You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
Dusted off 257 Roberts - surprising result
- Thread starter ligonierbill
- Start date
ligonierbill
New member
First, Jerry Kuhnhausen passed away in 2022. But his book is still available, and required reading for anyone working with old Mausers.
Let's get to facts. It is a fact that the Swede is a quality rifle made from the best steel available at the time. But the design basis was less than 50,000 psi. Even today, the SAAMI spec is 51,000. While the quality of the steel may provide some margin, it doesn't change the design basis. (Note that the CIP spec is 55 ksi, and I admit to exceeding that. But not in my 96!)
Now, the Gewehr 88, the "Commission Rifle". It is the basis for the famous 98, but in fact, Mauser only made a prototype. They never produced 88s. This rifle introduced the 8x57 J, with a 0.318 bore. In 1905, Germany went to the 8x57 JS, with a lighter 0.323 bullet at higher pressure. An important fact is that even the "high pressure" round was initially loaded to less than 47,000 psi. (Remember that the initial load for the 30-06 was a 150 gr at 2,700.) The 88 saw limited use in WWI. But of course, it's the Model 1898 that became the main battle rifle of the Heer.
Kuhnhausen's admittedly conservative recommendation is to use large ring 98s for "standard pressure" rounds, and some of the small rings (favoring the 96) for "low pressure" rounds. No third lug is something he highlights.
I know folks work all sorts of cartridges into these rifles, usually without problems. But I want to be able to hand any of mine to friends or relatives with no worries. For that, I'll listen to a guy who wrote 24 shop manuals. Seems like he knew what he was doing.
Let's get to facts. It is a fact that the Swede is a quality rifle made from the best steel available at the time. But the design basis was less than 50,000 psi. Even today, the SAAMI spec is 51,000. While the quality of the steel may provide some margin, it doesn't change the design basis. (Note that the CIP spec is 55 ksi, and I admit to exceeding that. But not in my 96!)
Now, the Gewehr 88, the "Commission Rifle". It is the basis for the famous 98, but in fact, Mauser only made a prototype. They never produced 88s. This rifle introduced the 8x57 J, with a 0.318 bore. In 1905, Germany went to the 8x57 JS, with a lighter 0.323 bullet at higher pressure. An important fact is that even the "high pressure" round was initially loaded to less than 47,000 psi. (Remember that the initial load for the 30-06 was a 150 gr at 2,700.) The 88 saw limited use in WWI. But of course, it's the Model 1898 that became the main battle rifle of the Heer.
Kuhnhausen's admittedly conservative recommendation is to use large ring 98s for "standard pressure" rounds, and some of the small rings (favoring the 96) for "low pressure" rounds. No third lug is something he highlights.
I know folks work all sorts of cartridges into these rifles, usually without problems. But I want to be able to hand any of mine to friends or relatives with no worries. For that, I'll listen to a guy who wrote 24 shop manuals. Seems like he knew what he was doing.
"Let's get to facts. It is a fact that the Swede is a quality rifle made from the best steel available at the time. But the design basis was less than 50,000 psi. Even today, the SAAMI spec is 51,000. While the quality of the steel may provide some margin, it doesn't change the design basis. (Note that the CIP spec is 55 ksi, and I admit to exceeding that. But not in my 96!)"
That's where the difference comes in. SAAMI dictates just how much pressure is allowable by designating the Maximum Average Pressure. (MAP) The problem is some MAPs were dictated by the ammo manufacturers while applying for SAAMI sanction to the cartridge. Two very prime examples are the .280 Remington and .35 Whelen which technically have pressure MAPs no different than the 30-06 for fear of them causing problems in Remington's pump and semi-auto rifles. Kind funny, peculiar and not ha ha as those rifles all came chambered to the .270 Win. or has that ammo been quietly downloaded under the table? During a test a while back, I ran some Winchester .308 Win. and 30-06 factory loads over the chronograph. Both cartridges held the same 180 gr. Powder point bullet. Both rifles had 22" barrels. The .308 was an M70 Youth Ranger I won n a raffle that I restocked in a Ramline synthetic so it would fit me better. The 30-06 was a factory original J.C. Higgins M50. The only difference in barrels was the .308 was 1 in 2" and the 06 a 1 in 10" twist. Each was fired five rounds times and four sets of the five for each cartridge. End result was the .308 Win. was actually 20 FPS faster than the 30-06 at 2620 FPS on average. I can't say if the slightly slower 1 in 12" twist made much difference but other than that both barrels were for all practical purposes equal.
I know why the 7x57 has been held to a lower standard but that low standard did cost me a deer back in 1973, the year I bought the rifle. Years later when chronographs became affordable I acquired another rifle chambered to the 7x57. I also purchased two more boxes of the load that lost the deer. I ran five rounds of the new ammo and five rounds from the purchase when I bought the rifle. Average velocity for both loads was a bit over 2200 FPS, nowhere near the 2400 plus FPS advertised. I might as well have been using my grand dad's old 30-30. I also sectioned a bullet from the old and new boxes and the jackets looked way too thick to open properly at that low velocity. Since that time, whenever I buy a new rifle, I always buy a couple of boxes of fresh factory ammo. First to get an idea of how wellit may shoot, felt recoil and chronograph at least five rounds to see a comparison to factory advertised figures.
Paul B.
That's where the difference comes in. SAAMI dictates just how much pressure is allowable by designating the Maximum Average Pressure. (MAP) The problem is some MAPs were dictated by the ammo manufacturers while applying for SAAMI sanction to the cartridge. Two very prime examples are the .280 Remington and .35 Whelen which technically have pressure MAPs no different than the 30-06 for fear of them causing problems in Remington's pump and semi-auto rifles. Kind funny, peculiar and not ha ha as those rifles all came chambered to the .270 Win. or has that ammo been quietly downloaded under the table? During a test a while back, I ran some Winchester .308 Win. and 30-06 factory loads over the chronograph. Both cartridges held the same 180 gr. Powder point bullet. Both rifles had 22" barrels. The .308 was an M70 Youth Ranger I won n a raffle that I restocked in a Ramline synthetic so it would fit me better. The 30-06 was a factory original J.C. Higgins M50. The only difference in barrels was the .308 was 1 in 2" and the 06 a 1 in 10" twist. Each was fired five rounds times and four sets of the five for each cartridge. End result was the .308 Win. was actually 20 FPS faster than the 30-06 at 2620 FPS on average. I can't say if the slightly slower 1 in 12" twist made much difference but other than that both barrels were for all practical purposes equal.
I know why the 7x57 has been held to a lower standard but that low standard did cost me a deer back in 1973, the year I bought the rifle. Years later when chronographs became affordable I acquired another rifle chambered to the 7x57. I also purchased two more boxes of the load that lost the deer. I ran five rounds of the new ammo and five rounds from the purchase when I bought the rifle. Average velocity for both loads was a bit over 2200 FPS, nowhere near the 2400 plus FPS advertised. I might as well have been using my grand dad's old 30-30. I also sectioned a bullet from the old and new boxes and the jackets looked way too thick to open properly at that low velocity. Since that time, whenever I buy a new rifle, I always buy a couple of boxes of fresh factory ammo. First to get an idea of how wellit may shoot, felt recoil and chronograph at least five rounds to see a comparison to factory advertised figures.
Paul B.
ligonierbill
New member
I guess I should give Deerfossil a direct answer. The poor fellow may be thinking he fell in with a bunch of maniacs. I will assume he is shooting a M96 Swede, since that is a popular rifle, and a good one. My load (FN 98 remember) with a 100 Barnes TTSX over Ramshot Hunter runs 3,158. QuickLOAD says that is generating 55,900 psi, somewhat below 257 Roberts +P of 58,000. If I back off to a MAP of 50,000, QL says it will run 3,048. Now, that is just a projection based on actuals from my rifle, but probably in the ballpark.
I use Sierra's Infinity ballistic program. If I insert that reduced load sighted +3" at 150, it will be on at 250 and maintain a velocity >2,000 fps (Barnes does best when they're going fast) to 430 with a drop at that point of 21". Sounds like a deerslayer to me. So, Deerfossil, do call your ammo maker. We'd like to hear what they have to say. But your best bet is to get a good single stage loading rig and work up some Barnes coppers.
I use Sierra's Infinity ballistic program. If I insert that reduced load sighted +3" at 150, it will be on at 250 and maintain a velocity >2,000 fps (Barnes does best when they're going fast) to 430 with a drop at that point of 21". Sounds like a deerslayer to me. So, Deerfossil, do call your ammo maker. We'd like to hear what they have to say. But your best bet is to get a good single stage loading rig and work up some Barnes coppers.
You state a lot of incorrect information . Mauser had nothing to do with the Gew-88 . It was a Mannlicher design action . The Gew-88 did not have a .318 bore , it was .3208 then later .323. The German S round was a .321 dia 154 grain bullet at 2880 fps and listed by the German military as 58,000 cup [ converted to cup ] . What SAMMI lists for the US standards for pressure for ammo loaded in the US has nothing to do with what each countries military used for their rifles limits and what pressures they used for their ammo to get the performance they wanted . I just listed facts and you still did not answer my questions . And the 3rd lug still does not add strength . And yes many books have bad info , just like the ones you got your Gew-88 info from .
The Gew-88 is a small ring action and many fought WWI using 58,000 cup 8mm S ammo with no problems the whole war
I believe this is a case where absence of evidence should not be considered evidence of absence.
First off, the Gewehr 98 was the standard service rifle in WWI, and Gew 88 rifles were in the hands of Landswehr troops (which were not normally frontline troops) and most of those had been replaced by 98 by 1915 or so.
Next point, if/when rifles fail in battle, they are rarely kept and turned in for repair, the usual fate is they are left on the battlefield, so there will be few to no records of why they failed, only "lost in combat".
Neither of those has anything to do with the strength of the action.
The strength of the action is normally irrelevant, unless you're looking to see what it takes to blow one up. It doesn't matter if it takes 98K 117K or 128K to blow up the action. What matters is how well the action handles its intended working pressure.
Like the redline on a tachometer, one can normally exceed the design specs BRIEFLY without disasterous immediate consequences. But doing that regularly is reducing the safety margin and likely the operating life of the mechanism. Normally rifles designed to run in the 45K psi range won't blow up or be immediately harmed by pressures of 50K or even a bit more. They are, after all, proof tested, and survive even higher pressures.
But, doing it constantly, or too high is likely to cause problems, possibly sooner than later. The designers spec things to operate for "the lifetime of the mechanism" and rifles tend to be well overbuilt in that regard.
But running too hard /too hot can shorten the life of the mechanism. So, why do it?? Just because you can doesn't seem to be a good reason, to me.
Considering all the newer rifles and rounds available, why push an old Mauser beyond what it was built to do?? If you need a "bigger hammer" GET ONE.
Hot rod a century plus old action if you desire, but if it breaks, or wears out early, there is only one person to blame, and that's you.
Regarding a 98 Mauser handling gas from a ruptured case better than a Win M70, well, duh, the Mauser was designed to do that (as a military rifle) where the M70 was designed as a sporting rifle, without the additional features found on the Mauser 98. You won't find the gas deflecting flange of a 98 on a model 70. Nor will you find a stock made to survive hand to hand combat, serve as a heat shield or a bayonet mount.
Designed for different purposes and different conditions, comparing a milsurp bolt gun vs a purpose built sporting rifle isn't an apples to apples comparison.
You should look up German WWI history and units . The Gew-88 was a front line rifle for the Germans on the eastern front for 18 months . It was a front line rifle for the Austro-Hungarians for the whole war . The Gew-88/05 was 50% of the front line rifles for Germany till late 1915 on the western front . It is a common find in many current WWI battle sight digs still . I have a friend who does that . It was still in use till the end of the war in the west to some extent .
You should look up German WWI history and units .
Perhaps I should. However we are drifting quite a ways off topic, so this subject should be dropped. If you want to discuss the Gew 88 and WWI history, start a thread about it.
Apologies to the OP for the thread drift.
ligonierbill
New member
Good idea. This is already costing me money - I had to order Ludwig Olson's book on Mausers. A hundred bucks on Amazon. I got a PM from the OP, and he's off to kill deer.
"Regarding a 98 Mauser handling gas from a ruptured case better than a Win M70, well, duh, the Mauser was designed to do that (as a military rifle) where the M70 was designed as a sporting rifle, without the additional features found on the Mauser 98. You won't find the gas deflecting flange of a 98 on a model 70. Nor will you find a stock made to survive hand to hand combat, serve as a heat shield or a bayonet mount.
Designed for different purposes and different conditions, comparing a milsurp bolt gun vs a purpose built sporting rifle isn't an apples to apples comparison."
I'm inclined to disagree. Mauser used the same action building sporting rifle while building their battle rifles. Most likely they did so even during the was and they probably just pulled the action off the line for the sporter.
There were several other deviations from the true Mauser action including the no gas shield and coned breech which in my humble opinion was a mistake. Ever Mauser I have in my collection feeds just as smoothly in the same manner a round feeds in the Model 70. Some of my Mausers are converted milsurp and some commercially made guns for the sporting market. I will admit, I am prejudiced in favor of the Mauser over the m70. I had a bunch of the pre64s for a while. they're gone and the Mauser(s) stayed. I think old Elmer Keith said in one of his early books, "I believe every man should scratch his own fleas in whatever manner he chooses.
Paul B.
Designed for different purposes and different conditions, comparing a milsurp bolt gun vs a purpose built sporting rifle isn't an apples to apples comparison."
I'm inclined to disagree. Mauser used the same action building sporting rifle while building their battle rifles. Most likely they did so even during the was and they probably just pulled the action off the line for the sporter.
There were several other deviations from the true Mauser action including the no gas shield and coned breech which in my humble opinion was a mistake. Ever Mauser I have in my collection feeds just as smoothly in the same manner a round feeds in the Model 70. Some of my Mausers are converted milsurp and some commercially made guns for the sporting market. I will admit, I am prejudiced in favor of the Mauser over the m70. I had a bunch of the pre64s for a while. they're gone and the Mauser(s) stayed. I think old Elmer Keith said in one of his early books, "I believe every man should scratch his own fleas in whatever manner he chooses.
Paul B.
Not a bad book [ but old ] some good photos , but a lot of generic black and white photos of the rifles as he did not have them . He is also one of the major sources of misinformation on German military 1889 to 1906 bores sizes and ammo sizes . Unlike myself who has a large collection [ over 150 ] of Imperial German military rifles from 1889 to 1918 and cartridges for that period. He did not as the measurements he gives to not match the actual rifles or cartridges , and he seems to have misinterpreted some info he read . The original P-88 ammo had a .3188 dia bullet and the S bullet was .3208 . A difference of .002 , which makes the case neck .002 larger dia , as shown by period ammo . NOT the .005 he states from .318 to .323 . He also states the first German 8mm barrel was .318 , it was not it was .3208 , and that Gew-98 rifles had a .318 barrel untill 1903 . Since there never was a .318 and the German standard from 1896 1/2 was .323 , that can not be true . Also all of my rifles match the correct info . He also states the German made the leade of the chamber 3x longer for the S bullet , which is wrong as the chambers were always made to fit the older P-88 ammo with the much longer rn bullet .That bullet need 3x more leade than the shorter S bullet . P.S. I would have sold you my copy of that book for $50 as it is weak and outdated .