Modelo 1935, Peruvian Mauser. I did a bit of research before I bought it and aparently they were made by FN and in the 1950's the peruvian govt switched to the 30-06. Bought a bunch of Springfields from the US. When they did that they sent a bunch of these 1935 FN Mausers back to FN to have them altered for the 30-06..

They are rather unique. The rear reciever ring is kind of squared off like the springfields and the saftey is reversed. It is also obvious that the bottom metal was machined out inside to accomodate the 06..

Unfortunatly there is pitting along the sides of the action , no worse than a couple VZ-24's I have though, and the bbl seems fair..

I gotta hand it to FN though, this is probably THE smoothest Mauser Ive ever had.

It's already got the original stock cut down to a bubba sporter, so a new stock is in order. But Im trying to decide if I want to remove the sights, drill and tap for a scope and alter the bolt, or just keep it as is for fun shooting and whatnot.

Do any of you guys have any experience with these rifles? Im curious if the sights are actualy calibrated for a military 30-06 load or ??

It seems they were originaly chambered for the 7.65X53. Im thinking if FN altered the sights to work with the 06 then they may be worth keeping on it, otherwise Ill prolly just turn it into a sporter..

I had one back in the early 70's.It had a Bishop stock and the sights had been removed.I had the bolt altered and drilled and taped.It was very accurate with 4895 and Sierra 150gr. bullets.

I bought one recently, too. It had already been bubba'd, with the stock cut down and a Williams reciever sight added. All of these I have seen converted have a vertical cut in the front reciever ring for bullet tip clearance and a large ".30" stamped on the rear bridge. Mine had been refinished with some sort of painted looking finish, but it was completely smooth and rust and pit free. Metal fit on these is generally really good. The one I got is really slick working for a military, but not hardly as good as an FN commercial.

I am surprised to hear that one shot well, especially with a short 150 gr bullet. The bore size on these barrels is .313, which is loose as a goose for a 30-06, but Peru made the switch when the US gave them essentially a lifetime supply of surplus 30-06 amo after the war. For battle use, round dispersion was a design parameter anyway at that time. With .308 bullets, most of them simply spray bullets. I have heard that some people use .311 bullets because they are easy to get, and they sometimes work to some extent. Loading them may require you put a 303 british expander in the 30-06 die. I would chuck the barrel and opt for something else. This is a common gun whose best service is as an action donor.

A couple of days ago, Midway had some A&B 7x57 barrels for sale in the $80 range. You can also find new military 7x57 and 8x57 arsenal barrels for sale at reasonable prices. These generally bolt on and headspace with noting else required.

By the way, the 1935 I bought had the hardest to remove barrel I have ever encountered on any mauser. After turning the shoulder completely off and soaking in oil, I had to resort to a two foot pipe wrench with a four foot breaker bar to get it loose. I suspect it was never removed as part of the rebuild, just rechambered down the action with the barrel in place.

quote:

Originally posted by Art S.:

I am surprised to hear that one shot well, especially with a short 150 gr bullet. The bore size on these barrels is .313, which is loose as a goose for a 30-06,

Ive read that too, but there is also info on the webb that some of them got re-barreled to .308 @ FN. They are supposed to have some kind of parkerize like finish.. Maybe you should get yours slugged!!

Im pretty sure mine is one of the .311 bores.

Some of them may have been, but I've never seen one. Mine appeared to be a stock (old!!) military barrel, and the bore didn't look to be worth slugging.

As to some of them getting rebarelled to .308, I suspect that is a case of someone getting them confused with the Chilean ones. I just happened to come up with one of those (action and barrel only) a few months ago and built it into a 7x57. The Chilean when converted had a front block installed in the magazine which was shaped to help chamber the shorter catridge. It was stamped NATO on top of the front ring behind the crest. The Peruvian was chambered to the 30-06 and stamped .30 on the rear bridge. I suspect the Peruvian was only converted to 30-06, since the move to rechamber was triggered by a shipload supply of WW II 30-06 ammo from the US. Reportedly, a small number of the conversions had new barrels, but these were supposedly parkerized, and I have never seen one without the painted/baked looking finish.

I think the 308 conversion you mention occured much later, around 1960, to a small number of guard unit rifles. Everything I have read says these were never released by th government and are all still in storage there. They effectively don't exist in the marketplace.

OK this is getting intresting..

I just slugged mine yesterday and the slug is .309...

Now bear in mind that this is the first slugging job that I have done, but I did it just as Malm on the Gunsmithing forum described in a previous thread, and I am pretty competent with such things as Ive built several of my own rifles up from millsurp actions.. I also double checked the zero on my calipers and checked again.. I could be wrong, but I dont think there is any way it could possibly be .311..

Just as you described yours, mine has the Peruvian crest and a .30 stamped on the rear bridge.. But the bbl appears to be the original and the numbers are matching..

Why would it be .309 as opposed to .308?? Is it possible that this is deliberate because of the thickness of the cut rifling? Or perhaps just due to a lack of tolerances in the 1950's/60's??

Hmm...

The next test for me will be with a chrony and targets..

It could be due to the slug being squeezed by the rifling to the point it doesn't fully flow into the grooves. It could be a dirty barrel, or it could be a .309 barrel. One thing I have run into is that I seem to always measure a slightly higher diameter with a micrometer on a slug than with calipers, even when carefully zeroed. I have come to suspect that it is due to the knife edge of the caliper vs the flat face of the micro. I generally see about a thousanth of an inch difference.

The only way to tell for sure is shoot it. This same difference comes up in the 7.62x39. Barrels are all over the map. The proof is in the target.

I bought a Peruvian mauser 98 about six years ago that had been sporterized. The barrel was stamped 7mm mauser caliber.

I'd always wanted a 7x57 so I picked it up for a great price (stock looked like it was made from a 2x4) and I picked up some ammo. It had open sights.

At the range - Target at 50 yards. First shot - way left. second shot - low. third shot - right. All off the paper. I had not looked at the fired brass. After the third shot I looked down and saw strangely fireformed brass.

Was I LUCKY ! When I brought the brass back to the shop, the owner looked at it and was apoligetic. We found it was rebored to a 7.62 Argentine. The 7mm bullet was pinballing down the 30 cal barrel. He gave me a box of those to try but also offered to take the rifle back.

I shot it but did not like the caliber so we worked out a deal for getting it rebarreled to 7x57 like I originally thought it was. I have worked on it little by little aver the years and i't now the way I wanted it. Maple burl stock with African Wenge tip and cap. Topped with a 3x9 Burris.

It's now my favorite deer rifle.