Author Topic: 8x57 does it all better? (Read 7719 times)

Coyote Hunter · « **Reply #30 on:** August 02, 2006, 07:01:12 PM »

S Summer –

You forgot to mention the steels those fine old rifles were made of – steels that were often inconsistent in quality and strength and unable to match the alloys developed around 1917 and later.

The words “Rugged, Reliable, Accurate, Plenty Powerful” pretty well describe all my centerfire rifles, none older than 1981. As to “Low cost”, the only war relics that have piqued my interest at all were anything but “low cost”. There was one good looking Mauser 7x57 made in Germany in the late 30’s that was being sold by a German fellow who claimed to have owned it since the early 60’s. The cost was $225 and I passed, the only old rifle I regret not buying.

“Low cost” is a relative thing, and if you don’t like what you end up with the cost is too high regardless of the price. A friend bought an old -03A3 and by the time he had a shooter it had a new barrel, bolt handle, trigger, bluing and stock. It looked great and shot very well – and he had considerably more into it than I have in any of my modern rifles.

I’m not trying to put old firearms down, but I have looked on numerous occasions (at virtually every gun show I attend, and I go to a lot of them) and so far I keep coming up with the same answer: “No thanks”. Some people love the old guns and I think that’s great, but I prefer modern steel, bolt guns made by Ruger and lever guns made by Marlin. My last seven purchases have in included two new Rugers, one used Ruger, three used Marlins and a used Remington.

As to quality, modern tooling and CNC machinery allows a consistency in tolerances not possible in the “good old days”. “Hand finished, hand polished Quality that will never be seen again”? Most of the war relics and old rifles I’ve seen lost their lustre years ago, and many never had much to begin with. Besides, while deep blue metal and walnut looks nice, I’m trending toward laminates and synthetics and stainless.

The question was specifically about 8x57. No thanks, I’ll take a .338 and a modern rifle. I don’t expect everyone to agree.

Blammer · « **Reply #31 on:** August 03, 2006, 07:42:59 AM »

I think the chart below says a lot. You can pick any angle you want.

S.S. · « **Reply #32 on:** August 03, 2006, 11:36:31 AM »

Disassemble just about any modern made firearm and you will find tool marks
(or worse) in some hidden areas.
The Swedish mauser I was referring to has none, anywhere.
The Model 1891 mauser has none, anywhere.
Savage model 110 Swirls under the stock on the barrel.
Winchester Model 70 Bit marks inside the action.
Ruger M77 One of the sloppiest jobs of fitting an action to a stock I have ever seen.
Browning A-Bolt -Good Grief, Nuff said Not even fully blued beneath the poor fitting stock.
CZ and Weatherby still appear to take pride in what they create,
Most of the other current manufacturers don't seem to care.
Don't get me wrong, cosmetics do not create accurate, servicable weapons,
But attention to these types of details sure impress me.

Coyote Hunter · « **Reply #33 on:** August 03, 2006, 02:30:23 PM »

S.Summer –

Your appreciation of aesthetics is completely understandable. Like you, I appreciate a good-looking rifle - but there are limits to my appreciation. I much prefer the manufacturers pay attention to detail where it counts rather than remove tooling marks in areas where it does not.

Fortunately there are enough rifles out there to please both of us.

nomosendero · « **Reply #34 on:** August 03, 2006, 03:52:37 PM »

Quote from: Blammer on August 03, 2006, 07:42:59 AM

I think the chart below says a lot. You can pick any angle you want.

Doesn't say much to me at all. Unbelievable that we are still talking about a "comparison", but I believe
I would take the best loads of each & then compare, which would then show the larger spread that all of us know exist between these two cartridges.

Drilling Man · « **Reply #35 on:** August 03, 2006, 06:37:56 PM »

Liveing in Alaska for many years gave me the opportunity to harvest a lot more big game animials than the average person would be able to. Because of this, it allowed me to use many different firearms, loads, bullets ect... While in Alaska i owned a gunshop, mfg'd ammo, designed and swaged "bonded core" bullets and hunted extensively all over the state.

As i got older i quit worrying about what those charts said, and focused more on what happened when i pulled the trigger, as i was testing bullets constantly.

Personally, i just never saw much of a difference between a properly loaded 30-06 and a properly loaded 8x57 on big game... Do i think the 30-06 has more down range power? Yes i do, but the 8mm is so close in performance to the 30-06 out to any range that you SHOULD be shooting big game at, it's just a non issue.

Drilling Man

nomosendero · « **Reply #36 on:** August 04, 2006, 04:59:51 AM »

Quote from: Drilling Man on August 03, 2006, 06:37:56 PM

Liveing in Alaska for many years gave me the opportunity to harvest a lot more big game animials than the average person would be able to. Because of this, it allowed me to use many different firearms, loads, bullets ect... While in Alaska i owned a gunshop, mfg'd ammo, designed and swaged "bonded core" bullets and hunted extensively all over the state.

As i got older i quit worrying about what those charts said, and focused more on what happened when i pulled the trigger, as i was testing bullets constantly.

Personally, i just never saw much of a difference between a properly loaded 30-06 and a properly loaded 8x57 on big game... Do i think the 30-06 has more down range power? Yes i do, but the 8mm is so close in performance to the 30-06 out to any range that you SHOULD be shooting big game at, it's just a non issue.

Drilling Man

Yes, you are right & it is what I have been saying all along concerning these two great cartridges, the 30-06
has more down range power.

I have a little experience as well & have been in the 3 digits for a long time with Deer & have killed a few other animals as well. I have been around long enough to know this, there is no set distance or distance limit
for people to shoot & harvest Big Game. So as far as how far people SHOULD shoot game, that depends
on the shooters ability, wind & weather conditions, accuracy of the weapon & bullet performance & retained energy. I see people each year "sighting in" there rifles & doing the 50 yard pie plate thing. I know some
serious shooters who won't hunt with their rifle unless it will shoot under MOA not just at 100 yards but at a
longer distance as well & then they practice from field positions as well so no, they can shoot off the bench too. So the distance that these 2 types of hunters SHOULD shoot at Game varies widely.

It is easy when a rifle type or cartridge doesn't fare well at the longer ranges to then say, well we should not
shoot that far anyway. It is up to us to know what WE can do with any kind of weapon from a Bow up to a
precision rifle & not to tell others what that limit is.

But back to the subject
Last fall, one of the Antelope's I shot was over 400 yards(Doe Tag). There was some wind, but steady &
could be allowed for with a good BC bullet. I was using a 25-06AI but if I had been hunting with a well tuned 30-06, I would have still been good to go. I would not have been comfortable with the range & the wind
attempting the shot with a 8X57.

Mr. Joe · « **Reply #37 on:** August 04, 2006, 05:05:18 AM »

That really shows how close the .308 and .30-06 are as well. With safe handloads the .308 easily tops factory .30-06 fodder, but again, the .30-06 can be loaded roughly 100fps faster than the .308 both using max handloads in my experience. I know this is off topic, but why does everyone say the .308 doesnt handle the 220 grainers well? Ive loaded and tested some with pretty good results my self, again about 100 fps slower than the handloaded .30-06. I thought it was the 1:12 rifling but yet again, i have no trouble stabalizing the big heavys. Again, sorry to wonder off...its early.

Its of my opinion, to say that any of these 3 rounds are not capable of doing the same thing with the same results may be an opinion not gained from experience. They are so close, that any small diferences especially in the field would be of no consiquence. My chronograph can hardley tell them apart! I can see the slight S D advantage for the .30 cals, but i dont think mr. bull moose would care to distinguish. I dont have much experience with the 8x57js but on paper, its realy just 6 of one, half dozen of another.

BTW, this is a great thread! You folks sure know your stuff!

nomosendero · « **Reply #38 on:** August 04, 2006, 05:41:18 AM »

It is shocking how Hornady shows 30-06 loads for a 220 grain with 10 different powders but don't
show 220 grain loads for a 308 at all.

The 2006 Hodgdon Reloading Annual shows 30-06 loads for not only 220 gr. but 250 gr. as well.
I had better call & chew both of these companies out, they must not know what they are doing.

BTW, I guess I need to buy a new Cronograph as well.

Mr. Joe · « **Reply #39 on:** August 04, 2006, 05:49:51 AM »

You kind of came off as a little abrasive. I hope i didnt somehow offend you? Ill post the 220 grain recepe for you if you like. 220 grain JSP one H4350-46.0 gr., mix with wooden spoon in a large bowl. 2,376 fps out of a 22 inch ruger 77 on average. This is not a max load and is safe in all my bolt actions.

I grouped ok with it considering my average shooting ability. I have a couple more 220 loads for it, but this has been my most consistant. Ill be honest with you...i dont see a need for the .220 in the .308 or the .30-06, but if you noticed, i was asking why does the .308 have the reputation to not handle the .220s well.

Drilling Man · « **Reply #40 on:** August 04, 2006, 06:45:56 AM »

Quote

Last fall, one of the Antelope's I shot was over 400 yards(Doe Tag). There was some wind, but steady &
could be allowed for with a good BC bullet. I was using a 25-06AI but if I had been hunting with a well tuned 30-06, I would have still been good to go. I would not have been comfortable with the range & the wind
attempting the shot with a 8X57.

That doesn't mean the 8x57 wasn't up to the task, it means YOU weren't. Like you said, "So the distance that these 2 types of hunters SHOULD shoot at Game varies widely". That's true, and it varies with the kind of weapon they have in there hands too.

I don't think deer are much of a test for either round, as both are more power than you need on such a thin skinned animial.

Quote

I know this is off topic, but why does everyone say the .308 doesnt handle the 220 grainers well?

I never cared if my 06's handled them well or not, as the 200 NP's out performed them on game by a wide margin... (i have NOT tested the 220 NP)

Drilling Man

nomosendero · « **Reply #41 on:** August 04, 2006, 09:18:08 AM »

Quote from: Drilling Man on August 04, 2006, 06:45:56 AM

Quote
Last fall, one of the Antelope's I shot was over 400 yards(Doe Tag). There was some wind, but steady &
could be allowed for with a good BC bullet. I was using a 25-06AI but if I had been hunting with a well tuned 30-06, I would have still been good to go. I would not have been comfortable with the range & the wind
attempting the shot with a 8X57.

That doesn't mean the 8x57 wasn't up to the task, it means YOU weren't. Like you said, "So the distance that these 2 types of hunters SHOULD shoot at Game varies widely". That's true, and it varies with the kind of weapon they have in there hands too.

I don't think deer are much of a test for either round, as both are more power than you need on such a thin skinned animial.

Quote
I know this is off topic, but why does everyone say the .308 doesnt handle the 220 grainers well?

I never cared if my 06's handled them well or not, as the 200 NP's out performed them on game by a wide margin... (i have NOT tested the 220 NP)

Drilling Man

Well, you can think that if you want to, I believe it would be the wrong tool for the job & as I said I would not be comfortable with it, I did not say the round would not kill out there & I did not say that that I could not hit one out there either, but again the wrong tool for the job. Kinda like playing Golf, use the right club for the given situation. I think someone who hunts in Wy. in wind would know what I meant by that statement. Maybe you can tell me what the wind speed was that day. Or maybe you are constantly on the defensive about a cartridge not up to the task. You know NOTHING about what I can or can't do, nor do I know what you can do or care.
But I do know this, anytime you want to "take me to school with you drilling at 400 or over with your "Drilling" & me with my Antelope rifle, let's do it &* publish the results, shall we.

Drilling Man · « **Reply #42 on:** August 04, 2006, 11:53:00 AM »

Quote

Maybe you can tell me what the wind speed was that day. Or maybe you are constantly on the defensive about a cartridge not up to the task. You know NOTHING about what I can or can't do, nor do I know what you can do or care.

Take a breath man, no need to get upset.

Your right i wasn't there, i was only going by what YOU said in YOUR story. You said.... "I would not have been comfortable with the range & the wind attempting the shot with a 8X57". No problem, but that doesn't mean no one could of done it. That was my point from the beginning.

Personally, in my 50 plus year hunting career, i've never had to take a 400+ yard shot at an animial, and doubt i ever will, even though i've fired a huge amount of ammo on the range, at distances further than that. That includes dall sheep hunts in the Brooks Range, and caribou hunts on the tundra where there's very little cover. I just always figured out a way to get closer. Also, i just don't have a problem watching an animial walk away....

Last thing i want to add here is, i never even liked the 8x57 untill i bought the one i now have. I mostly hunted with 30-06 size cartridges, but once i started useing my 8x57, i started to see how good it really is. With 200 NP's it has done everything i've ever asked of it as did the 30-06 it replaced. I could use either one for all of my hunting.

If you have seen me on the net much, you've seen me say, that IMHO the 30-06 is the finest all around cartridge ever invented and i could live with one the rest of my life. I just happened to find something that works at least for me, just as good.

Anyway, "Happy Shooting" with what ever you prefer to carry....

Drilling Man

nomosendero · « **Reply #43 on:** August 04, 2006, 05:14:30 PM »

Yes Sir, I don't have a problem watching them walk away either if I need to, it's just that the distance where I need to make that decision is not the same. As far as getting closer, I have at times had nothing between me and the animal but short grass. We all hunt in different places.

Mckie Hollow · « **Reply #44 on:** August 04, 2006, 11:04:41 PM »

Whew - This has been quite a Post. I think Everyone should remember how the 30-06 Springfield, was born. It was to replace the 30-40 Krag, Because the Opposition had something They called the 8x57 Mauser. Both Cartridges were developed by World Powers, Both Cartridges are over 100 years Old, It was much differant "Times", When both of These Cartridges were being developed. To this Day - There has been no other Commercial Cartridge developed, showing sizeable improvements over these Two. I would call these two - International Twins. Both compliment Each Other and Compliment the People Who Developed Them. Drilling Man - I like Your choices.

Brithunter · « **Reply #45 on:** August 05, 2006, 12:17:49 AM »

Sorry but the 30-03 was developed after the superiority of the 7x57 used by the Spainish and not the 8x57 Mauser. The 30-03 was later shortened slightly to become the 30-06. The British army found the same problem with the &mm Mauser in the hands of the Boers in South Africa however they chose to improve the 303 round and the way that the LE rifles were sighted in.

Cheesehead · « **Reply #46 on:** August 05, 2006, 05:07:16 AM »

Is it true the 30:06 is a near direct copy of its predecessor the 8x57.

Cheese

Coyote Hunter · « **Reply #47 on:** August 05, 2006, 05:28:10 AM »

Quote from: Mckie Hollow on August 04, 2006, 11:04:41 PM

[Regarding the 8x57 and .30-06] To this Day - There has been no other Commercial Cartridge developed, showing sizeable improvements over these Two.

Well that's it. Time to throw away the Win Mags, Weatherbys, Dakotas, RUMS and a variety of others. Or rather, others can do that - I'm not giving up my 7mm Rem Mag or .300 Win Mag.

nomosendero · « **Reply #48 on:** August 05, 2006, 05:41:06 AM »

Quote from: Cheesehead on August 05, 2006, 05:07:16 AM

Is it true the 30:06 is a near direct copy of its predecessor the 8x57.

Cheese

Nope

Cheesehead · « **Reply #49 on:** August 05, 2006, 07:29:16 AM »

Is the 06 based on the basic brass of the 7x57?

Cheese

R.W.Dale · « **Reply #50 on:** August 05, 2006, 07:35:49 AM »

Quote from: Cheesehead on August 05, 2006, 07:29:16 AM

Is the 06 based on the basic brass of the 7x57?

Cheese

Sorta but not really, 7.65x53 , 7x57 , 8x57 all use the same standard sized casehead as the newer 30-06 but the casr length is a good deal longer on the 06 = 7.62x64

Cheesehead · « **Reply #51 on:** August 05, 2006, 08:47:03 AM »

As far as case head dimensions go,, which order were these slightly similar cartridges developed?

Cheese

R.W.Dale · « **Reply #52 on:** August 05, 2006, 10:21:44 AM »

Quote from: Cheesehead on August 05, 2006, 08:47:03 AM

As far as case head dimensions go,, which order were these slightly similar cartridges developed?

Cheese

In the order...I think
8x57 1888
7.65 1889
7x57 1893

30-03 1903
30-06 1906

Cheesehead · « **Reply #53 on:** August 05, 2006, 10:57:09 AM »

Thanks Krockus.
That is a fine family of big game cartridges. All of them very capable. So many variants based on the origanal 8x57 case head. Thats one of the things that makes the 8x57 a great cartridge.

Cheese

Mckie Hollow · « **Reply #54 on:** August 05, 2006, 12:19:25 PM »

Brit Hunter- We all know about the 30-03. I didn't think it was around long enough to get mentioned. Sorry I missed the great 303,But it was never mentioned in this post.
Coyote Hunter - I will not throw away My 300 Win. Mag. either. Someone had to invent something bigger & better than the 06. Come to think of it, I think Whelen did it when He put a .358 in that 06 Case. Somneone else, I can't remember Who, also put a .338 in an 06 case.
As far as a 300 Win Mag. being a sizeable improvement over the 06, Well it took 50 years, and was it that big of an improvement?, Not near as big as the originals. Just My Opinion. By the way - I do not own an 06 any more, but Hold one for My British Buddy, Who comes Hunting Whitetail, every Season, All the way from The Market Square,Downtown London.

Coyote Hunter · « **Reply #55 on:** August 06, 2006, 03:38:59 AM »

Quote from: Mckie Hollow on August 05, 2006, 12:19:25 PM

As far as a 300 Win Mag. being a sizeable improvement over the 06, Well it took 50 years, and was it that big of an improvement?

GIven today's availability of load data and factory loaded ammunition (Hornady Light Magnum and Federal High Energy, etc.), the difference may not seem as great as it was when the .300 was originally introduced. Back in the '60's however, I think a person could easily decide there was a significant difference. Then there are the Weatherby .30s, as well as the RUM...

Brithunter · « **Reply #56 on:** August 10, 2006, 11:27:46 PM »

Hmmm well here goes 2nd attempt

the 1st one a few days ago dissapeared into cyberspace

Quote

You forgot to mention the steels those fine old rifles were made of – steels that were often inconsistent in quality and strength and unable to match the alloys developed around 1917 and later

Hmmm not all the modern steel is that good in quality especially from place like China and India, it might be cheap but quality control is sadly lacking and I wouldn't mind betting that the steel of pre WW1 was probably a lot better than this new stuff

having had to machine some of the so called quality Stainless Steel from India, well I can assure you it's quality at all more like pig iron

.

Quote

As to quality, modern tooling and CNC machinery allows a consistency in tolerances not possible in the “good old days”. “Hand finished, hand polished Quality that will never be seen again”? Most of the war relics and old rifles I’ve seen lost their lustre years ago, and many never had much to begin with. Besides, while deep blue metal and walnut looks nice, I’m trending toward laminates and synthetics and stainless.

CNC accuracy relies on good tooling and good programming then an operator who knows what they are doing. Just because it's a CNC machine does not mean it's going to be acurate. The actual quality of the base machine the control system and especially the tooling play major factors in accuracy. I remember when we first started using carbide inserts for machining which for me was 30 years ago.Those Sandvik inserts had ground edges and were guarenteed to be within 0.001" when indexed in their tool holders unlike todays inserts which are claimed to be accurate to within 0.01mm (0.0039") unless they are "Qualified" which means they cost about 10x the price. After a tip change with the modern Iscar, Mitsubushi etc you have to bring up the size being cut by at least 0.01mm and recheck it after the cutter pass as the size will be different then adjust to get you finish size. 30 years ago this was not called for unless working to extremely tight tolerances.

If only CNC are accurate can you explain how the parts on the Lee Enfields are all interchangable no matter which plant they were made in? How come back in 1839 a hammer of sear even a complete lock could be taken off one Enfield Musket and fitted straight onto another it being a perfect fit? Old world craftsmanship and difference guages and sealed patterns was the secret. Whitworth prooved it was possible to measure to one millionth of an inch. No the skill and the capabilty to make accurate parts was there and was employed unlike today where the reliance is on computers and cheap labour

. As for hand finished firearms not beign available

.................. sorry but your way off base there. My newest manufactured rifle was made in 1999 which is only 7 yeras ago

it was hand polished the makers name is hand engraved on the side of the action and the stock and bedding ware hand carved

even in the US there are makers who will do this to order, OK it's not the throw away price of the latest Remington but you do get a rifle which is built to last a lifetime and one which was built with pride and instils pride in the owner. Oh and yes I do hunt with it and it does have a couple of little marks on the wood but I can always have or refinish the stock as it has a traditional oil finish

.

Quote

“Low cost” is a relative thing, and if you don’t like what you end up with the cost is too high regardless of the price. A friend bought an old -03A3 and by the time he had a shooter it had a new barrel, bolt handle, trigger, bluing and stock. It looked great and shot very well – and he had considerably more into it than I have in any of my modern rifles.

Hmm your friend brought a collectable rifle and then preceded to butcher it? why didn't he buy an accurate rifle in the first place instead of destroying a piece of history? so in it's original form it didn't shoot too well but to a collector that is not important, it's the history that matters. There are plenty of old sporters already built on the Springfield 03 action which if he was really set upon using an 03 action one of these would have been more suitable for building a custom rifle on in my opinion

.

Quote

I’m not trying to put old firearms down, but I have looked on numerous occasions (at virtually every gun show I attend, and I go to a lot of them) and so far I keep coming up with the same answer: “No thanks”. Some people love the old guns and I think that’s great, but I prefer modern steel, bolt guns made by Ruger and lever guns made by Marlin. My last seven purchases have in included two new Rugers, one used Ruger, three used Marlins and a used Remington.

So you like cast rifles in Rugers and old fashioned but newly made lever guns in Marlins. At least the Marlin is made using forgings

for myself I prefer forged steel in my fireams and yes I understand the lost wax casting principle and I still prefer forged steel

Quote

The question was specifically about 8x57. No thanks, I’ll take a .338 and a modern rifle. I don’t expect everyone to agree.

You would be very daft to expect everyone to agree

shooting is one hobby which is covered by a very broad church

just think how boring it would be if everyone had or wanted exacty the same

myself I happen to like the 8mm Mauser and so much so I sought out this Parker-Hale 1200 super rifle:-

Straigjht out of the box

And now fitted with scope and mounts

P-H made a special run for an export order and as is normal made some over runs this is one of them. A newly made well in 1988

M98 actioned sporting rifle in 7.92mm (8x57mm) heck even Remington made a classic model in 8x57mm and a 196 Grn bullet at 2650fps is plenty for anything I am liable to hunt

.

jro45 · « **Reply #57 on:** August 11, 2006, 03:19:24 AM »

My 30/06 pushes the 150 gr bullet at 2998 FPS. Thats with a 25" barrel standard load.I've

shot those 180s before but didn't put them threw my conagraph. I think they'll do 2800.

S.S. · « **Reply #58 on:** August 11, 2006, 04:18:53 AM »

The standard 147-150 grain 30-06 military load had a velocity
of slightly less than 2700 fps. I have never seen one push over
2750. (Not Handloads, Military rounds) Actually 2650 is about
a good average thoughThe 196-198 grain 8 mm Mauser
averaged about 2700 also. The powder the Germans used was
far different pressure wise. And All of them were developed in response
to the ugly little 8mm Lebel from France ! It was the first smokeless
Military rifle cartridge and raised the bar for all the other countries that
followed. The U.S was slow to fully standardize, Some National Guard
(State Guard) units were still armed with Trapdoor Springfields in 45-70
up until the late 1930's for home guard use ! Black powder rounds
none the less too! (Although they probably never came out of their racks)

nomosendero · « **Reply #59 on:** August 11, 2006, 04:29:11 AM »

Brithunter, that is a nice looking rifle.