a poor man's 318? a modern 318? in the same league as the 35W and the 9.3x62.

308 -323 --338 .. 8x57 and h336 ..

neat old finn aagard article floating around about one he had bill wiseman build up for him if anyone has it.

Have one on a commercial action and really like it. Have taken elk with it. Also AHR(Wayne) built one for me on a CZ550 action--shoots real good.

Hard to beat a 338/06 on a Mauser! Goes togeather like peas and carrots. I have used the 8/06, 338/06 and the 35 Whelen with excellent results, but my favorite is my Vickers .318 Express. The 338 version is, for all intents, identical to the 318 except you have a greater variety of bullets. A 210 partition @2700 fps is good for most anything!

A 338-06 is a great cartridge and would work great in a mauser.

is there generally enough meat in a barrel say like an old guild type barrel to re-bore from 8mm to 338 or even 9.3 for that matter?

Technically, yes, but those barrels are too light for me (most are just military stepped barrels) when coupled with bigger holes, unless you have one of the heavier octagons. Rebarrel is best anyway; you get a modern chrome moly barrel.

If you want to build a wildcat on a Mauser action not designed for a 30-06 length cartridge, it will not be cheap.

You could buy a 30-06 FN, Husky or Browning Mauser and have it rebored. All fine rifles and an inexpensive alternative.

If you want to do a complete build, a commercial FN action would be the Mauser of choice.

As an alternative you could buy an upgrade CZ 9.3x62 for the same money. It will work out of the box, have resale value, ammo is available and it will do more than a 338/06 within the 300 yard ethical envelope.

If you can handle it, the 375 H&H will eclipse either.

I see 'ol Larry Root is back as metalbeater.

How many usernames (7x7royal, lone_stranger, pigmaster, bumfarto, 4barexpert, artshaw, silverbullet45, 45-70shooter, etc., ect.) have you created specifically to circumvent the wishes of the Owner and Moderators, only to be banned repeatedly? Must be going for a record or you're a glutton for negativity...

Yes, It will make a good/great combination. I have one in 35 W. Great combination and very accurate.

quote:

Originally posted by metalbeater:
If you want to build a wildcat on a Mauser action not designed for a 30-06 length cartridge, it will not be cheap.

You could buy a 30-06 FN, Husky or Browning Mauser and have it rebored. All fine rifles and an inexpensive alternative.

If you want to do a complete build, a commercial FN action would be the Mauser of choice.

As an alternative you could buy an upgrade CZ 9.3x62 for the same money. It will work out of the box, have resale value, ammo is available and it will do more than a 338/06 within the 300 yard ethical envelope.

If you can handle it, the 375 H&H will eclipse either.

You're full of shit, as usual, Larry.

Larry Root, the Herpes-Simplex of the internet....

I used a 1950 Columbian military FN Mauser action for mine.

It feeds flawlessly with no modifications what so ever.

how did you set up the barrel; long, short? forum member z1r used a 26" on his and it looks like a wand!

quote:

how did you set up the barrel

For a 338-06 I can see no reason for anything longer than a 24"

mine has a medium weight 24" A & B barrel.

IT IS A TACK DRIVER!

quote:

Originally posted by metalbeater:
If you want to build a wildcat on a Mauser action not designed for a 30-06 length cartridge, it will not be cheap.

You could buy a 30-06 FN, Husky or Browning Mauser and have it rebored. All fine rifles and an inexpensive alternative.

If you want to do a complete build, a commercial FN action would be the Mauser of choice.

As an alternative you could buy an upgrade CZ 9.3x62 for the same money. It will work out of the box, have resale value, ammo is available and it will do more than a 338/06 within the 300 yard ethical envelope.

If you can handle it, the 375 H&H will eclipse either.

More drivel from Larry Root.

thanks for sparing the rest of us the need to reply to that one, craigster.

This .338-06 was built on a vz24. 26" barrel. weight as shown just a tad under 9 lbs. An elk killing machine.

I am amazed at how closely the 338-06's velocities approach the 338 Win. With a 26" barrel the 338-06 is really knocking on the door. Not that you have to drive good 338 bullets to the max to kill effectively. However, the extra velocity doesn't hurt anything, and your not going to drive typical 338 caliber bullets fast enough to turn meat into jelly anyway no matter what range the impact occurs. Too bad Jeffery or Westley Richards didn't come up this round in the old days. It certainly compares favorably with the 333 and 318. Very nice rifle, Mike!

I had my Spandau Mauser reamed to
.338-06, best thing I've done with a rifle in a long time!
Very happy with it. I shoot nothing but 250 Gr. Hornady RNs out of it with a full charge of IMR 4350

For all the strange reasons we love or don't like certain cartridges, the 338-06 just doesn't float my boat. BUT, looking at the velocities and ballistics, it is a fantastic cartridge.

It beats both the 35 Whelen and the 9.3x62. If I were to choose only on ballistics from those three, I'd take the 338-06.

Same with the 338-08(or 338 Federal) - it beats the 358 Win hands down. But if I ever build one, it will be the 358 Win, for all those strange reasons I think it is a cool cartridge!

quote:

Originally posted by A7Dave:
For all the strange reasons we love or don't like certain cartridges, the 338-06 just doesn't float my boat. BUT, looking at the velocities and ballistics, it is a fantastic cartridge.

It beats both the 35 Whelen and the 9.3x62. If I were to choose only on ballistics from those three, I'd take the 338-06.

Same with the 338-08(or 338 Federal) - it beats the 358 Win hands down. But if I ever build one, it will be the 358 Win, for all those strange reasons I think it is a cool cartridge!

I agree that the 338-06 is a great cartridge, just like the newer 338 RugerCompact of almost identical capacity. However, in compoaring ballistics, one must be careful to factor in artificially restricted loadings in the manuals. The 9.3x62 actually has more capacity and energy potential than the 338-06. Likewise, the 358Win will outshine the 338Federal when loaded to equal pressures.

to what may this be compared? To someone saying that the 500 Jeffrey is a more powerful cartridge than the 505 Gibbs. Or to someone saying that the 416 Ruger//416 Remington is equal to or more than the 416Rigby. The capacity of the 505Gibbs and 416Rigby will outshine the competitors where loaded to similar, but still conservative, pressure levels.

Going back to the 358 Winchester, yes, it would be a nicer deer, blackbear, and elk round than a 338 Federal. It has a grain or so more powder capacity and, more importantly, the wider bore allows it to reach even higher energy levels when loaded to the same pressure level as a 338Federal. Not that there are any flies on the 338Federal. The 33's have a great bullet selection. Both the 358Win and 338Fed would be great hunting rifles out to about 250 yards.

Mines built on a VZ24 '98 action, no probs with feeding or anything else for that matter. Shoots so accurately it's a freak. I only run 210gr Partitions in mine, runs 2750fps out of my 24" barrel. Kills large deer with no fuss and doesn't ruin any meat like my 300 magnums do.
I can't see how you could go wrong with either the rifle/action choice in this cartridge.

Cheers.

lots of people have a soft spot for the 210 NP I see.

210 NP will be be about perfect. It'll give you case capacity, accuracy and great terminal performance.

The 210 NP is a very nice match for the 338-06.

I don't believe that I've ever used the 210NP, maybe I had a box in the 80's, I can't remember. Mostly we used 250 grain NP's but that was because the 338WinMag could push the 250 grainers to 2700fps. 2700-2800 is a very nice velocity for a NP type of bullet.

Today, with monolithics 2800fps is still a very nice velocity. The only difference is that a hunter may drop down a notch in bullet weight. A 225grain bullet that keeps 99% of its weight now penetrates as well or better than the old 250 NP. And up close, even if it blows it petals, it will still provide extreme penetration. For a cartridge that drops down a notch in velocity, then either a 210 NP or better, a 210 TTSX will provide exceptional reliability.

To this may be added the new "extended range" version of the CEB bullets. The BC is back up to the .4 level. I would check them out for a 338-06.

The only thing I can see wrong, or better yet, not good is the magazine length.

I have a Rem 700 in 338-06 built in '65 and a VZ24 Mauser I 9.3x62 I built in 2009.

The chamber for the 338-06 was throated for discontinued Nosler 270 gr bullets and is LONG...the most accurate bullet for this rifle is the Hornady 225 SP at 3.55" OAL at 2750 fs shot over two chrono's to be sure, and puts 5 into one ragged hole all day long. I' tried pretty much all the other 338 bullets and it will shoot 1 1/4 - 2" groups with all of them. The NP 210 just prints patterns for some reason no matter what the OAL is.

When you use a Mauser action you limit the cartridge OAL to ~3.29 - 3.30" and you loose case volume and therefore velocity/energy. Some of which can be made up by using smaller amounts of a slightly faster burn rate powder with the lighter bullets, but with the heavier bullets you get stuck pretty bad.

BUT... for all intents and purposes...most of the OAL's in any of the manuals for all the bullets seem to run about 3.31 max...use a mauser action and you cant' go very wrong.

My 9.3 x 62 is limited to 3.29" which seems to be the best length for working through the mag/action. I shoot 270 gr and 286 gr bullet with it, at and above published velos and it doesn't seem to have much trouble putt'n'um down.

I have another VZ24 8mm mauser siting in the corner, a 375 H&H barrel I shortened to 21" from 26" and ruined for all intents and purposes (the loss of 225 fs just messes with my too much), and a set of 375JDJ dies I've been itching to start using, so maybe a 17-18" 375 JDJ is in the offing. Have to think/research that one a bit.

[QUOTE]Originally posted by NONAGONAGIN:
The only thing I can see wrong, or better yet, not good is the magazine length.

....When you use a Mauser action you limit the cartridge OAL to ~3.29 - 3.30" and you loose case volume and therefore velocity/energy. Some of which can be made up by using smaller amounts of a slightly faster burn rate powder with the lighter bullets, but with the heavier bullets you get stuck pretty bad.
.....QUOTE]

Hmm, the mausers I have built for .30-06 length cartridges have magazine boxes of 3.400".

The majority of the 9,3x62's I've built also utilize a 3.400" mag box. Not sure where your 3.300" limit comes from?

quote:

The 210 NP is a very nice match for the 338-06.

I used to switch between the 210Part and a BT depending on what I was hunting. Last several years and hunts I have simply stayed with the 200Accubond. Works great for Elk and deer and I have only one load to keep track of.

quote:

When you use a Mauser action you limit the cartridge OAL to ~3.29 - 3.30"

This would be the case only if you use the military box unmodified. The standard length M98 action will easily take a box 3.4" internal length and the magazine boxes are easy to modify to accommodate this internal box length.

Well, z1R ... your question got me to wondering...

"Whatthehellandwhy"...so I snatched my 9.3 off the rack, popped the mag cover and broke out the digital calipers...mag measured 3.308" at the bottom...the cartridges measured 3.268-9". They look like Hornady 286 SP's tho'.

I also checked my mauser sources and most of the 8.75" actions have 3.315" mags...only the commercial 8.75" actions had the 3.4" boxes as far as I can determine...I'm a long way from a mauser expert.

I also checked my 8mm mauser with the German Nazi markings and it is also measures 3.308".

You might have been using commercial actions???

Thanks for asking also...I checked to see what bullet I loaded and couldn't find ANY 9.3 bullets anywhere...only the 5 loaded round in the rifle...I shot them all up and didn't replace them. embarrassing in another context. Gives me a good excuse to try the Woodleigh 320's now, IF I can find any.

Looks like I need to do some work on the mag box.

Capo-Mike...Is this just a 0.090" mill job to the box, or finding a 3.40" surplus/commercial box or just what does it entail? Thanks.

90 thou to play with is 90 thou...that represents a whole 2.5 grains of case volume...that puts you up sitting next to the 9.3 x 66 Sako chair...hahahhahahahaha

quote:

...that puts you up sitting next to the 9.3 x 66 Sako chair...hahahhahahahaha

Sure would like some actual volumes for both the 62 & 66. Using what is in QL the 62 loaded to 3.4 has more net volume than the 66.

Which kind of supports my position. If you are limited to a 3.4" or shorter mag box then simply get new brass and set your 62 chamber up to allow you to use the full box. Why fool with the 66.

You are only limited to 3.315" by inaction.

Can't for the life of me figure out why someone going through all the effort and expense of building a MILSURP Mauser wouldn't put just a tiny bit of effort into lengthening the mag box? Most can easily be altered to accommodate the 3.340" max length of an '06.

QL gave 78 gr for the 62 case length 2.44, don't know which case brand, but I just weighed some new RWS cases at 76 gr...81 for the 66 at a length case length of 2.59"...I don't have a 66 case to weigh.

I simply calculated the volume difference using normal "a pie r square" geometry formula. .366/2=.183 x .183 x 3.1415 x 0.090" difference between 3.31" and 3.40" x 253 gr H20/cubic inch. which equaled 2.395, which I rounded up to 2.5.

The problem with QL and splitting pubic hairs is just that...don't mean much...you have to use YOUR own data, YOUR own cases, with that specific cases water weight, at whatever length you load them to. That can mean a whole lot of discrepancies.

That conundrum is what gets a whole lot of frazzled hairballs flying. I learned way back in a philosophy class that you have to set specific parameters if you are going to argue a point...if not it turns into a...WELL, BUT...and EVERYTHING goes straight into the toilet.

I just used the 66 because it had a volume close to the 62...sort of tongue in cheek. You could almost say it is a slightly stretched 62 and both had a OAL of 3.34", so where's the beef...TOTAL FUZZBALL...what OAL are you going to use???

You can use a few "tricks" to get bit more efficiency out of the 62, but why bother, it is a meat rifle to the max. Unless you blow the case out with minimum taper and sharpen the shoulder AND lengthen the case...use a 35 Whelen case or go to the Brenneke...you're basically just spinning your wheels and making an already good cartridge into some kind of red haired, ugly, bahstid child.

I like mine just the way it is, but lengthening my mag box invites some interesting possibilities. At 3.39", a 320 Woody with a 100% density load of WW760 gets you close to 2400 fs and over 4000 ftlbs...that ain't for shooting squirrels...that extra 0.130" of added volume makes a lot of difference.

That Sako case has potential for wildcatting, but I think If I wanted to wildcat 9.3 I would neck down a 375 RUM case with a receiver that would handle a 3.60 or longer OAL...but why bother...we already have the 375 RUM and what's a little 0.009" between friends anyway...it get's into the same 270/7mm arguments.

Isn't this game a total jazz...hahahahahaha

By the By, nice rig Mike.

When I built my 9.3 I didn't know, never came across the information on the difference in mag boxes, so I just used the stock box. It was my first mauser build.

I queried many forums and mauser rifle builders and surfed all the usual places for information on doing a mauser, but no one came up with the box difference...Maybe when I said I was doing a 9.3x62 there was no need for a longer box.

My question would be...WHY isn't that information forthcoming at the very beginning of ANY discussion on mauser remakes.

quote:

Capo-Mike...Is this just a 0.090" mill job to the box, or finding a 3.40" surplus/commercial box or just what does it entail? Thanks.

I do not have the skills to do perform this work myself so I leave that to a skilled craftsman or a gunsmith. The easiest for me is to purchase a commercial bottom metal with a 3.4" box.

Mike, you have shown that little gal how to shoot! She has great form!!!

Thanks, Jim...Might be the best answer for most.

I went back into my notes and resource material and also woke up...Don't know where my mind was but it wasn't on a mauser trigger guard.

I found one short sentence..."check mauser boxes" and a page number, 192, from M91-98 mauser shop manual...even had the page marked...sheesh.

Can't afford the $500-600 for bottom metal when the rifle cost was barely over that...might look at the aluminum one from Brownells for ~$80, and get a couple of milsurp's to practice on.

From the short look I did on the other mausers, plus checking my other 4 M96's I will measure the thickness of the box walls to see if just milling will do the trick.

I can't imagine that milling is the simplest thing to do, considering all the thousands of front box sections that have been cut, moved, bent, rewelded, and the reworked ramps and the many custom made billet/cast pieces that are available today...but 40 thou off the rear and 50 thou off the front just isn't all that much considering the box is steel and the walls appear to be twice that thickness. Either I'm hallucinating or something else is afoot.

I apologize for taking this outside the 338-06 question.

One little bit about my 338-06. With it's longer throat I can load the 300 gr Sierra MatchKings out to ~3.72". I single load and get ~2400 fs with WW760 at just under 65KPSI by QL.

I also have to add an extra 3-5 grains of powder at my OAL for the 225 Hornady and other bullets just to equal the published velo's, PLUS a few more to get the additional fs available due to that "Weatherby Jump".

I use 4320 for the 225 at 2750 fs which almost equals 338 WM published velo's.

Anyone doing a 338-06 on a mauser M98 is in good hands and will have an excellent tool to work with.