Mauser 96 action and modern higher pressure loads

[pacobillie]

I have a Mauser 96 rifle in 6.5X55 chambering. It was made in 1909 in the Carl Gustavstadt Geversfactori.

I have read a number of conflicting opinions as to whether it is safe to use higher pressure loads in these rifles. I remember reading a Guns & Ammo online article stating that hotter modern loads are safe to use in Mauser 96 actions, and that only Krag Jurgensen and Mauser 94 rifles are limited to the lower pressure loads.

On the other hand, on the Lapua website, the lower pressure loads are recommended for the Mauser 96 actions, and the higher pressure loads (the 6.5X55 SKAN loads) are reserved for modern rifles, i.e. Tikka, etc...

BWOE, the max load for a 139 Grain Scenar bullet is stated as 47.6 grains of N560, for a Mauser 96 action, and 49.1 grains of N560, for a "modern" action. the difference between the two loads is about 100 fps of bullet velocity at the muzzle.<

So, in your experience, which one of those views is the correct one?

 

[ben hunchak]

I agree with the Lapua/Velveeta website, the 96 is a step down in strength from the '98 or modern bolt actions.

 

[Eagleye]

I agree as well.
But with that in mind, I have seen these rifles rebarrelled to 308 Winchester a couple of times, and that is a modern, high pressure chambering.
Eagleye.

 

[Northman999]

I've seen lots of people state that the Mauser 96 is not as strong as the Mauser 98; it seems to be generally accepted fact.

However, I've seen Mauser 96's in quite a few calibers, including modern high pressure cartridges, and at least one in a modern magnum cartridge.

Personally, when I hear someone say that the Mauser 96 is not as strong as the Mauser 98, my question is. "So what? Does it really need to be?"

Same thing with comments about the Mauser 96 "not being designed for high pressure cartridges". Okay, it wasn't designed for that, "So what?" Unless "not designed for" equals catastrophic failure, then I don't give a crap what it was designed for. Technically, most of these old actions were only "designed" for one specific cartridge anyway, so if we want to start worrying, we should never re-barrel anything.

The real question is will a mauser 96 action fail if you pretend you're not a gunnut and go ahead and forget you ever heard the word "action" and just grab some full powered ammunition (in whatever caliber your M96 is chambered in) and go ahead and shoot it. For my part, I've never blown one up, or known someone who did.

 

[dan belisle]

I've had 96's in various calibers. Still have one in 6.5-06. Swede steel is pretty strong. The 98 is a better design for when something goes wrong. When it works normally, the 96 works just as well. - dan

 

[MiG25]

i wouldn't hotrod a 100 year old plus rifle.

 

[dan belisle]

Well, that would cover an awful lot of 98 Mauser sporters out there, most of which have had no issues. - dan

 

[H4831]

I have a great idea. We could (somewhat) put an end to the speculation. I have a good shooting Mauser 96 design 7x57 in good shape in some non descript military make.
If some of you guys in south central BC come up with $200 for my rifle, we could have a grand blow up of it and you guys could film it for whatever brand of computer program you wanted.

 

[MiG25]

i suspect that most rifle designs have a very large safety factor built in, and i doubt that the 98 is much stronger than a 96. but other than your own personal amusement, what benefit does an extra 100-200 fps offer?

others might know better, but isn't the brass case ultimately the weakest link in the system?

 

[MiG25]

I have a great idea. We could (somewhat) put an end to the speculation. I have a good shooting Mauser 96 design 7x57 in good shape in some non descript military make.
If some of you guys in south central BC come up with $200 for my rifle, we could have a grand blow up of it and you guys could film it for whatever brand of computer program you wanted.

i have a bubba'ed spanish 93 that i have often thought of testing to destruction. after all, spanish rifles are supposed to be the worst/weakest.

 

[H4831]

i have a bubba'ed spanish 93 that i have often thought of testing to destruction. after all, spanish rifles are supposed to be the worst/weakest.

PM me where in BC you are. Blow up parties would be fun!

 

[Ormachek]

I found that my 96 would get a little bit of a heavier bolt lift about 1 grain under book max, so I stuck to fairly mid-range loads. That being said, I found that I was getting very good velocities with mid-range loads, most likely due to my original 29.5" barrel. Off the top of my head, I believe I had MV of approx 2700 fps with a mid-range load of IMR 4831 and a 140gr bullet.

 

[MiG25]

PM me where in BC you are. Blow up parties would be fun!

i suppose the problem is can a rifle take 1 shot, 5, or a 100 before it lets go?

 

[farshot]

Do they "let go" like a hand grenade if you are 5% over charge? or merely seize up or crack somewhere, sometimes with gas blow back?

From what I have read (and seen) over the years - an actual fragmental blow up occurs with a relatively huge overload (which may not be possible with a close to correct powder type in a case due to volume constraints), plugged bbl, wrong powder (ie fast burning in a large case), defect in brass or rifle, etc.

Just wondering

 

[Northman999]

From what I have read (and seen) over the years - an actual fragmental blow up occurs with a relatively huge overload (which may not be possible with a close to correct powder type in a case due to volume constraints), plugged bbl, wrong powder (ie fast burning in a large case), defect in brass or rifle, etc.

Just wondering

Seems to be what I've gathered.

As I suggested (but did not specify) in my earlier post, I've seen M96's in a few modern , high pressure calibers - 22-250, .270, 7mm rem mag, .308 win and 30-06. The 7mm rem mag is rated for 61 000 psi and the 22-250 and .270 for 65 000 psi. You'd have to work damn hard (or damn recklessly) to get your 6.5x55 to 65 000 psi. And again, those rifles shooting .270 (ect) WERE NOT blowing up. They were working just fine.
So when does a Mauser 96 fail? I don't know, but I'd bet it's noticeably past 65 000 psi.

Comments about not wanting to "hotrod" an old action made earlier are nothing if not sensible, but I just think that there is a big gap between "watering down" loads (which many suggest) and "hotrodding". Personally, I don't water down my loads in any of my M96's, but I'm certainly not shooting loads that give me increased bolt lift or anything like that. Sometimes we can get caught up in paralysis-by-analysis and I'm kind of feeling like the whole M96 vs M98 thing often turns out that way. I load and shoot my own M96's the same as I do every other action I own (I don't own anything older than a Swedish M96), and I do this because I've never seen any evidence that I need to do otherwise.

 

[H4831]

Northman, that's a very good post. You say it like it is.
The amount of experience you have had with the 96 and on those high pressure calibres, certainly indicate it is a normal strength bolt action.
Another thing, shown in your post, is a 270 has a SAAMI pressure rating of 65,000. A 30-06 is in the 50,000 class and all loading books will show their "maximum" load as being in this pressure range. Yet a 270 and a 30-06 is the same rifle, up until they screw the barrel in. So why can't a modern 30-06 be safely loaded to the same pressure as a 270? The obvious answer is, they can.
The way the Mauser 96 is being used in these high pressure calibres, indicate a good Model 96 in it's original calibre, could also be loaded the same as a 98 action in the same calibre.

 

[Northman999]

Northman, that's a very good post. You say it like it is.
The amount of experience you have had with the 96 and on those high pressure calibres, certainly indicate it is a normal strength bolt action.
Another thing, shown in your post, is a 270 has a SAAMI pressure rating of 65,000. A 30-06 is in the 50,000 class and all loading books will show their "maximum" load as being in this pressure range. Yet a 270 and a 30-06 is the same rifle, up until they screw the barrel in. So why can't a modern 30-06 be safely loaded to the same pressure as a 270? The obvious answer is, they can.
The way the Mauser 96 is being used in these high pressure calibres, indicate a good Model 96 in it's original calibre, could also be loaded the same as a 98 action in the same calibre.

You, sir, are a sage!

 

[Baribal]

The M/94 design just can't handle a case failure as good as a modern rifle and does not have a third lug to stop the bolt from backing to your face, and material wise,the '98 is much thicker too. And also, the bolt shroud is not designed to hold-up escaping gases.
It was designed BEFORE the thought of using a higher pressure was raised.
This issue is a real never ending story.

This is what happens when a case head failure occurs in a M/94/96/38

Would someone chamber a Rolling Block in .300 WM?

 

[ratherbefishin]

I'm not sure why anyone would WANT to hotrod a 96-I've got several swedes in 6.5x55 and 9.3x57-and they are sweet rifles,accurate, very efficient,low recoil and well made.If you wanted to push the limits-why wouldn't you get something designed for high pressure loads?

 

[Northman999]

The M/94 design just can't handle a case failure as good as a modern rifle and does not have a third lug to stop the bolt from backing to your face, and material wise,the '98 is much thicker too. And also, the bolt shroud is not designed to hold-up escaping gases.
It was designed BEFORE the thought of using a higher pressure was raised.
This issue is a real never ending story.

This is what happens when a case head failure occurs in a M/94/96/38

Would someone chamber a Rolling Block in .300 WM?

Thanks for the great pic!