7mm08 and Heavy Bullets

mickthebrick

Well-Known Member
I've been thinking of buying some heavier bullets to have a play with and I've come across some 158grn Prvi GROM bullets. These are solid copper with a lead filled hollowpoint and sound quite good, though probably a bit pointless unless I ever end up shooting a wild pig.

Here's some info on them http://artemis-hunting.com/pdf/Test ammo in Shooting Sportst.pdf

Do you reckon these will be too long, especially being copper to get a usefull amount of powder in the short 7-08 case?
Does anyone bother using heavier than 140grainers in their 7-08's or 7x57's

Cheers
Mick
 
Hey Mick

To be honest not even sure why we would. 140gr, is going to do the job and knock'em down with no worries and minimal damage.

I have even thought about rolling back to 120gr, but when you look at the fps your up in the 3000 +. I figure more damage to the meat or the head flying through the carcass.

But then again, mine is an Ackley Improved 19" Barrel.

ArthursC
 
I use 120 or 140 grain Sierras or 139 grain Hornady's in my 7mm08, they all do the job. For heavier bullets I use my .308 or .300 WSM.

Phil
 
good suggestion Muir.

I have used this site many a time and the load if is damn good.

~ArthursC
 
Maybe a reminder of the "birth" of the 7mm-08 and its current "sphere of use" might answer the poster's question?

It is, no more nor less, apparently a means to get around the ban, in Mexico, on military calibres. Specifically the 7.62 NATO in its USA mantle of 308 Winchester.

Which is why it is also popular in France.

So if you accept 7mm-08 as basically a non-military version of the 308 you can judge it better. In other words it will work best with those bullet weights that also work best with the 308 Winchester.

Too many think that because it is a cut-down 30-06 case that the 308 is somehow a "short" 30-06. It isn't. Because the case mouth is shorter. So it is not optimum for heavier and so longer bullets.

And to get back to the original post neither is 7mm-08 a "short" 280 Remington or 7 x 57 for the same reason. If you want 175 grain bullets or bullets that are of the same sort of length as that they are a better choice! The copper GROM may also have issues because of the amount of bullet that protrudes back into the case even in the weight you mention.
 
Last edited:
Enfield Spares: Maybe I'm a bit thick but I don't see the point in your post. I don't think a 158 grain is too heavy for the 7-08. I have shot 168's in the 7-08 and 175's in the 7x57. If these 158 grain bullets will fit the throat of the 7-08 in question why shouldn't he try them? Can you clarify? ~Muir

PS: Hodgdon lists loads up to and including 175 grain bullets for the 7-08
 
Last edited:
Thanks for the replies gents. I noticed Hodgdon do show loads for the heavier stuff and the velocities dont seem too bad either. I guess if the bullet fits the throat of the cartridge and doesn't compress the load then all should be okay. 175grn does seem heavy though, wonder what the trajectory is like:eek:

Cheers
Mick
 
Maybe I'm a bit thick but I don't see the point in your post. I don't think a 158 grain is too heavy for the 7-08. I have shot 168's in the 7-08 and 175's in the 7x57.
The point is that the cartridge is designed to be at its best with 140 grain bullets. Same as 308 was designed to be at its best with 144 grain bullets.

That you can load heavier isn't being questioned. You can load a 200 grain bullet in a 38 S & W revolver - we British did and called it the 380 Mk I. But velocity was abysmal at much over short distances and trajectory like a rainbow as simply there was not enough room for enough powder for a decent initial "oomph" or to do it at anything less than borderline maximum loads.

The same with 160 grain and 175 grain bullets in the 7-08. There is not enough room for enough initial "oomph" AND you are using maximum loads to even get much above 2400fps with the 175 grain. Indeed some of those loads in shorter barrel rifles will not be "deer legal" in Scotland in velocity terms. They struggle to even approach the velocities of the old 303 Mk 7 in a No4 or SMLE with the same bullet weight.

Now good as it was the 303 fell out of favour as a stalking round not just because it wasn't chambered in fashionable rifles but because at longer unknown distances bullet placement became imprecise as the trajectory curve was so steep compared to rifles with a muzzle velocity of 2,700 and above.

You can't get 2,700 and above in a 7mm-08 with any 175 grain bullet weight load that I would consider safe or sensible.

And with the 160 grain again you will struggle to get above 2,600 fps in a 7-08 with a barrel under two feet. The case capacity just is not there unlike in a 280 or 7 x 57.

The reloading manuals may say XXX but the chronograph doesn't support it always.

I think that if Mr Mick the Brick wants to use nominal 160 grain bullets or heavier in his 7-08 he will be disappointed in its performance. Especially if it has a short barrel much less than two feet.

Using anything a 175 grain bullet (or a nominal 160 grain) in a 7-08 is not much more than duplicating (at near maximum load pressure) standard load pressure 303 performance!

Wonder what the trajectory will be like with a 175 grain in the 7-08? Think probably as bad as the old 303 Mk 5 "Jungle Carbine"!
 
Well, the only game I saw him mention was boar. Even he theorized it might be "pointless" but that doesn't mean it isn't worth a looksee.

You fail to take sectional density & ballistic coefficient into account when you talk of heavier bullets in the 7-08. Just a velocity comparison is a little thin in the fairness department. I shot 500M metallic silhouette with 168 grain bullets in the 7-08. Shot flatter than the 308 I was using with like weighted projectiles. A comparison to the .303 is humorous at best.

The Sierra 175 grain SP has a b.c. of .462 and if you plug that in with a starting velocity of 2450 fps and a 100 yard "zero" it still only has a 5.7" drop at 200 yards with a retained energy around 1600 ft/lbs. Change the zero to +2" and you flatten that arc out even more.

In the end, if Mick wants to try it we should encourage him. He'll learn a lot about his rifle and he'll share it with us. We'll all then be the wiser. JMHO~Muir

Oh, and cartridges like the .303 fell out of favor when we quit being hunters and started being kill technicians. Besides, aren't we in the age of laser rangefinders??
 
I thought that i had read, maybe wrongly, that because the 7mm-08 was a in short action that the higher (therefore longer) bullet weights lead to overly compressed powder charges, so they would fit in the action?

I have also read that the larger 7mm bullet weights perform better from the 7x64 or even the 7x57 (and i suppose the almost mythical .280). Surely a mainly copper bullet, which is what we are talking about, will have a much longer length because of the less dense metal being used? I would have thought this could lead to chambering problems in a short action rifle?

Yours unknowingly, ft
 
Read Eyefor's post on the previous page. It may cause magazine fit issues but not necessarily chambering issues. There's only one way to find out...~Muir
 
Last edited:
While I don't have a 7-08, cannot see the point when I already have a 7x57mm :p, but the fastest drop to shot I have had was a Four Point Roe Buck shot with RWS factory ammo using the 173 Grn H-Mantle.

Now according to the ballistic data on the box they claim the MRD to sight in is 170 yards and at 200 yards it will be -1.7" and -11.8 at 300 yards. The box does not say what the velocity is but I picked up a new RWS catalogue and in that they claim 770 M/S sorry they don't work in proper units of measurement :mad:.
 
While I don't have a 7-08, cannot see the point when I already have a 7x57mm :p, but the fastest drop to shot I have had was a Four Point Roe Buck shot with RWS factory ammo using the 173 Grn H-Mantle.

Now according to the ballistic data on the box they claim the MRD to sight in is 170 yards and at 200 yards it will be -1.7" and -11.8 at 300 yards. The box does not say what the velocity is but I picked up a new RWS catalogue and in that they claim 770 M/S sorry they don't work in proper units of measurement :mad:.

Goodness me Brithunter, you are into everything! I have a 7-08, but as you have beaten me to it there is no need for me to add anything to this thread. :lol:
 
Goodness me Brithunter, you are into everything! I have a 7-08, but as you have beaten me to it there is no need for me to add anything to this thread. :lol:

:p Why thank you. I also have some 175 Grain Remington bullets I brought back from the US with me some years ago as I was trying to develop loads to shoot to the sights of this:-

9877161.jpg


3107656.jpg


3107647.jpg

But discovered that the bead is missing from the adjustable fore sight and so it shoots about 10" high at 100 yards :oops:. As yet I have not been able to get a replacement made :doh:. The RWS ammunition is too hot for this rifle of course even though RWS don't warn of such things leaving it up to common sense of the owner.

Perhaps you can guess what the rifle is and for whom is was made?

Answers on a Post card please :p. No but it might be interesting to hear what people think it is and how old it is. The modern 7x57 is a BSA CF2 and according to John Knibbs book only 389 were chamered for the 7mm Mauser cartridge.

One day once I get the foresight blade/bead replaced my aim is to use it for Roe Buck one day :cool:.
 
Perhaps you can guess what the rifle is and for whom is was made?

Answers on a Post card please :p. No but it might be interesting to hear what people think it is and how old it is. The modern 7x57 is a BSA CF2 and according to John Knibbs book only 389 were chamered for the 7mm Mauser cartridge.

Brithunter, Can't run to a postcard but, would the initials W D M B be close?

If it is, I would envy you, which is not something I say very often.

ft
 
Can't run to a postcard but, would the initials W D M B be close?
Oh how I wish but Bell did use one captured whilst he served as a scout in SA but then he also used a Mannlicher Mdl 1892 in 6.5x53R and of course a pair of Lee Speeds at different points in his hunting career. Oh and it's not Jim Corbets either as he had a .275 Rigby with a silver oval plate set into the butt that was awarded him for killing a man eating Lepoard.

There were less than 1000 of these made and at least two stock styles have been noted. Now I doubt anyone would actually guess the individual owner as they are not that well documented. By Whom I mean group as they are far more widely known and even sporting stadia are named after events they were involved in.
 
There aren't many of these Boer Mausers and fewer still with the oval in the stock. So I'm guessing it will be a figure prominent from that time. Maybe not a Smuts, Kruger or a Botha rifle but maybe a Kemp or de Wet weapon?
 
There aren't many of these Boer Mausers and fewer still with the oval in the stock. So I'm guessing it will be a figure prominent from that time. Maybe not a Smuts, Kruger or a Botha rifle but maybe a Kemp or de Wet weapon?

Your right of course it's an original DWM M93 "Plezier" the name engraved on the silver oval is J.P DuPlessis Jnr. Now we cannot be sure but the Boer museum can trace 13 DuPlessis but could not asign the rifle to one of them which is a pity as there was a pair of DuPlessis twins who commanded a very active Commando. If only it could talk ;).

A gentleman from the US sent me a quantity of original Boer 173 grain RN Cupro Nickel bullets he had salvaged from 1899 dated ammunition that the cases were all splitting on for me to work up some suitable loads with. As far as we can judge the rifle dates from about 1897.
 
Back
Top