7.5 Swiss Loading Modern Bolt Action Rifle

RC20

New member
This is probably a Unclenick directed question as we are getting into in depth technical. I think it has the possibility of learning about chamber pressures and what is involved in general as well.

Is there a know breakdown on what limits a modern gun and chambering?

Obviously the barrel material is a factor, brass is a factor.

Does the brass have enough of a factor that it become the driving limitation?

Realist the only available Brass is PPU (which Hornady used when they made 7.5 ammo). Norma costs a fortune, Lapua is not available.

While the K31 Rifle has a well established load history to go on, the question I have are "what are the limitations" for a Modern Bolt Action rifle using the 7.5 Chambering?

I know that is a dicey question, but the cartridge does have close to 30-06 capacity and it would seem it could be used.

Can the modern load programs give you an idea on what the Pressure that combination can take.

The gun in this case is my Savage 116 that has a Lothar Walther barrel on it.

The GP11 is listed as 55,000 psi which is no wimp

30-06 is listed as 60,200

308 is listed as 62,00

While I would like to explore the upper but safe limits I would like to get the input on it and if its negative, then not do so.
 
Your main problem, of course, is you don't really know what pressure you're generating. I use Quickload to get an estimate for my loads, but it's just that, not a measurement. I load for a K-31, and my only goal was to match the famous GP11 round. I did, with a review of published data, careful workup, and yes, QL estimates. Those indicate I am well below MAP spec, and no issues with my rounds.

But you have a rifle that is regularly chambered for higher pressure 30 caliber rounds. Why wouldn't it work with the Swiss cases loaded to those pressures? I don't have a reason why not, but a couple cautions. The nominal case volume for .308 is 56.0 cc vs. 67.5 for the Swiss. That may affect the resolved stress on barrel and action at the same hydrostatic pressure. The '06 is closer at 68.2 cc. Just for fun, I started upping my powder charge in QL, keeping everything else the same. It predicts a substantial velocity increase with 58 ksi MAP. If I add just one more grain of powder (not sharing my load) the pressure jumps to near 62 ksi with less than 50 fps additional increase. That's typical. If you are running near max, a very small increase in charge can drive your pressure up quick. Brass is not an issue.

The other issue is having hot rounds that could be chambered in the wrong gun. I would never hot load my K-31.

I won't recommend that you do it, but lots of people sneak over spec. Don't wait to get a sticky bolt or bulged primer; you're way over when those things happen. Without a calibrated strain gauge setup, you best bet is measuring case expansion near the base.

Personally, I try to get my rounds to be all they can be, but not something they're not.
 
CAUTION: The following post includes loading data beyond or not covered by currently published maximums for this cartridge. USE AT YOUR OWN RISK. Neither the writer, The Firing Line, nor the staff of TFL assume any liability for any damage or injury resulting from use of this information.

It's going to be a combination of the brass and the gun design. The steel itself has no issues with the pressure. The issue will be how much unsupported area the case heads have at the breech end of the chamber and how thick the brass you have actually is over that area.

In your shoes, I would work up a normal load and carefully measure the head in front of the rim all the way around by setting the jaws of a blade micrometer over the brass near the rim so your measurement is over the actual head brass and not up to the pressure ring, then turning the case between the jaws to see if it is wider anywhere else. As you work up beyond a manual charge weight, don't increase by more than 2% at a time and repeat the measurement each time. Back off 5% if you get a clear pressure sign.

The head may grow a little at the higher pressures, but what you are looking for is any evidence of flow into an unsupported area. If there is none, or if the chamber support is symmetrical around the firing pin axis in your gun, then you are just looking for excessive expansion. The old rule of nothing over half a thousandth is probably reasonable. While expansion does not serve as an accurate measure of pressure, it does serve to tell you that the particular case involved didn't care for it.

If you measure ten or fifteen cases and average the result, that is much more reliable than a single case. Single cases can be touchier than the rest. Always either tip the gun up or handle the cartridge so as to have the powder over the primer flash hole when you fire. That will make the highest pressure the load will give you.

Blade micrometers are not cheap, so you may want to take a standard round spindle and anvil micrometer and use blade attachments like this place has for $10 (click on measuring tools, then micrometers and attachments and go down to the next to last item). I haven't tried them personally, so I can't vouch for them, but it does look like an economical option if it works as intended.
 
Thank you.

I do have blade micrometers and one is electronic that goes to .0005.

The increase in steps helps a lot process wise.

Also I am not nuts in my thinking (at least in this case)

Most of the shooting is 100 yards, and I shoot low level loads there.

I plan on a 300 yard shoot and some day I want to try the 1000 yard range that's up North of us.

No plans to shoot any of the higher loads in the K31, honor and respect that limitation 100%.
 
CAUTION: The following post includes OPINIONS beyond or not covered by currently published maximums for this cartridge. USE AT YOUR OWN RISK. Neither the writer, The Firing Line, nor the staff of TFL assume any liability for any damage or injury resulting from use of this information.

I have a love/hate relationship with pressure questions. Hate, mostly because if I give my honest opinion about some things, some people might think I am advocating something unsafe. I am not. DO NOT do anything you feel is unsafe, and don't take my word that something is safe for you to do, just because I said it had never been unsafe for me.

First, there is our current, multiple means of measuring pressure. Different measuring systems The same amount of pressure is a different number using c.u.p., psi, kg/.cm2 or stone per square rod.

So, to be an accurate comparison, all the numbers must be from the same measuring system.

Second, Industry standard maximums for cartridge pressure are NOT maximum possible pressure limits they are well below that. They are safe working limits. They are what the industry decides is a good place to stop, in order to be safe in the majority of arms in each particular caliber.

They are intended to be the max that the "usual" guns in each caliber can handle with MINIMAL risk.

Proof loads are well above working ammo pressure standards. They are a significant overload, compared to standard ammo. And each gun proof fired survives the proof load, without damage. This should illustrate clearly that exceeding industry working maximums slightly does not instantly, irrevocably and unfailingly turn your gun into a grenade.

Modern bolt action designs are pretty strong. Some decades ago, I was told that Remington proofs their 700 series actions at 80-90,000psi. I cannot verify this info, but it seems reasonable to me. I would expect Savage to do something similar.

Think about that for a moment. Depending on the exact cartridge chosen that about a 1/3 (or more) overload pressure, compared to regular ammo.

The rifles survive, unharmed, and then we buy them!

What chambering the rifle is in (mostly) only matters when it comes to what it takes to generate the pressure in the case, not how the rifle handles it.

Very large and very small rounds that significantly change the amount of metal around the chamber of a given design could make a difference in ultimate blow up failure point, but we're not talking about going anywhere near that, right??

At a certain pressure level, even the best supported brass begins to fail. I have heard that depending on specifics (including rifle design) this can begin as low as 65k psi. (the beginning of the failure cycle is the classic 0.001" expansion of the solid head of the case).

Reading Uncle Nick's post I learned that some folks consider half that to be the limit. I had been unaware of that, previously, thank you Uncle Nick.

I'll take a shot at some of your questions, pull the grandpa thing and tell you a story from the ancient past...

Does the brass have enough of a factor that it become the driving limitation?

The brass is THE limiting factor. Meaning, it is going to be the first thing to fail. And it should be! How well it is supported, quality of the brass, and thickness at vital points determine where on the pressure scale it will fail, but it will fail before the steel does, or something is drastically wrong.

the question I have are "what are the limitations" for a Modern Bolt Action rifle using the 7.5 Chambering?

I would say at least 80k psi for a modern action, probably much higher (just a guess, I have no data other than 40+ year old hearsay) The case, somewhat less but how much less involves a lot of factors.

Can the modern load programs give you an idea on what the Pressure that combination can take.

Computer programs still work on GIGO. Garbage in, garbage out. Meaning accuracy of result depends on accuracy of input. Very good at doing arithmetic calculating pressure generated using default values and variables you give them. Can't calculate what that pressure will do in YOUR rifle, with all the additional variables involved.

In other words, they can calculate load X generates 73,200psi. Can't say what 73,200psi will do in your gun, with your brass. (and yes, I deliberately picked a high number for dramatic effect. ;))

While I would like to explore the upper but safe limits I would like to get the input on it and if its negative, then not do so.

"Safe" is a term with widely varied and very situational meanings.
IF you go beyond recognized industry standards you go beyond what any 3rd party will recognize as safe and prudent, and whatever happens is entirely your, and only your responsibility. Such is our world, today.

Now, my personal pressure horror story..
having all the wisdom that comes with being 16 and reloading for about a year, I was confident that I would not make a mistake. And I didn't. I made several.
Rifle :Remington 600 .308 Win
intent: "plinking" load using 173gr cast bullet and bullseye powder.
Mistake #1: Using an improvised tool for the job.
I didn't have a powder trickler, so I used a fired case, instead.
Mistake #2: (mistakenly) using a sized, primed case, (ONE TIME!!!) instead of a fired case as the powder trickler
Mistake #3: Putting that case, about half full of pistol powder into the loading block. Mistake #4: Seating a bullet in that case. Mistakes #5 & 6, not realizing what I had done, and firing the round.

Got hit on the cheek with gas. (ALWAYS WEAR SHOOTING GLASSES!!!)
Bolt frozen shut. Fortune favoring the fool slightly, the overload was the last round in the magazine.

Off to the gunsmith. Old family friend, distant cousin, and a very good smith. I got quite the talking to with the final damage report.

Broken extractor. Broken Extractor pin. Broken safety pin, broken sear pin. Said he did everything short of x-ray and couldn't find any cracks in the bolt or the receiver.

I don't have the measurements of the fired case anymore, but I have kept it as a reminder of stupidity. Case head expanded enough that the primer fell out and cracks in the web could be seen. A "belt" of brass was swaged around the body of the case, at the front edge of the solid head.

According to the best info I could find at the time it took between 90-110,000psi to do that. The rifle survived, slightly damaged, but repairable, and so did I.

Hope this long rant gives you some things to think about.
 
It does.

I want to use what I think is the available range but I don't have any desire to push the limits.

As its close to 30-06 in capacity, that is sort of the high end to look at, but starting low, doing the checks and using the Chronograph as well as the other tools and indicators.
 
Never understood the need for determining loads that are dependent on how much velocity and how much pressure could be generated.
There are so many other considerations for hitting the target at even very long distances, other than speed and power.
Gotta' think the Swiss military and ammo manufacturers figured out this stuff long ago to everyone's satisfaction.
Just my thoughts on the subject.
 
Never understood the need for determining loads that are dependent on how much velocity and how much pressure could be generated.

Just my thoughts on the subject.

I think RC20 likes Unclenick more than he likes us; and that is OK. A friend died last year, before that happened he asked me to clean out his shop, at the same time I helpe3d him sort through 60 years of educational material at his office. One of the rifles he gave me was an Argentine 1891 that I assumed was a 7.65mm53, I was wrong, it is a 308 W . He used a M1917 30/06 barrel, he did one fine job. After checking the chamber I went for a visit to get more information of the modification. He said he used the rifle as a loaner, if someone showed up to hunt without a rifle he loaned them the Argentine 1891.
I have collected enough parts to get the rifle back to 7.65mm52, and then thought about it; I could reduce the load and bullet weight but then I thought about it again. What happens after I die?

F. Guffey
 
I think Ligonierbill says it all: "Your main problem, of course, is you don't really know what pressure you're generating."

You can compute, you can measure brass - Ken Waters was happy with .0005" expansion above factory in most cases, maybe you could use his .0010-.0015" allowance for chronically underloaded cartridges like .257 Roberts to port your loads to a turnbolt - or you can go by brass life - Rocky Gibbs said primer pockets should remain snug for 10 loadings.

I see that Vihtavuori does not show a load that equals Swiss service ballistics. I don't know what their pressure limit was, probably something suitable for K31 and Stg 57, but it is something to think about.
 
You can compute, you can measure brass - Ken Waters was happy with .0005" expansion above factory in most cases, maybe you could use his .0010-.0015

.0005" case head expansion is twice the daily recommended allowance. .001 would be 4 times the daily recommended case head expansion for one firing, moving to .0015 would be 6 times the daily recommended allowance for case head expansion for one firing. Understood, the case is once fired and there is no advantage to continue using the same case because the case head hardens as it is worked.

And then there is measuring flash hole diameter and case head crush; who measures case head crush and or flash hole diameter?

Ken Waters was happy with .0005" expansion above factory in most cases

Hammering a chamber with the maximum is something I avoid, there is nothing about it that I find entertaining, it is possible I have a barrel that is not tight, I could be using bullets that are a little small, I could have a long chamber and the case is spending a lot of time filling the chamber.

F. Guffey.
 
FWIW, I have loaded a whole lot of 7.5 Swiss (for a K-31 rifle) using moderate .30-'06 data. Never had a problem.

Jim
 
Original GP11 ammo ran at 45,000PSI due to the rifles being designed for that. A 174gr .3087” bullet giving 2640fps in the 25.65” barreled K31 and only a little more velocity in the longer 30.7” barreled M1889-96.
For some reason, Hodgdon doesn't give pressure numbers. There is load data though. Neither does SAMMI. CIP does though. Max pressure is 55,000 PSI. A lot less than .30-06.
You can measure case until the cows come home and still know nothing at all about how much pressure caused the dimensions. The whole thing is determined by the barrel you have on the thing. Not what the Swiss did. Factory ammo will run at the low end for liability reasons.
 
Mr. Guffey: What I like about Unclenick is a clear answer. I have nothing against you. Mostly I can't unravel your point. I do think you should say RC20 does not like me, speaking for everyone is incorrect (if you feel that way)
For the life of me I have no idea what a 1891 Mauser has in regards to a modern gun that has no caliber designation on it other than the back of the barrel unless you think my build is misleading?
If so, there is no caliber designation on it at all and the receiver merely has an SN. As its not an OEM barrel, or stock, it is not misleading, anyone that would put a 308 in that gun is nuts (and as its a Savage more so)
At some point the 7.5 Swiss gets etched into the barrel. In the meantime those around me know I have a 7.5 Swiss, there is a lot of 7.5 components around. I hope that eases your mind if it was perturbed.

44 Amp had a very clear set of comments as well.

Then there is G. Wilkers. He is right, for the time of that rifle (though the metallurgy dates back to the 1890s for the 1911 version)

I obviously missed being clear on what my goal was. So I can clear that up.

There is usually an accuracy node up towards the top of loadings.

That is my only goal, I am not after the hottest loads, I do want to explore up above where I am at as this is both a modern barrel and action and its a true 30 caliber barrel though it is 7.5 Swiss chambered.

Sometimes someone has a view that is technically wrong and I will point that out.

But I do think if someone else has a beef with me, it is up to them to express it, not you.
 
Mr. Guffey's comparison to the 1891 points out a baseline for what is adequate for the .308 Winchester. I am actually not too surprised by this, as even the .308, at 52,000 CUP runs below the original proof pressures for the Swiss round (about 57,000 CUP) and the 1891 Mauser with dual forward locking lugs was, I am confident, stronger than the 1896/11 incarnation of the Schmidt-Rubin design for the 7.5×55.

I note that several sources cite the 7.5×55 as being known for producing high bolt thrust. I took a look at the CIP drawings and estimate that if the internal maximum case diameter is about where SAAMI takes the first case body OD (0.2" forward of the case head face) and the interior of the case body is at its widest there and about 0.07" less than the OD, then the 7.5×55 will produce about 15% more bolt thrust for a given chamber pressure than the .30-06 does. It is, however, unlikely to bother a modern action much, as they are routinely required to withstand still higher bolt thrust from still wider magnum cartridges. So case strength remains the limiting factor.

Mr. O'Hier brings up original pressure. I've seen 45,500 psi for GP11 in the Wikipedia, rather than 45,000 psi, but when you follow the reference the source says "about" 45,500 psi. Switzerland went to the metric system in 1838 (coincidentally, the year Paul Mauser was born), so pressures measured back then would not likely have been reported in psi, though I don't know what precursors to the Newton/m² or Pascal they would have used back then. Newtons and Pascals were not yet approved units at the time. I do know piezo transducers were not invented until 1922 and that they weren't made cheap enough for wide spread use until about 1960, so all these pressure numbers would be reported as measured by copper crushers. On a modern pressure transducer of the European type, 55,000 psi (actually, 380 MPa, or 55,114 psi) is a reasonable equivalent number for 45,500 psi.
 
CIP spec for 7.5x55 is 3,800 bar (55,114 psi). However, I'm matching GP11 velocity with a load that QuickLoad estimates to be <40,000. So that 45,000 sounds likely.
 
A friend of mine, decades ago, loved the 6.5x55mm Swede. The Swede is another of those rounds that is relegated to the "45,000psi" group. And it needs to be, if you are shooting a century+ old Mauser, or Krag.

He had a Winchester 70 rebarreled to 6.5 Swede, and loaded it up a bit over factory levels. I'm sure he had no idea exactly what pressure his loads were producing, and he didn't care what the number was, he cared about performance, and pressure signs. He got the performance he wants, and didn't get pressure signs in that rifle, so it was all good.

Handloaders who shoot Ruger .45-70 rifles regularly go well beyond the industry standard for the .45-70 cartridge, with good results in their rifles.

What the upper end of safe working pressure is, depends on many things, but the most important one is the rifle used.

industry standards are set to be safe in everything, across the board, old and new.
 
ligonierbill said:
...I'm matching GP11 velocity with a load that QuickLoad estimates to be <40,000. So that 45,000 sounds likely.

That could be, but it's not uncommon for QuickLOAD to get lower pressures or higher velocities owing to the QL gun being ideal. It is also possible to get a particular velocity with a slower powder and have lower peak pressure. It just makes up for it with more gas from its larger charge weight producing more late-bore acceleration.

You can check on this by comparison if there is pressure data for your bullet and powder available somewhere.
 
It's not always so, but QL was right on estimating the velocity in this case. No tweeks to get it to match. Reloder 17 + 175 Sierra MatchKing
 
That's a powder that produces higher velocities than others near its burn rate, so it will have relatively high late barrel acceleration and produce a given velocity with lower peak pressure. For example, to get your 175 grain SMK to about 2600 fps in a 24" barrel, use 50 grains of RL17 and 2601 fps is produced with a prediction of 41106 psi. If I drop down to RL10X, which is closer to the burn rates of early smokeless propellants like Pyro DG, I need 41.2 grains to produce 2599 fps, but the peak pressure is now predicted to be 53090.
 
I've seen 45,500 psi for GP11 in the Wikipedia, rather than 45,000 psi, but when you follow the reference the source says "about" 45,500 psi. Switzerland went to the metric system in 1838 (coincidentally, the year Paul Mauser was born), so pressures measured back then would not likely have been reported in psi, though I don't know what precursors to the Newton/m² or Pascal they would have used back then. Newtons and Pascals were not yet approved units at the time. I do know piezo transducers were not invented until 1922 and that they weren't made cheap enough for wide spread use until about 1960, so all these pressure numbers would be reported as measured by copper crushers. On a modern pressure transducer of the European type, 55,000 psi (actually, 380 MPa, or 55,114 psi) is a reasonable equivalent number for 45,500 psi.

When the original locking mechanisms, barrels, were designed, CUP was assumed to be PSI. It was a reasonable assumption as the deformation of the copper pellet was equal to a static load of equivalent weight. They did not understand till improved measuring equipment, that the load was actually higher, because of material response.

Now, what this means, with the original loads, the actions were being loaded above what the designer used in sizing his mechanism. Designers used large enough safety factors that when ever lug breaking occurred, the cracks were assigned to defective manufacture, not undersizing of the locking mechanism.

But, just because you can push pressures up and not burst the cartridge case, does not mean you won't cause a structural failure of the mechanism through fatigue failure. Lugs will crack, receivers can too. Push enough over pressure loads through a bolt action and you will crack the lugs. The Army is currently having this problem, as they have an action (the M16) that was designed for 50,000 CUP, and they are issuing rounds that are now close to 68,000 psi. The Army is basically in denial on this topic, blaming "increased bolt thrust" on oil or grease, and ignoring the fact that their issue rounds are almost at proof pressure levels, and probably will be at proof pressure levels in hot weather.

I would not push any K31 hotter than Swiss service levels. These rifles have already been through one service life, you don't know if your action was rebarreled at some time, it could have been. You don't know the number of rounds through that locking mechanism. Besides, what is wrong with the Swiss round as is?

This is the velocity I measured firing Swiss ball in a K31:

AP11 Swiss Ball headstamp DA 78

24 Mar 04 T = 70 ° F

Ave Vel = 2565
Std Dev = 11
ES = 23
Low =2551
High =2574
N = 4

Based on my tests, I would use 51.0 grains of AA4350.

168 gr Nosler Match 51.0 gr AA4350 INDEP brass and primer OAL 2.850

22 Dec 01 T = 58 ° F

Ave Vel = 2536
Std Dev = 17
ES = 45
Low = 2510
High = 2555
N= 9



168 gr Nosler Match 52.0 gr AA4350 INDEP brass and primer OAL 2.850

22 Dec 01 T = 58 ° F

Ave Vel = 2624
Std Dev = 31
ES = 72
Low = 2588
High = 2660
N = 5


If the OP alters his modern Savage, well, it is made of modern materials, he could probably push pressures a little higher, but we don't know if the cartridge will stick in the chamber, it might, regardless of what the action will hold. I think the 7.5 Swiss, pushing a 174 grain bullet at 2565 fps is plenty powerful, hard to really know just how much better it would be adding a 100 fps or so. The OP will be on his own.

Something else to understand about CIP pressures and all. Europeans have to submit rifles to proof testing when the rifle is transferred to a new owner. The thing is gaged, measured, inspected, and test fired. If it fails in any way, it does not pass proof test. These proof tests were designed to weed out old and obsolete firearms. So, European ammunition manufacturers know that what is out there are guns that are basically "factory new", or pretty darn close. We don't do that in the US and so ammunition manufacturers have to assume that everyone is firing some worn out relic.
 
Last edited:
Back
Top