The Accurate Reloading Forums THE ACCURATE RELOADING.COM FORUMS Rifles Big Bores Did Ian Nyschens use a 10.75x68 Mauser or a 404 Jeffery?Go | New | Find | Notify | Tools | Reply | |
| One of Us |
I guess I am one of those who really enjoyed reading "Months of the Sun" by Ian Nyschens. It became clear that Nyschens much preferred his double 450 NE No.2 over his 404 bolt rifle for elephant hunting in the jesse. However, it struck me that the mentioned 404 could have been the 10.75x68 Mauser, and not the 404 Jeffery? In the book, it only says “404 rifle”, which is of course the same caliber as 10.75 mm. As we know, the 10.75x68 shoots the slightly inferior 347 grain bullet, while the Jeffery made its reputation with 400 grain bullets. Probably not insignificant when it comes to elephant hunting. Does anyone know if Nyschens bolt action rifle(s) was the Jeffery or the x68 Mauser? | ||
|
| one of us |
Not so sure he used it because it is my understanding he was a critic of this cartridge ? | |||
|
One of Us |
I believe it was the 404 later on. While not necessarily a gun nut he was well versed in calibers and performance. He mentions several in his writings, 600NE,450#2,416rigby, and of course the 404. His early career I believe he was shooting 10.75, in fact he says as much and did not like it’s performance. Later in life in an interview with Buzz Charlton he mentions the 475#2 as what he would carry if he went out again. “Low chamber pressures” | |||
|
| one of us |
The 10,75 x 68 is one of my all time favorites, light, handy, holds 6 with one up the snout with a drop box. Recoil is mild, and it kills very well indeed, but only if you use present day 404 bullets. There never was a problem with the 10.75 x 68, it was the too light, poorly constructed bullets. The designers and builders had the same mentality as todays bean counters display from time to time!  Its a diamond in the rough.. Ray Atkinson Atkinson Hunting Adventures 10 Ward Lane, Filer, Idaho, 83328 208-731-4120 rayatkinsonhunting@gmail.com | |||
|
| one of us |
The designers and builders had the same mentality as todays bean counters display from time to time! What ???? Are you short on your meds ?  You are equating the ballisticians engineers, physicists, chemists and mathematicians that gave us / you everything shooting to "bean counters" ? A little rich don't you think ? | |||
|
| One of Us |
Or, more likely, there be an extended session of drool-age in the porridge again. Returning to the merits of the OP's question, it's the .404. Stone colder killer then, and now. Pachyderms, rhino, buff, ... or any species of the big bruins. All The Best ... | |||
|
| One of Us |
Very early in his career...and the book, he clearly states he used the 10.75, I believe in Mozambique, eventually unsatisfied by and selling it and acquiring a 303. After some hair raising adventures with that round, he moved to the big bore Rigby 450#2 in conjunction with a 404 for backup and insurance for a larger part of his career. | |||
|
One of Us |
He pretty explicitly states the 10.75 rifle (maker) was inferior, not necessarily the round. But as is often the case, the baby went out with the bath water. Later in the Zambezi he used a 404. He clearly knew the difference. Corrected: I do see his statement later regarding the 10.75s performance, bullet weight/design etc. | |||
|
| one of us |
No Alf I.m referring to the business men that make decisions for hunters. and the misfortune of the 10.75 x68 WAS because of an inferior 350 gr. bullet of that time, it came apart, end of story, you should of all people know that, Hydell probably not he is dumber than a box of hammers, that's common knowledge!  ..I have used the 10.75 with todays Woodleigh bullets for the 404 and they work like a charm, I would hunt any animal with the caliber and those bullets and have almost. Its a grand caliber with proper bullets like most calibers...your a groupie, Im not if Nyschens said the caliber was the problem then he was probably a good hunter but not much on balistics...Many of the old boys and todays guides and PHs are not the last word in ballistics and consider a gun a tool..A 400 gr. Woodleih in a 10.75 at 2150 to 2200 FPS is a good DG combination the 404 proved that early on and many folks apparently still use that combination, as has been stated on AR many times...I shot my 404 with a 400 gr. Woodleigh at 2300 to 2400 FPS, the end results were the same as my 10.75 btw..Ray Atkinson Atkinson Hunting Adventures 10 Ward Lane, Filer, Idaho, 83328 208-731-4120 rayatkinsonhunting@gmail.com | |||
|
One of Us |
Ray, Ian was a man of not so many words and the folks that knew him knew he wasn’t boastful of the hundreds and hundreds of elephant he shot. Months of the Sun details this somewhat. I for one find actually shooting a large animal, I.e., elephant (or thousands in Ian’s case) more insightful than a ballistic program. I’ve settled on my calibers and bullet selections. I feel safe with my rifles in dangerous game country. In that respect, to each his own. But Ian wouldn’t dog the 10.75 for the sake of it. His rifle and ammo were his tools. His life depended on them. I believe he said it lacked sufficient penetration for frontal brain shots. He was very fond of his .450 and had confidence it would stop an nzhou in the thick shit. He tried to use the .404 when the circumstances were right. But you can tell when he was in the jess, with the .404, he was uneasy. Finally, yes as others have said. He used both and found the 10.75 inferior. | |||
|
| one of us |
With all due respect to Taylor's book but he was full of shit ! So too the urban myths that arose as consequence of ! The Bullets used in 10,75 x 68 are the very same bullets in construction and form used in the 404 Jeffery by DWM, RWS and Kynoch ! The only difference is the mass So claiming that the rifles failure was because of "poor bullets" holds no water ! you can argue the bullet was to light ! but not because it was of poorer construction ! | |||
|
| one of us |
The 10,75 x 68 in general is misunderstood mainly because of misplaced urban legend and rehashing of half truths starting with the the date of production. COTW propagated the " somewhere in the twenty's " date and this we see propagated each time the topic of the 10,75 comes up.... much akin to Bell's use of the 7x57 ! The date of first production is likely 1908, the reason we can claim this is because of existence of Mauser Sporting rifles with SN's in the 1908 date range chambered in this cartridge. Further this we see reference to the DWM #515A case in the DWM 1911 Alpha list RWS and Gustav Genshow (GECO) list this around 1912 We further see reference to the Normalization of the 10,75 x 68 at the Ertfurt Conference on 21/09/1909...... So we can confidently argue for a 1908 date The issue of the 347 (22.5 gm ) Bullet. Why this "odd weight " choice , why hamstring the 10,75 x 68 when at the time DWM had a heavier 10,75 caliber 26 gram ( 401 gr ) bullet? The answer lies in the fact that Mauser for whatever reason wanted a lightweight sporter which utilized a standard Mauser action with a magazine box dimension approximate to the original M88 round nose load. As such they opted for a 84mm mag length, the same as the 9.3x57 and the 8x60 albeit with rear dimensions to fit with their "cosine rule " for the 68mm Grundig case. in addition to the lightweight mantra they chose to load it to a very pressure limit of around 36,000 psi though the later adopted CIP limit placed a 47,000 psi on the cartridge The limiting factor was the magazine dimension and not the freebore. The freebore on the 10,75 was 30mm as opposed to the bigger 404 with only 7mm and some. The 404 case interestingly enough is only 73mm as opposed to the 10,75's 68mm and the COL differed by not much. 81mm for the 10,75 x 68 and 89mm for the 404...... so in effect the amount of "nose showing " above the case rim was about the same. It brings to the use of 400 gr bullets in the 10,75 and long monometals in the 404. The mag dimension of the original Jeffery and 10.57x73 Mauser sporters was only 92 mm with a cartridge COl of 89mm as opposed to the 10.75's 81 mm COL and 84mm mag box There have been many who have laid claim to getting their 10,75's to shoot like a stock standard loaded 404. The answer is both yes and no ! The no part not unless you ignore the pressure limit and only if you use compact cup and core 400 gr bullets like woodleigh The minute you go monometal and 400 gr you run into a huge space occupying problem ! The long 400 gr monometals have to be loaded so deep into the case there is nowhere to go with powder and to boot those who have explored the pushing of boundaries with the 10,75 using just about every burn rate powder available have found the limits of this cartridge | |||
|
| one of us |
Very interesting post, Alf. Buy a buy a donkey! Maybe the Winchester engineers looked at that 10.75x68mm Mauser throat in designing the .458 WIN throat. Mauser used a 0*21'11" Leade Angle with base diameter of Leade being 10.82mm (0.4260"), with groove diameter of 10.75mm (0.4232"), with bore diameter of 10.45mm (0.4114"), with bullet diameter of 10.78mm (0.4244"). The 30mm (1.181") length of "freebore" you speak of is the distance from base of Leade to bore diameter, with zero parallel-sided free-bore. By comparison, the .458 Winchester Magnum throat is proportionally wider at base diameter (0.469"), and greater in Leade Angle (0*29'30") yet with a shorter actual distance from base of Leade to bore diameter: 1.115"  The .458 WIN throat is like the H&H-Coned-Up Throat and the 10.75x68mm Mauser had a baby.  I like the circa 1908 vintage 10.75x68mm Mauser even more now. Let us not forget that the 404 Jeffery was also loaded with 300-grain bullets in the early days, at about 2600 fps MV. The greatest North American sheep trophy ever, Mr. Chadwick's Stone Sheep ram, was taken with that 404 Jeffery 300-grain load. Or at least Mr. Chadwick drew first blood with it, and then the guide finished it with a .30-06, IIRC.  Rip ... | |||
|
| one of us |
RIP: There is more to this issue of this caliber / cartridge was "good" and that was "bad" (Taking into account at the time there was no home reloading) With time many of these comparisons became either a bad of honour or a bad of shame for various cartridges. The usual statement goes something like "bad bullets" The problem with this statement is simply that it is flat wrong because at the time we had in the big game hunting scene very few ammo producers and they in turn used the very same bullets for all of the cartridges ! We had DWM and they had a set range of bullets, these were in design by type the same across the board so in effect all that was different was caliber, mass thus SD and then velocity at which they were shot. The same could be said for Kynoch and RWS. ( RWS of course had a huge bullet type range ) So when comparing the Jeffery 404 and the 10,75 x 68 the bullets were exactly the same in construction just the weight and velocity was different ! So calling the 10,75 out as "bad" because of "bad" bullets is not entirely correct. What about the 416 Rigby ? Again Kynoch used the same bullets by type and construction in their 416 as they did their 404. When comparing cartridges of the time we should really be doing it based on SD, Geometry ( axial and transverse moments of inertia ) and velocity as all essentially used the same bullet | |||
|
| One of Us |
In Africa Dangerous Gsme Cartidges P. van der Walt makes a very good argument that German ammo was loaded with softer, inferior bullets compared to English ammo. Not saying he is right. But he does make a fact based argument comparing different bullets used during the time frame the 10.75x68 was used. I can give pages numbers tonight that the rebuttal can be found. | |||
|
| one of us |
I was very fortunate very early in my "gun nut disease state" to have access to the very last gasps British and German ammo and then of course something the American shooting world was deprived of access to Warsaw pact era Czech rifles and Ammo (Povaske Strojarne ) ( i will touch on this history of that all came about later) We tend to forget then it was with these original components and loads that reputations were made and lost ! The bullet options we have today alter the playing field for old cartridges totally !    The Kynoch bullet list we see the cannelure grooves close to the base and that is because they used military style crimping way down on the neck  The Manton list 1937 The 404 and 430 Manton aka 10,75 x 68 was all Kynoch  Manton's 430 Mauser aka 10,75 x 68  DWM 1926  | |||
|
one of us |
Oh to be able to buy a Manton HV Mauser in .404J at those prices or even equivalent pricing today! On the plains of hesitation lie the bleached bones of ten thousand, who on the dawn of victory lay down their weary heads resting, and there resting, died. If you can talk with crowds and keep your virtue, Or walk with Kings - nor lose the common touch... Yours is the Earth and everything that's in it, And - which is more - you'll be a Man, my son! - Rudyard Kipling Life grows grim without senseless indulgence. | |||
|
| One of Us |
The pages making the case of inferior/softer bullets loaded by German Firms is found on pages 271-274. Somewhere in the book outside of the 10.75x68 chapter he starts this conversation, but the book has no index. Without, reading the entire book from cover to cover. I cannot find the first page he starts this conversation. I am not going to re-write the chapter. However, in summary, he states that the 10.75x68 was loaded with inferior/soft bullets by German firms. Brits loaded better 347 grain bullets in the 10.68x68. When used with British ammo the issues with penetration went away as he witnessed. He concludeds, in the middle of his argument, a 347 grain bullet made of Tungsten would penetrate well. Implication better than a 400 grain of lessor construction, while the soft German bullets are poor penetrators. I am not versed enough to declare which camp on the 10.75x68, 347 grain bullet is right. However, I can say well reviewed and rational argument for German firms loading a softer bullet has been made. There are other things that P. Van Der Walt has writtten that I do not agree with. But he says he has seen common in use German ammo and British ammo, and they were loaded with different bullets, and the German was softer. I am not of the opinion he is lying. Looking at the charts posted by Mr. Alf, it appears both he and P. Van Der Walt may be right. Is it possible the soft nose or split nose 347 grains bullet is what caused the reputation of the 10.75x68. All bullets for the 10.75x68 were 347 grains. So, the weight got blamed. The 404J had two bullet weights 400 grains that soft and solids, and a high velocity soft, 300 grain load. | |||
|
| one of us |
Also and important to discussion is timeline ! Nyschens was born in 1923 and only started hunting / elephant control shooting in 1947. 1947 is important in terms of what ammo was available to him. Just as a side note: The 10,75 x 68 was one of the cartridges used by Hermann Gerlich of Gerlich and Halbe fame, to do experimentation on "Squeeze bore" or tapered bore guns with. He used a Gerlich skirted bullet of 10,75 mm and squeezed it down to 6.5mm ! The velocities attained were off the charts fast ! | |||
|
| one of us |
Alf, I never heard of Ian Nschens, and Im sure he was fine gentleman, a great hunter, but I know many good hunters that are misled on guns and ballistics., however Im sure you put words into his mouth in that he had no choice for better bullets, and like many of todays hunters blamed the gun..If he also condemned the 404 Jefferys then or now he is just stupid. I do take issue in that I have no doubt the 10.75 was a stepchild that was delt a blow with a 340 gr. bullet by idiots..It had no sectional density and was too soft and made no sence..I have infact shot a couple of collector bullets of that weight into magazines and they came apart on contact almost, which I knew they would as it has been common knowledge for years now. I have also shot a few buffalo with the 10.75 of which Ive built half a dozen and sold a few on AR back when..All were for use with 400 gr. bullets, only Woodleigh still makes a 340 gr. bullet for the uneducated I suppose. His 400 gr. bullet is awesome in the 10.75 x 68 and the guns I built had drop boxes and 6 rounds.. Contrary to Ian, I found the 400 gr. Woodleigh at 2100 FPS as good a DG rifle Ive ever used, and the exact equal to the 450-400 balistically and in the field, with the same results..If you and Ian can believe that all is lost. I normally respect your posts a great deal, but this time you just fell off your brick truck stepped on your pinkie. Ray Atkinson Atkinson Hunting Adventures 10 Ward Lane, Filer, Idaho, 83328 208-731-4120 rayatkinsonhunting@gmail.com | |||
|
| one of us |
Ray Where do you get this from ? This guy hunted from 1947 and for a relative short time worked in the Rhodesian game department. Loooong before Woodleigh ! He died in 2006 at age 73 Home reloading at the time was not common in Southern Africa and to boot Woodleigh bullets only became available around 1985 ! That was just the other day ! Kynoch was done for by 1972 , DWM way before ! Povaske Strojarne was done for by 1954. Some of the stored Kynoch's that we sourced had seasonal neck cracking, some had extruded bullets and performance after years of storage was poor ! For a time the only bullets we had were bullets made by the late Ken Stewart a former PH from Kenya and later Rhodesia who moved to Ofcolaco in the Eastern Transvaal. Ken was the model for the Character "Buttons" in the Movie Hatari. Ken made me brass for many of my Euro guns when none were available. Ken was a time the only source of bullets for old calibers ! he died in 2014 I lived the ammo shortage and that is how I picked up many of the guns I now own... Guns but no ammo ! no cases and no Bullets ! | |||
|
| new member |
My library uses the "Big Heap" form of "organization". I just tripped over Nyschen's book. Early on (1947) he stated his 10.75 was an inferior build and had become unreliable. He said in 1948 he bought,in Salisbury, a .404 Jeffrey for 80 pounds sterling. I know that was a lot then but it still boggles. | |||
|
| one of us |
Thanks for that bit of info ! | |||
|
| one of us |
Alf, and none of that has to do with the caliber of the gun itself, your attacking the bullets and the old age worn cases, that fail in all calibers..Not reasonable IMO. Im talking about a good Mauser actioned rifle and handloaded or factory good ammo loaded with proper bullets..not the old stuff of yesteryear. As to the man himself and his reputation as a hunter, I make no judgement, Im no groupie and feel no need to have to agree with him based on invalid claims, but hey I disagreed with Elmer Keith most of the time! and I absolutely disagree with Nyschens condemnation of a fine caliber of rifle..If he shot 200 gr bullets in a .375 the results would be a disaster of much the same significance .. I notice you made no comment as to my comment about the ballistics of a properly loaded 450-400, as being exactly the same as the 10.75x68, so it appears that you and Nyschens feel the 450-400 is a poor choice, that's where I get that to answer your question. But never the less, I do respect your usual comments and you have been a wealth of information on AR, but I must take issue on the subject of the 10.75 that has been derailed for years by well know experts both pro and con however. Ray Atkinson Atkinson Hunting Adventures 10 Ward Lane, Filer, Idaho, 83328 208-731-4120 rayatkinsonhunting@gmail.com | |||
|
| Powered by Social Strata |
 | Please Wait. Your request is being processed... |
|
The Accurate Reloading Forums THE ACCURATE RELOADING.COM FORUMS Rifles Big Bores Did Ian Nyschens use a 10.75x68 Mauser or a 404 Jeffery?
Visit our on-line store for AR Memorabilia