North American rounds and their European/Continental Counter parts

sigarms226

sigarms226

Regular
Rating - 100%
19   0   0
Location
SK
Just finished remodeling my basement and as a result my reloading room. I was sitting back and looking at my cartridge collection up on the wall(all chamberings I've ever fired) and it got me thinking. I was looking at half of them and thinking how redundant many are vs EU rounds and even like rounds from NA.

This led me to another thought. I took inventory of what I currently have in my inventory and what I see as being a sensible alternative to them from overseas and I wanted to see what others see as an alternative to what is listed.

This is the current "North America" list and what I think is interchangeable in terms of ballistics and similar intended use.

22-250-> 220 Russian
25-06 -> 6.5x68 or 6.5x65 light for caliber bullets
270 Win-> 7x64 loaded with light for caliber bullets
7mm-08-> 7x57/275 Rigby
30-06-> 8x57
300 Weatherby-> 8x68S
45-70-> 450-400 3"

What are some others I never considered? What are ones that you'd use as step in for the above chamberings?

I've got an unhealthy(according to family and co-workers) obsession with Euro chamberings.
 
Last edited:
The obvious 6.5 Creed - 6.5x55
Also there’s a bunch of cool 9.3 chamberings in Europe that I don’t think have a NA equivalent. Maybe 338 Win Mag
 
The only two comparisons that make any sense are the 7-08 vs 7X57 and .30/06 vs 8X57... and the later only from a military application. The 6.5 CM is a Johnny-Come-Lately... the comparison should be .260 Rem vs 6.5X55 and .280 Rem vs 7X64 (as stated above).
 
The .35 Whelen is very similar to the 9.3x62 ( except the Germans had it first)
The .275 H&H is similar to the 7mm Rem Mag and the 7x61 S&H ( except the Brits had it first.)
The .318 WR is similar to the .338-06 ( Brits again)
If the Americans had started chambering rifles for the 7x64 it's unlikely we would have either the .270 or .280.
There was a 6x57 cartridge way back when, which is essentially what the 6mm Rem is.
The .240 Apex ( or .240 H&H) is so similar in appearance the .240 Weatherby you would have a hard time telling them apart.
 
hoytcanon said:
The only two comparisons that make any sense are the 7-08 vs 7X57 and .30/06 vs 8X57... and the later only from a military application. The 6.5 CM is a Johnny-Come-Lately... the comparison should be .260 Rem vs 6.5X55 and .280 Rem vs 7X64 (as stated above).
Click to expand...

In regards to the 30/06 vs 8x57 is this more a bullet variety difference or ballistically speaking once you reach the heavier end of the bullet spectrum? Those would be my only reasons for NOT owning an 8x57.
 
So so far we are seeing the normal Euro chamberings show up. What about their more speedy "magnum" rounds. ie 6.5x68, 8x68... I would actually love to hear some first had reports from ANYONE using the previous two especially in NA.
 
sigarms226 said:
So so far we are seeing the normal Euro chamberings show up. What about their more speedy "magnum" rounds. ie 6.5x68, 8x68... I would actually love to hear some first had reports from ANYONE using the previous two especially in NA.
Click to expand...

I shot a wild boar in Germany with a Sauer rifle chambered in 8x68s. Ballistics are apparently similar to the 325 wsm.
 
Last edited:
sigarms226 said:
So so far we are seeing the normal Euro chamberings show up. What about their more speedy "magnum" rounds. ie 6.5x68, 8x68... I would actually love to hear some first had reports from ANYONE using the previous two especially in NA.
Click to expand...

I have had both 8x68 and 8 Rem Mag rifles. The N.A. cartridge is a little faster, and is what I kept. Although I do have the parts to put another one together here, maybe I'll do another. - dan
 
I would agree totally with the 7 x 64/280 comparison considering the reload data is virtually identical. The 7 x 64 just came up with it in 1917 in stead of 50 years later. I do have both. The 7 x 64 is a Frankonia Mauser with a Kepplinger single-set trigger. Figured I should just have it 20 or so years ago.

southernman said:
I would put the 7x64 paired with the .280 Remington, ( peas in a pod)

I add the .25-35 Winchester paired with the 6.5x52 rimmed

6.5x54 mannlicher, matched with the creedmore, similer capacity,

.358 Norma and 9.3x64 are pretty close to the .375 H&H.
Click to expand...
 
Sir Plus said:
The obvious 6.5 Creed - 6.5x55
Also there’s a bunch of cool 9.3 chamberings in Europe that I don’t think have a NA equivalent. Maybe 338 Win Mag
Click to expand...

6.5x55 is closer to .260 Rem than 6.5Creedmore

9.3x62 - 35 Whelan
9.3x57 - 358 Winchester
 
Last edited:
loosely comparable in terms of function AND popularity, this is what you'd run into with other hunters in the woods compared to NA for similar hunts;

(redneck caliber) 30-30 WIN // 7.62x39
(lightweight) 243 WIN // 6.5x55
(lightweight) 6.5 CREEDMORE // 6.5x55
(middle weight general purpose) 270 WIN // 7x57
(middle weight general purpose) 308 WIN // 8x57
(middle weight general purpose) 30-06 // 7x64
(laser beam) 7mmRemMAG // 270 WSM (yes Europeans have interestingly heavily adopted the 270 WSM especially in France!)I don't mean to cheat here, the .270 WSM has now become more of European then NA cartridge in my book!
(heavy weight) 300 WIN MAG // 9.3x62
(heavy weight) 45-70 // 9.3x74R
(death star) 338 WIN MAG // 300 Norma
 
Last edited:
jethunter said:
6.5x55 is closer to .260 Rem than 6.5Creedmore

9.3x62 - 35 Whelan
9.3x57 - 358 Winchester
Click to expand...

This be mostly on, though the 9.3x57 has the advantage of tossing 270-286+ gr boolits in the bolt rifles they be chambered in. The 358 Win being chambered in shorter actions is best suited to projectiles in the 200-250 gr range. The shorter neck of the 358 hinders its' use with the heavy projectiles above 250 gr too boot. Both the 9.3x57 & 6.5 Swede cartridges are the ones I prefer as they normally run at lower factory pressures than the 308 Win based cartridges.

As fer the Whelly/9.3 comparo, ye can't go wrong with either one in my book. ;)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom