Why all the love for the M98 action?

I've a couple of 'German ( Wehrmacht )' rifles and they are not overly impressive finish and fit wise. WW1 & WW2 manufactured units; one of each. Good enough tools of war I suppose.
The one's made for export in peacetime years are somewhat more impressive.
I find the rifles a tad unwieldy; collecting South American contract carbines at the moment and they are much more impressive fit and finish wise. Handle like a dream too.
Took me a long time to come around to Mausers.
As far as WW2 Wehrmacht units; dunno, the whole 'Evil Empire' thing is slightly fascinating. That's why I bought the Luger, lol.
But Waffenampts removed; just a tool of war, unimpressive compared to the peacetime export units IMO.
Claw extractor is a little different compared to the other main battle rifles.
My boys grew up on LE's & MN's and I have drill it into them " Don't throw one in the pipe and slam the bolt shut! Magazine load only"
But a good working weapon.
 
mkrnel said:
Similar thing can happen with the push feed rifle, see this video for explanation -

Click to expand...


The Ruger M77 with claw extractor that was NOT a 'controlled feed' action was just another 'push feed', but with the big honking Mauser non-rotating extractor.

In the end, nothing is fool proof in the hands of a fool or the inadequately prepared. A tool is as good as the operator.
 
tokguy said:
I've a couple of 'German ( Wehrmacht )' rifles and they are not overly impressive finish and fit wise. WW1 & WW2 manufactured units; one of each. Good enough tools of war I suppose.
The one's made for export in peacetime years are somewhat more impressive.
I find the rifles a tad unwieldy; collecting South American contract carbines at the moment and they are much more impressive fit and finish wise. Handle like a dream too.
Took me a long time to come around to Mausers.
As far as WW2 Wehrmacht units; dunno, the whole 'Evil Empire' thing is slightly fascinating. That's why I bought the Luger, lol.
But Waffenampts removed; just a tool of war, unimpressive compared to the peacetime export units IMO.
Claw extractor is a little different compared to the other main battle rifles.
My boys grew up on LE's & MN's and I have drill it into them " Don't throw one in the pipe and slam the bolt shut! Magazine load only"
But a good working weapon.
Click to expand...


Then you havent seen enough or good condition matching Wehrmacht rifles my friend. An unissued GEW98 is just as nice as the exports. As for WW2 they are superb quality all the way to 41. Look at the Portuguese contract rifles they turned out, while invading Russia.....A nice 35-40 would have quality way beyond what was needed.


Besides all this, the argument is moot. Its like trying to tell ford guys Chev is better, or a guy who likes blondes that brunettes are better. Its all preference and personal experience. If you'd handled a mint mauser and a crappy lee enfield you know how you would feel after walking away and vice versa, same if a particular model failed you.
 
Color me guilty for my soft spot for various teutonic rifles.
Two Mausers presently grace my gun rack, a 22 trainer and a customized wildcat.

I've just never had a great overwhelming desire to own a Lee Enfield rifle 303 British? My very first deer capable rifle was a bubba'd Mark III that my father helped me 'rebuild' to safe firing condition with a Numrich catalogue and my first reserve service pay checks. It could shoot, but someone buggered up the barrel in the distant past!! That's probably why I so dislike chopped 303s!
And I had another much better one in the past, a nice as issued, Savage made No 4 that I would have kept, except it's sights were just too basic for my tastes.
If I ever acquire one or two surplus LEs, I could see myself purchasing a 22 trainer or a 7.62 variant. Maybe a Longbranch made smallbore and a Ishapore 1A1 in good or better rack condition. And that's about it for me.
And P14s and M1917s in cherry condition get a bit of attention from me for sure.

Cheers!
 
Last edited:
one thing I can say with certainty, I have never picked up a Mauser that had decent sights on it. They are borderline unusable to me. Heck even the Mosin sights are better. That in itself is enough for me not to have one.
 
CanadianAR said:
Then you havent seen enough or good condition matching Wehrmacht rifles my friend. An unissued GEW98 is just as nice as the exports. As for WW2 they are superb quality all the way to 41. Look at the Portuguese contract rifles they turned out, while invading Russia.....A nice 35-40 would have quality way beyond what was needed.


Besides all this, the argument is moot. Its like trying to tell ford guys Chev is better, or a guy who likes blondes that brunettes are better. Its all preference and personal experience. If you'd handled a mint mauser and a crappy lee enfield you know how you would feel after walking away and vice versa, same if a particular model failed you.
Click to expand...

Oh, I'd not argue with you on that point. I only just warmed to them, and I've handled more early units (say 1891 - 1930's) than WW2 by far. We had a CE 44 unit around when I was a youth and the old girl pictured in the faux sniper thread. Not claiming to have handled lots of war era units in any way. That would likely cost me volumes of money at this juncture in time, lol.
BTW the fit and finish on 50% of LE's is unimpressive I find too. Bigger number there.
I just find the extra money attached to waffenampt'd units to be a tad excessive compared to the value and finish of the contract rifles.
I tend to look for one of each type; a Ross, a M39, a Cavalry mauser etc. So sometimes I don't get to see the best there is to offer of a particular type.
 
davemccarthy707 said:
one thing I can say with certainty, I have never picked up a Mauser that had decent sights on it. They are borderline unusable to me. Heck even the Mosin sights are better. That in itself is enough for me not to have one.
Click to expand...

And I'm the opposite. I'm one of those odd people who actually like the Mauser sights. I was conditioned by necessity as my first and only rifle was a well used Yugo K98. I learned to use the front sight hood and leaf guide to help frame the V notch to speed up acquisition.

Soviet style sights...my eye can't decide what to focus on.
 
They are hard to see in low light and almost always shoot high in my experience. But with the exception of the NO.4 Enfield I find most military rifle sights to be inadequate.
 
Most civilian Mausers don't have the clip loading cut out in the left side wall of the receiver and have single stage triggers, many or most incorporating some form of safety lever.

"For ease of manufacture, the civilian versions lack the inside collar in the receiver ring, so the barrels require a reinforced shoulder to butt against the front of the ring to hold it tightly in place." From "Bolt Action Rifles" by Frank de Haas

There are other minor differences between my Husqvarna '98 sporter actions, the closest to the original '98 having an FN-manufactured action with original ejector. What they all have in common is the non-rotating, controlled round feed extractor.
 
Sharps '63 said:
Most civilian Mausers don't have the clip loading cut out in the left side wall of the receiver and have single stage triggers, many or most incorporating some form of safety lever.

"For ease of manufacture, the civilian versions lack the inside collar in the receiver ring, so the barrels require a reinforced shoulder to butt against the front of the ring to hold it tightly in place." From "Bolt Action Rifles" by Frank de Haas

There are other minor differences between my Husqvarna '98 sporter actions, the closest to the original '98 having an FN-manufactured action with original ejector. What they all have in common is the non-rotating, controlled round feed extractor.
Click to expand...

Not sure where he gets that idea from if this is in regards to commercial 98's but FN, Santa Barbara, and Zastava commercial or "civilian" actions still have the inner shoulder. What's different is they are cut on both sides of the lug raceway instead of just the extractor side like on a military or early commercial action. This is a time saving operation and are referred to as the "H" style inner collar as opposed to the military "C" style.
 
jbmauser is correct ....

"FN actions were first made with the full inside collar, just as in the military M98 action, with the collar slotted on the right side for the extractor. At some point, FN began to fudge and, thereafter, slotted the collar on the left as well, leaving only partial collars top and bottom. This was done for one reason only - to make milling the left locking lug raceway much easier.
I think this was an unwise move, and that Paul Mauser would think the same. Although I have no solid evidence to indicate that dividing the collar has affected the safety or strength of the action, I would certainly rather have the collar remain as Mauser designed it." Frank de Haas - "Bolt Action Rifles"
 
Actions with the "H" inner collar have been chambered for all sorts of high pressure rounds and handle them with no problem but I still prefer the "C" collar as well.

Another thing to consider is that by the time H inner collars were being produced, most actions were being made of a more modern alloy steel most likely. The M98 is a massive action that was designed to be super safe with the metals available at the time it was invented. Take that same action and make it with the steels we have now and it's pretty bullet proof.
 
About the H vs C ring... And interesting quote from the firing line forum

It doesn't really matter except to the purist who wants to know his is the original design and therefore The Best... ....If you overload the gun so much that it becomes a weak point, you have probably blown something else out anyhow.
Click to expand...

I have to agree with this guy.
 
9.3mauser said:
In my biased opinion, the Mauser 98 is the best bolt action ever. Full Stop. Complex and expensive to manufacture, it's very simple in design. Any major component that is likely to fail can be changed within minutes if you have the parts on hand. Just try changing a Lee Enfield firing pin.

It can be very smooth to operate, but I've found that this requires some polishing of the raceways to get the best out of it. I've never had a problem with bolt wobble. This is just a tolerance that helps keep things working in the field. Besides, there's no wobble when the bolt is closed. If you're having problems with ejection, then something is amiss. Most of the Mausers I've owned will fling the empties across the room if I snap the bolt back.

I'm sure someone will correct me if I'm wrong, but I don't believe the Springfield was ever purchased by any other country but the U.S. The Lee-Enfield was only used by commonwealth countries and British colonies of the time. The Mauser was adopted by dozens of countries worldwide, and especially popular in South America.

I'm quite happy that Mausers were made in the tens of millions. It means a good supply of affordable actions to make custom hunting rifles out of!
Click to expand...

I think Arisaka 99 is better than the Model 98 Mauser, and I think the Lee-Enfield is likely better than both but I absolutely respect where you're coming from.

I need to get me some form of Mauser - I was thinking perhaps a South American carbine in 7.65 Argentine because I am an insufferable hipster. Either way, I am starting to become unhappy with my collection as it stands because it doesn't have a Mauser (or an Arisaka for that matter ) in it.
 
In "Hatcher's Notebook", he says the Arisaka rifle was the most difficult to blow up with gross overloads - like a full case of Bulls Eye powder! De Haas conducted similar experiments with cases full of 3031, 4198 and 2400, the latter blowing off the extractor, floor plate and springing the bolt stop. The bolt could not be opened by hand and the barrel was later fitted to another Arisaka action.

He also reports of an Arisaka chambered to .30-'06 and fired with the original .264 diameter barrel! Neither the barrel or the action blew up.

I always thought they were ugly and ungainly rifles with an odd safety but the JIA did pretty well with them.
 
I just checked my 1950's produced FN military .30-'06 Mauser and my Husqvarna Sporter with FN-produced action. Both have the 'H' inner collar. My Husky carbine with Husqvarna action does not.

My 1942 Remington produced '03-Springfield (before the A3) has the 'C' style 'cone' breech which is why it feeds so well.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom