the 30-06, 270, 280 and its ilk with good results...Fact not fiction, and just a tad of prejudice tossed in for my love of the caliber....

7mm Remington Magnum recoil is tolerable enough for seniors.

Nostalgic memories of the 7x57 make it very popular and low recoil.

Monometals make the round a four hundred yard elk rifle with no wind conditions.