Your opinion why the 7x57 Mauser flourished and the .275 H&H faded

[C.W. Richter]

Were the (odd) bullets seated out farther, requiring the Mag Length action?? Otherwise, the case length (2.5") is identical to the 7 RM (which is approx. the same as a 3006). The 7 cases are 0.35" shorter than a mag length 375, which is 2.85". I could also see the optics of the time providing little advantage in this longer-range capability 7mm cartridge over the 757. (i.e. taking game at <300 yds and often well within that distance, way back then.)

 

[Muskox]

Stolen Valor in that case, a la the Schulers...

The 6,5x68 is popular=ish kind of in Austria and Slovenia.

The 8x68S is kind of the some here in Germany.

The 7x66 Vom Hoffe was the big boomer and almost the same as the 7mm Blaser.

 

[Bob Nelson 35Whelen]

1. Not a military cartridge.
2. Was proprietary, through gentlemen's agreement or litigation it wasn't chambered by other companies.
3. It was before it's time.
4. No one championed it. The 270 is a great example.
5. Would have been a logistical nightmare for anyone trying to support a 7mm H&H rifle at the time, or for certain today.

@Muskox
6. The powders if the day ie cordite wouldn't give the velocity that you could get now with modern powders.
Bob

 

[Bob Nelson 35Whelen]

I'm thinking about using that spare action I have around to build a .275 H&H, so I've put a little thought into this:

The .287 diameter bullet is a bit of an issue, but they can be found today. Not certain that affected things then, because if it had caught on, there'd be a lot more .287 bullets lying around.

I think it is more of a case that in the original load, the 175 grain bullet was moving at only 2680 fps. A 7X57/175 grain, on the other hand, moves at around 2300 or so fps... so not a huge difference for a magnum round requiring more powder. That, coupled with the availability of military surplus rifles, and there's your answer.

Modern metallurgy should allow a bit higher pressure, and hand loading should get you much closer to 7mm Rem Mag velocities...

@SaintPanzer
If building one today I would use .284 bore size and it will out run the 7mm REM and be closer to the Weatherby.
Bob

 

[Bob Nelson 35Whelen]

I don’t know, but bring back the 8mm Remington mag

@pilar
Winchester bought back the 8mm REM mag but it wasn't popular. It was called the 325 WSM. Almost identical velocities in a compact case. For some reason the USA just come to love 8mms despite being superior to the thirty cals.
Bob

 

[Muskox]

The only popular 8mm in the world is the 8x57 IS.

I would say popularity of 8mm's goes like this.

The first 3 are easy, currently in production in both ammo and rifles.
1. 8x57 IS .323 bullet, popular here in Europe. 3rd behind the 308 and 30-06.
2. 8x57 JRS or IRS or whatever the current naming convention is .323 bullet
3. 8x68 Schuler Currently chambered by Steyr, Blaser, Heym, Roessler, and probably a few more.

The next 3 are probably a tie.
4. 8mm Remington magnum no current production rifles chambered for it. Enough rifles in America that it isn't unheard of. Ammo is getting to be a challenge.
5. 325 WSM, I don't think there are currently rifles in production. Ammo is still available.
6. 8x64 Brenneke, this is a 8mm-06 before it was cool. Still common, some smaller companies are chambering for it.

Real obscurity: Some of these have ammo, available or at least brass. The .318 bullet diameter was kept in Eastern Europe during Cold War by sportsmen. Today they have shifted to the .323, but there are still some rifles in .318 available on the used market.

5. 8x75R this one is still chambered by boutique rifle companies like Schierring, and maybe on special order with Krieghoff or Heym.
6. 8x57 and 8x64 with .318 bullets, there was never a 8x68 with .318 bullets.
7. 8x65R
8. 8x56
9. 8x56R

 

[Flbt]

@pilar
Winchester bought back the 8mm REM mag but it wasn't popular. It was called the 325 WSM. Almost identical velocities in a compact case. For some reason the USA just come to love 8mms despite being superior to the thirty cals.
Bob

The best thing I saw with the 325 was you could get it on a blr takedown
I had a chance at the blr but when the only 323 ammo I could find local was right at 150$ a box nope

 

[One Day...]

I would hazard a guess that the reason the 7x57 flourished while the 275 H&H floundered was a case of simple economics. By the time the 275 H&H came out the 7x57 was well established in an economical Mauser 98 and ammunition was available virtually worldwide. Just a guess of course.

Yep, I entirely agree.

Put simply:

Hundreds of thousands of reliable, indestructible, cheap Mauser 7x57 rifles in the hand of every British and German colonists using the rifle daily all over Africa, vs. a few thousands (or hundreds?) H&H rifles with wealthy British gentry going on safari.

The fact that the .275 H&H is nothing but a loud 7 mm Mauser, like the 7 mm Rem Mag is nothing but a loud .280 Rem -- or more relevantly, 7x64, because the .280 simply duplicates the 7x64 -- certainly did not help...

Actually Rigby saw the light of day and shamelessly renamed the 7x57 Mauser the .275 Rigby...

 

[Schüler Jumbo]

FWIW from WikipediA:
“The cartridge is today often erroneously referred to as the ".275 Rigby", however neither Rigby & Sons nor Kynoch (the major UK ammunition manufacturer of the period) sold the cartridge in boxes labeled .275 Rigby - instead it was always marked ".275 bore" (Rigby) or 7mm Mauser (Kynoch) and it is doubtful the cartridge was ever referred to as the ".275 Rigby" during its golden period.”

 

[PerH]

Because:
- 7x57mm Mauser cartridges were being manufactured by Winchester, Remington, Kynoch, DWM, Norma and Sellier & Bellot. While .275 Holland & Holland Magnum cartridges were only manufactured by Kynoch (until 1957) and Western Cartridge Co. (until 1939). When Kynoch stopped producing ammunition for it, it virtually died out overnight.
- The 7x57mm Mauser could be built on standard length actions. While the .275 Holland & Holland Magnum required a Magnum length action.
- The .287 caliber bullets were less common than the .284 caliber bullets of the 7x57mm Mauser.
- Nobody tried to revive it because the 7mm Remington Magnum came out in 1962 and can basically do everything which the .275 Holland & Holland Magnum can (with the bonus of ammunition being manufactured by every single manufacturer of sporting rifle ammunition worldwide).

And as Bell noted and many others followed his advice aswell as many others . The millitary ammo surplus and good German hunt ammo was around in tons to find . Worked well at good cost , and cases and primers worked on top of the bullets that didn’t break or bend much .

 

[rookhawk]

In 1912 Holland & Holland envisioned a complementary pair of sporting rifles and introduced the .375 H&H and .275 H&H. We all know the story of the great .375 while the .275 faded. The 7x57 was introduced in 1892 as a military cartridge and has gone on to stardom. What is your opinion of why the .275 H&H did not find the success that the 7x57 Mauser has earned?

Thank you.

Simple: the 7x57 was ubiquitous, military ammo was everywhere. The 275 was a fairly uncommon sporting rifle that required expensive ammo and pricey rifles.

 

[One Day...]

...

Actually Rigby saw the light of day and shamelessly renamed the 7x57 Mauser the .275 Rigby...

FWIW from WikipediA:
“The cartridge is today often erroneously referred to as the ".275 Rigby", however neither Rigby & Sons nor Kynoch (the major UK ammunition manufacturer of the period) sold the cartridge in boxes labeled .275 Rigby - instead it was always marked ".275 bore" (Rigby) or 7mm Mauser (Kynoch) and it is doubtful the cartridge was ever referred to as the ".275 Rigby" during its golden period.”

"Same difference"

To simplify: I do not think Rigby ever stamped/engraved 7 mm Mauser or 7x57 on their rifles, right?

What could they possibly imply when they stamped/engraved .275 bore on their rifles the same way they engraved .416 bore, hmm? Why did they not simply stamp/engrave 7 mm Mauser or 7x57, hmm?

 

[TXTad]

Because:
- 7x57mm Mauser cartridges were being manufactured by Winchester, Remington, Kynoch, DWM, Norma and Sellier & Bellot. While .275 Holland & Holland Magnum cartridges were only manufactured by Kynoch (until 1957) and Western Cartridge Co. (until 1939). When Kynoch stopped producing ammunition for it, it virtually died out overnight.
- The 7x57mm Mauser could be built on standard length actions. While the .275 Holland & Holland Magnum required a Magnum length action.
- The .287 caliber bullets were less common than the .284 caliber bullets of the 7x57mm Mauser.
- Nobody tried to revive it because the 7mm Remington Magnum came out in 1962 and can basically do everything which the .275 Holland & Holland Magnum can (with the bonus of ammunition being manufactured by every single manufacturer of sporting rifle ammunition worldwide).

All this plus the fact that until slower patterns came along, the Rigby didn't offer enough performance over the Mauser to justify the expense.

 

[One Day...]

FWIW from WikipediA:
“The cartridge is today often erroneously referred to as the ".275 Rigby", however neither Rigby & Sons nor Kynoch (the major UK ammunition manufacturer of the period) sold the cartridge in boxes labeled .275 Rigby - instead it was always marked ".275 bore" (Rigby) or 7mm Mauser (Kynoch) and it is doubtful the cartridge was ever referred to as the ".275 Rigby" during its golden period.”

To further the answer, because the Wikipedia statement surprised me, I tried to look at vintage ammo boxes. I am not sure whether these boxes (Thank You Google!) are from "the golden period" (or what are the precise years of the golden period) but these are not new (John Rigby & Co. was located at 43 Sackville Street from 1912 until 1955) and it really looks like Rigby was not going out of their way to give Mauser credit for the cartridge when they produced these

By the way, I personally think that Rigby fumbled up when they moved away from the Mauser 173 gr load to increase velocity with a 140 gr bullet. That load could not possibly have been more useful in colonial Africa where scopes were virtually unknown, although probably OK (if on the light side) for Scottish Red Stag.

Actually, to this day they continue with this, to the point that a friend of mine had to have his Highland Stalker re-reamed in the US so that the throat would be long enough to accept 175 gr bullets (although that does not address rifling twist, but accuracy if good enough for field purpose).

 

[TXTad]

All this plus the fact that until slower patterns came along, the Rigby didn't offer enough performance over the Mauser to justify the expense.

Autocorrect strikes again, and I guess these forums don't let you edit posts after a brief window. This should have said "slower powders". Jeez.

 

[BFaucett]

Autocorrect strikes again, and I guess these forums don't let you edit posts after a brief window. This should have said "slower powders". Jeez.

I think the edit window is 30 minutes after first posting.

 

[coreydb]

My own opinion is that Mauser created and developed the round, but the British Expeditionary Forces were so impressed by its lethality (after they got their butts initially handed to them in the Boer War; much like we (the USA) did from the Spain in the Spanish American war, that the Brits copied it but avoided giving credit where credit was due (embarrassed maybe?), and named the 7x57 as its own 275 Rigby. (my own "fractured fairy tale" ). Actually, I believe it was totally due to seeing first-hand the lethality and effectiveness of the smokeless powdered cartridge no matter the distance. It was the perfect hunting caliber.