mauser actions
- Thread starter mike Crawford
- Start date
- Location
- kingston Ontario
No floor plate .. It has a magazine that hold four shells I believe .. I have not shot it yet 
))
You have to remove the shells by running them through the gun I guess
)) You have to remove the shells by running them through the gun I guess
- Location
- kingston Ontario
Yes it was hard to turn down .. Another had first dibs on it .. As he responded too the ad first ...
Then backed out .. I thought it was gone for sure .. But I just told him if by chance the other guy did not take it ... to email me
I did not even try to get a better price ... I just said my wallet is in the truck .. I will be right back
Nice rifle Mike in a good calibre. The 33-40 was the precursor of the Brno 21 - 22 series, a small ring and barrel thread combination
with lightening cuts on the outside of the bottom rails. Also I believe the left side wall was lightened - at quick glance it may look
like a large ring. Should be no problem loading a bit hot - (using common sense of course). --- John
with lightening cuts on the outside of the bottom rails. Also I believe the left side wall was lightened - at quick glance it may look
like a large ring. Should be no problem loading a bit hot - (using common sense of course). --- John
One of the advantages of CRF is that you don't have to close the bolt to run the shells out of the mag. Just work it back and forth.No floor plate .. It has a magazine that hold four shells I believe .. I have not shot it yet
You have to remove the shells by running them through the gun I guess
If I were to build a light weight rifle on a light weight action like the G33/40, I would have built it without bottom metal as well. That is a really well done custom.
- Location
- kingston Ontario
Yes I think it is 200 dollars well spent LOL ... Well I have to put gas money and a coffee on top of that .. But I think I did OK ...:)
I got Three full boxes of Remington shells and one box of Hornady .. So I thought the shells and the scope would close to 200.00 anyway
What should a gun like this be worth ... Ball park of course.. More than 200.00 ?????
)I got Three full boxes of Remington shells and one box of Hornady .. So I thought the shells and the scope would close to 200.00 anyway
What should a gun like this be worth ... Ball park of course.. More than 200.00 ?????
The down point of the M/94/96/38 is it's poor escaping gas handling and for the same reason, the fact that it caries only two bolt lugs. Not that the action can't stand higher pressure rounds, because it was chambered for 7.62 NATO - but, if you ever get one CG63 or 80 in your hands, check the bolt and realize they have a hole drilled in it to evacuate the escaping gases of a broken shell base through the magazine....
The steel of you Mausers is quite similar, about equivalent to SAE/AISI 1024 for the M/94/96/38 and about SAE/AISI 1036 for most pre-WWII M/98. Mauser had developped a hard shell (case hardening) with soft core, to avoid the broken actions shattering in small shrapnels, and this was not changed before the very end of WWII (mostly by FN and Brno).
Now, the standard CIP PROOF pressure for a round like, say, the 8X57IS is 1.25 times the MAP (57 700 PSI), so, it's around 72 000 PSI - for a "standard" caliber.
Then, consider the HVA 1640 series, a small ring Mauser (compound of 94 and 98 features) with a third lug and modern steel, when chambered for the .358 Norma Magnum having a MAP of 4400 bar, or, 63 817 PSI, facing a proof pressure of 5500 bar (1.25X4400 bar) or, if one prefers, 79 771 PSI.... never saw one failing.
So, you're plenty good to go, as long as you respect the animals you are handling. The key is "respect".
The steel of you Mausers is quite similar, about equivalent to SAE/AISI 1024 for the M/94/96/38 and about SAE/AISI 1036 for most pre-WWII M/98. Mauser had developped a hard shell (case hardening) with soft core, to avoid the broken actions shattering in small shrapnels, and this was not changed before the very end of WWII (mostly by FN and Brno).
Now, the standard CIP PROOF pressure for a round like, say, the 8X57IS is 1.25 times the MAP (57 700 PSI), so, it's around 72 000 PSI - for a "standard" caliber.
Then, consider the HVA 1640 series, a small ring Mauser (compound of 94 and 98 features) with a third lug and modern steel, when chambered for the .358 Norma Magnum having a MAP of 4400 bar, or, 63 817 PSI, facing a proof pressure of 5500 bar (1.25X4400 bar) or, if one prefers, 79 771 PSI.... never saw one failing.
So, you're plenty good to go, as long as you respect the animals you are handling. The key is "respect".
Yes I think it is 200 dollars well spent LOL ... Well I have to put gas money and a coffee on top of that .. But I think I did OK ...:
I got Three full boxes of Remington shells and one box of Hornady .. So I thought the shells and the scope would close to 200.00 anyway
What should a gun like this be worth ... Ball park of course.. More than 200.00 ?????
I'll give you 400 for it today.
Seriously, you got a heck of a deal!
- Location
- kingston Ontario
I paid more than 200 for sure . But I am happy like a school girl ... that is why I am up at midnite LOL ,, I can;t sleep ... I want to shoot my new guns...
turbo_bird
CGN Ultra frequent flyer
- Location
- Kamloops, BC
In my speer reloading manual there is separate data for mauser 96 actions and strong commercial actions with hotter loads. Nice score on the sporter.
Kristian
Kristian
The down point of the M/94/96/38 is it's poor escaping gas handling and for the same reason, the fact that it caries only two bolt lugs. Not that the action can't stand higher pressure rounds, because it was chambered for 7.62 NATO - but, if you ever get one CG63 or 80 in your hands, check the bolt and realize they have a hole drilled in it to evacuate the escaping gases of a broken shell base through the magazine....
The steel of you Mausers is quite similar, about equivalent to SAE/AISI 1024 for the M/94/96/38 and about SAE/AISI 1036 for most pre-WWII M/98. Mauser had developped a hard shell (case hardening) with soft core, to avoid the broken actions shattering in small shrapnels, and this was not changed before the very end of WWII (mostly by FN and Brno).
Now, the standard CIP PROOF pressure for a round like, say, the 8X57IS is 1.25 times the MAP (57 700 PSI), so, it's around 72 000 PSI - for a "standard" caliber.
Then, consider the HVA 1640 series, a small ring Mauser (compound of 94 and 98 features) with a third lug and modern steel, when chambered for the .358 Norma Magnum having a MAP of 4400 bar, or, 63 817 PSI, facing a proof pressure of 5500 bar (1.25X4400 bar) or, if one prefers, 79 771 PSI.... never saw one failing.
So, you're plenty good to go, as long as you respect the animals you are handling. The key is "respect".
Baribal, between you Ganderite and Smellie, we have gotten some very definitive information on Swede and other Mausers.
This information may be widely known by a narrow few but for most of us it is play and learn as you go.
None of it is rocket science, whatever that is, but the information you three put out is not commonly available, unless, you know exactly where to look or have special access to the knowledge.
Much appreciated. Many years ago, there was a fellow just out of Portland Oregon that was converting 98 Krags to 308 Winchester. Wayne something or other. I was just so skeptical about those conversions that I just didn't pay a lot of attention to him. I did however pay attention to his workmanship on the rifle. He did the metal work. He used a bunch of Springfield made Krag actions that he had picked up reasonably from the CMP, if I remember right. He jobbed out the rough work on the stocks and his wife fitted and finished them, including some of the most perfect checkering patterns and leaf reliefs I can ever remember seeing since. He made those rifles up in 243Win as well.
He swore up and down to me that the rifles were safe, even with commercial ammo and his rifles were not only smooth as glass but accurate. This was a purely custom business. He had a half dozen display rifles on hand with stocks made from different type of wood. They were light, smooth as silk to handle and from the targets he displayed very accurate. The polish and blueing were also flawless. You had a choice of barrels that were available at the time and the price of even the cheapest, plain Jane model was about twice that of a high end Winchester Mod 70 though and to tell the truth, I was leery about the strength of the action.
Later on, there were others doing similar things with similar actions. There were rumors that gas escape ports were being drilled to make them safer as well. Many gun mag authors of the period shunned these creations as well. They came up with all sorts of ideas as to why these rifles weren't safe.
In 1975, I visited PO Ackley. I had read his books and articles every chance I had. HE was a great fellow. I visited him at his shop in Ogden Utah.
He was impressed with the fact that my girlfriend and I had ridden my 850 full dress Moto Guzzi all the way from British Columbia and taken the time to drop in to see his shop. He understood that we had taken a several hundred mile detour to do so. He loved to explain his theories and tests and had no qualms about his failures.
One thing he did manage to impress upon me was that even though Kabooms happened, it usually had little or nothing to do with the actions themselves. Often as not, outside factors were involved. He explained to me the testing he had done on several actions to compare their individual strengths against each other. He made it pretty plain that it was very difficult to blow an action up. Even with gross overloads they seldom let go.
Their barrels would burst first or the cartridge case/primer would fail and blow bits and pieces out of any hole available. Now, this isn't the case with many muzzle loaders. They can detonate when the powder is packed with an air space. Not the rifle's fault. Sometimes, soft receivers will let go as well. The most common form is the top receiver ring coming off because it is the weakest part of the ring. Even in those cases, as long as the shooter was wearing proper protection, injuries were few and far between.
Understand, we're talking about bolt action rifles. His treatise was that the actions are as strong as their weakest component.
While in his shop, I saw actions being converted to cartridges that I would never consider, even today. Old habits die hard. Ganderite and Baribal echo most of his words. Not only that, Ganderite has actually done experiments to confirm Ackley's findings. Ackley told me that he had taught in a University, concerning gunsmithing and did a lot of experiments while he was there. He felt those were some of his best days.
The steel of you Mausers is quite similar, about equivalent to SAE/AISI 1024 for the M/94/96/38 and about SAE/AISI 1036 for most pre-WWII M/98. Mauser had developped a hard shell (case hardening) with soft core, to avoid the broken actions shattering in small shrapnels, and this was not changed before the very end of WWII (mostly by FN and Brno).
Now, the standard CIP PROOF pressure for a round like, say, the 8X57IS is 1.25 times the MAP (57 700 PSI), so, it's around 72 000 PSI - for a "standard" caliber.
Then, consider the HVA 1640 series, a small ring Mauser (compound of 94 and 98 features) with a third lug and modern steel, when chambered for the .358 Norma Magnum having a MAP of 4400 bar, or, 63 817 PSI, facing a proof pressure of 5500 bar (1.25X4400 bar) or, if one prefers, 79 771 PSI.... never saw one failing.
So, you're plenty good to go, as long as you respect the animals you are handling. The key is "respect".
Baribal, between you Ganderite and Smellie, we have gotten some very definitive information on Swede and other Mausers.
This information may be widely known by a narrow few but for most of us it is play and learn as you go.
None of it is rocket science, whatever that is, but the information you three put out is not commonly available, unless, you know exactly where to look or have special access to the knowledge.
Much appreciated. Many years ago, there was a fellow just out of Portland Oregon that was converting 98 Krags to 308 Winchester. Wayne something or other. I was just so skeptical about those conversions that I just didn't pay a lot of attention to him. I did however pay attention to his workmanship on the rifle. He did the metal work. He used a bunch of Springfield made Krag actions that he had picked up reasonably from the CMP, if I remember right. He jobbed out the rough work on the stocks and his wife fitted and finished them, including some of the most perfect checkering patterns and leaf reliefs I can ever remember seeing since. He made those rifles up in 243Win as well.
He swore up and down to me that the rifles were safe, even with commercial ammo and his rifles were not only smooth as glass but accurate. This was a purely custom business. He had a half dozen display rifles on hand with stocks made from different type of wood. They were light, smooth as silk to handle and from the targets he displayed very accurate. The polish and blueing were also flawless. You had a choice of barrels that were available at the time and the price of even the cheapest, plain Jane model was about twice that of a high end Winchester Mod 70 though and to tell the truth, I was leery about the strength of the action.
Later on, there were others doing similar things with similar actions. There were rumors that gas escape ports were being drilled to make them safer as well. Many gun mag authors of the period shunned these creations as well. They came up with all sorts of ideas as to why these rifles weren't safe.
In 1975, I visited PO Ackley. I had read his books and articles every chance I had. HE was a great fellow. I visited him at his shop in Ogden Utah.
He was impressed with the fact that my girlfriend and I had ridden my 850 full dress Moto Guzzi all the way from British Columbia and taken the time to drop in to see his shop. He understood that we had taken a several hundred mile detour to do so. He loved to explain his theories and tests and had no qualms about his failures.
One thing he did manage to impress upon me was that even though Kabooms happened, it usually had little or nothing to do with the actions themselves. Often as not, outside factors were involved. He explained to me the testing he had done on several actions to compare their individual strengths against each other. He made it pretty plain that it was very difficult to blow an action up. Even with gross overloads they seldom let go.
Their barrels would burst first or the cartridge case/primer would fail and blow bits and pieces out of any hole available. Now, this isn't the case with many muzzle loaders. They can detonate when the powder is packed with an air space. Not the rifle's fault. Sometimes, soft receivers will let go as well. The most common form is the top receiver ring coming off because it is the weakest part of the ring. Even in those cases, as long as the shooter was wearing proper protection, injuries were few and far between.
Understand, we're talking about bolt action rifles. His treatise was that the actions are as strong as their weakest component.
While in his shop, I saw actions being converted to cartridges that I would never consider, even today. Old habits die hard. Ganderite and Baribal echo most of his words. Not only that, Ganderite has actually done experiments to confirm Ackley's findings. Ackley told me that he had taught in a University, concerning gunsmithing and did a lot of experiments while he was there. He felt those were some of his best days.
Well, Bearhunter,
Thanks for the kind words.
Sharing our experiences is what forums are about, I personally hate when it turns to personal attacks and stubborn discussions...
In fact Ackley himself - in his 'Volume II" - speaks about the respect we owe to the pre-98 Mausers for what they are; desing of the less than 60 000 PSI MAP calibers era.
Since the huge amount of Swedish Mausers, M/96/38/41B (M/94 to a much lesser extent), FSR, CG63 and CG80 have shown in America, we can document more and more of blown guns, mostly in 6.5X55. While this does not happen everyday or weeks or even months, we know several well documented cases.
And, as far as I can tell, they almost all involved pretty slow burning powders - with what one would consider reasonable pressure.
We also know since a long time that set back occured - creating excessive headspace - on some reworked M/96 by Kimber (well, Kimber is a complicated story). This is likely due to lug lapping, which, on a old Mauser, removes the case hardening layer to a point where it just can't be strong enough to handle the pressure without deforming.
Anyhow, while being a much better action than the 54, early Winchester M/70 were also known to badly handle escaping gases from a case head rupture when heat treatment or steel purity was not there. The modern alloyed steel qualities are used to compensate for lack of safeties Paul Mauser introduced in his M/98 (especially larger steel ring and large gas handling capabilities).
Like for the Springfield '03, they used alloy steel instead of the plane Jane low carbon steel used by Mauser. Once they've learned to control the heat treatment better (it was pretty now then and the same went for the P-14/M17), they've been able to make these rifles much better - even if they lacked the extra built-in safeties of the M/98.... Even Ross used swedish steel for it's purity.
With today's processed steel and machinery, it's much easier to monitor heat treatment and to keep the limits and fits very sharp... but to my point of view, modern production rifles often loose a lot of personality in the process...
Finally, if I had to build a high power (60 000 PSI and UP, including Magnum calibers) rifle using a standard lenght cartridge (3.340" or so) on a Mauser, I'd stay with post WWII production, like the triangle FNH - Santa Barbara (P-H 1100, 1200) - Zastava (or Mark X, Rem 798) or a Brno - ZG - ZKK - Cz or a HVA 1640, or even better for a Magnum, if one can find one, a rare Brevex Magnum Mauser.... but that's another story
Thanks for the kind words.
Sharing our experiences is what forums are about, I personally hate when it turns to personal attacks and stubborn discussions...
In fact Ackley himself - in his 'Volume II" - speaks about the respect we owe to the pre-98 Mausers for what they are; desing of the less than 60 000 PSI MAP calibers era.
Since the huge amount of Swedish Mausers, M/96/38/41B (M/94 to a much lesser extent), FSR, CG63 and CG80 have shown in America, we can document more and more of blown guns, mostly in 6.5X55. While this does not happen everyday or weeks or even months, we know several well documented cases.
And, as far as I can tell, they almost all involved pretty slow burning powders - with what one would consider reasonable pressure.
We also know since a long time that set back occured - creating excessive headspace - on some reworked M/96 by Kimber (well, Kimber is a complicated story). This is likely due to lug lapping, which, on a old Mauser, removes the case hardening layer to a point where it just can't be strong enough to handle the pressure without deforming.
Anyhow, while being a much better action than the 54, early Winchester M/70 were also known to badly handle escaping gases from a case head rupture when heat treatment or steel purity was not there. The modern alloyed steel qualities are used to compensate for lack of safeties Paul Mauser introduced in his M/98 (especially larger steel ring and large gas handling capabilities).
Like for the Springfield '03, they used alloy steel instead of the plane Jane low carbon steel used by Mauser. Once they've learned to control the heat treatment better (it was pretty now then and the same went for the P-14/M17), they've been able to make these rifles much better - even if they lacked the extra built-in safeties of the M/98.... Even Ross used swedish steel for it's purity.
With today's processed steel and machinery, it's much easier to monitor heat treatment and to keep the limits and fits very sharp... but to my point of view, modern production rifles often loose a lot of personality in the process...
Finally, if I had to build a high power (60 000 PSI and UP, including Magnum calibers) rifle using a standard lenght cartridge (3.340" or so) on a Mauser, I'd stay with post WWII production, like the triangle FNH - Santa Barbara (P-H 1100, 1200) - Zastava (or Mark X, Rem 798) or a Brno - ZG - ZKK - Cz or a HVA 1640, or even better for a Magnum, if one can find one, a rare Brevex Magnum Mauser.... but that's another story
Last edited:
Baribal, your mention of good Swedish steel perked me up.
I was a kid, growing up in the boon docks of northern Canada prior to WW2. All sorts of hand tools were very much a part of adult life, and as an observant kid, I always knew what went on. I was very much aware that the finest tools; axes, saws, knives and other wood cutting tools in particular, that one could get, had two words on them, "Swedish Steel."
Quite early in my life I had a 30-06 rifle, a cheapie Savage with a dark bore, but it never missed a moose and they died just the same. I have told the story on here before, but as Christmas 1949 approached I decided to get my own Christmas present, a new rifle. I felt flush, walked into a local hardware store, prepared to buy any rifle I wanted. Among the choices was a Model 70 Winchester in 30-06, but when I spied the newly imported to Canada, Husqvarna, and there on top of the large ring Mauser 98 action was the Swedish Crown, I was sold! Baribal, I think you once told me the action of that rifle is a FM. I was also impressed by the light weight of the Swede, with its slim, 24 inch barrel, which I later measured as only .526 inches in diameter, a half inch back from the muzzle, I could look at no other rifles and I have never regretted that decision.
It has been on many very hard trips, soaking wet with rain and wet snow for days at a time, but I will mention one trip in particular. We were packing up to go home from a trip in the mountains, with the caribou(s) loaded on the horses. We were all set to leave, with the horses tied to a rail. I went to get my saddle horse, with my rifle over my shoulder, when I had to leave to help one of my two partners with something. I set the rifle down, leaning it against the rail the horses were tied to. I was gone a bit longer than intended and when I returned my rifle, this same 30-06 Husqvarna, was laying in the mud and my horse was standing with his big front foot on the barrel of my rifle!
Of course, I cleaned it up good when I got home and I could see no damage.
A week later two of us were again on a trip in the mountains, this time a back packing trip for mountain goats. We were in the mountains hunting when I remembered I hadn't checked the sighting after the horse had been standing on my rifle in the mud! Rifle shots have little to do with scaring goats, so I picked out a white stone across a gully and aligned my Lyman 48 aperture sight with the front post and held on the white rock. Chips flew, indicating a good hit, so we carried on and later in the day I killed a goat.
A couple of years ago I decided a Lyman All American would be a good, period correct, one time prestigious hunting scope, to have on the rifle, probably when a son or grand son takes it over. Thus, I bought a fixed four power Lyman AA on the EE, from Ted.
I loaded up some 180 grain Grand Slam bullets with 58 grains of IMR4350, to sight in the Lyman scope. When it was sighted in I had four left over, so I just shot a four shot group on the hundred yard target.
Before writing this article today, I went to the basement and again checked that target, which was fired one after the other, with no thought about letting the slim barrel cool between shots. As near as I can measure it the four shots, centre to centre measure .625 inch!
There are much more expensive hunting rifles on the market, but are they better? I may put up an argument on that point.
Bruce
I was a kid, growing up in the boon docks of northern Canada prior to WW2. All sorts of hand tools were very much a part of adult life, and as an observant kid, I always knew what went on. I was very much aware that the finest tools; axes, saws, knives and other wood cutting tools in particular, that one could get, had two words on them, "Swedish Steel."
Quite early in my life I had a 30-06 rifle, a cheapie Savage with a dark bore, but it never missed a moose and they died just the same. I have told the story on here before, but as Christmas 1949 approached I decided to get my own Christmas present, a new rifle. I felt flush, walked into a local hardware store, prepared to buy any rifle I wanted. Among the choices was a Model 70 Winchester in 30-06, but when I spied the newly imported to Canada, Husqvarna, and there on top of the large ring Mauser 98 action was the Swedish Crown, I was sold! Baribal, I think you once told me the action of that rifle is a FM. I was also impressed by the light weight of the Swede, with its slim, 24 inch barrel, which I later measured as only .526 inches in diameter, a half inch back from the muzzle, I could look at no other rifles and I have never regretted that decision.
It has been on many very hard trips, soaking wet with rain and wet snow for days at a time, but I will mention one trip in particular. We were packing up to go home from a trip in the mountains, with the caribou(s) loaded on the horses. We were all set to leave, with the horses tied to a rail. I went to get my saddle horse, with my rifle over my shoulder, when I had to leave to help one of my two partners with something. I set the rifle down, leaning it against the rail the horses were tied to. I was gone a bit longer than intended and when I returned my rifle, this same 30-06 Husqvarna, was laying in the mud and my horse was standing with his big front foot on the barrel of my rifle!
Of course, I cleaned it up good when I got home and I could see no damage.
A week later two of us were again on a trip in the mountains, this time a back packing trip for mountain goats. We were in the mountains hunting when I remembered I hadn't checked the sighting after the horse had been standing on my rifle in the mud! Rifle shots have little to do with scaring goats, so I picked out a white stone across a gully and aligned my Lyman 48 aperture sight with the front post and held on the white rock. Chips flew, indicating a good hit, so we carried on and later in the day I killed a goat.
A couple of years ago I decided a Lyman All American would be a good, period correct, one time prestigious hunting scope, to have on the rifle, probably when a son or grand son takes it over. Thus, I bought a fixed four power Lyman AA on the EE, from Ted.
I loaded up some 180 grain Grand Slam bullets with 58 grains of IMR4350, to sight in the Lyman scope. When it was sighted in I had four left over, so I just shot a four shot group on the hundred yard target.
Before writing this article today, I went to the basement and again checked that target, which was fired one after the other, with no thought about letting the slim barrel cool between shots. As near as I can measure it the four shots, centre to centre measure .625 inch!
There are much more expensive hunting rifles on the market, but are they better? I may put up an argument on that point.
Bruce
Last edited:
Bruce,
If I remember well, your rifle was a so-called "Hi-Power" either a "1950" or a "1951" ?? can't remember for sure, but these were made on FN actions and are quite good ones. And by after WWII, HVA started making cold hammer forged barrels, some of the best ever made - just before Sako did.
What is sad is that our memories don't follow our guns, unless we pass it on to someone who knows us very well...
If I remember well, your rifle was a so-called "Hi-Power" either a "1950" or a "1951" ?? can't remember for sure, but these were made on FN actions and are quite good ones. And by after WWII, HVA started making cold hammer forged barrels, some of the best ever made - just before Sako did.
What is sad is that our memories don't follow our guns, unless we pass it on to someone who knows us very well...
I guess my point was not well stated, my apologies. As other more knowledgeable folks have already stated, back in the day, these rifles were proofed (at a greater pressure than their "working" pressure. Published data these days take into account all sorts of rifle types and have to be safe to a certain extent, so perhaps they are a little weaker than a particular action's actual intended "working" pressure. That being said, it is up to the handloader to work up loads to the specific rifle. The handloader should also research, particularly on older rifles, what the design working pressures were intended. SAAMI - lawyered up or not, are good reference points for safety in reloading. Some factory loads are hotter, others not, either way, I am not aware of any factory load which exceeds recommended (published) "working" pressures of a particular caliber.
And that's the whole point. We have to recommend above all - safety first - to those unfamiliar with handloading. I am all too familiar with pressure systems and the issues arising when the "design working pressure" is regularly exceeded and pushed closer to the "test pressures". All I advocate is safety first, and then cautious experimentation only to the working limits the firearm was designed to - anemic or not.
