Gunboards Forums banner

1 - 19 of 19 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
78 Posts
Discussion Starter #1
Hello,

I am thinking of reloading 8mm Mauser (I already load for a number of cartridges), but the reloading data seems to be loaded pitifully low.

Does anyone know of any reloading data that will match the original military load, especially in the 200 gr. range?

Along those lines, what is the best powder for 8mm? Any powders to avoid? Any that meter especially well?

Thanks.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
230 Posts
Some of the reloading manuals list "real" military/European level loads. On the spur of the moment I pulled the Speer #13 manual off the shelf. Their top loads are running close to 50,000 cup. Basically .30-06 ballistics.

Any of the medium to medium-slow powders are good candidates. IMR3031, IMR4064, IMR4895, IMR4350 are all good depending on your particular bullet weight. Of course, ball powders meter better, so you could try WW 748, and WW 760. There are lots of Hodgdon and Accurate powders that are good too. Basically, if its good in the .30-06 it's good for the 8mm Mauser.

Speaking of bullets, I have taken a liking to the Remington 185 grain pointed core-lokt. They are relatively inexpensive, especially if you buy 500 or 1000 at a time (like from Midway.) This assumes you don't have a large pile of surplus bullets in stock.

Try searching for some reloading sites - there are several on the net. I use ammoguide.com a lot, although it's costs about $18 a year to use it. Speer shows a top load of 46.0 grains of IMR4064 for 2434 fps. with a 200 grain spitzer. They start at 42 grains for 2196 fps. WW 760 shows 48.0 - 52.0 grains, with velocities of 2171 - 2392 respectively. H380 shows the highest velocities. Exactly the same charge weights as WW 760, with velocities of 2242 - 2469 fps.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
182 Posts
H4895

Just to make thgings REALLY simple I do most of my rifle loading with H4895, it works well for most everything I load (7x57, 8x57, 7.62x39, 7.62x54R) and it is readily available at the local shops. I like 44gr under a 200gr Speer for the 8x57. Their data lists the max at 45.4gr @2530fps and 49,200 CUP, so this is under the listed maximum, and plenty accurate in my Hakim and VZ24. I did load some 200gr Barnes X-bullets at 46gr, and they were also very accurate, but much more expensive...
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
230 Posts
Oh, I forgot to mention that the velocities I posted were for a 24" barrel - a 29 incher will be a fair bit faster.

Czechshooter13: I usually try IMR4895 (and sometimes H4895) when working up loads for the medium bores. For some reason IMR4064 always seems to end up working better for me. They are about the same burn rate and the load data is (for the most part) interchangeable. Maybe it's my karma or something. Have you ever compared IMR4895 and H4895 in the 8mm? I have always thought the IMR version was a slight bit faster.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
182 Posts
IMR vs. Hodgdon...

Celt-

As a matter of fact, I have used IMR 4895 for the 8x57, and loaded it to the H4895 spec, as I didn't have the IMR spec handy at the time. I haven't run any across the chrony as of yet, but I am planning on heading up to the happy hunting grounds maybe on Friday, (I've got to get the boat into winter storage) so if possible, I can run them both over the chrony and see what the difference (if any) really is. I do know (now) that the data for the IMR 4895 seems a bit anemic to me, here is data from Hodgdon's website:

IMR 4895:

150gr HDY- 36gr- 2310fps- @37000CUP
170gr HDY- 33.5gr- 2145fps- @37000CUP

H4895:

150gr HDY- 51gr- 2987fps- @49500CUP
170gr HDY- 49gr- 2769fps- @48700CUP

THAT is a HUGE difference!

Now in MOST reloading manuals I have that are put out by the bullet manufacturers, IMR and Hodgdon are no more than one grain apart on any load that I use, and the pressures and velocities are about the same. It seems like the lawyers over at IMR are sticking to the weak and anemic American 8x57 spec which isn't even close to Euro military loads from my experience. This is one of the reasons that I started reloading in the first plcae, was to get FULL POWER 8x57 hunting loads instead of those light Remington and Winchester factory loads that just don't seem to have the POP of the Yugo FMJ 8x57.

I guess that the only way to know for sure is to compare them side by side, and I guess that is what I'll have to do.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,060 Posts
It seems that giving the 8x57 a pressure ceiling of 50,000 psi is a good round-figure for max. The 7.62x54R in some manuals is given as low a ceiling as 44,000 psi, but seems to work best (and be the most like its military loadings) when it is in the range of 50,000 psi as well.

I think that ammo producers are scared of being litigated to death by someone trying out full-power 8x57 JS ammo in a rusted out J-bored GEW88. Lawyers suck.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
23 Posts
8 MM military specs

I am looking for the article but I remember reading that the orginal 8 MM military loading was 150 gr bullet at approx the same velocity as 30-06 ball ammo. Maybe 100-150 fps less. I have two 98 k's and have been looking to reload for them myself. Most loadings I see are for much heavier bullet weights. I was wondering why? I was looking for that info because I figured the iron sights would be close to right on if I matched the orginal load it was designed for.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,080 Posts
"orginal 8 MM military loading was 150 gr bullet at approx the same velocity as 30-06 ball ammo. Maybe 100-150 fps less"

No sir!
Two things:
1) The "Original" 8x57 military loading (8x57I) was a 226 grain, .318" diameter bullet at 2095 fps.

2) The 154 grain 8x57 IS (1905, .323" diameter bullet) averaged 2880 fps. The 150 grain M2 Ball 30-06 spec is 2740 fps.
The German 154 grain round was 140 fps faster than the 30-06 150 grain round as issued.
M-1 Ball 30-06 was a 172 grain bullet and the spec is 2640 fps.
The 8x57 IS 197 grain (1934) spec is 2493 fps.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
23 Posts
Found the article on orginal ballistics

Guns Magazine June 2007. "Feeding Old Military Rifles" By: Mike "Duke" Venturino.
I was thinking of the K98k of WW II vintage and not the older "commission rifle".

Here is what was printed.
Orginal Military Ballistics

6.5X50 Japanese 139 gr @ 2,500 fps
7.62X54 Russian 147 gr @ 2,600 fps

.30 M2 (.30-06) USA 150 gr @ 2,700 fps--(Garand Load)-150 gr Hornandt Spire Pt--H4895--48.0 gr-- 2,691 fps
(1903A3 Load)-155 gr Palma Match--Varget--48.0 gr-- 2,694 fps.
303 MK VII British 174 gr @ 2,400 fps

8X57 Mauser 154 gr @ 2,800 fps ----150 gr Hornandy Spirepoint---Varget--50.0 gr--2,603 fps.
(Cast Bullet Load)---190 SAECO #081 .323---Accurate 5744--27.0 gr --1,869 fps

Just because I read it of course doesn't make it so. But it does appear that bullet weights & velocities change depending on where you get the info. I find it confusing at times. I have noticed that many bullet weights got heavier depending on who you read. You seem to be more well informed . Could you clarify it for me. How did the heavier 8 mm loads come about? Also I have a M1 Garand and was going to match military loads for that rifle also. Is M1 ball older ammo specs for say a 1903 Springfield and M2 for WW II vintage Garands? I have a '03-A3 also. What would be "correct" to match it? Is it because the heavier loads were made before the spitzer bullets came out?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,060 Posts
7.62x54R 147gr moves around 2800 fps from non-carbine barrels, and 182gr moves around 2600 fps. This is, of course, courtesy of www.7.62x54r.net/
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
23 Posts
Can't always trust whats in the magazine

I suppose it is individual guns and trial and error that wins in the end. Can't allways trust what I read in the magazines. The article I read also said that russian barrels were not always the same diameter so slug the barrel to get best performance. I suppose that is like readiing a horoscope in the paper. It could apply to everybody.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,080 Posts
The Germans went to a heavier bullet to get greater momentum and range in 1935. The US went from a 150 grain bullet used during WWI to a 173 grain, designated M1, for the same reason. The US dropped back to a 150 grain, designated M2, when it was found the 174 grain load was carrying beyond the old ranges safety areas. The M1 was developed around the M1 load, the M2 round was loaded to function the Garand at the designated 2740 fps.
If you reload for the Garand, those rounds will work fine with an 03-A3 rear site graduations, the 03-A3 having been introduced after the Garand to supplement it. The M2 round ballistics may not match you 1903 ladder sites though.
When you look at the specs, notice the German 154 grain load was tested in a 29 inch barrel with no mention as to distance from muzzle it was measured or if it was adjusted to muzzle velocity. The US M2 spec is for a 24 inch barrel measured at 78 feet or so from the muzzle. It gets more confusing if you look at reloading manuals which are almost always 26 inch barrels and velocity either measure 15 feet from the muzzle or old military rifles, which really throws variables in.:(

Google up ¨M2 ball load¨ or data. Itś easy to duplicate with IMR 4895, IMR 4064, IMR 3031, H4895, Varget, etc. And no, being safe for your Garands op-rod doesnṫ come close to extracting the potential of the 30-06, but the Garand wasnṫ designed around faster or slower powders, nor bullets over 174 grains. Keep it 180 grains or under and between IMR 3031 and 4064. I actually load lighter than spec for 100 and 200 yard ranges. Some are shooting Highpower matches with 125 grain bullets! Less kick, better recovery in rapid fire. The 168 grain HPBT is still king though.
Wikipedia has some good history on the development of 8x57 and 30-06 if you want to read up and not do tons of searching through innaccurate or ill informed sites. I also may have made a mistake off the top of my head as to dates or exact velocity:D www.wikipedia.org
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,717 Posts
Help

I bought some reloads of 8mm with 175 grain psp sierra game kings. The powder used is ??? but the grain was 46.3 grains. The powder particles were kinda large though, larger than IMR 4064, IMR 4895, and Varget. The reloader mentioned that he reloads to the book so does anyone have an idea of the powder used and what the muzzle velocity would be? I don't have the books so I cannot look anything up.
Thanks
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
5,090 Posts
no shit. i did it once with a 44 mag. locked the cylinder and loading gate.
now... ha ha... try 4064. with the 185 Remington bulk bullets and 42 grains (light/mid) and work up from there. also i found that depending on throat wear,, the OAL and bullet seating is important. on my bSw i didn't get to great a group until i sat the bullet above the crimp collar.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
14,275 Posts
Take quotes of military rifle velocities with a grain of salt.
Unless you look at the manual closely you may not figure out the 6.5X55 or what ever velocities were taken with a 17.5" carbine barrel or a 29" rifle barrel. Japanese barrels can go as long as 31".
KAR 88 barrels are short and GEW 98 barrels are long so the data would be all over the place with both barrel length and pressure being different.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,080 Posts
The idea is to get "in the neighborhood" so that site markings are sort of close. When bulk Remington 185gr were the cheapest bullet available I shot a very pleasant light, start load out of my 98k for fun/plinking. Velocity was so low that at 100 yards I had the site set above 200 meters.
Surplus 150gr and 198gr were very close to the site settings out to 220 meters (Remember; these aren't target sites, just "in the neighborhood").
Use a chronograph when working up loads and you may be surprised to come close to the site markings before you get up to advertised military velocity or may see signs of pressure before you get there.
 

·
Silver Bullet member
Joined
·
407 Posts
Another vote for Remington 185gr PSP Corelokts........

........as I have very good luck seating them long and using Varget. At around 48gr of Varget I got 20fps or less ES out of 2 different rifles. Accuracy was just barely over 2" for 5 shot groups, at 100yds, from a fully dressed VZ-24 with a scout style 2x scope, bedded action, & polished trigger/sear. The barrel is less than stellar, but for $100 I knew what I was getting. Velocity at 48gr was 2518fps average from the VZ24. The throat is so worn/long in this rifle that I never reached the lands. I just seated it as long as possible, 3.150" OAL to be exact. The other rifle, a sporterized Turk, has a bedded action, free floated original barrel, and polished trigger, as well as the original barrel cut down to 28" and an older Weaver 3x9. The barrel condition is a little better, in this rifle, and the throat is definately shorter. I was able to seat the 185gr Remingtons just off the lands with an OAL shorter than the Vz-24's. The same loading of 48gr gave me a velocity of 2654fps from the Turk, and the accuracy was similar at around 2" for 5 shots. Not too shabby for a $75 dollar rifle. I also found, looking at the data, that 3-shot groups measured at just under 1 inch from the Turk, and just a hair over 1 inch from the VZ-24. To be honest, I do fully prep cases, weigh/segregate cases and bullets and throw powder from a scale at 1/10gr accuracy, or as close as possible. No crimps with these loads as the cannelure wasn't near the case mouth. I feel the Remington's are a good value, and if you have time to segregate them, even better. If I ever run across any match grade heavy .323's at a discount I'll try them, but for now I am very pleased with the Remington's that were $15 per 100 when purchased. Of course I cannot be responsible for you using any data provided in this reply. Always work up loads for your rifle. 48gr of Varget is 1gr under the max load listed of 49gr and 185gr Remington combination. This load is definately not for a Gew88 rifle with a .318" groove!!!!!!

Dale
 
1 - 19 of 19 Posts
Top