Dear me! As a southpaw I want to get a K-31 pull bolt rifle and yet am drawn to the Swedish rifle for it's excellent cartridge. Would I be giving up much were I to go for the former?
K-31 with 7.5x55 vs Swede Mausers in 6.5x55: Which is better?
- Thread starter Teapot
- Start date
+1
The swiss cartridge have a little bit more recoil, very similar to a .308. Very fun to shoot caliber.
K31 are awesome rifles in every aspects ! I like the swedish mausers too !
One or the other is not really helpful, lol. K-31 is light or seems light. I have shot a Swede at 200 y and it hit poa easily. Too easily. Then again so did the K-31. The benefit of the Swiss is the straight-pull bolt and the benefit of the Swede is that the cartridges can be had at Canadian Tyre.
.
I shoot both the Swedish Mauser and the Swiss k-31 rifles. Both are accurate and on the average, I really do not think one has much advantage over the other on the target range. The average k-31 will run you about $300-$350 and if targets are your turn on, then for the same price you should be able to pick up a good Swedish Mauser WITH target sights on it. Check out Trade-Ex.
Is the straight pull of the k-31 really a factor. It might be in a Combat situation when faced with a lot of charging enemy infantry, but for ordinary shooting, it really is not a factor. The Mauser bolt is less complicated than the k-31. 6.5x55 ammo is a bit more obtainable.
The K-31 has a bit heavier, though shorter barrel. A good one can be insanely accurate. If you reload, or intend to reload in the future, components are fairly easy to come by, the cases are imported by Trade-Ex and a good selection of .308 diameter bullets are available. As mentioned, recoil is a bit more than the Mauser.
It will be a hard decision to make if you only can get one of them.
I shoot both the Swedish Mauser and the Swiss k-31 rifles. Both are accurate and on the average, I really do not think one has much advantage over the other on the target range. The average k-31 will run you about $300-$350 and if targets are your turn on, then for the same price you should be able to pick up a good Swedish Mauser WITH target sights on it. Check out Trade-Ex.
Is the straight pull of the k-31 really a factor. It might be in a Combat situation when faced with a lot of charging enemy infantry, but for ordinary shooting, it really is not a factor. The Mauser bolt is less complicated than the k-31. 6.5x55 ammo is a bit more obtainable.
The K-31 has a bit heavier, though shorter barrel. A good one can be insanely accurate. If you reload, or intend to reload in the future, components are fairly easy to come by, the cases are imported by Trade-Ex and a good selection of .308 diameter bullets are available. As mentioned, recoil is a bit more than the Mauser.
It will be a hard decision to make if you only can get one of them.
While I agree that both rifles are excellent, the 6.5x55 simply eats the 7.5x55 in terms of longer range ballistics when target shooting. At shorter ranges it is a push, go with whichever one tickles your fancy.
Mark
Mark
I think the statistics are that 10% of the people in the world favor their left hand. In the older Military Training Days, soldiers who were left handed were trained and forced to shoot right handed. There are also people who are right handed and have a left "master" eye and vice-versa.
Assuming that both the Swedish m/96 Mauser and the Swiss K-31 would cost about the same, (in the $300-$350) then add a left hand K-31 adapter for another $250 would bring a K-31 up into the $500 range.
One of the more successful methods to the left hand problem and bolt action rifles has the shooter rotating the rifle to the left after firing. This brings the bolt upwards where it can be operated with the left hand to eject the empty and chamber a live round. Being the curious sort, I took an m/96 and a k-31 and tried just that on my "cow pasture" range. Of course, being right handed, it was a bit awkward for me, but both rifles seemed to take about the same amount of effort to operate, but the Swede had one more motion, that of rotating the bolt handle. After the bolt handle was rotated, the effort to bring it back and eject the cartridge case was less than the k-31. Forward motion to chamber a cartridge was about the same, and there was not a great problem pushing the bolt handle back down to lock it. A left handed shooter might find it even easier than I did. The k-31 took a bit more effort to unlock and start the bolt back initially, but the round was a bit easier to chamber due to the straight shove forward. I am sure that a bit of bolt manipulation practice would make it much more easier and natural.
A while ago, I was sent a video of the American Nationals at Camp Perry. There was a left handed shooter using a k-31 in the Vintage Military Rifle Shoot, and he did very well with it. Of course, being a good shot and lots of practice helps.
Left handed shooters have been a small "problem" with a right handed Military Establishment since the early use of Gunpowder. When SMELLIE visited the Pattern Room during the time when the British were converting over to the .223 round for their military, he was shown a new production model of the rifle. When asked his opinion, he noted that with a few minor alterations, a left hand ejection port and substituting a left ejecting bolt, it could be used by either left or right handed personnel, and an ejection port cover could be made that could be switched from left to right. He was then shown an experimental rifle that had exactly the modifications he had told them about.
.
Assuming that both the Swedish m/96 Mauser and the Swiss K-31 would cost about the same, (in the $300-$350) then add a left hand K-31 adapter for another $250 would bring a K-31 up into the $500 range.
One of the more successful methods to the left hand problem and bolt action rifles has the shooter rotating the rifle to the left after firing. This brings the bolt upwards where it can be operated with the left hand to eject the empty and chamber a live round. Being the curious sort, I took an m/96 and a k-31 and tried just that on my "cow pasture" range. Of course, being right handed, it was a bit awkward for me, but both rifles seemed to take about the same amount of effort to operate, but the Swede had one more motion, that of rotating the bolt handle. After the bolt handle was rotated, the effort to bring it back and eject the cartridge case was less than the k-31. Forward motion to chamber a cartridge was about the same, and there was not a great problem pushing the bolt handle back down to lock it. A left handed shooter might find it even easier than I did. The k-31 took a bit more effort to unlock and start the bolt back initially, but the round was a bit easier to chamber due to the straight shove forward. I am sure that a bit of bolt manipulation practice would make it much more easier and natural.
A while ago, I was sent a video of the American Nationals at Camp Perry. There was a left handed shooter using a k-31 in the Vintage Military Rifle Shoot, and he did very well with it. Of course, being a good shot and lots of practice helps.
Left handed shooters have been a small "problem" with a right handed Military Establishment since the early use of Gunpowder. When SMELLIE visited the Pattern Room during the time when the British were converting over to the .223 round for their military, he was shown a new production model of the rifle. When asked his opinion, he noted that with a few minor alterations, a left hand ejection port and substituting a left ejecting bolt, it could be used by either left or right handed personnel, and an ejection port cover could be made that could be switched from left to right. He was then shown an experimental rifle that had exactly the modifications he had told them about.
.
Here is the left handed shooter with a K31 in US Nationals.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=L-g-WrIPpeU
And at the Brünig indoor 300m range. Look at the monitor for last shot placement, flashes.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ieuHo2s-x-k
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=L-g-WrIPpeU
And at the Brünig indoor 300m range. Look at the monitor for last shot placement, flashes.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ieuHo2s-x-k
Last edited:
That video of the Vintage Rifle Match at the U.S. Nationals is the one I was sent.
The Vaile Range is the 1000 yard range at Camp Perry. The winds coming off Lake Erie are a force to contend with, and can fishtail and switch direction and velocity downrange. In the 200 yard offhand portion take a look at the Flag in the background and you will see what I mean.
The Vaile Range is the 1000 yard range at Camp Perry. The winds coming off Lake Erie are a force to contend with, and can fishtail and switch direction and velocity downrange. In the 200 yard offhand portion take a look at the Flag in the background and you will see what I mean.
Almost but not quite, Buffdog.
I was shown serial number 04 of the 4.85mm X-70 rifle. This was 3 days after the first photograph (left side only: right side told you too much) had been released. The rifle itself still was rather high on the "Secret" list. We played with it, right in the Pattern Room, for about half an hour, tearing it down completely. I got a VERY good look at the internals of the rifle as it existed at that time. When all of this was done, I was asked if I had any recommendations. I thought about it for a couple of minutes and made 3 suggestions.
One suggestion was for the use of light alloys, the rifle I was shown being entirely steel construction. This, I found out, had been tried and rejected for one very important reason: they had learned the lessons of 1940 well. To build the rifle in England, NOTHING need be imported; the entire thing is built of LOCAL materials. If Britain is caught off-guard again, at least they can build their own rifles.
The final suggestion regarded training and operation, the rifle being at that time a dedicated right-hand model. This is when I made the suggestions regarding mirror cuts in the frame, repositionable extractor and ejector, mirror-image ejection-port cover and bolt-handle cuts in the Carrier, to enable fast swapping of parts to create a left-handed rifle on a minute's notice OR a combination L/R rifle for dominant eye and special-purposes uses (firing around corners, etc.).
They noted this down carefully, I inspected Maxim Guns for the next 3 hours (they had Serial Number 1 on one table, Serial Number 100 sitting on the table next to it! Number 1 was unmodified, 100 had ALL the mods approved before the type went out of Service: a treasure-trove of information in those 2 guns!). Came back to Canada, heard no more about it, although I did arrange a swap with Peter Labbett for a 4.85mm round, likely the first one in Canada in civilian hands. Few years later a new edition of Small Arms of the World appeared and there were MY 1-1/2 lines: they had built the conversion units, they had worked.... but had been axed by the bean-counters.
So, as it stands, I own 1-1/2 lines of Small Arms of the World, Sir Charles Ross has a page, James Paris Lee has about 5 pages: the World is well in proportion!
But I really wonder why nobody has done it. About 1 man in 7 is born left-hand dedicated. MOST of them are converted (with difficulty ranging from little to extreme) to Right-hand over time but (1) a small hard core exists of men who can NOT be converted and (2) they STILL will be more adept with Left-handed rifles and tools AND have a lower accident rate "on the job". Add to this that the proportion seems higher among Women (which could be due to social tolerance) AND the fact that it now seems socially-acceptable to send the honeys In Harm's Way, this after we have spent 4,000,000 years trying to protect them. To me, if making our fighting men and women safer costs an extra $10 on a $1500 rifle, go ahead and spend the damned money!
Rifles cost dollars; blood is beyond value.
Someone with a very big stick should pound this into the heads of the damned bean-counters.
I was shown serial number 04 of the 4.85mm X-70 rifle. This was 3 days after the first photograph (left side only: right side told you too much) had been released. The rifle itself still was rather high on the "Secret" list. We played with it, right in the Pattern Room, for about half an hour, tearing it down completely. I got a VERY good look at the internals of the rifle as it existed at that time. When all of this was done, I was asked if I had any recommendations. I thought about it for a couple of minutes and made 3 suggestions.
One suggestion was for the use of light alloys, the rifle I was shown being entirely steel construction. This, I found out, had been tried and rejected for one very important reason: they had learned the lessons of 1940 well. To build the rifle in England, NOTHING need be imported; the entire thing is built of LOCAL materials. If Britain is caught off-guard again, at least they can build their own rifles.
The final suggestion regarded training and operation, the rifle being at that time a dedicated right-hand model. This is when I made the suggestions regarding mirror cuts in the frame, repositionable extractor and ejector, mirror-image ejection-port cover and bolt-handle cuts in the Carrier, to enable fast swapping of parts to create a left-handed rifle on a minute's notice OR a combination L/R rifle for dominant eye and special-purposes uses (firing around corners, etc.).
They noted this down carefully, I inspected Maxim Guns for the next 3 hours (they had Serial Number 1 on one table, Serial Number 100 sitting on the table next to it! Number 1 was unmodified, 100 had ALL the mods approved before the type went out of Service: a treasure-trove of information in those 2 guns!). Came back to Canada, heard no more about it, although I did arrange a swap with Peter Labbett for a 4.85mm round, likely the first one in Canada in civilian hands. Few years later a new edition of Small Arms of the World appeared and there were MY 1-1/2 lines: they had built the conversion units, they had worked.... but had been axed by the bean-counters.
So, as it stands, I own 1-1/2 lines of Small Arms of the World, Sir Charles Ross has a page, James Paris Lee has about 5 pages: the World is well in proportion!
But I really wonder why nobody has done it. About 1 man in 7 is born left-hand dedicated. MOST of them are converted (with difficulty ranging from little to extreme) to Right-hand over time but (1) a small hard core exists of men who can NOT be converted and (2) they STILL will be more adept with Left-handed rifles and tools AND have a lower accident rate "on the job". Add to this that the proportion seems higher among Women (which could be due to social tolerance) AND the fact that it now seems socially-acceptable to send the honeys In Harm's Way, this after we have spent 4,000,000 years trying to protect them. To me, if making our fighting men and women safer costs an extra $10 on a $1500 rifle, go ahead and spend the damned money!
Rifles cost dollars; blood is beyond value.
Someone with a very big stick should pound this into the heads of the damned bean-counters.
samsplacci71
Regular
- Location
- Toronto area
I have both. They are equally well crafted. I paid roughly the same for my m96 and my k31,both from trade ex. If you look at shooting match results, both rifles are usually dominant. I love shooting both, but I give the edge to my Swede. Due to availability of commercial ammo, availability of reloading components, long range accuracy as well as very low recoil. Just my 2 cents...Though if I were you I'd buy both, especially given their current low price. Regardless of your choice, you'll enjoy the rifle! Good luck
I've a Ross and I don't find it any faster than an LE. Mind you LE's are the fastest bolt action in the world, definitely faster than my M96, but not as accurate or deadly at distance of course.
So perhaps the K31 is slightly faster, but the straight pull isn't a world of difference better than a good bolt.
Definitely not a deal maker or breaker.
But I find the K31 to be an awkward looking rifle so I'm prejudiced already
So perhaps the K31 is slightly faster, but the straight pull isn't a world of difference better than a good bolt.
Definitely not a deal maker or breaker.
But I find the K31 to be an awkward looking rifle so I'm prejudiced already
