Rebarreling M96 Swedish Mauser to 308 Win

[jethunter]

jethunter, check out the sporting rifles offered for sale on Tradex. I've owned M96 rifles in 8x57, 9.3x57, 30-06, all factory made and a 7.62x51 rifle that was scary accurate, built by a close friend. When he passed away, I gave it to his son.

I've seen several re barreled to 308Win and 243Win. I have one with double set triggers, in 6mm Rem. Nary a problem with any of them. Mind you, I never have been a max pressure freak. I would rather go to a magnum if I want a significant increase in velocity.

Those actions are strong. They have extra gas venting that their predecessors don't have.
The late Frank DeHaas, stated that the model 91-96 Mausers, "with the possible exception Of the Swede 94/96 Mausers" should not be considered for the 308Win. He then goes on to show a photo of an M94 that was converted to 308Win. The 7.62x51 loadings should easily be in the safe margins of the M96. Swedish ballistic steel was renouned because it had all of the minor ingredients needed in the raw ore. It didn't have to be added in questionable amounts.
That isn't common knowledge for most people.

The big thing here, is if you are looking for extreme performance from a 308Win, even the 98 actions, aren't good enough for this. They are fine for factory pressures but anything beyond that is questionable. Remember, the 98 actions were built for a steady diet of 47,000psi or less. The 96 actions were built for a steady diet of 45,000 psi or less. Only a 5% difference.

The key here is common sense. If you want a strong, Mauser style action, look at a BSA, Rem798, or Husquvarna, to name a few. Personally, IMHO the new FN actions are among the nicest and most closely resemble the original 98 actions.

Definitely your call and do what you think is best. One more caveat, other than the 308 I gave away on a 96 action, I would never sell, trade or give away one of these rifles that have been converted to high pressure rounds. It's my face and my call. When it's time for me to get rid of them, they will have the barrels removed and either a 6.5x55 barrel installed or the actions made unserviceable. Ignorance knows no boundaries.

I am very much aware of the tradeex site. I own just over a dozen husqvarnas and they have been my hobby for several years. I'll stand by everything I said.

I did not say the M96 type actions aren't strong. I said Husqvarna was not making rifles based on the M96 action in 1953 to my knowledge, and the early Smith and Wessson rifles were based on the 1640 action, not the M96 action. I don't know where you got the rest of it from.

 

[nanuk]

I will have to check again in my reference manuals.

the rifle I bought is an anomoly to me. No thumb cutout, and no holes D&T'd.

I will be able to confirm the date, but not sure about the model.

from what I can remember without refering to the manuals, is that HVA had leftover stock from military contracts. they built rifles from that stuff.

also, I have read that the Swedish manufacturers made commercial rifles at the same time as military, using the same actions.
and Yes, I am pretty sure I read that S&W's first actions were indeed M96's and only became the 1640's (or whatever model...) after the military surplus actions were used up.

again, I'll read more on this and see....

 

[jethunter]

I will have to check again in my reference manuals.

the rifle I bought is an anomoly to me. No thumb cutout, and no holes D&T'd.

I will be able to confirm the date, but not sure about the model.

from what I can remember without refering to the manuals, is that HVA had leftover stock from military contracts. they built rifles from that stuff.

also, I have read that the Swedish manufacturers made commercial rifles at the same time as military, using the same actions.
and Yes, I am pretty sure I read that S&W's first actions were indeed M96's and only became the 1640's (or whatever model...) after the military surplus actions were used up.

again, I'll read more on this and see....

Husqvarna made sporting rifles without thumb cutouts based on both the M96-type and FN98 actions. However, according to my references by 1953 HVA were using the FN98 action and no M96-type actions at all. The last of the HVA sporting rifles based on M96-type actions was during and just after WW2 when FN was unable to supply actions under Nazi accupation.

 

[burnt_servo]

pictures of the rifles in question would go a long way to end any confusion here .

 

[nanuk]

Jethunter: by FN98, are you refering to a large ring? or did they make small ring also

 

[bearhunter]

Jethunter, I'm not trying to put you down or your information. I know where you're coming from and for the most part, am in complete agreement.

My source for strengths and metalurgy in 96 actions is from Frank DeHaas books, WHB Smith The Book of Rifles and of course PO Ackley, as well as the internet.

I've seen 98 Krags converted to 308Win. and used for years. Why the people did the conversion, I have no idea. They had to load down their cartridges and do a huge amount of work, just to get them to feed reliably. IMHO, a ticking time bomb waiting to happen.

I've owned 96 actions, built by Carl Gustav and Husquvarna in 8x57 and according to Norma, they were perfectly safe for their full power loads, as long as they had corresponding bore dimensions.

My reply, had nothing to do with your statement about Husquvarna sporting rifles and when they were made. I was only referring to the 96 style actions that were and are being offered in cartridges, other than 6.5x55.

There are other manufacturers than Husquvarna that used the 96 actions. I have absolutley no doubt about your statement of dates that Husquvarna quit using 96 actions, nor did I intend to imply any.

These actions were used in Finland, Sweden, Norway and Denmark. They were used as a basis for sporters by commercial and private persons as well. That is what I was referring to.

 

[Baribal]

... from what I can remember without refering to the manuals, is that HVA had leftover stock from military contracts. they built rifles from that stuff.....

also, I have read that the Swedish manufacturers made commercial rifles at the same time as military, using the same actions.
and Yes, I am pretty sure I read that S&W's first actions were indeed M96's and only became the 1640's (or whatever model...) after the military surplus actions were used up.

again, I'll read more on this and see....

To clarify this; HVA never made commercial rfles from ex-military actions - the actions they used were always pulled off from the manufacture line either from Carl Gustav or from their own.
Also, when they used the m/38 as their - commerical - actions (solid wall) these were freshly made for the trade, from leftover blanks, not from military actions.
The solid wall does not bring any more srenght to the action except for added rigidity. For a given material, more lug area and receiver wall thickness gives more strenght.
Also, HVA never chambered their M/38 with anything above 57 700 PSI (8X57) and even there, they used a commonly known trick to reduce the pressure; they made very long throats (engaging cones).
They used the solid wall M/38 for their 640 series mostly between 1944-45 while waiting for the FN factory to be set to work again, in 1946.

The other 'manufacturers' who used the m/94/96 (ex-military) were mostly Vapen Depoten and Stiga. Now, keep in mind that SWEDEN NEVER BEEN A MEMBER OF CIP (But Norma is, as a private member). So no one knows what the testing procedures were for those rifles. They also have very looooong throats to lower the pressure. We do not even know if there was any heat treatment and / or surface treatment redone on those receivers.

S&W never used the M/96, they first used the (late) 1640 then switched to the 1900 in 1968.
The 1640 is a much stronger action made of (modern) alloy steel.


I am totally aware that the chilean m/95 have vent holes drilled and were also recarburized and have (very) long throats. But still, to my point of view, it's a poor choice seen the quantity of much better design actions (like the M/98) we have today. And most notably, it's not because it was made that it's the best thing to do.

 

[lejarretnoir]

Baribal knows what he's talking about when it comes to the 96 actions.

Having smithed a few of these he's indeed correct about the long throats. I also converted a 1916 Spanish Mauser rearsenalled from 7.62NATO to 7.62x39 and recently a Swede 96. The old barrel has the long throat and the action has the extra gas ports.
The 7.62x39 makes a good candidate for these actions because of low pressure rounds. Lug setback would be my concern over extended use of .308 commercial loads. For modern high pressure cartridges there are better options.

 

[Riflechair]

If only we had a better assortment of .310 bullets to choose from. 123gr is nice but I'd like something more in the 160gr range. Otherwise the 7.62X39 would definetly be an option.

 

[jethunter]

Jethunter: by FN98, are you refering to a large ring? or did they make small ring also

"FN" is Fabrique Nationale (Belgium). "98" is mauser 98. FN98 is... well you get the idea. Yes it is a large ring model 98 mauser action.

The early (1928-1938?)Husqvarna sporting rifles were small ring mausers built on M94 Swede small ring actions sourced from Carl Gustav.

During 1939-41, Husqvarna began building rifles on the FN98 action in 9.3x57(M146) and 9.3x62(M246). FN actions became unavailable during the WW2 with the Nazi occupation of Belgium. HVA then began making rifles based on the M38 Swede small ring action during this time.

When FN resumed commercial production after the war, HVA went back to using the FN98 actions.

About 1957 or 58. HVA began making and selling an action they designed - the 1640, which has similarities to both but is neither a small or large ring mauser. It is purely Husqvarna and considered the equivalent or better to the large ring mausers in strength.

 

[Baribal]

Jethunter,

I can help with the manufacture dates.
The introduction of the 1640 was in 1953 and HVA stopped making them in 1967. But for some time HVA continued to sell rifles made of remaining stock of FN actions, even after 1953. As I understand it FN stopped their deal with HVA about 1951-2, when they started supplying Sako (Sako's historian told me they started to deal with FN in 1951).

You are right about the Carl Gustav receivers produced between 1927 to 1937. Those don't have the roll stamps on the receiver ring (the Model 46).
From '37 to 41 they used the FN M/98 (standard, same as K98) for their series 146 and to a much lesser extend the 246.

From 1942 to 1945 they used reserved receivers from their own production of M/38 for the M/46 series (M/46AN '42-'43, M/46B '42 / '43 and M/46A '42 to '45). From 1944 to late '45, with the introduction of the model 640, they used blanks (wich became the "solid walls") from their own M/38 production.

Then, from '46 to '49 HVA switched to the FN made M/98 again, but those are on the way to become the "Supreme", and lose more and more of their military heritage (thunmb cut-out, charger rail lips) and by looking carefully, you can see the transition to what will be the end result buy 1949 (thiose with the small lever or "tab" to release the floorplate, wich they extensively used from 1949 to about 1955 (but the "real" production stopped in 1953). They introduced their 1640 action before the FN Supreme, and Sako was then THE FN customer..

 

[lejarretnoir]

If only we had a better assortment of .310 bullets to choose from. 123gr is nice but I'd like something more in the 160gr range. Otherwise the 7.62X39 would definetly be an option.

Use a .308 bore and 155-165grs. You don't need a .310 bore. All .310 bullets fire down that .308 bore no problem with my longer throated reamer designed for it. 900rds of Czech surplus and still shooting fine. Headspace still where I set it.
That old 96 Mauser is the most used gun here in the neighbourhood. All the kids love it. 7.62x39 has little recoil, inexpensive Czech surplus and I get to enjoy youngsters having fun with that sportered Mauser.