8mm mauser help needed

P

polska

New member
I was recently given a box of 8mm projectiles. They are vintage for sure. They are made by MGS Bullet Co. in Holleydale, California. They are a pointed round nose with a flat lead base. The weight is 236 grains and .323 diameter.
Since I only have 100 rounds, I only need a load to shoot at the steel plate, nothing fancy. The problem is I can't find any load data for a bullet of this weight. Can anyone steer me in the direction for load data?
 
My memory has faded a bit on the detail, but the 8x57 used two different bullet diameters. Maybe "J" and JS"? Maybe .318 and 323?? Don't trust me to be correct. I never loaded for 8x57.
Do your own research and make sure your bullet matches groove diameter.

Search "Hodgdon Reloading Data" It has SOME 8x57 loads but they don't have your exact bullet.

Is you bullet jacketed? You might search for Norma Data
 
Last edited:
Yes I have a Hornady book from 1973 and a Speer book from 1968 and nothing that heavy. Yes the bullets are copper jacketed. I also have Ken Waters book and the highest he has is a 225 grain bullet. I guess I could try working from there. Guess the bullet was designed for Moose or Bear.
The price on the box is $6. The good old days.
 
Those are very old bullets. MGS stopped making them in the early '50s.

Some of the old NRA reloading books might have data. Maybe Hornady books from the '60s.
Otherwise you have three options:
1. PO Ackley's Vol. 1.
There is only one max load listed for the 236 gr bullets - 46.5 gr IMR4320

CAUTION: The following post (or a page linked to) includes or discusses loading data not covered by currently published sources of tested data for this cartridge (QuickLOAD or Gordon's Reloading Tool data is not professionally tested). USE AT YOUR OWN RISK. Neither the writer, The Firing Line, nor the staff of TFL assumes any liability for any damage or injury resulting from the use of this information.

2. Use an alternate cartridge and work up.
.33 WCF and .358 Winchester data can be used as a starting point for 8x57mm, by matching bullet weight and using a reasonable COAL.

3. Make friends with someone that has Quickload, add the bullet to the database (it's not in there), and see if the predictions seem safe and sane before working the load up.


.
 
The price on the box is $6. The good old days.
Click to expand...

Those are very old bullets. MGS stopped making them in the early '50s.
Click to expand...

$6 for a box of bullets in the 50s was EXPENSIVE!!

$6 for a box of bullets was high end price for "regular" jacketed rifle slugs in the early 70s!

Collectors might still be interested in your slugs. Though they probably would pay a bit more for the box if it was still sealed.

I'd check that out before wasting them "bangin' steel".
 
CAUTION: The following post includes load data generated by calculation in QuickLOAD (QL) or Gordon Reloading Tool (GRT) software is based on particular powder lots, the assumption the primer is as mild as possible, and assumptions about component, chamber and gun geometry that may not correspond well to what you have. Such data should be approached by working up from published starting loads. USE THIS DATA AT YOUR OWN RISK. Neither the writer, The Firing Line, nor the staff of TFL, nor QL's author or distributor nor GRT's author assumes any liability for any damage or injury resulting from use of this information or information derived from it.

I'll share my actuals plus a little QL extrapolation. I have run Woodleigh 220s over 51 gr Re-17 in a 1916 vintage Danzig Mauser with a 23" barrel. This yields 2,400 fps, and QL says well under 50 ksi. If I substitute a 250 Woodleigh at the same powder charge, QL says 2,346 at 47,228 psi. My Mausers really like Re-17. It's up to you, but if I had 100 old bullets, I don't think I would bother working up a load.
 
CAUTION: The following post includes load data generated by calculation in QuickLOAD (QL) or Gordon Reloading Tool (GRT) software is based on particular powder lots, the assumption the primer is as mild as possible, and assumptions about component, chamber and gun geometry that may not correspond well to what you have. Such data should be approached by working up from published starting loads. USE THIS DATA AT YOUR OWN RISK. Neither the writer, The Firing Line, nor the staff of TFL, nor QL's author or distributor, nor GRT's author assumes any liability for any damage or injury resulting from use of this information or information derived from it.

The heavier bullet lowered the pressure? That's bizarre! I tried the two Welcdcore bullets in QL with a 51-grain charge of RL-17 and got 47,149 psi for the 220-grain and 54,031 psi for the 250-grain, so the 250 RAISED the pressure 14.6%, as expected. You did something funny there.

More importantly, I ran both QL and GRT and got the biggest disagreement between the two that I've ever seen. Using QL's case water overflow capacity and 3.228" length in both, GRT predicted a peak pressure of 66,845 psi for the 220-grain bullet load and 82,150 psi for the heavier bullet, the heavier bullet producing 37.5% more pressure.

Looking at the powder, the two programs have some disagreement about its properties, as you might imagine, with GRT giving it both a somewhat faster burn rate and higher energy content than QL, among other things. So I looked at Alliant's load numbers for 308 Win (they don't have 8×57 Mauser), which is a little smaller in capacity (QL says the case has about 63 grains of water capacity, while GRT says 59 grains, about like a Winchester 308 Win case), but not by much, and there a 50-grain load is the max for a 165-grain bullet. Comparing it to results in GRT, GRT matches very well. So I think QL is just way off with its Re17 model one, and GRT is much closer. So I think I would want to have a strain gauge and work the load out on a pressure trace for this powder. Something is askew.
 
Interesting, 236 gr was the 1888 standard weight but .323" was the ca 1905 S bore diameter.

Bear in mind that SAAMI pressure for 8mm are very low to protect all those old guns from larger diameter bullets.
 
If you do use an older reference such as PO Ackley, beware powder has changed over the years.
Example, what WAS a safe and normal H-4895 load for 30-06 listed in "PO Ackley Handbook for Shooters" became a load that would splay out a primer pocket with modern H-4895. (Long story!! Olde Guy duplicated a load he used in the 1960's. It came to me to figure out)

As old as your bullets are, I would not trust data published contemporary with those bullets.
If I had to "find my own way" I might study measured velocities achieved at safe pressures and sneak carefully up on those using my chronograph.

If published max was 2400 fps with that bullet, I'd look at 2400 fps as a "do not exceed" if I was bootlegging data using modern powder. ( And I'd still back off and work up to it)

On old bullets/old prices I have some .308 dia Norma 93 gr 30 Luger bullets
They are priced about $1.50 I would load those in my 30 carbine in the late 1960's. They would unglue a jackrabbit pretty well.

I keep them because I bought them from Claude Simmons. Claude was a northern Colorado Gunsmith that had time for me when I was a kid hanging around the gun shop. Nostalgia. I'm 70 now. The old brown Norma box takes me back. Then on the South end of town was Louis Baechler. Good guy, Another local Smith. He kept Duffy;s soda in a refrigerator in the shop.

Lime Duffy's. Louis also sold bulk Hodgdon powder. H-4831 was $1.60 a lb.
If you forgot your bleach bottle he;d put it in a brown paper bag. And CCI primers were about 75 cents a hundred

Yup. Good Old Days
 
Last edited:
Ligonierbill,

You are correct. When I saw the mention of 50,000 first and 47,228 second, it caused me to infer that was the order of the pressures you got. I couldn't figure out how, so I am glad it was my reading malfunction and not QuickLOAD doing something odd. It remains to resolve the problem of how much pressure is actually being generated, given the sort of amazing difference in the predictions made by the two programs. I know Alliant has pressure barrels, because they sell testing as a service, but I wish they would publish the pressures they measure for their published loads. That way, we could calibrate the models in both QL and GRT. I know the QL model was established first, and that the GRT model gets modified by feedback from users doing Pressure Trace tests, so I am starting to wonder if the powder has changed some over time?
 
Unfortunately we can only measure the velocity our rifle produces. In this case my old Mauser averages 2,399 fps with std of 24.4. Woodleigh (it's their max load) got 2,325, but they don't share what they're shooting. I know this rifle runs about 100 fps slower than my rebarreled K29. Woodleigh's Re-17 max for their 250 RN is 50 gr and 2,250. I do change my QL chamber volume to match my actual and check the predicted pressure, but while it is interesting, I take it for what it is, a calculation. And I'll be glad to see the Aussies back in business.
 
Some mis-information posted here . The 1888 P-88 ammo did have a 236 grain .3188 dia bullet shot in a .3208 groove barrel . In 1896 1/2the German military went to a .323 + groove size and all Military rifles made from then on or rebarreled used .323 . That was known as a Z bore . S is not a bore size in the German military . The S ammo [ which was made well before 1905 ] had a .3208 dia main body bullet with a small driving band . Made that way to be shot in all the still in use .3208 barrel Gew-88 rifles . German military 98 rifles will be found with groove sizes from .323 to .326 , that will effect the velocity you get from a load , rifle to rifle . Yes I know the out dated books you have say different , but they are wrong .
 
Thanks, Ernie8. That's interesting history. Is there a resource you can point to for others wanting to read about it?


ligonierbill said:
Unfortunately we can only measure the velocity our rifle produces.
Click to expand...

I and a number of other folks use this equipment to measure pressure. It works quite well. Unfortunately, the price has doubled since I got my copy, and the individual strain gauge assemblies are up by half again what they were. But that's the world we live in.
 
I applied a lot of strain gauges when I made an honest living, but no more gadgets for me (->2 Pinochios). Maybe if I were working a real unknown or developing a wildcat, but mostly I stay on the ranch. Have you compared measured pressures with this device to the GRT and QL predictions? Any surprises?
 
Just a friend and I's research of 15 years on original German documents and the measuring of over 200 rifles . He has a degree in imperial German and I am a collector and gunsmith .
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top