Parker Hale Soldered scope bases

P

Potashminer

CGN Ultra frequent flyer
Uber Super GunNutz
Rating - 100%
586   0   0
Location
Western Manitoba
So, back in the day Parker Hale made and sold many types of commercial sporter mauser rifles - I have two here - one in marked Safari Super, the other is marked Safari De Luxe. Both of these have the soldered Parker Hale bases - no mounting screws, just a divot in the centre of each to accept the recoil stud on the Parker Hale rings. And, pretty much, ONLY Parker Hale rings fit these bases.

The Safari Super has been badly abused - the front base has been removed, although significant solder remains. I have a loose front base that was removed from a different rifle by someone else. I am considering trying to replace that front base, but am curious about what solder was used - one "story" is that it is genuine "silver solder" which was set while the receiver was going through it's heat treat series - requires very near to red hot temperature, apparently. The competing story is that it is basic lead/tin solder.

I have some 4% silver / 96% tin solder with appropriate flux that I intended to use - the melting point is about 450 F (220 C). Thought I would clean the surfaces, "tin" with the 4%/96%, then "sweat" the two pieces together.

So any comments appreciated - any hints how to clean off that old solder from the receiver and the base? Any "neat" ideas how to position and hold the thing in place as the "tinned" surfaces go liquid? Is this going to "wreck" this mauser receiver?
 
Last edited:
It may have already been 'wrecked' while removing the front silver soldered base... I suggest you shoot a few hot loads through it and see if the lugs set back in the action and the head space changes. If the lugs set back it will be extremely hard to extract the case as opening the bolt has to force the case ahead into the chamber to get over the 'hump' in the lug recesses caused by the set back.

Filing and polishing is the safe way to remove the exposed left over silver solder... and re bluing. Drilling and tapping is the correct way to mount the front base.
 
Thank you for the comments, guntech. As shown in pictures below, I am stuck with the original rear base still in position, so I thought to either re-attach an original front, or file/scrape/polish the front base area, and repeat to remove the rear base. No hints at all as to how the front base was removed - no sign that I can see of heat on the pre-existing bluing, but lots of evidence of rough handling to remove the barrel (vise teeth marks along the barrel, evidence of something like a crescent wrench used behind the front receiver ring to unscrew the action from the barrel) As the seller described, looks like Bubba's dumber cousin has been at work. The original barrel's chamber is ruined with several gouges / divots as if trying to pry something out of chamber. I have a replacement 243 Win barrel on hand, if I can sort out the scope base issues. A Brownells Receiver Facing Mandrel does slide through and hand tightens to the C-ring, so, as is, it is "straight enough"...

IMG_1898.jpg

IMG_1899.jpg
 

Attachments

  • IMG_1898.jpg
    IMG_1898.jpg
    73.5 KB · Views: 168
  • IMG_1899.jpg
    IMG_1899.jpg
    45.2 KB · Views: 167
Question/ idea / need to check

did they remove the front sight base to make it easier to remove the barrel ?

if they used a wrench behind the round portion of the receiver ?? did they twist the receiver ? making it junk

there is a flat on the bottom (recoil lug) and a flat on the top ( sight base ) can you check to see if they are still square before you do anything ?

to me it looks like instead of heat, they used a chisel to remove the front sight
 
answers to Post #4 - I am guessing, but do not know, that the first attempt at unscrewing action was using something like the flats of crescent wrench jaws on flat behind recoil shoulder and flat on top of front base, which ripped off or loosened that front base - I tend to agree that the front base was apparently removed mechanically, not by melting the solder. The axis of the rear action screw hole is no longer perfectly in line with axis of the front action screw hole, so there is some amount of a "twist" through the magazine area. However, as mentioned, an action mandrel slips through and hand screws into the receiver barrel threads, so makes me think the thing might be "salvagable" - barrel tenon threads are still round, the bolt slides through and locks up easily. Harbouring no illusions about it - thought I would try to clean it up, install replacement barrel that I have doing nothing, repair the stock and see what the holes in the targets tell me. Selling the bolt, the hinged floor plate magazine/trigger guard and the adjustable trigger would easily recover what I paid for it, but what would be the "fun" in that??
 
If it was mine I would simply saw the action in half and throw it in the metal bin and salvage the bolt and any other parts...
 
I think tradeex canada prob has the lowest cost used guns ... Complete

If I was going to do a rebarrel job and looking for a donor action I would look there ..... or a cheep Savage or rem 783

add a Boyds stock and go on from there

I have a Savage and a 783 and both have seen the big die grinder on there plastic stocks.... trying to find out how well they shoot before they get or do not get a Boyds
 
So, same action as shown in Post #3, several hours later. As per Post #2, careful with file, then scraper, then 320 grit emory. Used hacksaw to remove bulk of rear base, then 14" bastard file, then repeat scraping, etc. as for the front base. Three coats of Birchwood Casey "Super Blue". Soaked with oil. Gentle polish with 4/0 steel wool. Learned some things. There is a distinct "shoulder" all around the footprint of those "soldered" bases - I believe the receiver's final polish was done after the bases were soldered in place, so "perfect" would actually require a re-grind / re-polish of those top surfaces. I don't have resources here to replicate the PH dark bluing, so touch up cold blue will have to do. Will next try out a new-to-me Forster jig to drill / tap for conventional bases, after headspacing the replacement barrel.

IMG_1912.jpg
 

Attachments

  • IMG_1912.jpg
    IMG_1912.jpg
    72.2 KB · Views: 113
If there was any quantity of twist in the barrel the bolt wouldn't work. 1/64 scuppered an action I have. That said, they can't really be straightened again either. The action is FN and while I don't have the specs on hand it has identical properties to 4140. It's not junk -- FN built actions for Sako, Weatherby, Browning, Parker Hale, during this era.

Unless you want to sell it to me. In which case, I'll give you $20 cause it's just a paperweight...that I have NOS rings and bases for.
 
Ha! I might just take you up on your offer, Dogfish!! However, as earlier mentioned, a mandrel slides though easily and hand screws tight to the C-ring, and the bolt slips in and out and locks up appropriately. I am not a commercial guy - nobody could make any money at the hours this thing is taking - but just a retired guy with many Brownell & Forster tools and jigs, passing away a weekday or two, or three... I do know that bent metal can not be bent back to shape - too much stretching occurs. Just hoping to get it back running as a 243 Win - attach a scope, repair the stock, bed it and go out and scare a few coyotes. Not going to be a target rifle, nor am I a competitive shooter.
 
I would suggest you fit a barrel and test fire it a few times with hot loads and see if the lugs set back or if it works fine... before doing anything else... if the lugs set back with hot loads the action is toast... why drill and tap, etc before you know if the action is good...
 
Yep, fire off a set of loads, before doing anything else - that is a good suggestion! At this point I have nothing to indicate what allowed the front base to be removed, so excessive heat is possible. I do have a serviceable stock that will work for that. Thanks.
 
If Parker Hale then it would have been through proof, and if aluminum bases silver braze wouldn't have been used as the bases would melt at about the same temps or even before the braze/solder and the ring would be starting to glow. These actions were used for the first Weatherby branded rifles as well.

That said test shots would hurt nothing and potentially save a ton of work.
 
Those bases definitely not aluminum - the pieces are picked up by a magnet, and that rear one was a chore to saw through with hacksaw, so some type of iron/steel. The Birmingham proof mark on the original barrel is showing Q X B which is 1965 proof, if I read the hallowellco.com table correctly.
 
Weren't the PH commercial pattern Mauser actions made in Spain?
I have seen four different types. Military, with thumb cut in left sidewall; commercial with full "C" inner collar; commercial with "( )" inner collar; commercial with no internal collar.
 
I am familiar with the actions made in Spain - some had the word "Spain" ground or scratched off; I think I had a Voere that still had the full word in place along the tang, below the wood line. This one is a commercial action (no thumb cut) with a "C", not an "H", internal collar, and no evidence of a stamping existing or being removed along the left side of the rear tang. Only other markings on exposed metal is the "BNP" and a three digit serial number on the left side of the front receiver ring.
 
Ah gotcha; my rings and bases look the same but are aluminum.

Tiriaq gave me pause so hit the books. It looks as though Santa Barbaras were factory d&t. It would *seem* that this is early commercial FN. But who knows. My PH Safari is built on a Vz-24.
 
I just checked on various loose Parker Hale bases here - the ones that attach with screws - have several dozen - none are attracted to magnet; have 5 or 6 pairs of Parker Hale rings - high RAHS and low RALS - only the screws and the recoil stud attract the magnet, so those bases and rings could be aluminum. The "correct" pair of bases for this type of rifle are listed by Parker Hale as # 22 and # 28 - both of them are thicker - say about .100" taller, than the soldered ones.
 
There have been different European rifles with bases integral with the receivers. Perhaps this is what PH was attempting to emulate with these permanently attached bases. Can't imagine it was easier, cheaper or more efficient to permanently attach the bases, rather than drilling and tapping. Certainly less versatile.
Silver solder (silver braze) takes red heat. That would certainly affect receiver heat treatment, whether the receiver is carburized mild steel or something like 4140.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom