Surplus Small Ring Mausers - safe to shoot...

grelmar

CGN Ultra frequent flyer
Rating - 100%
9   0   0
After the Calgary Easter Gun show I posted a pic of my unfired since rebuild Fr-7, and it set off the pretty much obligatory "conversation" about whether or not the gun is safe to shoot standard load 7.62 surplus ammo (spoiler alert: yes it is).

But it does touch on the larger issue of older Small Ring Mausers and the types of loads and chamberings they can handle safely. Because I'm a bit OCD, and not interested in having a rifle grenade in my hands, I kept looking looking for more info on the subject, and came across this interesting bit from Chuckhawks:

http://www.chuckhawks.com/small_ring_mausers.htm

Mauser: Small Ring, Big Controversy

By Mike Hudson​


Mark Twain once observed that a lie can travel halfway around the world while the truth is still putting on its shoes and nowhere is that axiom more true than in the world of firearms, especially since the advent of the Internet. A word then, perhaps, about the inherent “weakness” of small ring, non-98 Mauser actions, including the 91, 93, 94, 95 and 96 models manufactured for use by Spain, Argentina, Sweden, Chile, Turkey and many other countries around the world. This non-issue has been written about by illustrious gun scribes and aped by ignoramuses far and wide for decades.

“The steel used by the Spaniards is considered to be soft,” one know-nothing opined on a web page recently, perhaps not realizing that all of the true 1893’s were built by Mauser, Ludwig Lowe or DWM in Germany. The truth is, while the earlier actions are indeed not as strong as the rugged M-98, they are plenty strong enough when used as intended. For years, the Swedish firm of Husqvarna turned out fine sporters based on 96 Mauser actions in .30-06 caliber.

Thousands of beautiful custom sporters in useful calibers like 7x57mm Mauser, 257 Roberts, 8x57mm Mauser, .35 Remington, 9.3x57, 6.5x55 Swedish and the .300 Savage and .250-3000 Savage have been turned out using small ring actions, which have a number of advantages some believe offset the fact that they can’t be chambered for the .458 Winchester Magnum.

In truth, the myth about the weakness of the earlier Mauser actions coincided almost perfectly with the foundation of the Sporting Arms and Ammunition Manufacturers’ Institute (SAAMI), a private organization established at the behest of the United States government. This was in 1926, more than a generation after Mauser began turning out smokeless powder repeating rifles.

Currently, SAAMI dictates that ammunition sold in America for most of the calibers mentioned above generate no more than 50,000 psi when fired, a mandate that has led to the underloading of popular European calibers like the 7x57 and the 8x57, as well as some American calibers. The .257 Roberts very nearly became extinct because of SAAMI pressure standards set arbitrarily and absurdly low due to the large numbers of small ring Mauser and other surplus actions used as the basis for rifles built for the former wildcat cartridge.

In its original military loading, the 7x57mm cartridge produced an average pressure of 50,370 CUP when fired through the M93 Spanish Mauser rifle, according to J.M. Whittemore’s 1899 treatise, Report Of Test of Mauser Arms And Ammunition Relative To Pressures And Velocities. Whittemore drew from the work five years earlier of the Spanish ballistician Salvadore Cardenal, whose 1895 report for the Spanish government reached the same conclusions.

However, SAAMI has published a Maximum Average Pressure of only 46,000 CUP for this round, which leads to the possibility that commercial rifles built to SAAMI standards may not be designed to withstand the powerful military cartridges intended for the more robust pre-98 Mauser designs.

It’s a well known fact that older military cartridges loaded for sale in Europe are hotter than their American counterparts, but it isn’t generally known why. Certainly, the European governments care as much as the Americans about citizens dying from catastrophic firearms failures.

Instead of SAAMI, the Europeans employ C.I.P., the Permanent International Commission for Firearms Testing. A far more independent organization, the C.I.P. was founded in 1914 and does not answer to corporate American or European gunmakers. According to official C.I.P. guidelines, the 7×57mm case can handle up to 390 MPa (56,564 psi) piezo pressure. In C.I.P. regulated countries, every rifle/cartridge combination has to be proofed at 125% of this maximum C.I.P. pressure to certify for sale to consumers.

By contrast, SAAMI specifies a far lower maximum pressure of 46,000 CUP or 51,000 psi. Although this lower specification is due to concern about the allegedly weaker actions of the older Mauser 93 and 95 rifles, this anxiety is misplaced, as the original ammunition developed for, and issued with, the M-93 Spanish Mauser produced an average pressure of 50,370 CUP in those rifles. Since the Spaniards continued building M-93s themselves into the 1950s, continued C.I.P. proof testing would have uncovered any inherent weakness in the action.

Some might argue that the century old steel in original 1891, 1893, 1895 and 1896 Mauser actions is somehow not as strong as it was when first manufactured. In the case of rusted, pitted, dented or otherwise damaged examples, this would indeed be the case. Anyone who thinks fine steel somehow degenerates in ways not apparent to the naked eye over a period of time as brief as 100 years would do well to research Japanese swords turned out on primitive hand forges as early as the 13th and 14th centuries. The pristine blades are as strong as they ever were, in many cases stronger than steel blades turned out today using modern technology.

I suppose I’m thinking about all this today because, on the table in front of me, sits a Spanish M-93 action, turned out by Ludwig Lowe of Berlin in 1896. A quarter of an inch shorter and two ounces lighter than the large ring M-98 action, it remains, I believe, the perfect platform for the 7x57mm cartridge, the round for which it was specifically designed 120 years ago.

I’ve decided to go ahead with the project, a lightweight sporter in the classic configuration, and have just spent the morning happily ordering a new stock and barrel, an adjustable trigger and bolt safety, a set of iron sights, scope bases and rings. I know a gunsmith near here in the Santa Monica Mountains who can put it all together for me and in a few months I’ll be the proud owner of a custom 7x57 capable of taking anything I might find out here in the west, from coyotes to elk, so long as I do my part.

One thing is certain. No matter what ammunition I use, I’ll be a lot more concerned about my own strength and stamina than I will about that of the Mauser action Lowe turned out 60 years before I was born.

Now, one article is never "definitive" - so it would be worth having a discussion on the subject. I figure there is likely to be a decent body of knowledge here for the discussion to be informative and polite.
 
I have seen severl hundred Swedish Mausers used as 308 target rifles in the DCRA. They are referred to as "Gustavs". That ammo ran 55,000 to 60,000 psi. I know, because I had some of it tested in the IMR lab.

Don't ever recall there being a problem.

I use Spanish and Swedish small rings for some sporting rifles (7-08, 308 and 358) and have read about the small ring issue. I found that the strength of the action was not the issue. The issue was, what would have in a catastrophic failure? e.g. The case got loaded with 296 instead of 748. (I have seen that done in a M70 Winchester. Broke the bolt. And in a Rem 700 - shattered the action.)

The answer was that the M98 has a safety lug, in case the two main lugs fail. So, it is not that the M95 is unsafe. It is that the M98 is safer.

My observation is that both lugs don't fail. The action might blow up, but the bolt lugs don't fail.

But, I am very careful about ball pistol and rifle powder.
 
http://sportsmansvintagepress.com/r...pistols-table-of-contents/historical-forward/
Bit of history on Peter Paul.
The only issue with the pre-98 Mauser design is gas handling in the event of case failure...they tend to grenade, and the small bolt shroud doesn't protect the shooters eyes from escaping gas.
For a case to fail today however, it would be almost 100% user error for that to happen.
The concern with 30'06 length cartridges in a '96 action BTW is that the action is a bit on the short side for this cartridge length, so when the magazine is extended, and feed ramp is modified, it removes metal from behind the lower receiver lug which does weaken the action somewhat.
The '98 is definitely a better design from a strength and gas venting standpoint.
 
The 93,95 +96 are all fine until they are not.I personally use them in 6.5x55 with loads to pressures designed for that action.........same in 7x57 or if in .308 loaded to .300 Savage levels. JIC
 
All good points. I've looked at my Model 70 Winchesters and a friends M700 Remington, and I don't see "safety" lugs on either. Can't really see how the Win M70 handles escaping gases much differently than a Swedish M96 or Spanish small ring. As has been pointed out on this site many times, the genius of the mauser design is the case harden over a softer core - the lug seats will yield (stretch) and that is easy to check with headspace gauges.
One last point - on many many inter web sites I see sage comments that the Spanish Guardia conversions of the 7x57 1912 were meant for use with the 7.62 CETME cartridge, not the 7.62 NATO. How that story got started would be interesting to know. Here is a scan of the front page of the Spanish publications for that rifle - you don't have to be conversant in Spanish to read "7.62 NATO"...
Spanish Guardia Manual cover.jpg
 

Attachments

  • Spanish Guardia Manual cover.jpg
    Spanish Guardia Manual cover.jpg
    31.9 KB · Views: 475
Thanks guys. Fits my understanding of the issue, but it's nice to have a sanity check from people with more experience.
 
100 rounds in so far, the only damage so far is mild wear and tear on my shoulder from firing 7.62 from a 7.5lb bolt gun. Not the best bench gun, but firing off-hand is fantastic. Such nice balance. Easy to put a bead on target and hold it there.

 
100 rounds in so far, the only damage so far is mild wear and tear on my shoulder from firing 7.62 from a 7.5lb bolt gun. Not the best bench gun, but firing off-hand is fantastic. Such nice balance. Easy to put a bead on target and hold it there.


Nice to see someone who knows how to use a sling other than as just a carrying strap.
 
Nice to see someone who knows how to use a sling other than as just a carrying strap.

Thanks. Old habits die hard. Especially if its something that works.

I recall seeing a survey on another forum, no FR7 SN's over 4k. The FR8 goes close to 50k. So in other words a somewhat rare rifle.

Interesting. I suspect the mis-information surrounding the CETME cartridge has really kept the price and desirability of these guns lower than it should be. Both the FR7 and FR8 are handy, light, carbines, in a modern common caliber. They should really be fetching more than they do.

And there's always this:

Yup, saw that video. Ian does his research. It would be a fool's game to argue against his historical knowledge.
 
When Samco first imported the FR-7 rifles into the US, they had heard all the stories about the M1893 and 7.62x51 NATO. They commissioned the HP White Labs to do independent testing. Nothing untoward happened, and Samco started selling the rifles in the litigious United States.
Something to consider though - some old ex-service rifles have been used for decades, even for a century, and may be worn. And most ex-Spanish 7x57 have mismatched bolts. Worth checking headspace. The Spanish rifles have m/m bolts because the Gov't didn't trust the Army, and rifles and bolts were stored in separate armouries. When the Civil War started matching rifles and bolts was not a priority. A m/m bolt in a Spanish rifle is evidence that the rifle was used during the Civil War.
FR-7s and FR-8s are post WW2 rebuilds.
 
I've seen the White Labs testing referenced a couple times, but can never track down any primary sources with the data. It would be really interesting to see.

As for headspacing, I haven't been too scientific about it, but have been checking spent cases for any warning signs. That won't catch everything, but it should allow me to spot anything severe.
 
Back
Top Bottom