7mm-08 Obsolete for a Mountain Rifle Cartridge?

[Mustangs Rule]

Is this a joke? I’m actually not trying to be mean, but I can’t tell if you’re serious or trolling.

Man-Eaters of Kumaon - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

He hunted maneating tigers with a 275 Rigby, the British name for the 7x57. The first Scandanavian explores of the Arctic, went into polar bear country with the 6.5x55. I recall reading about the first American hunters in the wild mountains of the middle east. They used savaga 99's in 250-3000. Thoughts from the past. These new calibers have only numbers going for them. And the numbers might be much better, but the stories they have are scant indeed.

Im Hunting Elk in the High Desert, I wrote about using my .270 for elk instead of my 280AI.

History counts, but only if one is old I guess.

 

[ImBillT]

I do not know what trolling means.

No it is not a joke,,,unless one on me at 73. I think I am still in some vortex from the past. To me a 7mm-08 is a new cartirdge.

Bear in mind that this next big game season will be my 59th.

Okay then.

1) American factory ammo and lots of American load data for the 7x57 is pitiful due to being dramatically over cautious about old military actions. European load data and factory ammo shows them to be equal. They have practically equal case capacities. With American brass the 7x57 actually has more case capacity, but European brass for their Mauser cartridges is usually VERY thick, and thus European 7x57 brass has about the same case capacity as a 7-08Rem. Downloading the 7x57 for no good reason does not make the 7-08Rem a magical cartridge.

2) It exceeds a 284Win by 100fps? On what planet? A case with 53.5gr H20 capacity does not beat a case with 66gr H20 capacity if they’re both treated equally. If Barnes printed that, there’s either an error, or you’re missing soemthing. A 284Win can drive 140gr and 150gr bullets 200fps faster than a 7-08Rem.

 

[ImBillT]

Man-Eaters of Kumaon - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

He hunted maneating tigers with a 275 Rigby, the British name for the 7x57. The first Scandanavian explores of the Arctic, went into polar bear country with the 6.5x55. I recall reading about the first American hunters in the wild mountains of the middle east. They used savaga 99's in 250-3000. Thoughts from the past. These new calibers have only numbers going for them. And the numbers might be much better, but the stories they have are scant indeed.

Im Hunting Elk in the High Desert, I wrote about using my .270 for elk instead of my 280AI.

History counts, but only if one is old I guess.

History away all you want. Many a handloader loads 7x57 ammo to equal a 7mm-08Rem at equal or lower pressure, and never has a 284Win failed to blow the doors off a 7-08 in terms of velocity. Be my guest at romanticizing whatever you want, but the 7mm-08 has no special magic. It’s well below the point of diminishing returns in terms of case capacity/bore area, and it doesn’t fit the bullets that make a 7mm so wonderful into a short action magazine without soaking up what little case capacity it had, and thus giving up even more ground to other 7mms. At least a lot of 7x57s came in actions that can handle the large 7mm bullets.

Why you’re posting about books written about 7x57’s when the issue is about a 7-08Rem, I don’t understand.

I have in the past, and will in the future hunt with a rifles simply because I like them, or because they have some sentimental value to me. That’s fine and good, but the idea that because someone 100yrs ago who hunted with a cartridge of the day and wrote a good story about it, somehow means that we shouldn’t shoot something contemporary, or that there are no advantages to something more contemporary, or that the very people who wrote those stories wouldn’t be shooting a 6.5CM today is highly flawed. You do realize that if the guys writing those stories had been of the same mind set as yourself, they’d have been hunting with self-bows and wooden arrows.(which I actually intend to do, but will never claim them to equal to a compound)

And back to the point, those books aren’t about the 7-08Rem whose performance you over-inflated and a 7-08Rem isn’t all that old.

Wow how does a 6.5x55 get brought into a conversation where I’m suggesting that claiming a 7-08Rem to be superior to a 7x57 and 284Win is more than a stretch?

 

[Mustangs Rule]

History away all you want. Many a handloader loads 7x57 ammo to equal a 7mm-08Rem at equal or lower pressure, and never has a 284Win failed to blow the doors off a 7-08 in terms of velocity. Be my guest at romanticizing whatever you want, but the 7mm-08 has no special magic. It’s well below the point of diminishing returns in terms of case capacity/bore area, and it doesn’t fit the bullets that make a 7mm so wonderful into a short action magazine without soaking up what little case capacity it had, and thus giving up even more ground to other 7mms. At least a lot of 7x57s came in actions that can handle the large 7mm bullets.

Why you’re posting about books written about 7x57’s when the issue is about a 7-08Rem, I don’t understand.

I have in the past, and will in the future hunt with a rifles simply because I like them, or because they have some sentimental value to me. That’s fine and good, but the idea that because someone 100yrs ago who hunted with a cartridge of the day and wrote a good story about it, somehow means that we shouldn’t shoot something contemporary, or that there are no advantages to something more contemporary, or that the very people who wrote those stories wouldn’t be shooting a 6.5CM today is highly flawed. You do realize that if the guys writing those stories had been of the same mind set as yourself, they’d have been hunting with self-bows and wooden arrows.(which I actually intend to do, but will never claim them to equal to a compound)

And back to the point, those books aren’t about the 7-08Rem whose performance you over-inflated and a 7-08Rem isn’t all that old.

Wow how does a 6.5x55 get brought into a conversation where I’m suggesting that claiming a 7-08Rem to be superior to a 7x57 and 284Win is more than a stretch?

I am disappointed by the lack of civilty in your responses, Really not necessary to season them with a dash or two of sarcasm.

I based my numbers on looking at Barnes data for the 145 grain long range. THe data is there for you t examine too. I will not be responding to anymore of your posts. You know a lot about reloading i can see that, as far as being polite we are from different planets.

 

[AvidIndoorsman]

Man-Eaters of Kumaon - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

He hunted maneating tigers with a 275 Rigby, the British name for the 7x57. The first Scandanavian explores of the Arctic, went into polar bear country with the 6.5x55. I recall reading about the first American hunters in the wild mountains of the middle east. They used savaga 99's in 250-3000. Thoughts from the past. These new calibers have only numbers going for them. And the numbers might be much better, but the stories they have are scant indeed.

Im Hunting Elk in the High Desert, I wrote about using my .270 for elk instead of my 280AI.

History counts, but only if one is old I guess.

6.5x55, shooting a 160grn round nose and therefore had a much faster twist rate. With the creed craze folks have re-examined twist rates, but that essentially was the issue, rifles like the .264 win mag were designed for speed alone not ballistics. I think Woodleigh and maybe Hammer are the only ones who make a 6.5 bullet over 140grns. If you go online I don’t think you can find any factory ammo for a 6.5 with an offering over 140 except for the 6.5x55.

IMHO it’s not as much about the cartridge as commercial offerings, which is the OPs point.

 

[Mustangs Rule]

6.5x55, shooting a 160grn round nose and therefore had a much faster twist rate. With the creed craze folks have re-examined twist rates, but that essentially was the issue, rifles like the .264 win mag were designed for speed alone not ballistics. I think Woodleigh and maybe Hammer are the only ones who make a 6.5 bullet over 140grns. If you go online I don’t think you can find any factory ammo for a 6.5 with an offering over 140 except for the 6.5x55.

IMHO it’s not as much about the cartridge as commercial offerings, which is the OPs point.

I believe I understand what you are saying, and I agree. There is a difference between the European/African mindset of barrel twist and that of Americans. Americans, lacking much if any real dangreous game went with lighter faster bullets. The .270 is a perfect example of this. I think the .260 Remington also is. And yes the 6.5 Creed, with it's faster twist for heavier/longer bullets went more European/African,,,,,which has led to it's great success.

Historically that faster twist for heavier/longer bullets is what built the reputation for killing power with the 7x57 and even the more slight 6.5x55 Swede. Early Scandanavian explorers of the Arctic did hunt polar bears with the 6.5x55.

Going back some decades I used to live and hunt in NW Wyoming. My antelope hunting took me into the high mountain meadows surrounded by aspens where Antelope would hang out until the first big snowstorm. This period was before bear spray was on the scene, which I now have great confidence in.

Anyway, when hunting there then, my rifle, and my being on my toes were the only defense I had in case of a bear encounter.

Regularly while hunting high country antelope I would see tracks and scat from grizzly.

This changed my choice of firearms. I took my first antelope with a 35 Whelen. Later I used the 270 with the 180 grain Barnes originals. Without the best twist accuracy was not the best but they worked fine for me and were quite effectice and offered some "Bear Comfort".

One rifle that I was very comfortable with back then was a Mauser carbine in 7x57 that had the fastest twist for the longest bullets. It shot the 175 grainers quite well and back then I bought some 7mm Barnes originals that were 190 grainers.

They were round nosed and looked like a pencil broken in half they were so long. With either the 175 of the 190 grain bullets I could easily MOA all day,,,,,with quality peep sights. I was young then and so were my eyes.

Beiing about in Grizz country in the pre-bear spray era, I set my minimum caliber choice as 7mm,,,,with long heavy bullets, hence my appreciation for the 7mm-08 over the 6.5 Creed.

Those were great years. As a Wyoming resident I could get piles of Antelope tags then, nobody hunted the high meadows for Antelope. I had them to myself,,,,and yes the bears.

The antelope had a much better diet up high,,,lots of wild geranium, and shrubs. They tasted very good, much improved over the sagebrush fed ones out on the plains. Shots were close,,my first antelope buck was about 60 yards away when I shot him while I was laying on a boulder under a big fir tree.

Hunting antelope is easy and close after Identiying thier SPUD sites, Scratch, Paw, Urinate, and Deficate.

Mustangs Rule

 

[Mustangs Rule]

Much more important than a long range rifle, is paying attention to where the sun shines the longest where you are hunting. Where the sun comes first,,,,,and where it stays the longest later in the day. Also where this meets with less chilling wind. Those places will have the most and most active photosythesis going on, which produces more sugar in plants.

All herbivores are micro tuned into this extra bit of sweetness, especially in the fall as the sun wanes and they are geared up to prepare for winter.

Once you turn on to this type of hunting the key will be to oversee such places in the last half hour before it gets dark. Once the sun goes down and photosythesis stops, the sugars rapidly return to less sweet componds.

Finding those places at the right time when sweeetnees brings the herbivores there can be very productive. Then the rifle becomes almost irrelevent.

I down load my .308 Sako Finnlight with 30-30 Barnes bullets and use a fixed 2.5 power scope. Easy on meat. No more is needed.

 

[ImBillT]

I am disappointed by the lack of civilty in your responses, Really not necessary to season them with a dash or two of sarcasm.

I based my numbers on looking at Barnes data for the 145 grain long range. THe data is there for you t examine too. I will not be responding to anymore of your posts. You know a lot about reloading i can see that, as far as being polite we are from different planets.

Barnes needs to throw the 284Win data in the trash and start over. Something is wrong. No one else lists a 284Win as being slower with the same bullets than a 7-08Rem, and no one holding the two cartridges in their hand hand ever thought the 7-08Rem was more powerful. One need not know that the 284Win has 23% more powder capacity to understand that it’s more powerful than a 7-08Rem.

Nosler’s max load with a 140vr in a 7x57 is 61fps behind a 7mm-08Rem, BUT they used a 4” shorter barrel in the 7x57. A 7x57 gains 24fps/inch, which puts the 7x57 35fps faster than a 7mm-08Rem if they had the same barrel length. Norma lists some loads faster for the 7x57 and some faster for the 7mm-08Rem, which is what should happen when you test two almost identical cartridges. Hodgdon show the 7x57 lagging the 7-08Rem, but they also consistently hold it back to about 6% lower pressure than the 7-08, which is common in the US out of an improper fear of those old military actions. The 7x57 and 7-08Rem are roughly identical.



I apologize for my rudeness. I was a little bit struck that someone who posts frequently on this forum would claim that down was up, and then support it with the claim that they had been hunting for longer than the rest of us, as had some other people who wrote about shooting cartridges other than the one in question. While perhaps I could have changed a few words, I don’t believe that I could have addressed the fact that your post contained substantial misinformation without stepping quite forcefully on your toes. If politeness requires that I pretend that misinformation is correct, then I will never be good at being polite. You’re disappointed with my lack of civility, and I’m disappointed that someone who writes extensively about shooting and hunting could claim a 7-08Rem defied physics, and then stood on your age as proof that you were correct.

 

[Wild Bill]

Shave your toothbrush down, don't bring a sleeping pad and sleep on the ground, forget boots and go barefoot, and only carry one bullet. You do all this stuff and you'll offset a heavier gun while saving money. You can thank me later.

 

[Don Fischer]

Okay then.

1) American factory ammo and lots of American load data for the 7x57 is pitiful due to being dramatically over cautious about old military actions. European load data and factory ammo shows them to be equal. They have practically equal case capacities. With American brass the 7x57 actually has more case capacity, but European brass for their Mauser cartridges is usually VERY thick, and thus European 7x57 brass has about the same case capacity as a 7-08Rem. Downloading the 7x57 for no good reason does not make the 7-08Rem a magical cartridge.

2) It exceeds a 284Win by 100fps? On what planet? A case with 53.5gr H20 capacity does not beat a case with 66gr H20 capacity if they’re both treated equally. If Barnes printed that, there’s either an error, or you’re missing soemthing. A 284Win can drive 140gr and 150gr bullets 200fps faster than a 7-08Rem.

I think pitiful is in the minds of American shooter's only! For instance how far away would you feel comfortable taking a round from one of those pitiful things in the chest?

 

[Don Fischer]

6.5x55, shooting a 160grn round nose and therefore had a much faster twist rate. With the creed craze folks have re-examined twist rates, but that essentially was the issue, rifles like the .264 win mag were designed for speed alone not ballistics. I think Woodleigh and maybe Hammer are the only ones who make a 6.5 bullet over 140grns. If you go online I don’t think you can find any factory ammo for a 6.5 with an offering over 140 except for the 6.5x55.

IMHO it’s not as much about the cartridge as commercial offerings, which is the OPs point.

I think if we look, every cartridge today, even the old one's are more capable than a lot of hunter's. I don't know and have never known anyone willing to take a shot from a 22 RF to prove a point that they are not adequate enough. Every cartridge is adequate enough the question is is the shooter, that is the flaw in this whole thing!

 

[ImBillT]

I think pitiful is in the minds of American shooter's only! For instance how far away would you feel comfortable taking a round from one of those pitiful things in the chest?

Perhaps. My point was that the cartridge is slightly larger than a 7-08, and is usually loaded up to its potential in Europe, yet usually loaded well below its potential in the US due to a fear of the weakness of German military actions. In the 1950’s when US ammo manufacturers began loading 7x57 ammo, they loaded it well below its potential in spite of the fact that Europeans had been using those actions, with ammo loaded to its full potential, for almost 50yrs(the original 175gr loads in 1893 were a bit weaker than a 7-08Rem). That is pitiful. The cartridge isn’t pitiful. The poor loads that most us manufacturers put out for it is pitiful.

Furthermore, it’s one of those pitiful loads that Mustangs Rule was using to suggest that the 7mm-08Rem has magical powers. The two are practically equal, and even the majority of the over cautious loads place a 7x57 much closer to a 7mm-08 than the tremendous gap that he quoted.

 

[Mustangs Rule]

I have a loading manual for all major companies, Speer, Sierra, Hornady, Nosler and Barnes. I also have multiple editions of some manuals.

I read that some of my first manuals are considered too "hot" now, and have been toned down from 40 years ago when I first bean reloading.

Making comparisons across the boards there are some major consistencies,,,,and ocassionaly some surpising variations, especially with the 7X57 and 6.5x55 Swede,

Now I only reload with the most recent Barnes manual for hunting loads. I still use all the others for target shooting.

On occasion I have seen some loads that surprised me with Barnes bullets.

Apparently some times with some bullets they get higher pressure sooner because of being surface issues.

At some point I will ask them about the various velocities for the bullet, the 145 Long range X, with the calibers we have been discussing on this post just recently.

 

[Mustangs Rule]

I just compared the 7mm-08 versus the .284 with 140 grain bullets on the Nosler website. It matches the data on the Barnes sight and also others. With around 56 grains of powder the ,284 just breaks 3012'feet/sec.

With the 7mm-08 with 47 grains of powder the 140 grain bullet is going 2953'/sec. Way under 100'/sec diference with a huge difference in powder.

What I have read many times is the the .308 case is just super efficient.

Very similar situation with my 280AI compared to the 7mm mag with bullets in 140 grain range. Barely a 100'/sec difference but the 7mm Mag takes much much powder for a "chicken little" gain.

Some cases are just 'magic" with thier physics. The 250-3000 case is another one

 

[Beanland_fan]

Question on the 7mm08. Is anyone here loading the 150 ABLR and using it on game? If so what are your results? Thanks!

 

[Mustangs Rule]

I just went to Nosler reloading data ,,,,again,,,,and there is the .284 Cartridge data,,,fasted load was 56.5 grains of Hunter powder shooting a 7mm 140 grain bullet at 3012/second,,,97% case capacity.

It is right there. I went right to 7mm rifle cartridges and clicked on it.

 

[ImBillT]

I just compared the 7mm-08 versus the .284 with 140 grain bullets on the Nosler website. It matches the data on the Barnes sight and also others. With around 56 grains of powder the ,284 just breaks 3012'feet/sec.

With the 7mm-08 with 47 grains of powder the 140 grain bullet is going 2953'/sec. Way under 100'/sec diference with a huge difference in powder.

What I have read many times is the the .308 case is just super efficient.

Very similar situation with my 280AI compared to the 7mm mag with bullets in 140 grain range. Barely a 100'/sec difference but the 7mm Mag takes much much powder for a "chicken little" gain.

Some cases are just 'magic" with thier physics. The 250-3000 case is another one

Look at

I just went to Nosler reloading data ,,,,again,,,,and there is the .284 Cartridge data,,,fasted load was 56.5 grains of Hunter powder shooting a 7mm 140 grain bullet at 3012/second,,,97% case capacity.

It is right there. I went right to 7mm rifle cartridges and clicked on it.

You’re right that it’s there. It doesn’t show up if you click on data by cartridge, but it does show up if you click data by caliber. I usually do not click the data by caliber option. Nosler needs to fix that.

A 284Win gains 24fps per inch of barrel difference.(more if you load it long) Nosler’s data uses a 24” barrel for the 284Win and a 26” for the 7mm-08Rem. To correct for barrel length the 284Win would be 3060fps. That’s over 100fps faster than the 7mm-08Rem. Your first post on the subject claimed that a 284Win was 100fps slower than a 7mm-08Rem. The Barnes data needs to be updated.

There is nothing about a 308Win case that makes it superior to other cases except that it is about the largest thing you can reasonably fit into a short action. The 30TC(6.5CM), 6.5x47L, and 250-3000 Savage cases are more reasonable fits for a 700 short action.

 

[Deleted member 20812]

100 FPS is some serious velocity difference. Serious…..

 

[Mustangs Rule]

100 FPS is some serious velocity difference. Serious…..

Okay, I’ll play this silly game one last time.



Finn Aggard was a hunting and shooting writer I thought brought such a vast amount of experience to every article he wrote. He was a very well respected hunting guide in Kenya until hunting was banned and he was taken in by his fellow hunters in Texas where he guided, hunted and wrote till he died some years back.



As an old man he was a top performer at the active shooting event named the Keny-Athalon held at the NRA center in New Mexico. This event began being designed for hunters.



He never won first place as he refused to use tricked out rifles that had left being true hunting rifles, and were instead target/sniper rifles.



Eventually the sniper crowd took over,,,and what I thought was the finest active shooting event in America went off course and fizzled out. Too bad,



Finn was an eminently practical man. I recall one of his articles in which he discussed the.308 Winchester cartridge.





He wrote about one of the most successful “one shot kill” hunters who went to Africa to hunt plains game. The only rifle he took for this once in a lifetime hunt was the .308.



In the course of this writing Finn compared the .308 to the 7mm-08. As good as he thought the 7mm-06 to be,,,he then said that nothing could beat the .308 for “All around game field Utility”



I never forgot that term. Finn was never lured in by things like the last drop of velocity, or the last fraction of BC. Again,he was eminently a very practical man, and the .308, and all the calibers that share that case are very practical performers.



I write all this thinking about your comment about how “serious” a 100’/second is.



Actually if you take the maximum velocity for the 140 grain bullet in the ,284 which is 3012’/second and compare it to the max for a .7mm-08 with that bullet which is 2953’/sec you get just under a 2% increase in velocity, 59’/sec. which is trivial. This is gained by a 19% increase in powder going from 47.5 grains to 56.5 grains with the .284.



I would, take the 7mm-08 and run.



What we have here in these comparisons bears similarity to 14 year old boys looking at “Playboy”

and arguing which pictured model is “better”, based on measurements which are trivial and reflect little real life experience.



There now , I am done with this silliness

 

[old roper 42]

If it's any help, Nosler new manual # 9 dropped loading data for 284.