I should probably direct this to ALF.
------------------

The 10.75x68 and 8x68s do not share the same case. Any idea why not? Atkinson once told me that the 8x68 case was larger which I find strange seeing as how the 10.75 uses a much bigger bullet. Who developed the 10.75x68 and when? What is its history?

Any ideas?

Please allow me to hijack this thread for a moment. The only reason to build a 10.75 x 68 is that it is damn hard to get a .404 to feed properly on a Mauser action without spending some big bucks. First, there is only one company (ERA) making a properly angled magazine box for the .404, and it still requires fitting by an expert gunmaker, not a backyard mechanic. However, the 10.75 is a bit easier to get to work without spending a lot of money.

The 10.75 x 68 was considered inadequate in its day due to low penetration. Today it can be souped up with hotter loads (higher pressure).

Now, back to Alf.

.

quote:

Originally posted by 500grains:
The 10.75 x 68 was considered inadequate in its day due to low penetration. Today it can be souped up with hotter loads (higher pressure).

Exactely, but also to remember that in those days it was the bullet offered that gave the bad reputation, not the case design.

Today, it should easily reach 2300 f/s with a 380grs North Fork or a 370grs BridgerFNS.
And with that, I will be undergunned for - what?
John Taylor had full confidence in his 450-400 with 400 grs at 2100 - for any game.

I know a .404 Dakota will give me hotter options, but i don't think I need them. The '68 will give me one more in the magazine.
That, I might need.

Alf,
Thanks for listing those box dimensions.
a CZ 550 Magnum box is perfect for the .404 Jeffery. Even the CZ factory can make them function well.

Alf,
Thanks for interesting info! You mention a cartridge named 9,3x63, I have never seen this listed anywhere. An experiment cartridge or actually used?

.