What about the 8MM mauser?

01 November 2003, 03:45

dan belisle

Perhaps he means the length of the body to the base of the neck, I'm not sure. As to wildcats (or let's just say variations on the case, wildcatting isn't as popular in Europe as it is here), there are lot's of them, just not that many on this side of the pond. Search thorugh some of the old eeuropean catalogs some time, lot's of info there. - Dan

01 November 2003, 04:13

tiggertate

I am not absolutely sure but aren't all the metric series on the 57mm case basically the same? In which case, the factories have done it all; there is nothing left for the curious to do.
Rounds I can remember:
5.6 x 57 RWS
6.5 x 57 RWS
7 x 57
8 x 57
9 x 57
9.3 x 57
9.5 x 57
11.something x 57

I think there was also once a 6 x 57 but I'm not sure. anyway, pretty much everthing that can be done has been except .277 & .257, at least in Europe.

Footnote: I didn'mean to leave out the 6MM Rem or 257 Roberts or any American .277 Wildcat. I was just trying to count European factory rounds.

[ 10-31-2003, 19:49: Message edited by: tigertate ]

01 November 2003, 05:06

Snapper

Hey, I like the 257 and 6 mm.

[ 10-31-2003, 20:07: Message edited by: Snapper ]

01 November 2003, 10:08

Oddball

The 7x57 mauser has a shoulder length of 1.7277" and base of neck at 1.8664". The 8x57 mauser has a shoulder length of 1.8273 and the base of the neck is at 1.9330". That is from my RCBS load program and from the Sierra load manual.

02 November 2003, 16:29

browningguy

I shoot both and they are actually the same case, you can think of the 7mm as a necked down 8x57 with a long neck. Or think of the 8mm as a blown out 7x57. The neck is longer on the 7mm but thats it.

Some of the reloading manuals do show the case length being .005" shorter on the 7x57 but I don't think it's correct.

03 November 2003, 11:58

arkypete

Gentlemen
Is not the case head size of the 8mm the same as the 30-06? Would I be to far in error to think of the 8mm as a shortened wider mouth 30-06 case? As I gather the 30-06 is 7.62 by 63 mm, the 8mm is 7.92 by 57 mm and the 7.62 NATO is 7.62 by 51!
Maybe there's little to be gained from wildcatting the 8mm.
Jim
PS
Just dawned on me the 8mm maybe an interesting case for 24, 25, 26, 27, 28 calibers like they did with the 7.62 NATO. But the same thing could be achieved by shortening the 30-06

[ 11-03-2003, 03:01: Message edited by: arkypete ]

03 November 2003, 14:07

leo-too

I believe it was the spanish-american war where the the 7x57 out-classed the then existing american military cartridges(san juan hill). So the u.s. came up with the 30-03 using the same case head size as the 7x57 and 8x57. Later, the 30-06 with higher velocities.

03 November 2003, 14:58

jeffeosso

the x57 mauser cases all use the same headspace gage, from the german 22 hunting round x57 up.

It's a GREAT round, only topped, for case and actions, in MY opinion, by the new steyr round... 115 years or so later

hey Jeff, did it go off?

jeffe

[ 11-03-2003, 06:01: Message edited by: jeffeosso ]

03 November 2003, 23:04

Jiri

And what about .257 roberts and 6mm Norma BR and 6x47SM and a maybe hundred else cartridges based on 8x57 Mauser case mentioned by tigertale and others ?

Jiri

04 November 2003, 02:17

Pecos41

One big reason there aren't scads of 8mm Mauser wildcats running around is because there isn't much you can do with the original case to "Improve" it. We can neck the 8mm case down to other calibers.......which we have done already. But this old case was considerably ahead of it's time and already has pretty much a minimum body taper, sharp shoulder and fairly short neck. What's to improve? It's about right to begin with. [Confused]

05 November 2003, 04:30

<eldeguello>

quote:
I believe it was the spanish-american war where the the 7x57 out-classed the then existing american military cartridges(san juan hill). So the u.s. came up with the 30-03 using the same case head size as the 7x57 and 8x57. Later, the 30-06 with higher velocities.

This is ALMOST correct! The Spanish 7X57 DID NOT outclass the .30/40 Krag ROUND!; however, the Spanish Mauser rifle turned out to be better in military situations than the Krag, which required loading with individual rounds rather than the 5-round stripper clip of the Mauser. YES, the 7mm was much better than the .45/70 black powder round, but the .30/40 was also much better than the .45/70! [Big Grin]

The MAIN problem with the .45/70 was that when you fired it, you gave away your position to people who could see the puff of smoke, because they were firing smokeless powder, unlike previous wars in which everyone was pretty much blinded as to what was occurring on the battlefield after about two or three volleys had been fired!! [Eek!]

As to an 8X57mm IMP, there was an article several Handloader's Digests ago about one of these that was built on a Ruger No. 1! Turns out that it is quite a cartridge, but no better than a standard 8mm/'06, if one is planning to rechamber an 8X57 M 98 Mauser. (See?? There's really nothing new under the sun, when it comes to cartridges!!) [Roll Eyes]

As to "other caliber" wildcats on the 8X57mm case, every round from the .22 Newton through the 9.3X57mm can be considered to be such, since the 7,8X57J was the original round with this case type.

[ 11-04-2003, 19:33: Message edited by: eldeguello ]

05 November 2003, 06:15

HondoJohn6508

Oddball,
As to the 8mm case I had 2 reamers made up recently--a 8x57 MAI and a 338x57 MAI (Mauser Ackley Improved)..I just happen to like the Ackley Improved design and the benefits it provides for long case life.

The barrel on a '24 Yugo was pulled, set back 0.025 and rechambered to the 8x57 MAI.

A CZ action was rebarreled to a Shaw SS, standard contour, 1 in 10" and chambered to the 338x57 MAI.

Load development will begin soon, I hope.

Yes, there is not much new 'under the sun' as to the 8mm case and its offspring.

Ol' John

05 November 2003, 06:45

z1r

Oddball is right that the shoulder is further forward on the 8x57. Also, the 8x57 uses one headspace gage, the .257 bob and 7x57 use another and the 6mm rem uses yet another. I can't speak to the other various Xx57 cartridges.

It seems like the 8x57 case might have been a better parent cartridge due to the shoulder being further forward.

05 November 2003, 13:14

Woodcutter

Don't forget the .33-50 O'Neil which was a Mauser case necked up to .338. Power was (I believe)somewhere between the .338-08 and the .338-06 neither of which is shabby.

06 November 2003, 03:18

Phantom Duck

Close but no cigar. The 57 case is in itself a great design and it would be hard to improve on it. However go the other way. The 8mm 06 is hard to beat and may be a better choice than the 336-06 or the 35 whelen (except that there is no factory ammo for the 8mm 06). I have always thought that th 8 X 57 and the 7 X 57 were extremely balanced cartridges and as versatile as the venerable 30-06 (Sacrilege). What about the 6.5 X 57? I've never tried it as the 6.5 X 55 shot great enough for me. What about a 6 X 57. Should get lots of velocity. Don't know that it would be any more accurate than a 243. But I am sure someone has messed with it and could share their experiences. Hell for hunting you could do a lot worse than an 8 X 57.

eldeguello

Not sure I agree with you. Seemed to have read accounts of the US soldiers being taking hits from the 7 X 57 before the Spanish were in range of the U.S 30-40. To me that says the main difference is the cartridge. I don't think too many would disagree with me that the 7 X 57 has a greater range and is inherently more accurate than the 30-40, and this would be the case if the two were fired from similar firearms.

06 November 2003, 03:54

Zach

Phantom Duck,

The 6x57 is also known as the .244 remington or 6mm remington. Both of which are easily as accurate as the .243 and get speeds of at least 100fps better than the .243.

06 November 2003, 14:06

Swany

Hard to beat a rechambered, 98 large ring in 8mm/06 AI

07 November 2003, 16:57

Wstrnhuntr

quote:
Originally posted by Oddball:
Why don't we have 8x57 wildcats? That thing has been around for ever....105 years? The case body is longer than the 7x57 so to me would be a better choice for case development.

I asked this same question about a year ago. There is a slight difference in the 7X57 and the 8X57, but not enough to really matter. Only enough for better feeding of the 7mm.

There are lots of european cartridges based on the 8X57. The 9X57, 9.3X57 etc..

The 6mm rem, 257 r and 7mm are all derrived from the 57mm case. A 338X57 would be interesting. [Wink]

08 November 2003, 07:34

<eldeguello>

quote:
Not sure I agree with you. Seemed to have read accounts of the US soldiers being taking hits from the 7 X 57 before the Spanish were in range of the U.S 30-40. To me that says the main difference is the cartridge. I don't think too many would disagree with me that the 7 X 57 has a greater range and is inherently more accurate than the 30-40, and this would be the case if the two were fired from similar firearms.

Well, Duck, the .30/40 Krag military round used a 220-grain roundnose bullet at around 2100 FGPS, while the 7X57mm Spanish Mauser round used a 175-grain roundnose bullet at around 2250 FPS, so, given the fact that both bullets have about the same sectional density and shapes, I believe it is safe to assume their ballistic coefficients are about the same also. Since these bullets were both launched at velocities within 150 FPS of each other, their maximum ranges could not have been too much different. I'd be willing to bet that at 30 degrees elevation, both of these rounds will reach a maximum range of at least 3,000 yards.

The U.S. Army fired Krags on the range at distances up to 1,000 yards, just as they did the .45/70 (and later, the .30/'06)! However, I don't know the doctrinal maximum effective range at which U.S. troops were taught to try to engage enemy forces with the Krag.

I have Ruger single shot rifles in both .30/40 and 7X57mm, and they both shoot sub-MOA groups, so I would say your belief that the 7X57 is "more inherently accurate than the .30/40" is also wrong!

[ 11-07-2003, 22:39: Message edited by: eldeguello ]