• This Forum is for adults 18 years of age or over. By continuing to use this Forum you are confirming that you are 18 or older. No content shall be viewed by any person under 18 in California.

8x57 for long range shooting...

I was referring to the Nazi snipers...

Having read widely on the subject and talked a lot to Martin Pegler, formerly of the GB Royal Armouries and now resident in the Somme WW1 battlefield area of France, who is probably the greatest living researcher on the histories of 20th century military sniping, German snipers very rarely took exceptionally long distance shots on any battlefield in WW2. That applied to most other participants too as the optics used simply aren't up to what we would regard as long-range nowadays. With most German snipers using a selected KAR98k up to '43 or '44 fitted with the very limited usefulness Z41 1.5-power LER type scope, they were far more hamstrung than their US, Soviet or British equivalents with conventional action mounted 3.5-4.5 power optics.

Later on the Ostfront, most German snipers abandoned the KAR98k and used the preferred Walther designed semi-auto Gewehr 43 (or K43 as it's often called) if they could get hold of one, not a super long-range rifle. Likewise many Soviet snipers especially female ones preferred the scoped version of the 7.62X54R Tokarev SVT-40, a weapon that Pegler describes as having a 300-400 metre maximum effective range in the sniping role.

The outstanding sniper rifle in that theatre throughout 1941-45 was the Soviet Mosin 1891/30 especially with the better top mounted PE scope. Many Germans used captured 91/30 or SVT-40 sniper rifles in preference to their own kit if their superiors were willing to allow this and suitable grade ammunition could be scrounged.
 
Having read widely on the subject and talked a lot to Martin Pegler, formerly of the GB Royal Armouries and now resident in the Somme WW1 battlefield area of France, who is probably the greatest living researcher on the histories of 20th century military sniping, German snipers very rarely took exceptionally long distance shots on any battlefield in WW2. That applied to most other participants too as the optics used simply aren't up to what we would regard as long-range nowadays. With most German snipers using a selected KAR98k up to '43 or '44 fitted with the very limited usefulness Z41 1.5-power LER type scope, they were far more hamstrung than their US, Soviet or British equivalents with conventional action mounted 3.5-4.5 power optics.

Later on the Ostfront, most German snipers abandoned the KAR98k and used the preferred Walther designed semi-auto Gewehr 43 (or K43 as it's often called) if they could get hold of one, not a super long-range rifle. Likewise many Soviet snipers especially female ones preferred the scoped version of the 7.62X54R Tokarev SVT-40, a weapon that Pegler describes as having a 300-400 metre maximum effective range in the sniping role.

The outstanding sniper rifle in that theatre throughout 1941-45 was the Soviet Mosin 1891/30 especially with the better top mounted PE scope. Many Germans used captured 91/30 or SVT-40 sniper rifles in preference to their own kit if their superiors were willing to allow this and suitable grade ammunition could be scrounged.


I once read an article about German snipers in WWII and many preferred not to have a scope. Many preferred the scope too of course. I remember one quote "If I can hit a man in the face nine times out of ten at 300 meters with iron sights, why do I want to fool around with a scope..." and he went on to describe various problems that were common with to the scopes they had.
 
I seem to remember hearing that the most feared 8X57 or (7,92 X 57 - Euro talk) round in WWII was with the 196 grain bullet. I would look for a good 196 grain hpbt match type bullet (as mentioned). One of the 4350's might be a good powder choice with velocities in the 2,600 fps range (792 M/sec, more Euro talk). Many years ago I had some beers with a WWII veteran who told me just how feared this combo was. Use in a simple bolt action rifle would provide good long range slamming effects. I believe the 196 grain bullet would be a 12.7 gram or .0127 kilo gram (kilo) bullet.

Upon looking at load data Re 15 appears to be a good choice, not a 4350. I would guess that the 196 would have more momentum than a 140 grain or so 6.5. I have no plans to get a 8X57 for any use.
 
Last edited:
The 7.92 sS (Schwerer Spitzgeschoss) heavy bullet cartridge with a nominally 12.8g / 197gn JMJBT bullet was adopted as the standard German military round prior to WW2. It had been developed late in WW1 to give machineguns firing on fixed bearings en masse enhanced range and striking power. (This was a feature of both sides' use of MGs in the later stages of trench warfare on the western front - MGs were given additional roles with groupings of up to battalion size being used as rifle calibre mini-artillery saturating the other side's support trenches and forward supply dumps with shoots at ranges of up to 4,000-5,000 yards in indirect fire missions during the night when all sides moved units and supplies around, did maintenance work etc.)

For logistics reasons, the Germans decided to standardise on this round in 1934 at the time the country started to rebuild its armed forces and reequip them with new or enhanced weaponry. The front end of the rifle chamber was altered with a new long tapering leade and revised throat to allow this very high pressure round to be fired safely in this type of weapon. The downside was that alongside the length and weight reduction of the rifle involved in adopting the KAR98k at the same time, recoil and muzzle blast were very heavy indeed - and remain so with most surplus ammunition as found today.

If you read General Julian Hatcher's Notebook the US Army did exactly the same thing between the wars but then had a change of heart and rowed back. When the US entered the European war in 1917, she was so short of MGs that the US Expeditionary Force had to borrow French and British weapons and be supplied by her allies with parts and ammunition. Once .30-06 Colt manufactured M1895 'potato diggers' started to be manufactured in quantity and supplied to US units, the units reverted to their own equipment firing the standard early 20th century version of the .30-06 with a 150gn flat-base FMJ bullet at a nominal 2,700 fps MV. According to the US Army issued Ingles ballistic tables, this had a maximum range of around 5,000 yards, similar to that of the British and French .303 and 8mm rounds, but American machinegunners soon found that these were optimistic. Hatcher did work post war on Daytona Beach Florida firing an MG along the high water line with observers stationed downrange and found that its actual maximum range was only 3,500 yards or so.

Given the tactical doctrines that had evolved during WW1, the US Army was severely disadvantaged by the .30-06 ballistics in MG use, so a great deal of work was undertaken to develop a new heavy bullet L-R version of the cartridge, starting with acquiring 174gn .308 FMJBT bullets from Swiss ordnance, Col Rubin (of Schmidt Rubin fame) being one of the most innovative of cartridge and bullet designers and taking the design from there. The result was the 1920s M1 cartridge, a hot 173gn FMJBT number. As Germany was later to do, it was decided that for logistical reasons the M1 would become the standard US ball cartridge for use in both MGs and rifles. But first tens of millions of leftover 150gn 30-06 rounds in store had to be used up and this took until the mid to late 1930s. By that time, interest in L-R MG fire had waned, the WW1 generation of infantry regimental and field officers had moved on and their senior officers often retired, so few could even remember why the M1 had been designed.

Moreover, when the M1 was finally issued to infantry units for training and familiarisation, it proved to be very unpopular with the troops thanks to (surprise, surprise) excessive muzzle blast and recoil. Then National Guard units pointed out that the round's maximum potential range exceeded that of danger areas on their firing ranges creating a possible safety hazard. So, the ball cartridge M2 with a 152gn flat-base FMJ at 2,800 fps nominal was developed in the late 30s initially for Guard use and units were expected to revert to the M1 in the event of a shooting war. But before the USA entered WW2, there was a change of heart and the M1 was quietly dropped and the M2 standardised for all 30-06 weapons. If the machinegunners needed extra range, they fired heavy bullet AP ammunition.

Most major western military powers went down the high-pressure heavy bullet path in this era, Britain having the heavy bullet Mk9z and Finland developing the famous D series of rebated boat-tails for L-R MG use developments of which survive today as 30 or .310-calibre match bullets. Germany and the US were in a minority though in making their machinegun cartridge a 'universal round', and as noted, the US never really implemented the concept. Many European countries that used the 7.92 and had developed their own versions of short '98 Mauser service rifles in 7.92 or bought them from Nazi Germany pre '39 also adopted sS type cartridges.

The upsides were that the sS was a far superior MG loading and that it also made the cartridge more useful in non-infantry roles. The British RAF was severely hindered in the early stages of WW2 by its fighters being equipped with eight Browning 303s, compared to German fighters with the 7.92 and 20mm cannon, the USAAF with .50BMG MGs. British night bombers used the 303 for the entire war for defence and rarely fatally wounded a German night fighter even if they managed hits - unlike US Flying Fortress day bomber gunners with their 50s. The downside was that the 7.92 sS was never a happy choice in an infantry rifle .... but as 90% of the rifle squad's combat effectiveness was derived from the MG34 or later MG42 and their 1,000 rpm fire rates, that was regarded as an acceptable trade. Another downside though is the bulk and weight of these rounds and coupled to the voracious appetite of its MGs on the Ostfront added to Germany's already severe transport and logistical difficulties in supplying her troops in theatre.

It is also worth remarking that German infantry officers had realised that the 7.92X57 was ballistically far too over-specified and created these logistical problems as early as the 1930s. A short-term 'fix' was the development of the 9X19mm calibre SMG and widespread issue of MP38/40 submachineguns to infantry units in early WW2, but the limitations of this cartridge and weapon system were recognised. So serious work started on 'intermediate cartridges' as early as the the 1930s and culminated in the 1942/3 7.92X33 and MP43 / StG44 assault rifles.

So far as the 7.92X57 goes today in recreational target shooting, the facts remain that the cartridge has very little going for it. First, it is an unknown as AFAIK nobody has developed optimised match chambers etc for it, so nobody knows its true potential. Then there is the (poor) bullet situation. The 8mm SMK has so little relevance to today's competition L-R disciplines that Bryan Litz doesn't include it or any 8mm design in his books and invaluable ballistics exercises and reports. Taking Sierra's three G1 velocity-banded values, their average is 0.495. The equivalent for the antediluvian 200gn 0.308 SMK is 0.560 and for the more modern 210gn VLD SMK is 0.637. So, the 200gn 8mm SMK has a very high (ie bad) 'form factor' compared to say a 200-20X Berger Hybrid in .308 given that the 200gn Sierra thirty is an elderly high-drag design and the 210 has been left behind by newer Berger and Hornady designs. Even where allowed into FTR, I would put my money onto an optimised 308 Win loading in ballistics alone - and we know the 308 can produce exceptional precision in this form but have little to work on in the case of the 7.92. QuickLOAD suggests a 7.92X57 run at the CIP limit with a hot high-energy powder (RS60/Re17) might produce another couple of hundred fps in a 32-inch barrel over the 308 with a 200gn Berger, but I suspect 100-150 fps is more attainable. As it is, many 308 FTR shooters who have adopted 200 and 215gn Hybrid loads run them at below maximum performance as the full-house loading recoil reduces scores.

In countries such as Canada, Australia and the UK where there would be no question of 7.92X57mm being allowed into FTR, I'm not even going to comment on this cartridge's lack of competitiveness against 7mm short magnums and the 284, .300 SAUM and WSM in 'Open'. (Note an early successful F-Open cartridge, long ditched in favour of better numbers, was the 7mm Boo-Boo, an 'improved' 8X68 necked-down to 7mm.)
 
The first deer I ever shot was with 98K my father brought home. Yup it kicked. Deer? DRT shot was only about 60-70 yds if I remember right
 
long time no answers,
anyway here is 300 meters target, 20 shots, with few flyers, still need load tweaking SMK 200gr
also need tweaks around lock time, heavy firing pin, proper match trigger etc....
 

Attachments

  • resized.jpg
    resized.jpg
    123.4 KB · Views: 54
I shoot the Nosler 200gr CC in my Yugo. We have a 18" square plate at 675Y, with the irons I can hit the plate every time if the winds down and at 100Y groups are 2" or less.
 
Now regarded as some funny foreign gun with an odd bore size - how about a 8mm-06 loaded with a low drag factor 196 grain bullet. Then there was the 8mm Rem magnum - what ever happened to it? I like Laurie's detailed write-up on the 7.92 sS so much I read it 2-3 times each year.
 
The 7.92 sS (Schwerer Spitzgeschoss) heavy bullet cartridge with a nominally 12.8g / 197gn JMJBT bullet was adopted as the standard German military round prior to WW2. It had been developed late in WW1 to give machineguns firing on fixed bearings en masse enhanced range and striking power. (This was a feature of both sides' use of MGs in the later stages of trench warfare on the western front - MGs were given additional roles with groupings of up to battalion size being used as rifle calibre mini-artillery saturating the other side's support trenches and forward supply dumps with shoots at ranges of up to 4,000-5,000 yards in indirect fire missions during the night when all sides moved units and supplies around, did maintenance work etc.)

For logistics reasons, the Germans decided to standardise on this round in 1934 at the time the country started to rebuild its armed forces and reequip them with new or enhanced weaponry. The front end of the rifle chamber was altered with a new long tapering leade and revised throat to allow this very high pressure round to be fired safely in this type of weapon. The downside was that alongside the length and weight reduction of the rifle involved in adopting the KAR98k at the same time, recoil and muzzle blast were very heavy indeed - and remain so with most surplus ammunition as found today.

If you read General Julian Hatcher's Notebook the US Army did exactly the same thing between the wars but then had a change of heart and rowed back. When the US entered the European war in 1917, she was so short of MGs that the US Expeditionary Force had to borrow French and British weapons and be supplied by her allies with parts and ammunition. Once .30-06 Colt manufactured M1895 'potato diggers' started to be manufactured in quantity and supplied to US units, the units reverted to their own equipment firing the standard early 20th century version of the .30-06 with a 150gn flat-base FMJ bullet at a nominal 2,700 fps MV. According to the US Army issued Ingles ballistic tables, this had a maximum range of around 5,000 yards, similar to that of the British and French .303 and 8mm rounds, but American machinegunners soon found that these were optimistic. Hatcher did work post war on Daytona Beach Florida firing an MG along the high water line with observers stationed downrange and found that its actual maximum range was only 3,500 yards or so.

Given the tactical doctrines that had evolved during WW1, the US Army was severely disadvantaged by the .30-06 ballistics in MG use, so a great deal of work was undertaken to develop a new heavy bullet L-R version of the cartridge, starting with acquiring 174gn .308 FMJBT bullets from Swiss ordnance, Col Rubin (of Schmidt Rubin fame) being one of the most innovative of cartridge and bullet designers and taking the design from there. The result was the 1920s M1 cartridge, a hot 173gn FMJBT number. As Germany was later to do, it was decided that for logistical reasons the M1 would become the standard US ball cartridge for use in both MGs and rifles. But first tens of millions of leftover 150gn 30-06 rounds in store had to be used up and this took until the mid to late 1930s. By that time, interest in L-R MG fire had waned, the WW1 generation of infantry regimental and field officers had moved on and their senior officers often retired, so few could even remember why the M1 had been designed.

Moreover, when the M1 was finally issued to infantry units for training and familiarisation, it proved to be very unpopular with the troops thanks to (surprise, surprise) excessive muzzle blast and recoil. Then National Guard units pointed out that the round's maximum potential range exceeded that of danger areas on their firing ranges creating a possible safety hazard. So, the ball cartridge M2 with a 152gn flat-base FMJ at 2,800 fps nominal was developed in the late 30s initially for Guard use and units were expected to revert to the M1 in the event of a shooting war. But before the USA entered WW2, there was a change of heart and the M1 was quietly dropped and the M2 standardised for all 30-06 weapons. If the machinegunners needed extra range, they fired heavy bullet AP ammunition.

Most major western military powers went down the high-pressure heavy bullet path in this era, Britain having the heavy bullet Mk9z and Finland developing the famous D series of rebated boat-tails for L-R MG use developments of which survive today as 30 or .310-calibre match bullets. Germany and the US were in a minority though in making their machinegun cartridge a 'universal round', and as noted, the US never really implemented the concept. Many European countries that used the 7.92 and had developed their own versions of short '98 Mauser service rifles in 7.92 or bought them from Nazi Germany pre '39 also adopted sS type cartridges.

The upsides were that the sS was a far superior MG loading and that it also made the cartridge more useful in non-infantry roles. The British RAF was severely hindered in the early stages of WW2 by its fighters being equipped with eight Browning 303s, compared to German fighters with the 7.92 and 20mm cannon, the USAAF with .50BMG MGs. British night bombers used the 303 for the entire war for defence and rarely fatally wounded a German night fighter even if they managed hits - unlike US Flying Fortress day bomber gunners with their 50s. The downside was that the 7.92 sS was never a happy choice in an infantry rifle .... but as 90% of the rifle squad's combat effectiveness was derived from the MG34 or later MG42 and their 1,000 rpm fire rates, that was regarded as an acceptable trade. Another downside though is the bulk and weight of these rounds and coupled to the voracious appetite of its MGs on the Ostfront added to Germany's already severe transport and logistical difficulties in supplying her troops in theatre.

It is also worth remarking that German infantry officers had realised that the 7.92X57 was ballistically far too over-specified and created these logistical problems as early as the 1930s. A short-term 'fix' was the development of the 9X19mm calibre SMG and widespread issue of MP38/40 submachineguns to infantry units in early WW2, but the limitations of this cartridge and weapon system were recognised. So serious work started on 'intermediate cartridges' as early as the the 1930s and culminated in the 1942/3 7.92X33 and MP43 / StG44 assault rifles.

So far as the 7.92X57 goes today in recreational target shooting, the facts remain that the cartridge has very little going for it. First, it is an unknown as AFAIK nobody has developed optimised match chambers etc for it, so nobody knows its true potential. Then there is the (poor) bullet situation. The 8mm SMK has so little relevance to today's competition L-R disciplines that Bryan Litz doesn't include it or any 8mm design in his books and invaluable ballistics exercises and reports. Taking Sierra's three G1 velocity-banded values, their average is 0.495. The equivalent for the antediluvian 200gn 0.308 SMK is 0.560 and for the more modern 210gn VLD SMK is 0.637. So, the 200gn 8mm SMK has a very high (ie bad) 'form factor' compared to say a 200-20X Berger Hybrid in .308 given that the 200gn Sierra thirty is an elderly high-drag design and the 210 has been left behind by newer Berger and Hornady designs. Even where allowed into FTR, I would put my money onto an optimised 308 Win loading in ballistics alone - and we know the 308 can produce exceptional precision in this form but have little to work on in the case of the 7.92. QuickLOAD suggests a 7.92X57 run at the CIP limit with a hot high-energy powder (RS60/Re17) might produce another couple of hundred fps in a 32-inch barrel over the 308 with a 200gn Berger, but I suspect 100-150 fps is more attainable. As it is, many 308 FTR shooters who have adopted 200 and 215gn Hybrid loads run them at below maximum performance as the full-house loading recoil reduces scores.

In countries such as Canada, Australia and the UK where there would be no question of 7.92X57mm being allowed into FTR, I'm not even going to comment on this cartridge's lack of competitiveness against 7mm short magnums and the 284, .300 SAUM and WSM in 'Open'. (Note an early successful F-Open cartridge, long ditched in favour of better numbers, was the 7mm Boo-Boo, an 'improved' 8X68 necked-down to 7mm.)
Why don't you tell us all you know ?
 
If you are going to go the '06 route, might as well ditch the 8mm and step up to .338 bullets. In this context, the humble 338-06 starts to look better and better. Or, simply go with the old '06, itself. With modern brass (Lapua), modern bullets, and modern powders, all loaded to modern pressures, either one can reach a performance level with which the 8x57 simply cannot compete.

This is not to condemn the 8x57. Twenty years ago, using the best available components, the 8x57 would have had rough parity with .308/175 SMK loadings. The problem is that the 8x57 has been frozen in time (in terms of development), while the .224, 6mm, 6.5mm, 7mm, .30 caliber, and .338 caliber shooting world has seen prolific development of better brass, better chamberings, better bullets, and better powders. Even the definition of Long Range has begun to shift as the technology has improved.

If one is to stick with the x57 case, the way to go is 7x57, perhaps even a 7x57 AI. Apply modern powders, modern pressures, and modern bullets, and it can come closer to keeping pace. The things the 7x57 would then have working against it are required action length and lack of Lapua brass. It would seem many shooters would see both of those elements as disqualifiers in a competitive environment. Less so, I would think, in a sporting environment.
 
Last edited:
The 7.92 sS (Schwerer Spitzgeschoss) heavy bullet cartridge with a nominally 12.8g / 197gn JMJBT bullet was adopted as the standard German military round prior to WW2. It had been developed late in WW1 to give machineguns firing on fixed bearings en masse enhanced range and striking power. (This was a feature of both sides' use of MGs in the later stages of trench warfare on the western front - MGs were given additional roles with groupings of up to battalion size being used as rifle calibre mini-artillery saturating the other side's support trenches and forward supply dumps with shoots at ranges of up to 4,000-5,000 yards in indirect fire missions during the night when all sides moved units and supplies around, did maintenance work etc.)

For logistics reasons, the Germans decided to standardise on this round in 1934 at the time the country started to rebuild its armed forces and reequip them with new or enhanced weaponry. The front end of the rifle chamber was altered with a new long tapering leade and revised throat to allow this very high pressure round to be fired safely in this type of weapon. The downside was that alongside the length and weight reduction of the rifle involved in adopting the KAR98k at the same time, recoil and muzzle blast were very heavy indeed - and remain so with most surplus ammunition as found today.

If you read General Julian Hatcher's Notebook the US Army did exactly the same thing between the wars but then had a change of heart and rowed back. When the US entered the European war in 1917, she was so short of MGs that the US Expeditionary Force had to borrow French and British weapons and be supplied by her allies with parts and ammunition. Once .30-06 Colt manufactured M1895 'potato diggers' started to be manufactured in quantity and supplied to US units, the units reverted to their own equipment firing the standard early 20th century version of the .30-06 with a 150gn flat-base FMJ bullet at a nominal 2,700 fps MV. According to the US Army issued Ingles ballistic tables, this had a maximum range of around 5,000 yards, similar to that of the British and French .303 and 8mm rounds, but American machinegunners soon found that these were optimistic. Hatcher did work post war on Daytona Beach Florida firing an MG along the high water line with observers stationed downrange and found that its actual maximum range was only 3,500 yards or so.

Given the tactical doctrines that had evolved during WW1, the US Army was severely disadvantaged by the .30-06 ballistics in MG use, so a great deal of work was undertaken to develop a new heavy bullet L-R version of the cartridge, starting with acquiring 174gn .308 FMJBT bullets from Swiss ordnance, Col Rubin (of Schmidt Rubin fame) being one of the most innovative of cartridge and bullet designers and taking the design from there. The result was the 1920s M1 cartridge, a hot 173gn FMJBT number. As Germany was later to do, it was decided that for logistical reasons the M1 would become the standard US ball cartridge for use in both MGs and rifles. But first tens of millions of leftover 150gn 30-06 rounds in store had to be used up and this took until the mid to late 1930s. By that time, interest in L-R MG fire had waned, the WW1 generation of infantry regimental and field officers had moved on and their senior officers often retired, so few could even remember why the M1 had been designed.

Moreover, when the M1 was finally issued to infantry units for training and familiarisation, it proved to be very unpopular with the troops thanks to (surprise, surprise) excessive muzzle blast and recoil. Then National Guard units pointed out that the round's maximum potential range exceeded that of danger areas on their firing ranges creating a possible safety hazard. So, the ball cartridge M2 with a 152gn flat-base FMJ at 2,800 fps nominal was developed in the late 30s initially for Guard use and units were expected to revert to the M1 in the event of a shooting war. But before the USA entered WW2, there was a change of heart and the M1 was quietly dropped and the M2 standardised for all 30-06 weapons. If the machinegunners needed extra range, they fired heavy bullet AP ammunition.

Most major western military powers went down the high-pressure heavy bullet path in this era, Britain having the heavy bullet Mk9z and Finland developing the famous D series of rebated boat-tails for L-R MG use developments of which survive today as 30 or .310-calibre match bullets. Germany and the US were in a minority though in making their machinegun cartridge a 'universal round', and as noted, the US never really implemented the concept. Many European countries that used the 7.92 and had developed their own versions of short '98 Mauser service rifles in 7.92 or bought them from Nazi Germany pre '39 also adopted sS type cartridges.

The upsides were that the sS was a far superior MG loading and that it also made the cartridge more useful in non-infantry roles. The British RAF was severely hindered in the early stages of WW2 by its fighters being equipped with eight Browning 303s, compared to German fighters with the 7.92 and 20mm cannon, the USAAF with .50BMG MGs. British night bombers used the 303 for the entire war for defence and rarely fatally wounded a German night fighter even if they managed hits - unlike US Flying Fortress day bomber gunners with their 50s. The downside was that the 7.92 sS was never a happy choice in an infantry rifle .... but as 90% of the rifle squad's combat effectiveness was derived from the MG34 or later MG42 and their 1,000 rpm fire rates, that was regarded as an acceptable trade. Another downside though is the bulk and weight of these rounds and coupled to the voracious appetite of its MGs on the Ostfront added to Germany's already severe transport and logistical difficulties in supplying her troops in theatre.

It is also worth remarking that German infantry officers had realised that the 7.92X57 was ballistically far too over-specified and created these logistical problems as early as the 1930s. A short-term 'fix' was the development of the 9X19mm calibre SMG and widespread issue of MP38/40 submachineguns to infantry units in early WW2, but the limitations of this cartridge and weapon system were recognised. So serious work started on 'intermediate cartridges' as early as the the 1930s and culminated in the 1942/3 7.92X33 and MP43 / StG44 assault rifles.

So far as the 7.92X57 goes today in recreational target shooting, the facts remain that the cartridge has very little going for it. First, it is an unknown as AFAIK nobody has developed optimised match chambers etc for it, so nobody knows its true potential. Then there is the (poor) bullet situation. The 8mm SMK has so little relevance to today's competition L-R disciplines that Bryan Litz doesn't include it or any 8mm design in his books and invaluable ballistics exercises and reports. Taking Sierra's three G1 velocity-banded values, their average is 0.495. The equivalent for the antediluvian 200gn 0.308 SMK is 0.560 and for the more modern 210gn VLD SMK is 0.637. So, the 200gn 8mm SMK has a very high (ie bad) 'form factor' compared to say a 200-20X Berger Hybrid in .308 given that the 200gn Sierra thirty is an elderly high-drag design and the 210 has been left behind by newer Berger and Hornady designs. Even where allowed into FTR, I would put my money onto an optimised 308 Win loading in ballistics alone - and we know the 308 can produce exceptional precision in this form but have little to work on in the case of the 7.92. QuickLOAD suggests a 7.92X57 run at the CIP limit with a hot high-energy powder (RS60/Re17) might produce another couple of hundred fps in a 32-inch barrel over the 308 with a 200gn Berger, but I suspect 100-150 fps is more attainable. As it is, many 308 FTR shooters who have adopted 200 and 215gn Hybrid loads run them at below maximum performance as the full-house loading recoil reduces scores.

In countries such as Canada, Australia and the UK where there would be no question of 7.92X57mm being allowed into FTR, I'm not even going to comment on this cartridge's lack of competitiveness against 7mm short magnums and the 284, .300 SAUM and WSM in 'Open'. (Note an early successful F-Open cartridge, long ditched in favour of better numbers, was the 7mm Boo-Boo, an 'improved' 8X68 necked-down to 7mm.)

One of the things that is often overlooked is that the German military concluded in essence that grenades were better than rifles following the First World War.

In fact they got rid of the rifleman (Jager) designation towards the middle of World War II.

So even while maneuvering, a German rifle team was trying to use their rifles just to get close enough to throw grenades at you. The stick grenade was specifically for the purpose that you could throw it further.
 
I can at will hit a large steel gong at 1000yrds. with a scoped military LR Mauser in 8x57. Normally I use meters but in this case the owner of the property and the gong has it marked in yards so that is why I used yards in this case. I have never tried shooting for groups at that distance. I routinely use 8x57 to hunt with and 500m and under it is a deer slayer. 300 and under it will drop an Elk, Moose or Caribou no problem. You can easily find bullets in the 150gr to 220gr bullets with out trying too hard.

I like the 8x57 a lot but I would not specifically choose it for hunting or target shooting. I own 3 Military Mauser's so since I have it I use it. If you are starting from scratch I would recommend you chose a better round. The problem with the 8x57 is that until recently your choice were not great if you did not reload and bullet options sold in the USA was also not great. To shoot for accuracy or to kill at a distance requires energy and it is hard to get an 8mm bullet traveling at an ideal speed for long range hunting or target shooting with the powder capacity limits of the 8x57 cartridge. The 6.5x57 was a good solution when it was first released to get around some of that.

I love my Marlin 1895 in 45-70 but if someone asked me if I would recommend it to someone wanting to hunt beyond 200m or target shoot with it I would not recommend it at all. It is by far my favorite hunting tool but were I live most game is taken under 100 yards 90% of deer for instance are taken at 40yards according to the DNR "Department of Natural Resources" in my state. So how a tool is used is far more important than numbers on paper.

One of the best things a person can do if they have a Mauser that needs a new barrel is to build a 284 Win on it.

Do not get me wrong the 8x57 was and is a great cartridge but it is not going to be competitive by modern standards so as long as you keep this in mind and use it accordingly no reason not to have fun with it!
 
If you are going to go the '06 route, might as well ditch the 8mm and step up to .338 bullets. In this context, the humble 338-06 starts to look better and better. Or, simply go with the old '06, itself. With modern brass (Lapua), modern bullets, and modern powders, all loaded to modern pressures, either one can reach a performance level with which the 8x57 simply cannot compete.

This is not to condemn the 8x57. Twenty years ago, using the best available components, the 8x57 would have had rough parity with .308/175 SMK loadings. The problem is that the 8x57 has been frozen in time (in terms of development), while the .224, 6mm, 6.5mm, 7mm, .30 caliber, and .338 caliber shooting world has seen prolific development of better brass, better chamberings, better bullets, and better powders. Even the definition of Long Range has begun to shift as the technology has improved.

If one is to stick with the x57 case, the way to go is 7x57, perhaps even a 7x57 AI. Apply modern powders, modern pressures, and modern bullets, and it can come closer to keeping pace. The things the 7x57 would then have working against it are required action length and lack of Lapua brass. It would seem many shooters would see both of those elements as disqualifiers in a competitive environment. Less so, I would think, in a sporting environment.

I think a 30-06 with a 180gr. to 220gr. bullet in 30cal would outperform a .338-06. The BC on the heavy 30cal bullets is better than the BC of 225gr-250gr .338 bullets! 180gr. and 220gr. 30-06 loads are some of my favorites and going back a few decades for short range the 220gr round nose soft point bullets in 30cal had devastating penetration and mushroomed nicely. I will use lighter bullets like 167gr/168gr. but my meat and potatoes 30cal bullets for 30-06 and 300WM are in the range of 180gr to 220gr. this is for hunting and 190gr, 210gr. and 230gr. for target work. The above is my opinion and not in anyway facts.

If I was going to neck up the 30-06 case I would skip the 338 and go to 358. You might also consider a 9.3mm.
 
I have seen two 8mm/06 hunting rifles over the years. One was a highly customized KAR98 in a Fajen stock and it was a beautiful rifle and was said to be very accurate even with the original barrel but I never saw it fired. The other was a friends buba'd surplus K98 bought for less than $50 at a Wolco in the early 1070's. He had a gunsmith run a 30-06 reamer in to rechamber it and drill and tap the left side of the receiver for a side mount for a scope. He got loading dies I believe from Redding and used them to expand his 30-06 cases to 8 mm and load hunting bullets. He had a Weaver 2.5X scope and he could shoot about 2.5 MOA at 100 yds on a good day. I could easily out group him with my Ruger 77 in 30-06 but he still was just as effective at killing deer and even antalope at the range we hunted at. He probably had about $100 tied up for the whole thing including a leather belt he fitted for a sling. It was his only hunting rifle and he moved to Montana in 1978 and took it with him and may still be using it for all I know. I think an 8mm Mauser would make a more than adequate hunting rifle for North American game but as others have said would be a struggle and frustration as a long range target rifle.
 
well after 5 years i have sold the rifle.. too much frustration, poor bullet selection, reloading process was pain in the but, as i have to sort and sort and resort, basic load was lapua cases, nosler cc, br2, and n140....
it can shoot perfectly for 10 strings and an flyer, and every time there is a flyer...

it just cant keep up with the top shooters, otherwise it is phenomenal.... i was using it for local f class matches in open class...
 
I went back and looked at your posts and I never saw what rifle/barrel you were using.
 
Well since someone else brought this back to the top I figured why not?

I do not think anyone would recomend the 8x57 for long range work by choice. That said if you already have an 8x57 or a nice 8mm barrel and you just want to do it to do it go for it! It is not the best choice though if building a purpose built rifle for long range shooting.

I recently put a brand new 8mm machine gun barrel rechambed to 8x57 on a M48A/B action just because. I prob. am sitting on 20 different barrel from 6mm to 338. I did not do any blue printing to the rifle at all because I want to see how it will perform as is. I can always have it blue printed latter if I think it needs it. I needed an 8x57 rifle for the 500 rounds of M75 Yugo Corrosive Ammo I have on hand. I am going to use it to shoot animals inside 300m and gongs up to 1000m. Not for competition just for fun.

For the hand loader the 8x57 is devasting on all game inside of 300m. It comes down to using a good bullet for the game you intend to hunt from 150gr. to 196gr. sp, hollow point, monolithic, controlled expansion, bonded, partition, grandslam, A-Frames etc.....Inside of 300m it will do anything a 338WM or 300WM will do witht he right bullet. Once you get past 300m it is hard to find a bullet optimized for the 8x57.

If you avoid corrosive ammo you will never shotout a 8x57 barrel that is starting out new. If you avoid corrosive ammo and clean and oil it once a year you can probably get 10,000 rounds out of a cut rifled or broached barrel a CHF barrel could easily do 20,000 rounds. This assumes a bolt action rifle not a machine gun with a 5 round capcity.
 

Upgrades & Donations

This Forum's expenses are primarily paid by member contributions. You can upgrade your Forum membership in seconds. Gold and Silver members get unlimited FREE classifieds for one year. Gold members can upload custom avatars.


Click Upgrade Membership Button ABOVE to get Gold or Silver Status.

You can also donate any amount, large or small, with the button below. Include your Forum Name in the PayPal Notes field.


To DONATE by CHECK, or make a recurring donation, CLICK HERE to learn how.

Forum statistics

Threads
165,096
Messages
2,189,754
Members
78,688
Latest member
C120
Back
Top