Swede M96 Action Strenght
- Thread starter Pathfinder
- Start date
/shrug
The M96 action seems to be plenty strong enough to handle the 8x57 Mauser which hucks out bullets within ~100-200 fps of the 30-06 in the same weight.
I've seen them chambered in 6.5x284 too, which is probably not a low pressure round.
I'd say it's a reasonably strong action and one that I have confidence in in normal rifle calibers.
I'd look at it a little more closely if I was going to chamber it in 458 Lott or such.
+1 out to TradeEx. Those guys really are the ****. Beautiful mauser action rifles, correctly described on the site and delivered to your door in less than a week.
The M96 action seems to be plenty strong enough to handle the 8x57 Mauser which hucks out bullets within ~100-200 fps of the 30-06 in the same weight.
I've seen them chambered in 6.5x284 too, which is probably not a low pressure round.
I'd say it's a reasonably strong action and one that I have confidence in in normal rifle calibers.
I'd look at it a little more closely if I was going to chamber it in 458 Lott or such.
+1 out to TradeEx. Those guys really are the ****. Beautiful mauser action rifles, correctly described on the site and delivered to your door in less than a week.
meathunter62
Member
- Location
- Cranbrook/BC
Your right Ron Smith from Alberta makes RKS-Brl's.
manbearpig
CGN Ultra frequent flyer
- Location
- Somewhere in the Third World
i dont think its should be a question of 'hey guys do you think its safe to chamber _____ in .30-06?'.
i think you should simply be asking yourself 'is it worth the risk?'.
really, is it?
even if theres a 0.001% chance, is it worth it?
i value my health, my eyesight, my fingers, and i have a family. theres a reason they added the safety features and large ring in the M98s, and their simple existence is good enough reason for me to use a large ring Mauser for a modern chambering.
a strong, well-designed action also minimizes the damage to a shooter in case of a failure. with so many suitable actions available for a few hundred bucks why even #%@$ around with high pressure loads in a small ring?
i think you should simply be asking yourself 'is it worth the risk?'.
really, is it?
even if theres a 0.001% chance, is it worth it?
i value my health, my eyesight, my fingers, and i have a family. theres a reason they added the safety features and large ring in the M98s, and their simple existence is good enough reason for me to use a large ring Mauser for a modern chambering.
a strong, well-designed action also minimizes the damage to a shooter in case of a failure. with so many suitable actions available for a few hundred bucks why even #%@$ around with high pressure loads in a small ring?
meathunter62
Member
- Location
- Cranbrook/BC
Thanks for that 'Why Not'. I'll try again: starting out at a 1:12 twist-rate & exiting at 1:7 twist-rate.
- Location
- Ft. Mac. Alberta
Andy, that was Charley sisk, and both he and Barsness have been know to be a little sarcastic on more than one occasion, and the 9.3B.S. was one of those times.
i followed the design of that cartridge on the 24 hour campfire and some of the comments were nothing short of rib splitting!
The fact that they took the rifle to Africa was just an aside, and I am nor sure wether or not Charley was serious when he was slagging the Mauser action.
Cat
- Location
- Ft. Mac. Alberta
meathunter62
Member
- Location
- Cranbrook/BC
In reponce to 'Manbearpig': I can understand your safety-concerns mate, but aren't you at least concerned & wondering about your 'odds' while sqeezing the triggers of any modern manufactured actions; as the vast majority of these lack all of the 'basic' safety-features that comes standard in any of the Mauser 98 or M38/96 (disregarding that very questionable 3th safety-lug)? Worser even: most of these action are now machined from 'Pre-cast' billets of questionable steel-properties/hardness!! It clearly shows how over-engineered the M98 (and M38/96 to a slightly lesser degree) action-design really is? Not even mentioning actions such as the Schulz & Larsen M54 (wich could easily withstand .50BMG pressures if only the action was large enough to handle the longer case)!! *Note: Wby's MKV don't qualify in my book!
meathunter62
Member
- Location
- Cranbrook/BC
Bolt-action rifle-safety: lug-engagement!
The question of safety-issues of the M96/38 chambered for certain non-standard cal.'s is in my eyes a very, very minor issue!
My yrs of gunmaking-experience has tought me that a more important factor of safety is the question of the amount of 'lug-engagement' deemed necessary to be considered safe. Not weather any older style action is save/unsafe for certain cal.'s, because these 'so-called' continious corner-cutting, budget-hungry & profit-orienteered 'expert' rifle-manufacturers tell us so!
Lug-engagement: how much is necessary to be save?
*See for yourself & look at the tell-tale signs of 'wear-marks' on the back of your bolt-lugs and decide if there is enough engagement (if any) on all lugs in order to shoot safely?
Hard reality is: the vast majority of new bolt guns have no engagement on all available lugs and will have to be manually & purposely 'lapped-in' or worked in over many yrs of use!
>A real 'classic' is the Wby MK-V & its 'clones'; on wich I have seen very little lug-engagement while re-brl'ing: even down to one small lug-engagement only!!
The question of safety-issues of the M96/38 chambered for certain non-standard cal.'s is in my eyes a very, very minor issue!
My yrs of gunmaking-experience has tought me that a more important factor of safety is the question of the amount of 'lug-engagement' deemed necessary to be considered safe. Not weather any older style action is save/unsafe for certain cal.'s, because these 'so-called' continious corner-cutting, budget-hungry & profit-orienteered 'expert' rifle-manufacturers tell us so!
Lug-engagement: how much is necessary to be save?
*See for yourself & look at the tell-tale signs of 'wear-marks' on the back of your bolt-lugs and decide if there is enough engagement (if any) on all lugs in order to shoot safely?
Hard reality is: the vast majority of new bolt guns have no engagement on all available lugs and will have to be manually & purposely 'lapped-in' or worked in over many yrs of use!
>A real 'classic' is the Wby MK-V & its 'clones'; on wich I have seen very little lug-engagement while re-brl'ing: even down to one small lug-engagement only!!
Well, it's not my intention to make trouble, but regarding the M94/96/38, I have to clarify/disagree on certain points.
While it can stand pressures of about 55 000 PSI, especially in it's "commercial" or "solid wall" version, it was not designed to handle the 60 000 - 65 000 PSI range of pressure. More, it was designed before the year of 1905, when Germany put to service the upgraded 8X57, loaded to higher pressures (55 000 PSI), to be used in the also newly introduced M98 Large Ring.
The military loads are always loaded at lower nominal pressures than the civilian ones (their announced pressures, anywways), and it's true for the 6.5X55 too (military load pressure was really 47 000 PSI not CUP, or 3200 ATM, or 325 MPa).
Another thing we tend to forget (or just don't think of) is that commercial ammunition, even rated for "higher pressures" are NEVER loaded to reach the MAP but are loaded at about 85% of the said MAP (wich is usually equivalent to the military loads). They protect themselves against being sued in doing so (i.e. the 62 000 PSI MAP SAAMI claims for the .308 Win, when lowered to about 85% is the military loads pressure for the 7.62X51 NATO (52 000 PSI vs 50 000 PSI for the military load - close enough)) .
One just have to look at a military manual and compare the pressures / velocities vs the powder loads / pressure specs (like the "Small Caliber, U.S. Army, tm43-0001-27") to understand that there is no way a company will give a load that constantly reaches or approaches the MAP (Maximum AVERAGE Pressure) SAAMI specifies.
Also, Husqvarna NEVER made any M94/96 based rifles in caliber rated at higher pressures than 55 000 PSI (MAP) (the exception being the 9.3X62 - at about 56 500 PSI). The only calibers available from them were 9.3X57, 6.5X55, 9.3X62 (but the 46AN was made in very little numbers, and they rapidly replaced the standard action (cut thumb notch) by the "solid wall" action made after WWII) and the "solid wall" (namely M640 series) saw only 9.3X62, 8X57JS and 6.5X55 SE.
The 30-06, 308 Win were made by Vapen Depöten Falun and Stiga from rebarreled military actions. It is not documented if they proceeded to a normalization heat treatment (annealing or slow cool - to bring the steel cristalization back to uniformity - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Annealing_(metallurgy)) like today's production (modern companies like Voere are doing so with the ex-military M98 they use/machine - BSA did that too, with the P-14/M17 they remodelled in the post war era) before re-surface hardening it.
Regarding the modern (post-WWII) actions, most of them are made from High alloy steel, usually from Chrome-Moly alloys or 400 Stainless Steel series wich have very little to do with the older actions made of low carbon steel. The tensile strenght of these alloys are much higher than any ancient steel made prior WWII.
Even Frank DeHaas says that the pre-M98 actions, "with the POSSIBLE exception of the M94 and M96 Swedish Mauser actions, as having marginal strenght and safety for the 308 Win cartridge". he continues saying "I would not recommend any of these actions (i.e. M92, M93, M94, M95 and M96) for the 22-250, 220 Swift, 243, 244 or 6mm Rem, 284 Win and 358 Win".
Also, Mauser collector and expert researcher Larry Ellis, debated this issue in Mauser Monthly, in October 1997, in response to the Rifle Magazine editor's arguments about the M94/96 actions (bottom of page 1);
http://www.frombearcreek.com/nonfiction/m_monthly/vol_2/ED8VOL2.pdf
and look here for Mr. Ellis point by point answer (second article, page 4);
http://www.frombearcreek.com/nonfiction/m_monthly/vol_2/ED9VOL2.pdf
Mr Ellis had the opportunity to study many old documents from the Mauser factories, including design notes.
There are many reports of M94/96/38 blow outs (and I personally experienced one and I'm no dumb guy), like the one you can see in the Norma reloading manual. Most of these failure are the result of fatigue, from repeated stress.
While it sometimes happens, the main failure is not at the bolt lugs area, but at the receiver's body (cracks on the receiver at the thumb cut out, top of the front ring separrated etc). These failures are well documented and known by the Swedish army.
Then, again, I don't say it can't be done, but it's not because it's done that it's a safe practice to do so.
And as a Swedish Mauser user myself, I don't say the M94/96/38 are not safe to shoot nor I say they're bad actions. It's just a matter of how we use them.
There are plenty of good actions out there, ready to be pimped (like the HVA 1640 series or the M98) to modern high pressures or post WWII cartridges.
While it can stand pressures of about 55 000 PSI, especially in it's "commercial" or "solid wall" version, it was not designed to handle the 60 000 - 65 000 PSI range of pressure. More, it was designed before the year of 1905, when Germany put to service the upgraded 8X57, loaded to higher pressures (55 000 PSI), to be used in the also newly introduced M98 Large Ring.
The military loads are always loaded at lower nominal pressures than the civilian ones (their announced pressures, anywways), and it's true for the 6.5X55 too (military load pressure was really 47 000 PSI not CUP, or 3200 ATM, or 325 MPa).
Another thing we tend to forget (or just don't think of) is that commercial ammunition, even rated for "higher pressures" are NEVER loaded to reach the MAP but are loaded at about 85% of the said MAP (wich is usually equivalent to the military loads). They protect themselves against being sued in doing so (i.e. the 62 000 PSI MAP SAAMI claims for the .308 Win, when lowered to about 85% is the military loads pressure for the 7.62X51 NATO (52 000 PSI vs 50 000 PSI for the military load - close enough)) .
One just have to look at a military manual and compare the pressures / velocities vs the powder loads / pressure specs (like the "Small Caliber, U.S. Army, tm43-0001-27") to understand that there is no way a company will give a load that constantly reaches or approaches the MAP (Maximum AVERAGE Pressure) SAAMI specifies.
Also, Husqvarna NEVER made any M94/96 based rifles in caliber rated at higher pressures than 55 000 PSI (MAP) (the exception being the 9.3X62 - at about 56 500 PSI). The only calibers available from them were 9.3X57, 6.5X55, 9.3X62 (but the 46AN was made in very little numbers, and they rapidly replaced the standard action (cut thumb notch) by the "solid wall" action made after WWII) and the "solid wall" (namely M640 series) saw only 9.3X62, 8X57JS and 6.5X55 SE.
The 30-06, 308 Win were made by Vapen Depöten Falun and Stiga from rebarreled military actions. It is not documented if they proceeded to a normalization heat treatment (annealing or slow cool - to bring the steel cristalization back to uniformity - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Annealing_(metallurgy)) like today's production (modern companies like Voere are doing so with the ex-military M98 they use/machine - BSA did that too, with the P-14/M17 they remodelled in the post war era) before re-surface hardening it.
Regarding the modern (post-WWII) actions, most of them are made from High alloy steel, usually from Chrome-Moly alloys or 400 Stainless Steel series wich have very little to do with the older actions made of low carbon steel. The tensile strenght of these alloys are much higher than any ancient steel made prior WWII.
Even Frank DeHaas says that the pre-M98 actions, "with the POSSIBLE exception of the M94 and M96 Swedish Mauser actions, as having marginal strenght and safety for the 308 Win cartridge". he continues saying "I would not recommend any of these actions (i.e. M92, M93, M94, M95 and M96) for the 22-250, 220 Swift, 243, 244 or 6mm Rem, 284 Win and 358 Win".
Also, Mauser collector and expert researcher Larry Ellis, debated this issue in Mauser Monthly, in October 1997, in response to the Rifle Magazine editor's arguments about the M94/96 actions (bottom of page 1);
http://www.frombearcreek.com/nonfiction/m_monthly/vol_2/ED8VOL2.pdf
and look here for Mr. Ellis point by point answer (second article, page 4);
http://www.frombearcreek.com/nonfiction/m_monthly/vol_2/ED9VOL2.pdf
Mr Ellis had the opportunity to study many old documents from the Mauser factories, including design notes.
There are many reports of M94/96/38 blow outs (and I personally experienced one and I'm no dumb guy), like the one you can see in the Norma reloading manual. Most of these failure are the result of fatigue, from repeated stress.
While it sometimes happens, the main failure is not at the bolt lugs area, but at the receiver's body (cracks on the receiver at the thumb cut out, top of the front ring separrated etc). These failures are well documented and known by the Swedish army.
Then, again, I don't say it can't be done, but it's not because it's done that it's a safe practice to do so.
And as a Swedish Mauser user myself, I don't say the M94/96/38 are not safe to shoot nor I say they're bad actions. It's just a matter of how we use them.
There are plenty of good actions out there, ready to be pimped (like the HVA 1640 series or the M98) to modern high pressures or post WWII cartridges.
Last edited:
