Talk:7×64mm

Correct dimensions
There seems to be some difference of opinion on the cartridge dimensions. I have several sources and I named the one I used previously from COTW. If you're going to change the data, please list your source. Otherwise I will correct it to match the published sources I have. In addition to COTW I have dimensions from Lee, Hornady, Handloaders Manual, and Custom cartridges (which is probably the most accurate of them all). In addition there are definitely multiple reamers for this cartridge with slightly varying dimensions. Arthurrh 06:49, 24 August 2007 (UTC)

7 x 64 edits
The 7 x 64 article needs to have references connected to the statements. Do you have some sources not listed in the article? It would be very helpful to list them, and especially to use the inline wiki-style references. Plus somehow we need to check all the sources on the dimensions and try to figure out which one(s) are correct. See the talk page there for more. Arthurrh 06:57, 24 August 2007 (UTC)


 * Thank you for your contributions to the 7 x64 article. As a European I can see for myself that many European hunters have 7 x 64 rifles and 7 x 65 R chambered break barrel rifles in actual field use. Reliable sales figures on cartridges are sadly hard to get in Europe (commercial secrecy?), but the fact that the 7 x 64 is offered by American ammunition manufactures says a lot about its commercial importance. Those manufacturers only seem to produce the commercially most important European cartridges. The dimensions in the drawing in the article must be quite correct since they are the official CIP dimensions giving them undisputable legal status in the 7 x 64 country of origin. CIP governs all technical things related to cartridges for a lot of European countries by law. It does not surprise me that data from SAAMI or ‘Cartridges of the world‘ deviates from CIP rulings. Lots of European hunters (in some countries legal arbitrary hunting licence exams have to be passed before you can even own let alone fire a hunting rifle) are aware of cartridge dimensional and maximum allowed pressure differences between CIP and SAAMI. controlled countries. Europeans even speak of “Delta L” problems when a perfectly CIP conform cut chamber will not properly function with (certain) factory loads from non CIP controlled countries like the US. An example of a possible “Delta L” problem source can be found in the section on the differences between 7 mm bores in Europe and the US, though lead cored 7 mm hunting bullets generally shoot satisfactory out of European CIP and US SAAMI conform 7 mm barrels. The same applies for US and German 8 mm bores. The 8 mm Remington Magnum bore dimensions also are slightly differing from the bore dimensions of German 8 mm cartridges. Francis Flinch 07:44, 24 August 2007 (UTC)


 * I will try to check what I can tonight. I suspect I can find a referenceable source for the dimensions. How did you get the CIP dimensions? If we can just reference that it would be good enough, it doesn't need to be online. Re the popularity, I don't doubt it. What we need is someone saying it's popular, it doesn't have to be actual sales figures, just articles from reliable sources talking about the popularity. I think we can make this into a very good article by polishing it up. I think we might add a small section about the difference between european and american chambers for example, since it definitely exists. Then we can work on the 9.3 x 64 article. Arthurrh 17:06, 24 August 2007 (UTC)


 * CIP dimensions (in metric values) can be extracted from official CIP cartridge and chambering drawings. Since you have to pay for that information and the fact that CIP information is copyrighted you will have to do with the technical dimension overview drawing in the article. It also occurred to me that in Wikipedia lots of European cartridges are non CIP conform termed. CIP terms cartridges of European origin as (lands bore diameter) x (case length) (other stuff) leading to CIP cartridge names like 6.5 x 55 SE, 7 x 64, 6.5 x 65 RWS, 8 x 57 IS, 6.5 x 47 Lapua, etc. This observation might lead to nasty reactions, so I do not feel called upon to correct this.


 * At http://www.wildundhund.de/r30/vc_content/bilder/firma438/Archiv_2005/052_057_patronenportrait_0605.pdf I just found an elaborate reference source on the 7 x 64 in German. It even states that until the late 1970-ties the 7 x 64 was the favourite bolt action rifle calibre in Germany. After that the .30-06 Springfield took over the number one position in Germany. In France (ban on (ex) military cartridges) the 7 x 64 is still the number one cartridge according to the “Wild und Hund” (Game and Hound – German hunting magazine) article. Francis Flinch 07:23, 25 August 2007 (UTC)

Wilhelm Brenneke
In addition, do you have enough background information on Wilhelm Brenneke to start working on an article? I'd be happy to help, but don't currently have a lot of info. I also don't think there is an article on Brenneke Gmbh. I do speak German if necessary to help decipher documents. I'm a bit rusty, but can plow my way through. And have you thought about joining the Wikipedia Firearms Project? You might enjoy it. There is a list of things that need to be done. Arthurrh 17:08, 24 August 2007 (UTC)


 * Google for "Wilhelm Brenneke" and short stories on the life and works of him (he also invented several bullet types) can be found on the internet in several languages. At http://www.lima-wiederladetechnik.de/Patronen/8x64S.htm a nice picture of Mr. Brennneke and his 8 x 64 S cartridge design (that Brenneke GmbH obviously tries to revive in Germany as an intermediate between the old German military 8 x 57 IS (commercially important) and 8 x 68 S (the only serious European alternative to the US .300, 8 mm and .338 magnums I am aware of) can be found. At http://www.brenneke.de/pdf/Imageprospekt_brenneke.pdf you find a Brenneke GmbH brochure in German/English/French. Francis Flinch 07:25, 25 August 2007 (UTC)

Removed "Brenneke" from the page name
Though being a Brenneke design, there never was or is no 7 x 64 mm Brenneke. CIP only knows a 7 x 64 without any further additions. The source for this confusion lies in the fact that Mr. Brenneke got the honor of the official addition of his name for designing the 6.5 x 64 Brenneke and 9.3 x 64 Brenneke cartridges. Things like this make cartridge nomenclature rather complicated, since it does not follow strictly logical rules. Francis Flinch (talk) 19:39, 26 November 2007 (UTC)

Dead link
During several automated bot runs the following external link was found to be unavailable. Please check if the link is in fact down and fix or remove it in that case!


 * http://www.cip-bp.org/index.php?id=tdcc-telechargement
 * In .223 Remington on 2011-05-20 21:28:33, Socket Error: 'getaddrinfo failed'
 * In 10mm Auto on 2011-05-23 02:08:47, Socket Error: 'getaddrinfo failed'
 * In .223 Remington on 2011-05-31 04:44:11, Socket Error: 'getaddrinfo failed'
 * In .325 WSM on 2011-05-31 12:36:32, Socket Error: 'getaddrinfo failed'
 * In 10mm Auto on 2011-06-01 01:40:56, Socket Error: 'getaddrinfo failed'
 * In 5.45x39mm on 2011-06-19 14:22:29, Socket Error: 'getaddrinfo failed'
 * In 6.5x68mm on 2011-06-19 20:34:20, Socket Error: 'getaddrinfo failed'

--JeffGBot (talk) 21:21, 19 June 2011 (UTC)

comparison with 7mm-08 Remington
How does this round compare to the 7mm-08 Remington ballistically/weight wise/precision etc? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 188.194.186.128 (talk) 12:59, 8 January 2013 (UTC)


 * The longer 7x64mm case has more case capacity and ballistically outperforms the 7mm-08 Remington, since these cartridges have identical maximum operating pressure. Comparing rifle cartridges has more to do with physics than magic. The 7x64mm dictates the use of a .30-06 Springfield/.280 Remington sized bulkier action and will not fit in a lighter more compact short bolt action like the .308 Winchester based 7mm-08 Remington. The general penalties for using bigger, more powerful rifle ammunition compared to smaller cartridges are increases in recoil, jump, flash, and barrel wear. If you want to use very long for the bullet diameter bullets the relatively fast standard twist of the 7x64mm can be a bonus compared to the slower standard twist of the 7mm-08 Remington. Cases remain in the rifle until the projectile has left the barrel and normally become important accuracy and presicion wise when very high Benchrest ammunition consistency is required.--Francis Flinch (talk) 20:53, 8 January 2013 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 1 one external link on 7×64mm. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
 * Added archive http://www.webcitation.org/5hL1iFuL0?url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.cip-bp.org%2Findex.php%3Fid%3Dtdcc-telechargement to http://www.cip-bp.org/index.php?id=tdcc-telechargement

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at ).

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 12:43, 30 September 2016 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 3 external links on 7×64mm. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
 * Added archive http://www.webcitation.org/6I7VGrifY?url=http://www.saami.org/specifications_and_information/specifications/Velocity_Pressure_CfR.pdf to http://www.saami.org/specifications_and_information/specifications/Velocity_Pressure_CfR.pdf
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20090831085149/http://www.rws-munition.de/en/rifle_cartridges/ballistic_data.htm?navid=10 to http://www.rws-munition.de/en/rifle_cartridges/ballistic_data.htm?navid=10
 * Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.cip-bp.org/index.php?id=tdcc-telechargement

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 10:55, 23 June 2017 (UTC)