Why all the love for the M98 action?

E

Eaglelord17

CGN Ultra frequent flyer
Rating - 100%
64   0   0
Location
Sault Ste. Marie
Hi all,

I was wondering what everyone's thoughts on the M98 action is. I have owned a three rifles with a M1898 action a Yugoslavian M24/47, Russian Capture K98k, and now the only one I have at the moment a M38 Turkish Mauser. I have also been significantly disappointed with them all (at least in comparison to all the hype I had been fed about them). The bolts are not very smooth, the #### on opening I consider more of a disadvantage then a plus, I find ejection to be a issue due to the fact the bolt can wobble when being pulled back and as such not hit the ejection bar properly (likely just a issue because I am a lefty) and to top it off in terms of manufacturing (at least back in the day) it was fairly complicated. The only two major plusses about this style of action is that it is strong and the safety is better designed then most of the contemporary designs.

My question is why did this design achieve the heights it did when so many better designs were left behind (a good example is the Arisaka Type 38/99 action which is stronger, easier to assemble and manufacture, and #### on closing so you can cycle the action faster).

Not trying to start a war (though I just opened the gates of hell with this debate) just curious what people see in these rifles (to be fair they are very attractive rifles).
 
Strong (the added strength of an Arisaka isn't an advantage when the M98 can handle higher pressures than any military load) rugged and reliable. If your rifle has ejection issues it needs some work. It's easy to work on which led to it's popularity as a sporting rifle post war.

Generally I don't believe it was the best bolt action battle rifle by any means. It's continued popularity is a result of attiributes that make it a great sporting rifle.
 
It's all a matter of preference I actually like the #### on opening .when they're set up right the eject is awesome. They're strong and with stripper clips very fast to load
 
The extractor claw can rip the rim off the case before letting go. I've never had an issue with brass extraction, I find it one of the greatest strengths of the design.
If you think the Mauser has a wobble bolt, try picking up a Mosin Nagant! They feel like they have unconnected parts randomly thrown into the receiver with a bolt handle sticking out. The 98 is glass in comparison.
 
I know all about the Mosins (I have 5) but I have never had a real issue with them. I think the ejection issues are more due to me being a lefty as when I pull the bolt back it tends to lean to the left which brings the edge of the bolt face that has the cut in it for the ejector bar on a angle which makes it less positive. My Mauser-Vergueiro uses the same style of ejection system but since it can't wobble to the left it always ejects positively.

There is no issue with extraction more the ejection/getting the brass to leave the action.

I don't really have a issue with wobbly bolts its more I have a issue with when it impedes function of the rifle.
 
Last edited:
Eaglelord17 said:
My question is why did this design achieve the heights it did when so many better designs were left behind (a good example is the Arisaka Type 38/99 action which is stronger, easier to assemble and manufacture, and #### on closing so you can cycle the action faster).
Click to expand...
WTF? don't try bringing logic into this, because like discussions on Remmy 700s, M16s vs AK47s, 1973 Ford Pintos, and the rise of the NDP, logic has no place in it.
Bare in mind any military contract has politics involved, and rarely does the best design win. Secondly people are willing to defend even the most ridiculous things bitterly.
From a purely rational perspective Germany invested a lot of money in them, and they had the economic might that the AK47 would later have under the USSR. Speciffically up until WW1 your over all choices were limited to what the big boys were making, Lee Enfields, Berthiers, Mausers etc. Russia was not a big exporter, and did not have colonial elements like the Brits, French and Belgians, so their guns didn't get the same spread globally.
The Germans had a strong commercial and military complex, and managed to push sales to a lot of second tier countries (militarily), like Brazil, Peru etc. That ensured the spread of the design, though with a huge number of modifications.
After the 98 lost two world wars (funny that), they flooded the market, and particularly after ww2 they were seen as a way of turning a sows ear into a silk purse, through customisation. The American gun media in particular took to them somewhat, and being cheap and plentiful in the post war they became delusionally popular.
In truth its a fair gun, not great. You don't see people making true K98s anymore do you. The only similarity most any guns out there today have with it is two locking lugs and a bolt handle.
The reality is, as with the Rem 700, its not what you would design today, after all, pretty much no one uses the trigger, the safety, the extractor, the charger guide, the bolt handle configuration, the take down disk in the stock, the hole through the stock for a sling, etc. The reality is pretty much anything people drone on about is more or less true about any other mainline rifle, with the exception of 'controlled feed'...blah blah blah. Lee Enfields didn't fail because the K98 was stronger, Mosin Nagants didn't fall apart because they didn't use controlled feed. Pretty much anything that the K98 can claim, another rifle can do as well, one way or the other.
They simply became popular for the same reason as the AK47, lots were made, lots flooded the market. Lets face it, the same can be said for Lee Enfields and now a days, Mosin Nagants, cheap and plentiful. The advantage the K98 has over both of them though, is its more aesthetically pleasing, looks more like a commercial rifle of today, has an easier receiver to drill and tap, and like the Rem 700, has more crap available that you can bolt/screw/JB weld to it.
Ford made lots of Model Ts as well...
 
I used to have a near-new BCD4 K98 in a laminate stock. Only 98 I've ever owned IIRC. It was a heavy, awkward clunk of a rifle with poor balance, unprotected foresight, a totally impracticable safety, and 5 round mag you could only empty by cycling the action, as well as being #### on opening. On the other hand, I've had Swedish M96 and M38s that were absolutely beautiful rifles all respects, except that they had a lousy safety, couldn't be manually cocked, despite what the nicely checkered little tab on the cocking piece would suggest, and only had a five round mag.

Why is the Mauser so popular? There's only so many ways to design a bolt action rifle; like a lot of other areas of technology it's who "gets there first with the most" and the Mauser did. When a country is choosing a new rifle it usually chooses from the available designs rather than attempting to create a new one. The Mauser gained a lot of credibility from combat in the 1890s, Germany's military and technological prestige was high: "nothing succeeds like success", favourable terms were offered, quality was excellent, probably Basil Zaharoff wasn't the only arms salesman providing "tips" to useful persons in little countries seeking arms; a bit of carrot, a bit of stick. Germany was a major exporter and supplier; "you want product x on favourable terms? You buy product y as well," same sort of stuff that goes on today.:sok2:rolleyes:
 
Them's dueling words Dosing! LOL. As if the Mauser rifle was the reason Germany lost WWI and WWII :p

For me, the history of the design, the story of the Mauser brothers, and untold numbers of relatives carrying them through two world wars is the "illogic" behind my love of all things Mauser.

The true innovations of the series culminating in the 98 are the controlled round feeding (CRF), the general strength of the action including the 3rd safety lug, the ruptured case gas handling and the stripper fed 5 rd box magazine completely contained within the rifle.

Nowadays, many of these things are either taken for granted, or just plain obsoleted by advances in technology. CRF is still my preference, but admittedly I'm not likely to be racking bolt lying upsidedown on my back while a lion is charging me. Heck, the K98k was already obsolete early in WWII. Semi automatic battle rifles like the G43 were a failure, eventually leading to the Stg44 and the future of the aptly named from the German translation "assault rifle" from that point on.
 
I only own one rifle that uses the Mauser M98 Action (a 1970's Sporter build in 30-06). My experience has been the opposite: smooth, reliable, precise and like all German designed and made products very well engineered. This gun has me thinking if I buy another hunting rifle Mauser will be on my short list.

Wolf
 
It might not be the absolute best, but many would argue that. But what you do get is a great design, built robust and with quality most other militaries never achieved. And to suggest the arisaka is better......well its a mauser type action.....

Also suggesting that it alone lost two worlds wars is obtuse. A million factors come into play, the lowly infantry rifle was not high on that scale.
 
diopter said:
Can't compare an RC capture with parts from who know where, and when, to a 98 that was fitted at one original factory.
Click to expand...

Agreed. The RC is a faint image of the quality they started out with.


Also all this #### on closing and opening rubbish. Smartly work the bolt, and it makes no difference. Just don't be all limp wristed and it wont make a difference.
 
I understand the RC part but honestly it was the best preforming out of the M98 Mausers I have used. As to the Arisaka comment it was more directing how there were significantly improved designs available which were never adapted outside there countries (I know it is a improved Mauser but the improvements are massive).
 
The Arisaka Type 38/99 action is a modified Mauser action. Anyway, Mauser actions are everywhere because of outstanding salesmen. (Just like FAL's are/were everywhere after W.W. II.) "Anything you want, we'll make. You want 'em delivered or will you pick 'em up?" goes a long way. Lot of it had to do with "That's what the Kaiser's army uses. We need it too."(spoken in the local dialect) too.
 
Ubiquity breeds ubiquity...

Mauser licensed the action broadly before WWI, so it was in the hands of a lot of troops during the war. The Americans copied the action in the 1903 Springfield, (ended up getting sued and having to pay royalties to Mauser right up until the US entered the conflict).

You can argue about the superiority/inferiority of the other designs (Arisaka, Mosin, Lee action, etc etc), but most of those actions were limited to their home nations or the home nations and a small set of allies/dependants.

After WWI, there were surplus rifles with Mauser actions everywhere, and in a fairly wide range of calibres - depending on country of origin. Huge numbers of sporting rifles were built around surplus actions. Sportsmen used them widely, and they worked. It became a case of "go with what you know" and every gunsmith and sportsman knew the Mauser action.
 
I know these are all Mauser based actions but I was specifically referring to the M98 action (as opposed to any of his other works) mainly because many consider it to be Paul Mauser's greatest achievement. Realistically it was a great achievement because it was adapted by arguably more countries than any other firearm in the world. But I am amazed at how many did adapt it as I consider many other options to be superior. I also happen to consider some of his earlier works better products (such as the Swedish Mausers).

Its the action I want to love but I can't seem to find much room in there for it (and I mean I love a fair bit of the more hated actions such as Steyr M95s and Carcanos).
 
Any "improvements" on the basic Mauser '98 action generally had serious flaws or built-in weaknesses absent in the Mauser design.

For example - the protruding magazine of the ungainly P-14/P-17 rifles, the ugly sight 'ears', #### on closing feature, etc.; the two piece firing pin of the '03 Springfield, the unnecessary magazine cut-off device and the inadequate battle sights, better suited for a target rifle.

Mauser kept improving his basic design as experience showed up weaknesses and flaws, resulting in the penultimate turn bolt battle rifle.
 
How long is a piece of string?

You asked a question that doesn't have one right answer because, like a-holes, everyone has a different opinion.

I own a K98k, M91, M91/30, No4 Mk1, No1 MkIII*, and a M1917 among other things. They all have their pluses and minuses. The most important part for their users; they worked when you pulled the trigger.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom