6.5x55, 7x57, 7.65x53, 8x57 Or ?

[AzRednek]

Just for the sake of discussion. Imagine yourself as the Secretary of War, at the turn of the 20th Century for Republica De Banana, an imaginary South American country. Your Dictator has ordered you to select and purchase rifles for the Army. Your country doesn't have the manufacturing capabilities to make your own, so you look to Europe to build them for you. You select the 98 Mauser. Assuming the rifle's cost would be the same if you chose a caliber that Mauser has previously tooled up to build. Assuming the ammo's cost is the same and the latest spitzer bullet technology is now available, which cartridge would you select from what was available in that era for your standard infantry rifle ?? And why??

 

 

[ken98k]

7X57

I love this catridge. It's accurate, effective, very moderate recoil and report.

[Horsefly]

6.5x55 or 7x57.Both are accurate,flat shooting,and low recoil.They would make any shooter the best shot they can be.7x57 would be 1st choice I reckon because it's more widely used and ammo could be easier had if in a bind during a war. Jerry

[Spiris]

As much as I like the 6.5x55, I think the 7x57 was as good and is evidenced by the battle at San Juan Hill in 1898. The US forces suffered 3 times the casualties as the Mexicans, and their 7x57 Mausers were decimating. It was one of the reasons the US paid Mauser for the rights to manufacture a Mauser styled 1903 Springfield.

A little known fact is that the US forces used Gatling guns in an offensive support position for the first time and eventually won the day because of that.

 

Spiris

[edspad]

Does 30.06 count ? that would be my choice if i could steal the technology from capitalist. otherwise it would be 8x57 for my MBR.

[roscoedoh]

7x57.

 

Why? Because every one of my armories is filled to the max with stockpiles of 7x57 from the M1893 and M1895 Mausers I've already purchased. Plus, the cartridge is powerful enough to kill or maim humans at long distance but the recoil does not pound the heck out of my troops. Its easy for them to shoot accurately and effectively at long ranges.

 

 

I really like the 8x57 and 30-06 for machine guns, but fired from a bolt-action rifle with a steel buttplate in tropic uniform is a bit much to ask from a relatively poorly trained soldier.

 

So...7x57 all the way.

[edspad]

7x57.

 

Why? Because every one of my armories is filled to the max with stockpiles of 7x57 from the M1893 and M1895 Mausers I've already purchased. Plus, the cartridge is powerful enough to kill or maim humans at long distance but the recoil does not pound the heck out of my troops. Its easy for them to shoot accurately and effectively at long ranges.

 

 

I really like the 8x57 and 30-06 for machine guns, but fired from a bolt-action rifle with a steel buttplate in tropic uniform is a bit much to ask from a relatively poorly trained soldier.

 

So...7x57 all the way.

 

HA! maybe that's the same reason i picked 8mm, I stocked up on Turk and every surplus i could buy before it disappeared. a Hot Loaded round and steel butt plate doesnt bother me much, not to say i am not bruised and a bit sore after a day of shooting. maybe its just the rite of passage? kind of like shooting a 416 rigby or 375HH, You know it going to bang you up a bit.

 

I wonder how much the impact of the round on the shooter plays a roll when deciding these factors, is the 7x57 that much smoother like a 6.5x55 recoil?

 

[Brenden]

Am i the only odd ball that would go with the 7.65x53? All of the above rounds are very well made, the 8mm being a little much recoil, the 6.5 being very accurate and low recoil as the 7mm, but the 7.65 holds many fond memories to me. It was the first mauser i ever held and it made me into the faniatic that i am today.

Brenden

[flaco]

Spiris?

 

Hello?

 

Actually, those using Mausers at the Battle of San Juan Hill were Spaniards.

 

Not Mexicans.

 

flaco

[bilurey]

My favorite overall is the 7x57, wide range of powders and bullets, great record as a game getter and target round. I decided to stand back and decide on the basis of which round I least like being shot AT me. That would be the 8x57 with it's 198grn. FMJ, Spitzer nose and Boattail base. These things don't stablize well until the 400M mark and even then they may tumble, twist, or turn internally following the greatest impact of all cartridges mentioned. Many wartime bullets were designed to be just ballisticaly stable to travel in a straight line, but, lose that stability on impact.

 

In WWI both Germans and British complained about the spitzer bullets which tumbled on impact, as opposed to the original round nose FMJs which sailed straight through minimizing damage. In WWII we learned that light weight Spitzer Boatails reduced time-to-target and recoil. However both the we and the Brits had serious intentions of using 7mm cartridges until war broke out with each of our sides having millions of our WWI cartridges in stock in a time of desprite need.

 

The Germans designed the Zf41-1 "optical sighting aid" to increase the probability of a first round hit. However, both the Russians and Germans ended up with "mini" rounds of standard caliber in selective fire stamped rifles to gain Volume of Fire. Unlike earlier "static" (trench or fortified positions) tactics, the new "Dynamic" wars move on motorized vehicles and potential locations of enemy are simply hosed down. This is the current trend, and the .30 cal. light weight Spitzer Boat Tail bullets give good penetration under these situations. With 50 cal. support for penetrating heavy cover and all but Tanks (and special rocket launched inverted cone explosive heads for armored targets) many nations are going to full auto pistol cartridge small arms for the dreaded Urban fighting.

 

On the other hand, I think the 7.65x54 is prehaps the best of the Mauser rounds for most hunting. After all, Winchester chambered the M70 for it and both Winchester and UMC sold SP hunting bullets for it. Almost all Mauser cartridges (military and hunting) are loaded with the heavist bullets posible - at modest velocities. This was not done by accident. Bill

 

[AzRednek]

Am i the only odd ball that would go with the 7.65x53? Brenden

 

You're not alone. I have a fondness of the 7.65 that goes back to when I got into shooting mil-surps back in the early 70's. 91 Argies were dirt cheap back then, most in excellent near mint condition and for an extra dollar or two one could get a bayonet and scabbard. Couldn't count all the 7.65's I've owned and horse traded away over the years. I'm down to only two 7.65's, one 09 carbine and a Peruvian 91,

 

Friend of mine, on leave before heading to Viet Nam in 1967 bought a 91 Argie so he could go deer hunting with his brother and dad. He claims he got the near mint condition rifle, two boxes of surplus ammo, one box of soft-tip hunting ammo, bayonet and scabbard for 39.95. After my friend mentioned to the Army-Navy store (Del Rae's in Phx) employee he was headed for Nam they gave him a sling and a bunch of grungy, loose surplus ammo.

 

It was the first mauser i ever held and it made me into the faniatic that i am today. Brenden

 

My first shot with a center-fire rifle was a Spanish Oveido, either a Model 93 or 95 in 7X57. Friends and I used to shoot metal dongs at long ranges with mil-surp rifles. Most likely due to the rifle more than the cartridge type, the 7.65's scored the best of all the Mausers but the 7 and 8 MM Mausers we had then were either battle worn, dark bored junkers or Spanish made. The Argies all had bright and shiney bores.

 

Just speculating, I imagine the South American's choice of available cartridges likely was influenced by whom they were allied with and their potential adversaries. The two big SA military powers of the era were Brazil and Argentina. Possibly Argentina selected selected the 7.65 because Brazil had 7X57's.

[Larry Gibson]

Wow, that is a tough one for sure. However one must make choice for the country based on practicality not personal choice. If one chose the 6.5 or the 8mm how could you make use of any captured ammuntion and weapons without much logistical and training problems? The old Dictator might not take too kindly to that! Serious considerations would have to given who you are allied with and who are your enemies. Also in what direction does the old Dictator want to strike out?. Another consideration is supply since you don't make your own ammo. How easy would it be to get ammo from an ally or from Europe and what is the cost? Boils down to a choice between 7x57 or the 7.65 Argentine. Dending on where the "Republic De Banana" was located SA would also be a consideration. If I was educated and had kept up on current developments of ammuntion I probably would opt for the 7.65 because of machinegun useage.

 

My personal choice is also the 7.65. However that is based on the buitiful rifles made for it and it's suitability with cast bullets. Those would not be a consideration in the above.

 

Larry Gibson

[AzRednek]

My favorite overall is the 7x57, wide range of powders and bullets, great record as a game getter and target round. I decided to stand back and decide on the basis of which round I least like being shot AT me. That would be the 8x57 with it's 198grn. FMJ, Spitzer nose and Boattail base.

 

When my friends and I used to shoot the metal dongs the WW2 German surplus ammo would dent the metal allot deeper than the 7.65, 7MM and 303 Brit. Depending on the range the 8MM would sometimes partially or completely penetrate as well as some French 30/06 we had. I don't recall the bullet weight of the 8MM or any of any of it as we used to pool our money and buy large quantities of the cheapest ammo we could find. We never considered bullet weight as we shopped strictly for the lowest price.

 

My personal choice is also the 7.65. However that is based on the buitiful rifles made for it and it's suitability with cast bullets. Those would not be a consideration in the above. Larry Gibson

 

My feelings exactly although I haven't really done much with cast bullet loads for 7.65. Just the nostalgia alone makes me favor the 7.65. So many of the 91 Argies I've seen over the years were really beautiful, especially the wood. How so many of the 91's showed up here in mint or near mint condition is kind of a mystery. My guess is (and it is only a guess as I don't know for certain) the Argies, like President Reagan had a philosophy of peace through strength and it kept the Argies out of war. Their possible enemies may have feared their powerful well equipped military. Obviously because of the numerous and beautiful 91's imported into the USA, the majority never saw any combat or hard use.

 

I used cast bullets to fire-form 06 brass into 7.65 and some of it left some decent groups on paper. If I remember correctly using straight wheel weights, the Lee mold dropped a slug measuring .313. We used a sizing die for 32 S&W that would lube the grooves but barely or no sizing to the slug. I don't recall the 32's sizing die's size but I'm guessing it was 315 or larger. My shooting buddy went through all the trouble of slugging his bore, properly sizing and gas checking his cast 7.65 loads. His loads didn't show much improvement over mine on paper at close range but his loads would score allot more hits on the metal dongs at long ranges. I was lucky if I heard a report 10% of the time with my loads. My cast bullet 7.65 loads were mild and were likely tumbling at the long ranges. Years back I landed a deal on some Russian jacketed soft steel core .310 slugs that although a bit undersized shot just great in the 7.65.

[Jimro]

The 7x57 would be my first choice, followed by the 6.5x55 because it would require fewer resources to make per round than any of the other choices.

 

A 9 grain difference in bullet weight doesn't sound like much per unit, but it is 6.5% advantage in lead that is your biggest non recoverable resource from training expenditures. Brass is 100% recyclable, powder use will be similar between all the cartridges mentioned, primer cost is the same.

 

Jimro