Found this page from a pamphlet posted on another gun board. Thought it was interesting since it illustrated a 6.8x57 cartridge.
Too bad the ownder did not scan it in high res.
First time I have seen that image in colour.
Thanks for sharing this !
Thanks for posting, downloading provides a large clear (SCANNED) image.
Edited to emphasize SCANNED :-)
Brain emphasis here should be on “scanned”…
Here are a couple of pictures of the Model 1907 in 6,8x57 held in the British National Firearms Centre (previously the Pattern Room) in Leeds;
They also have a k98 from Mauser Oberdorf in the calibre.
There are those who say that them there Americans copied the two cartridges (6,8x57 and 6,8x60) after the Great War and called it .270 Win.
I believe those got the story right. :-)
To be honest, my impression is that the Americans do not at all bother what others might have invented.
If they had, for example, ever looked at the French 7.5 x 54, they would not have taken the trouble to develop the .30 Light Rifle, aka 7.62 x 51 NATO.
The 6.5 mm Creedmoor would never had been “developed” if anyone had looked into the ballistics of the 6.5 x 55 Swedish cartridge.
I am sorry to say, they do not copy. They consider it unthinkable that others might have had smart ideas earlier.
Well, not speaking of cartridges but other stuff definately was copied…
The Pattern room version looks like a Small Ring Receiver…not the Type 1 G98 Large Ring receiver.
Mauser was usedto prepare “trial of Concept” rifles in several different receiver types ( Large ring, small ring, standard receiver, intermediate receiver) for valuation by customers. Only once the final design was settled was the contract sealed ( same thing happened with the 1914 Russian Cav. Carbine ( never completed).
As Pattern Room got examples either directly, or after WWI and II by sanctioned “souveniring” ( called “research”).
The rifle pictured could also have been an ammunition test rifle for DWM or Polte.
Would like to know the accession and provenance details.
P s, does anyone have DWM drawings with specs for the cartridge? I already have mocked up a dummy, but need chambering details to build a 6,8x57 Short Rifle/ Type 1 Cavalry Carbine ( looks like a Turk 1908 or an Argy 1909…
I have the round, if anyone needs measurements.
My understanding of the development of the .270 W.C.F. was / is that it was made simply by necking down the Cal…30 M-1906.
In fact the first documented .270 W.C.F.'s are .30-06 cases headstamped
" W.R.A.CO. (over) 18".
Here are two with this headstamp. the .270 W.C.F. above a Cal. .30 M-1906.
The .270 has a domed brass primer while the 06 has a ring-crimped, flat brass primer.
As shown in the ERCA Dataviewer (Woodin Lab):
This is the DWM version depicted in the diagrams above. There are Chinese, FN and G.Roth versions of the 6.8x57 and they all vary somewhat. Bill Woodin did a useful article on the 6.8mm Chinese variations. - see IAA 423 P28.
Actually they did look at the French 7.5. A local gun writer / editor had a bunch of Phil Sharpe’s notes / memorabilia (Sharpe was a Army Ordnance officer & one of the first into the German ammunition plants at war’s end, among other things.) and within was a study by the US military of the 7.5 French round. He went on to write an editorial that in fact the US did copy the Cal. .30 light rifle from the French 7.5.
Another collector told me about this article & upon contacting both the writer and Ret. Col. Frank Hackley I was told by Frank that it is standard practice for the U.S. to try to obtain and test and report on any and all foreign ammunition it can get it’s hand’s on.
I can’t speak on the Swedish / Creedmoor point but I expect your 100% correct on that.
I often have people bad mouth me when I say there was no reason for either the 6.5 Creedmore or the .300 Blackot to have even been developed.
The 6.5 Swedish and the .300 Savage are two of the greatest cartridges!
I do not follow the crowd toward the “latest and greatest” fad!
Pete, was the .280 Remington not also developed from the .30-06?
I have whitnessed several near-fisticuff arguments over which of those two cartridges is better.
Jack the 1st & 2nd headstamps used by Remington in .280 production are below.
The left example was recalled and most all were destroyed for fear of lawsuits. Only a very few now exist. (And a few also exist as a factory dummies with a holed nickel primer cup & case) The right example was short lived.
The British were the same, with a healthy habit of “acquiring” anything interesting, taking it apart and writing up an assessment of its virtues … or otherwise. When I’m digging around in libraries or archives I’m constantly surprised at what light-fingered but inquisitive folk happened across and brought home … and then there’s all the BIOS stuff.
Maybe this is of help. But I wonder why it is a 60mm case here.
Two versions were offered, a 6,8x57 and a 6,8x60; the latter to better support the projectile: COAL was the same…82mm.
( listed in the 3 volume book on cartridges…Woodin et al.)
The final manufacture was 6,8x 57, by DWM and others, and by Chinese Arsenals from 1912 to about the Mid 20s, when phased out following the 1915-16 adoption of a 7,9 version of the 1907, ( named Type 4).
Thanks for the excellent DWM design…will go well for both CNC
Projectile manufacture, and Case dies and chamber reamer Designs modified for 57mm version (neck shortened)
PS, strange that the designs are dated 1927 ??? Redrafted for archive purposes?