New lightweight mountain rifle, with a heavy side of Grizz. Debate starter.

[Ardent]

I have my Satterlee custom titanium Mauser action delivery soonish it appears, and I have a serious dilemma. I'm a solid fan of the 7x57 having used it here and abroad, and have taken game over 1,500lbs with it with really very few complaints. If I have one, I've noticed on truly big stuff response is sluggish, as in they slowly walk away and tip over twenty to a hundred yards into bush, I've seen this same effect several times- animals almost in a trance, eye wide, and sauntering off until they tip. Also have seen it's effect on Moose and Caribou, both convincing.

Now this performance from a hunting perspective is great. I do want to ask perhaps more of the rifle, and use it for Grizzly duty both on the north coast, where the all titanium construction earns its keep in being impervious to corrosion, and elsewhere in northern BC working where a light trim rifle is pleasant. This has me doubting the 7x57, and eyeing the 9.5x57 (yep 9.5). I am a fan of all things .375, with far too many components on the shelf therefore. My question to you the .358 Win, 9.3x57, and so on crowd is does the bigger, though not actually big bullet REALLY improve terminal effects over a high quality 7mm bullet that already penetrates like a train.

I am admittedly completely unversed in the subject of mild, medium bore cartridge effectiveness, as my medium bore loads have always been magnum. I did load a schwak of light loaded .375 H&H rounds for culling in Zim and performance honestly wasn't great. They worked swell but effectiveness was odds on identical to 7x57 and .30-06, and inferior to .300 mag class as witnessed over the course of much shooting. I'm 60% of the way to the 7x57 and shooting the crud out of it to know it like I enjoy knowing a rifle of mine, but I'll always wonder if I'm giving anything up passing on the 9.5. There is that neat, niche thing about the 9.5x57 MS (perhaps it should have been called .375 Westley Richards, they developed it for MS), and I'll admit that has allure. So does essentially only ever stocking one bore diameter.

I'd suspect the 9.5x57 with the smidge of improvement that can be done to the case with a custom reamer would push a 235gr TSX to 2,400 or 2,450, and hopefully a 250gr TTSX to 2,350+. What I'm wondering is what the difference is on a pissed off coastal grizzly sow, between it and a 175gr 7x57, will the trajectory loss up top in the mountains on goats and sheep vs lighter bullet 7mm loads be worth the arguable gains on the bears? Now those are debate starting words. There's something ###y about a very lightweight magazine .375 small case rifle in my eyes, it's irking me. The action is intermediate, it's the only titanium he makes, so it will be a x57 case. Yes, WSMs, 284 cases and all that but naw, I'm good, x57 based and never been an 8mm guy.

 

[bearkilr]

Here comes another 9.3x62 fanboy thread, regardless of the data and platform you posted.

The 9.5x57 sounds cool, go with that one, especially since it's a unique rifle.

 

[Ardent]

It's interesting to me too, and thinking with the advent of respectable BC monos it could well provide the reach I'd need the odd time. A 6lb'ish .375 bore all weather carbine is just tempting- even if the 7x57 makes arguably more sense.

 

[jeff270]

I think you should carry a bear gun in bear country.
Stainless .375 Ruger ; it's cheap short and handy.
Perfect for bear defense
5 lbs 7x57, perfect mountain rifle.

 

[bearkilr]

It's interesting to me too, and thinking with the advent of respectable BC monos it could well provide the reach I'd need the odd time. A 6lb'ish .375 bore all weather carbine is just tempting- even if the 7x57 makes arguably more sense.

The 7x57 is a great caliber, no doubt, but in all reality you're stuck with bullets that max out at 175 gr. The slow medium bores are actually pretty impressive in their terminal performance. They really do perform better on game than their numbers would indicate and as much as I joke about the 9.3x62, it's the perfect example of this. I've witnessed dozens of animals fall to a variety of calibers and quite frankly don't buy into the hyper velocity "bang flop" experience. Many of these animals were taken by European hunters and they have a tendency to use what North Americans would consider big bores; 9.3x62,9.3x64,375 H&H,etc.
I've always had a tendency to favor stout, heavy for caliber bullets over trajectory and BC. I still enjoy shooting quick cartridges, but I tend to limit game size to a smaller minimum than most.

 

[Ardent]

I think you should carry a bear gun in bear country.
Stainless .375 Ruger ; it's cheap short and handy.
Perfect for bear defense
5 lbs 7x57, perfect mountain rifle.

Thanks but I do, and have plenty. We have new work on the North Coast BC looks like, and quite frankly carrying my 9lb .375 (it'll be an H&H, not a Ruger ) where we have to go gets old. Grizzlies aren't just down on the coast either. Very familiar with toothy and clawed things and very sure I want to double duty this gun. So please let's keep it between the lines of the thread if possible.

 

[Ardent]

The 7x57 is a great caliber, no doubt, but in all reality you're stuck with bullets that max out at 175 gr. The slow medium bores are actually pretty impressive in their terminal performance. They really do perform better on game than their numbers would indicate and as much as I joke about the 9.3x62, it's the perfect example of this. I've witnessed dozens of animals fall to a variety of calibers and quite frankly don't buy into the hyper velocity "bang flop" experience. Many of these animals were taken by European hunters and they have a tendency to use what North Americans would consider big bores; 9.3x62,9.3x64,375 H&H,etc.
I've always had a tendency to favor stout, heavy for caliber bullets over trajectory and BC. I still enjoy shooting quick cartridges, but I tend to limit game size to a smaller minimum than most.

You're certainly at the top of the q on guys to ask on euro-recipe cartridge performance, so appreciate this and duly noted.

 

[Neilm]

That sluggish performance sounds like what I have experienced with Barnes bullets. Shoot a partition or A frame or accubond and the animal knows its hit. You hear a reassuring "thwack" and the animal using go down where they are standing.

Neil

 

[Ardent]

Unfortunately I've seen it with both soft cup and cores, and the TSX, literally both extremes. When the animals get big enough heart hits with 7x57 class cartridges can be pretty underwhelming, lethal, but sluggish as you put it very well. At least to a guy who uses .375 H&H a lot. The only big animal bang flop I had with the 7x57 was this past year's moose with a 160gr TSX, big BC bull- but moose are "soft" for their weight. What I'd be after is a 6lb package that delivers admirable lethality on good but far from perfect hits, with a large magazine capacity. 9.5x57 is a curious and interesting thing.

 

[Longwalker]

Your question about the difference between the effect of a mild medium bore vs the 7x57 is something I have a small amount of experience with.

I hunt with a 7x57 Brno 22F quite a bit and also with a Merkel 7x57r and a Krieghoff 7x57r, and just traded away a 7x57 Ruger #1. It is difficult to find a better penetrating bullet from a light rifle than a 175 or 160 grain from a 7x57. Results are not spectacular, but are efficient and predictable just like you described.

I have also hunted quite a lot with a .35 Whelen and some with a .356 Winchester. Mostly 250 grain bullets. My brother uses a .358 win and a 9.3x62 and a down loaded .375 Ruger. (I have no experience with the 9.5x57, but I do have a 9x57 that I have not hunted with yet). If you are comparing shots through the ribs broadside on reasonably large and kinda tough critters like elk, in my experience there is actually no noticable difference between the mediums and a 7x57. I think any difference in performance that you could observe between a 7x57 and a medium bore will involve heavy bones.

Hit the point of the shoulder, with that big dense humerus bone and scapula joint in the way, and the advantage goes clearly to the bigger heavier bullets. More likely to make it through without deflecting or fragmenting. Another challenge is oncoming shots, where a slightly off centre shot to chest can sometimes deflect, with a bullet skipping along the outside of the ribs instead of penetrating the vitals. Bigger, heavier bullets are just a wee bit less likely to be deflected by chest bones in that situation.

I don't take rear angling shots on big critters, but I did have to learn that lesson the hard way. To my shame I once lost an elk that I shot at an angle from the rear, and the 225gr. Nosler Ballistic tip .358 cal bullet did not penetrate through the rumen to the vitals. No big bones were hit, but the rumen stopped the bullet. A 7x57 175 gr at about the same speed just might have made it through.

So, it comes down to personal preference. If my travels and hunts took me into frequent contact with grizzlies, the possibility of actually having to put a bullet into the heavy shoulder bone or oncoming chest of a "pissed off coastal grizzly sow" would tip my choice toward bigger heavier bullets. But a 7x57 with good bullets will kill just as quickly as a medium bore in any but the most extreme and unusual situation. So to sum it all up, I'd likely pick the 7x57 and enjoy the flatter trajectory and lighter recoil in the mountains while hunting sheep or goats, and not feel under armed if I wanted or needed to shoot a bear.

But I really understand "There's something ###y about a very lightweight magazine .375 small case rifle in my eyes" That's why I'm playing with a 9x57 right now. I like the idea of a 250 grain .358 cal bullet at 2300, and a rare chambering in a a nice old German small ring Mauser...

Just do it. You'll always wonder otherwise!

 

[anglia2]

I thought I was the only one ! Over the years I've thought along the same lines as you . The 9.5X57 has always intrigued me , unfortunately , Ive never built one .
I have , however , used a 9.3X57 for a number of years . At first I used the 270 gr Speers and the traditional 286 gr RNs ( Privi ) but over the last few years I switched to the Norma 232 Oryx bonded core bullets . They don't shoot as flat as a 270 lol , but with a 150 yard zero , I have no problem out to about 250 trajectory wise , but IMHO , 200 yards is about as far as I would shoot at anything really large . After a few moose and one elk , I have to say I'm a big fan of the Norma bullets . Three animals isn't much experience to go on I know , but all three went down within 20 yards and showed immediate reaction when hit . All were within 150 yards , and there was complete penetration on all three , with the bullets under the skin on the offside . I have no complaints .
The 9.5 you're planning would have a lot more choice in bullets and if pushed to the velocities you've mentioned , would shoot flatter than my 9.3 . I think it would make a perfect rifle for what you have in mind . I hope you do build it and I'm looking forward to seeing it as well as hearing how it performs . Good luck and happy building .

 

[todbartell]

300 short mag with power points

 

[Ardent]

Great post Longwalker, thanks for that. Indeed I've found the 7x57 to be just as you've described it. For the better part of a decade I hunted with only a .375 H&H less for borrowed rifles, and admittedly I look for too much from the standard "sensible" chamberings as a result. Considered building a 6 1/2lb .375 H&H and still might (on an M70).

I think perhaps try the 9.5x57, as what do I have to lose? It's a pricey project a barrel's the cheapest part, can always change to 7x57, and the 7x57 is old territory. Might as well learn something new.

 

[sgt.rock]

I think you should carry a bear gun in bear country.
Stainless .375 Ruger ; it's cheap short and handy.
Perfect for bear defense
5 lbs 7x57, perfect mountain rifle.

^^^^THIS^^^^^^ I almost NEVER leave the house without my Ruger Alaskan. EVERY single other rifle I own unfortunately is gathering a serious layer of dust. I see your dilemma, but asking a short action gun to be a Dangerous game gun is asking for trouble. (in my humble opinion anyhow).
I was in the Yukon last year (I never hunted grizz , just moose, but my partners BOTH had Grizz tags with them. I was eating supper, when I heard a shot ring out about 20 YARDS away from me........scared the shyte out of me. I didn't hear any warning before the shot. My friend put a .300win mag round (with 180gr TTSX bullets) into a Grizz he saw stalking the camp. The bear squeeled, and turned around , sauntering off. When a second shot was put in the Grizz because he was still in sight, he turned right towards us and started running. The third shot dropped him. I was literally in shock. It was my gun, with my stiff loads that he used (it was in sight, layed against the quad, and he just grabbed it) , yet the bear took 3 shots to do it.
I know the ammo was churning out quite a few ft-lbs of energy, and all shots were within 40 yards. Grizzly Bears just do not have an email account to tell them they are dead. They die when they are ready. Black bears drop quickly, and are not that tough. Grizzly bears seem like a different species altogether, as their toughness is renouned.
After reading your post, I immediately thought back to the incident, and realized that a 7x57 would have resulted in at least a good mauling. (most likely worse) Get the .375 and never look back. Just because Karamojo Bell killed 1000 elephants with a 7x57 doesn't mean it is the best tool for the job. You can drive a nail into wood with a rock , but a hammer is much better. Use the right tool for the job and you'll be back here showing us pictures of the nice brown rug you have.

 

[Ardent]

Guess I should have expected this, there's no way to keep this between the lines. I will be building this as a dual purpose bear and mountain rifle, if there's one thing I've found lacking in the .375 H&H I carry more days of the month than not it's walking 20kms with it. Unfortunately the understanding here is quads and short walks, this is a rifle for days where you're literally going all day, day after day. As much as I love my .375 H&Hs they have no place here unless I build a 6 1/2lb .375 H&H, which I'm considering. This build will be for a long walking, and there is admittedly a trade off in taking a lighter chambering. Anyone who's done a 30km day in the mountains knows why, and the trade off is worth it.

I'll have 100lbs on my back at times of crap that's not even mine, I'll need to shave everything off the rifle I can, a .375 Imposter isn't even on the radar. I've hunted Grizz and spookier things, I'm familiar with their tenacity, and I'm no stranger to stopping chamberings up to .505 Gibbs. However in the terms of this compromise, we're looking at 7x57 vs .375 small case.

 

[Ardent]

300 short mag with power points

Power Points make the difference admittedly.

I thought I was the only one ! Over the years I've thought along the same lines as you . The 9.5X57 has always intrigued me , unfortunately , Ive never built one .
I have , however , used a 9.3X57 for a number of years . At first I used the 270 gr Speers and the traditional 286 gr RNs ( Privi ) but over the last few years I switched to the Norma 232 Oryx bonded core bullets . They don't shoot as flat as a 270 lol , but with a 150 yard zero , I have no problem out to about 250 trajectory wise , but IMHO , 200 yards is about as far as I would shoot at anything really large . After a few moose and one elk , I have to say I'm a big fan of the Norma bullets . Three animals isn't much experience to go on I know , but all three went down within 20 yards and showed immediate reaction when hit . All were within 150 yards , and there was complete penetration on all three , with the bullets under the skin on the offside . I have no complaints .
The 9.5 you're planning would have a lot more choice in bullets and if pushed to the velocities you've mentioned , would shoot flatter than my 9.3 . I think it would make a perfect rifle for what you have in mind . I hope you do build it and I'm looking forward to seeing it as well as hearing how it performs . Good luck and happy building .

Thanks for this, very good info.

 

[c-fbmi]

I read and understand your parameters Angus, and may I suggest a 35-284 or 375-284..........both of these with a good BC bullet will give you 300+ mtrs and with heavy duty bullets would give you more than a sporting chance at deterring an aggressive grizzly. Had a sling wing driver buddy in the Yukon that loved his lightweight 35-284 and said he never found it lacking for anything using 225 gn Parts. I have exactly the same opinion of my little Mod 7 KS 350 RM using 225 ABs. I also built a little 18" barreled 375-350 RM on a short Ruger, that rifle was amazing and gave me 2700 fps with 270 gn Win power points. Anything on the 284 case is going to come very close to that and still work with your action and bolt face.

I also hear you when it comes to weight, 30 Kms, backpacks and mountains.........been there, done that more than a few times and ounces really do matter by the end of the day...........

I know you will probably whittle a nice piece of wood out for this rifle, but may I also suggest you invest in a Brown Precision Kevlar stock.........they are pricey but there is nothing lighter or tougher out there for those rifles you are going to be packing mile after mile and abusing in the wet weather and tough terrain. And you are still young enough to get your value out of it, unlike me.........too soon old, too late financially set, but #1 son sure does love it for sheep and goats.

 

[brybenn]

I like dougs suggestion. But if you must stay on a 57 personally I'd go 9.3x57. I've never shot a grizzly but I don't think I'd feel under gunned with a short 9.3. A short 7 I think id always be walking with doubts

 

[Ardent]

I had a coghlans fork / knife / spoon that snapped together I used to carry, then I realized that's quite a few unnecessary ounces. Bought a titanium spork, and along with the knife all I carried, then I wondered why I'm not carrying a plastic fork and spoon. Went to that. You've been there when you're contemplating if you really need underwear. The .375 Imposter suggestions provide very good levity. I'll look into the .284 case again. It's the only case I considered aside from the x57. Might allow a little seating out relative to the x57 too, gaining a smidge of capacity.

 

[c-fbmi]

I quit the underwear many years ago..........just didn't need the extra weight, rather have a couple extra pairs of socks..........went to Ti cookware and coffee/water cup and never did carry a fork, just a large plastic spoon and the hunting knives I had to have anyway.