Quote:

---

But if it didn't exist in the past, then there is no nostalgia and there is no history. Then it's just a mistake.

---

Quote:

---

I think the "Rigby" ID is that of the cartridges loaded with the 140gr bullet at higher velocity than the standard 7X57
It was Rigby's loading for their rifles sighted to that load.
Bell famously used the military ammunition for elephant so it would seem that, if there was any difference in POI, he compensated for that.

---

Rigby’s 1924 catalog showed two models of their .275 rifles: Their No.1 was sighted for the standard 7x57 / 7mm Mauser load with 175 gr bullets, while their No.2 was sighted for the 140 gr High Velocity load. The sighting seems to be the only difference. So Bell may have used the No.1 model.
BTW, that catalog listed a No.4 model in .350 Magnum and a No.5 in .416 “Big Game” too. None of the cartridges were called “Rigby” by them.

Quote:

---

It's more accurate than using "caliber" for "cartridge."

---

Quote:

---

It is interesting the Rigby literature claim of 3000'/sec for their .275HV in the Rigby Mauser Model #2 rifle. Perhaps a bit of "artistic license" as to the claimed muzzle velocity?

Other sources like John Taylor give a speed of 2750'/sec and Cartridges of the World attributed 2800'/sec.

Certainly the average hunter/shooter back in the day did not have access to any kind of chronograph, but hey, catalog speed sounded good and maybe led to spirited campfire debate?

One of these days I may be lucky enough to come across a vintage box of Kynoch .275 HV ammo and I will certainly sacrifice 3 rounds to my LabRadar chronograph and my original 1936 Rigby "Sighted For High Velocity .275 Bore Cartridge" rifle.

Personally, given the powders available in the 1920's & 1930's, I'm betting closer to the 2750-2800 number…..

- Mike

---

Quote:

---

Easily explained by rifle makers using 30 inch barrels in test rifles.

---

Quote:

---

Easily explained by rifle makers using 30 inch barrels in test rifles.

---

Quote:

---

Personally I'm not a velocity fanatic. Most of my handholds, I picked for accuracy not the highest velocity. Usually the sweet spot is achieved several loads before too high pressure starts to appear.

I wonder if some handloaders sacrifice accuracy for higher velocities.

If one wanted great velocity, different choices than a 7x57, 7x64 etc. A 7 mm STW perhaps? I believe there is a 7mm Nosler?

---

Quote:

---

classic would be 7 mm SE vom Hofe

---

Quote:

---

because they don't had the original 5780 mm long test barrel

---

Quote:

---

Quote:

---

Personally I'm not a velocity fanatic. Most of my handholds, I picked for accuracy not the highest velocity. Usually the sweet spot is achieved several loads before too high pressure starts to appear.

I wonder if some handloaders sacrifice accuracy for higher velocities.

If one wanted great velocity, different choices than a 7x57, 7x64 etc. A 7 mm STW perhaps? I believe there is a 7mm Nosler?

---

classic would be 7 mm SE vom Hofe

---

I agree 100%.

Quote:

---

Right then; for those of you that are interested, my restoration gunsmith/importer/good friend Steve Bertram www.bertramandco.com has come up with some original ".275 Bore Rigby Special High Velocity Rifle" cartridges.
When I get out of our "deep freeze' Winter here I will take my .275 Rigby Mauser out and test fire 3 shots over the LabRadar to tentatively settle the question of no kidding ".275 HV for Rigby" muzzle velocity in real life.

As soon as this is done I will certainly post the results.

Who wants to go in on a betting Calcutta as to actual average muzzle velocity? (just kidding, too hard to deliver a bottle of Single Malt to the winner)

- Mike

---

Quote:

---

Not sure a session with the chronograph will take into account a century of deterioration of those early powders, and the associated drop in velocity, but still an interesting exercise for sure.

I'll guess 2725 fps, just to pick a number!
...provided you warm them up under your armpit first, Mike!

Pretty sure my local bottle-shop will take your credit-card over the phone, too.

---

Quote:

---

There is no mention of .275 Rigby in any of their catalogs - or by anyone else. The earliest reference is from an American gun writer in 1970.

---

Stoeger Catalog, 1939:




Full page image:

Quote:

---

It's more accurate than using "caliber" for "cartridge."

---

Quote:

---

Quote:

---

There is no mention of .275 Rigby in any of their catalogs - or by anyone else. The earliest reference is from an American gun writer in 1970.

---

Stoeger Catalog, 1939:




Full page image:

---

Quote:

---

Excellent post and some evidence.

Bloody Americans getting it wrong! Ha ha. Joke.

But this Stoegers Catalogue of 1939 shows some evidence of where the nomenclature came from.

---

Perhaps we 'bloody Americans' got it wrong twice?









The '.275 Rigby'/ 7mm Mauser 'High Velocity' designation reminds me of this:

Quote:

---

The 9.5x57 was known by both I believe. Or not?

Maybe these old USA catalogues reveal source of errors in naming?

---

The 9.5X57 MS has been marketed / referred to by several 'names' over the decades. Case, projectile, and overall dimensions of 9.5X57MS and .375RNE are identical.

Look at loading data from catalogs / references of the 1910s, 20s, 30s, however, and you'll notice that '9.5X57MS' and '.375RNE' have different powder loads and related ballistics.

Note the example previously posted (from an British ICI catalog) shows the MS with 45 grains Cordite, 43 grains for the RNE.

Other references:












Westley Richards, incidentally, also had their own 'express' variant:

Quote:

---

maybe kynoch download the .275 rigby for the use in hot climate

---

Quote:

---

Image below showing labelling of the lid end of the same old Rigby ammo box with ammunition referred to as .275 Mauser not .275 Rigby. Pity cartridge head-stamps can't be seen to confirm exactly what nomenclature was applied to the ammunition. I'm betting most likely 7x57 or in keeping with the age, 7mm Mauser.

---

Or this, for the 'Rigby No. 2' double rifle:

Quote:

---

So please explain what the difference is between the 275 Rigby and the 7x57 Mauser?

---

Quote:

---

Quote:

---

So please explain what the difference is between the 275 Rigby and the 7x57 Mauser?

---

Case wise, dimensionally, there is no difference.
Brass, dies, etc. - all the same.
The “Rigby” moniker is derived from their specific loading of the same cartridge.
The 275 Rigby was loaded with a lighter bullet and higher velocity than the standard 7X57 Mauser.
What was it, 140gr. Bullet for the Rigby and 170 something for the standard Mauser cartridge?

---

Quote:

---

In regards the heavier bullet loading for the 7x57/7mm Mauser/.275 cartridges, there is some confusion in this area too. Bell and Corbett were great exponents of the .275 cartridge in what ever moniker it may have been and in both their cases it is often said they used the 175gr bullet. Kynoch however used 173gr bullets in their heavy 7mm loading. Most of the German loadings were probably with the 175gr bullet but I would have thought Bell at least would have been using Kynoch ammunition. I think even he himself mentions somewhere in his writing his 7mm rifle ammunition with 175gr bullets.

---

Quote:

---

Rifles engraved as Rigby .275 Bore, effectively the same thing.

What does Kynoch ammo boxes say?

---

Quote:

---

Quote:

---

Quote:

---

There is no mention of .275 Rigby in any of their catalogs - or by anyone else. The earliest reference is from an American gun writer in 1970. . . .

Bloody Americans getting it wrong! Ha ha. Joke.

But this Stoegers Catalogue of 1939 shows some evidence of where the nomenclature came from.

---

Not so fast. Who mis-labeled it from metric in the first place? ;^]

Quote:

---

The fact remains that the 7x57 Mauser is a fabulous cartridge, very balanced and superbly efficient.

---