I don't think the 154gr RN are available anymore. Lots of companies are dropping the RN bullet in all but the most classic forms like 30cal 220gr and 7mm 175gr.
Mine is a ZH 204. No extra bbl.
Gonna use for grouse and deer combo hunts.
7x57
- Thread starter Cintax
- Start date
I don't think the 154gr RN are available anymore. Lots of companies are dropping the RN bullet in all but the most classic forms like 30cal 220gr and 7mm 175gr.
Mine is a ZH 204. No extra bbl.
Gonna use for grouse and deer combo hunts.
Johnn Peterson
CGN Ultra frequent flyer
- Location
- Chemainus B.C.
I don't think the 154gr RN are available anymore. Lots of companies are dropping the RN bullet in all but the most classic forms like 30cal 220gr and 7mm 175gr.
Mine is a ZH 204. No extra bbl.
Looks good. I've made mention of this in a thread a while back but my first 'look' at this type of combo gun came when I stopped in for a one day visit/hunt with my ex brother in law in the B.C. interior. I was headed up for a Moose hunt and had stopped in for a usual visit on my way through. We did a bit of shooting at his place and went for the next morning as it was blowing and raining, we went for a 'drive'. We stopped for a ditch chicken and after he potted that with his combo gun, a two point bolted near by and he got that as well. Now, I needed one of those combo guns. It comes in handy here on the 'wet coast' during days of similar weather conditions, walking old logging skid roads, especially in river bottem areas.The extra set of 12ga. OU barrels came as part of the deal for the gun. Never paid much attention to the 154gr Hornady RN but I have a box and a half that I've set aside for use in the Brno.
By the time they're gone, I may be as well.
Here is my "In Hand" take on the Zastava M70 Mannlicher... (note, this is my first Zastava centerfire, although I do have two rimfires)... I have yet to fire this rifle. Fit and finish are excellent, good bluing and nice satin finish on the wood... The color of the wood is too light for my taste, but I knew that I would be doing stock work anyway, so that didn't bother me... the stock does have nice grain. The action is smooth and crisp... the trigger (snap cap only) feels nice, light"ish", clean break, just a tad of travel, but not disconcerting... she'll be a "knock-out" when I'm done with her... and the fact that she's 7X57 only makes her better.
Sounds very interesting, looking forward to future updates..
That Santa Barbara is every bit as good quality as the Zastava. Maybe even better.
It's easy to tell that you're new to this.
You need to understand, back in the days when the 7x57 and its brethren were designed, they were just getting out of the black powder era.
The designers, still had bigger is better syndrome. It didn't take them very long to figure out that heavy bullets needed a very quick twist rate.
In the case of the 7x57, it was first chambered in Model 93 and Model 95 Mausers. Its versatility and accuracy were noticed right away.
It was so effective, that when the US came up against them in Cuba, they knew they were outgunned. Which led to the development of the 30-06.
Long heavy bullets were the rage back then. The reason for this was penetration.
Even out of the old 93/95 Mausers, the 175 grain factory bullets will go through both sides of a moose as well as any of the newer offerings.
I don't think you really realize the potential of that cartridge. It will do anything the 30-06 will do and maybe be a bit easier on your shoulder.
If you're having accuracy issues with that Santa Barbara, it likely needs to be glass bedded and the barrel free floated.
Also, when was the last time the copper fouling was cleaned out of the bore?????
That scope mounting job sounds a bit mickey mouse at best. Is everything tight???? Is it all level???
That rifle, is worth cleaning up the stock on and bedding it properly. It may never be a tack driver but it will definitely keep its point of impact within 2 minutes of angle at 100+ meters.
You need to find a mentor close by that can help you with this rifle.
Looking back, I should have been so lucky to start with such a potential gem.
I jus talked to a friend about his SB in 7x57.
He shoots Hornady 140 grain bullets. He has for 25 years. He has a safe full of rifles but he uses the old SB exclusively when it's an important hunt.
The Brazilian 1908, was a bird of its own. It was specifically designed to shoot 139 grain bullets at 2900 feet per second, form a 29 inch barrel.
They used a ball type powder, rather than extruded starting around 1935.
49.0grains of W760 (H414) over a magnum large rifle primer will give you exactly that velocity out of a 29 inch bbl. and according to the Lyman manual, will only develop around 43,000 psi.
This load is also safe in 93/95 actions. Lyman used a 95 action to develop it.
This is a very efficient load and cartridge. It is an extremely accurate combination, especially out of a rifle with a decent bore.
So I took the M1000 out to the range yesterday to sight it in after adjusting the scope, mounts and rings. I am using 140gr PSP Remington Core-Lokt 7x57. Velocity is specified to be 2660 fps. The bullet is a pointed soft-point. The gun was shot from a bench and supported. All shots were fired using 2.5 magnification from my 1.5-4.5x20 Bushnell Scopechief VI.
There are three groupings on this target and for these groupings the point of aim was always the center of the target. The first group was the initial sight in at 25 yards. I took one shot with the scope centered on the middle of the target. The result was the hole marked 1. I then adjusted the cross-hairs to be about on that point and fired a second shot. The result was the hole marked 2. Holes 3 and 4 are the follow up shots after adjusting the scope a bit right. I then moved the target out to 80 yards and took three shots which are labeled as 'Group 2'. I wasn't overly happy with the group and I decided to adjust the scope to bring the group a bit right. The final group was after all adjustments made; two consecutive shots resulting in touching holes. As I said earlier, I shot using only 2.5 magnification so at that range there was a bit of guessing on how centered the cross-hair was on the target.
Here is the target entirely.
Here is a photo of the scope and how it ended up being mounted on the M1000. Note the front scope base is a piece of rail drilled for M70 rear base (same as Mauser 98 front base). You can also see the pop can shims poking out a bit.
Here is a photo of the M1000 alongside my Winchester M72 chambered in 22 S/L/LR.
There are three groupings on this target and for these groupings the point of aim was always the center of the target. The first group was the initial sight in at 25 yards. I took one shot with the scope centered on the middle of the target. The result was the hole marked 1. I then adjusted the cross-hairs to be about on that point and fired a second shot. The result was the hole marked 2. Holes 3 and 4 are the follow up shots after adjusting the scope a bit right. I then moved the target out to 80 yards and took three shots which are labeled as 'Group 2'. I wasn't overly happy with the group and I decided to adjust the scope to bring the group a bit right. The final group was after all adjustments made; two consecutive shots resulting in touching holes. As I said earlier, I shot using only 2.5 magnification so at that range there was a bit of guessing on how centered the cross-hair was on the target.
Here is the target entirely.
Here is a photo of the scope and how it ended up being mounted on the M1000. Note the front scope base is a piece of rail drilled for M70 rear base (same as Mauser 98 front base). You can also see the pop can shims poking out a bit.
Here is a photo of the M1000 alongside my Winchester M72 chambered in 22 S/L/LR.
Last edited:
Thank you for this response. The person who I did my CFSC and Hunter's Education with has been mentoring me a bit as I have been going along. He gave me a hand with the scope and in the end, it seems to be level and working. On the first range trip; the scope moved in the rings from the recoil so I was extra careful to make sure that everything was tight for the second trip. I used loc-tite on all of the screws as well. It might be a bit mickey mouse but I think I will have to make the best of it all until I find a better solution for the scope base problem.
When I got this firearm there was a bit of copper fouling in the barrel. I cleaned it well and the bore is as shiny as a new gun now. Like with all of my guns; I clean it every time I shoot it.
My mentor of sorts has been kind enough to offer me use of his reloading bench and some help with load development. I will just need to buy some 7x57 dies and all the components. I am excited about this prospect as it adds a new dimension to the hobby.
In the future, I would like to free float the barrel, bed the action and fix up the stock a bit. I want to cut that tip from the stock and either round out the stock or add an ebony tip. I'd also like to refinish the stock.
I think this gun has quite a bit of potential and out of the box it seems to be a good shooter.
That is a decent rifle and the scope set up looks just fine.
Any rifle that will shoot factory ammo that well, is a real jewel.
Keep it. Don't trade it off. Lots of people on this site and others, pay a lot of dollars to get a rifle that shoots that well.
To me, it looks like you're good to go.
Now all you need to do is practice, practice and practice some more.
Off hand, standing especially. I see so many folks these days that can't even hit a 15 cm target at 50m from a standing position.
Try using a monopod. It also acts as a good walking stick.
Any rifle that will shoot factory ammo that well, is a real jewel.
Keep it. Don't trade it off. Lots of people on this site and others, pay a lot of dollars to get a rifle that shoots that well.
To me, it looks like you're good to go.
Now all you need to do is practice, practice and practice some more.
Off hand, standing especially. I see so many folks these days that can't even hit a 15 cm target at 50m from a standing position.
Try using a monopod. It also acts as a good walking stick.
Thank you for your kind words. I know she isn't a looker but she shoots well enough and that is what matters. My buddy has already offered me a few hundred for it which is quite a margin considering I got it from a co-worker for a cup of coffee and a box of .270 WIN. I don't think I'd ever sell it but I would like to clean it up a bit.
I really like the trigger on this rifle. If you slowly pull it and there is some slack but then you feel the trigger sort click into place, from that point, the lightest pressure and it releases the firing pin. Some people might not like it this way but I like the tactile feeling of knowing that the slightest squeeze and the round is away.
I think I might buy some dummy rounds and practice mounting the firearm, acquiring the target and squeezing the trigger. If I can get the 'shot' off without the cross-hairs moving from the target then I will be good to go I think. I will also begin practicing offhand at the range so that I am better prepared for an actual hunting scenario.
Practicing shooting with live ammunition is reason enough to reload I think. Remington Core-Lokt aren't super expensive at $26.99 but then again, that isn't cheap either. Oh, well, you need to make brass somehow right?
BigUglyMan
CGN Ultra frequent flyer
- Location
- New Scotland
There's no danger is dryfiring the rifle. No need to buy dummy rounds.
Good to know! Thanks.
I took the rifle to the range last Tuesday (2013-08-06) where I shot this group. The top target is a three shot group at 100 yards. The bottom target has some scope adjustments (four shots) with a three shot group at 50 yards. Point of aim was always the center of the target.
I wish the 100 yard group had turned out better, but even a fine reticle on a 4.5 power scope leaves a lot of room for error in terms of centering the cross-hairs on the target.
Here is my setup.
Parameters are 140gr PSP Remington Core-Lokt 7x57. Velocity is specified to be 2660 fps. The bullet is a pointed soft-point. The gun was shot from a bench and supported using the above rig. All shots were fired at 4.5 magnification using my 1.5-4.5x20 Bushnell Scopechief VI.
I wish the 100 yard group had turned out better, but even a fine reticle on a 4.5 power scope leaves a lot of room for error in terms of centering the cross-hairs on the target.
Here is my setup.
Parameters are 140gr PSP Remington Core-Lokt 7x57. Velocity is specified to be 2660 fps. The bullet is a pointed soft-point. The gun was shot from a bench and supported using the above rig. All shots were fired at 4.5 magnification using my 1.5-4.5x20 Bushnell Scopechief VI.
Last edited:
That is a rather bold statement - why do you think so? Zastava has always built a good quality, robust action. I believe they are using old FN tooling. Santa Barbara mausers on the other hand were very entry level actions. A large number (most?) had alloy trigger guards and floorplates. I believe most (all?) were investment cast actions. IMO the Santa Barbara is a low end action. And yes, I have owned one - a .30-06 with a maple stock.
I must be lucky. Everything on mine is steel.
Parker-Hale are Santa-Barbara Mausers. Both Zastava and Santa Barbara ended up buying a part of FNH sporting rifle machineries. While Santa Barbara had heat treatment problems once, it's not a big part of their production which was affected by this. Both used modern steel to manufacture their actions. Both can claim FNH legacy.
Finishing on Santa Barbara and Zastava rifles was not always the best though. Especially when we speak of the wood. But the Yugo era is now behind Zastava.... and CNC machinery starts to slowly replace the old jigs and fixtures set-ups...
Also, OP, you should be able to put a year of manufacture of your rifle by carefully looking at the proofmarks and stamps.
Last edited:
Baribal - are you saying that Santa Barbara actions were not cast? I haven't unpacked my Mauser book since I moved so I am going from memory. Also, with respect to Yugoslavian era Zastava, I believe Interarms Mk.X was made by them and they seemed to be pretty decent. What about Whitworth, were they not Zastava?
