It seems that there are a variety of opinions regarding the best way to build a take down Mauser.

From interrupted threads all the way to the Reimar Johannsen system, one must be better than the others.

Is one truly superior?

Just my opinion. The best systems are the ones that put the locking lugs integral to the barrel like a Blaser, Sauer, or Dakota. It takes thread wear out of the equation and the bolt helps draw the barrel up to maintain alignment. They take tools to disassemble though.

For a conversion of a normally fixed barrel action, like a Mauser, the best systems will have an adjustment for thread wear and be tool less. Otherwise, they are all about the same in terms of how they work.

Each gunsmith tends to have a variation that they like to use. All of the systems work, but non-adjustable systems will eventually become less and less accurate. That said, it will take a lot of wear to notice.

Jeremy

Yes, the H&H system is far superior to all others in that the barrel and receiver come off the stock, quickly and without tools, which is the mark of a takedown. If it requires tools, it ain't a take down; any bolt action can be taken down with tools. All others which remove just the barrel aren't as good. Not that they aren't cool; they are. And they work well enough for hunting. Allowing for wear is not the biggest design criteria; they wear very little.

Several years ago I got the takedown bug. Researched it and came up with a Blaser R93. I have the receiver and 3 barrels: 7mm Mag, 300Wm and 375 H&H. The scope fits on the barrel rather than the receiver, so each barrel has it's own scope.. Retains zero despite takedowns, and is very comfortable to shoot. I have no regrets. It is an amazing piece of engineering, and looks good too! Nice fitted case, and is amazingly accurate. Love it!
Peter.
PS. I may have muddied the waters a bit. I started off looking at "takedown" rifles, but ended up being more interested in "switch barrel" rifles. Even going to Africa, I see no real advantage to a takedown rifle, but I do see an advantage to a multi caliber setup.

I believe the best take-down system is the one offered by Alois Mayr www.mayr-jagdwaffen.com/takedown.php which has been tested with best results.

The best Mauser take down system, is the Mauser M03.

quote:

Originally posted by CZ:
I believe the best take-down system is the one offered by Alois Mayr www.mayr-jagdwaffen.com/takedown.php which has been tested with best results.

Thanks for the link. That's exactly what I am looking for. He certainly has good credentials. I wonder why some smiths seem so set on regular threads to join the two parts, while others use a barrel extension type system.

The best takedown system uses a top lever, underlever, or side lever and hinges in front of the breach! The forend can have an Anson pushrod or Deeley latch.

quote:

Originally posted by CZ:
I believe the best take-down system is the one offered by Alois Mayr www.mayr-jagdwaffen.com/takedown.php which has been tested with best results.

That guy makes some fine-ass rifles.

Blassers are not take down rifles (they are switch barrel) and neither are break open double rifles and the like because that is already part of their design; they are always "take down" capable by design.
A traditional take down rifle must start out life as a fixed barrel rifle which has some mechanism to remove the barrel and the forearm. without tools.
Still best is H&H that removes the entire receiver and barrel together from the stock, without tools.
Which, does not follow my earlier criterion for removing the forearm too.
But it is an old traditional take down design.
Why do some use threads and some use barrel extensions? COST; think about it; making the barrel extension costs much more than converting existing threads.
Or a vintage Winchester take down fits the definition.
It's fuzzy.....

dpcd: so you dont need a screwdriver to take break down the H&H?

How much should it cost to modify a rifle to H&H takedown system?

H&H advertised their takedowns, as "detachable stock" models, whilst keeping the "body" and barrel together. They used a hooked tang that held the back end in place, and a very large slotted captive screw in front. Meant for a coin. Remember, the English Penny was about 30mm in size, making for a serious tool. Ok, that is a tool, but every sporting gentleman had them available at all times.
I do prefer the rotating barrel and fore end type for coolness, but for accuracy, the H&H would be best. and cheapest to make.
How much? Let me think about it.

quote:

Originally posted by Colin Masters:

quote:

Originally posted by CZ:
I believe the best take-down system is the one offered by Alois Mayr www.mayr-jagdwaffen.com/takedown.php which has been tested with best results.

That guy makes some fine-ass rifles.

You bet!... He is going to build my travel rifle, a take down in 308 Norma Magnum...

Of course before the H&H take-the-barrelled-action-out-of-the-stock takedown system they had a conventional takedown system where the barrel and forend unscrewed together. Released by a turnscrew on the right hand front of action that engaged the barrel.

CZ, they are lovely rifles!

quote:

Originally posted by Rockdoc:
Of course before the H&H take-the-barrelled-action-out-of-the-stock takedown system they had a conventional takedown system where the barrel and forend unscrewed together. Released by a turnscrew on the right hand front of action that engaged the barrel.

CZ, they are lovely rifles!

I've seen a Jeffry rifle like that, screw on the side that interfaced with the barrel threads.

Interestingly, it's not all that different from current Accuracy International precision rifles with their barrel swap feature.

What is old, is new again...

I prefer the screw in std. barrel, can be done several ways, and depends on a slick barrel or iron sighted barrel how its done..

But I learned a lesson many years ago and that is you will probably have the wrong barrel on it at the wrong time, if were talking switch barrel take down.. Also I don't trust return to zero on takedown systems, unless 3 or 4 minutes of an angle return to zero is suitable. Return to zero is questionable with most rifle sitting in the gun closet for that matter as is holding a zero exact..

Ive kept those guns that never change zero and never lose their zero, and they are much harder to come by than the average shooter knows..and please save me the "my old betsy" has been sighted in for umpteen years and never moved an inch..Not impossible but damn seldom.

quote:

Also I don't trust return to zero on takedown systems, unless 3 or 4 minutes of an angle return to zero is suitable

I agree that 3-4 MOA is NOT acceptable, however, as I stated in my post, my Blaser R93 returns to zero every time. I keep the gun in the safe with one barrel installed, routinely change barrels, and have NEVER had to worry about the zero of the barrel. My Blaser 500NE had QD rings for it's scope, which I never kept on the rifle. Returned to zero every time. It's an engineering issue!
Peter.

quote:

Originally posted by dpcd:
H&H advertised their takedowns, as "detachable stock" models, whilst keeping the "body" and barrel together. They used a hooked tang that held the back end in place, and a very large slotted captive screw in front. Meant for a coin. Remember, the English Penny was about 30mm in size, making for a serious tool. Ok, that is a tool, but every sporting gentleman had them available at all times.
I do prefer the rotating barrel and fore end type for coolness, but for accuracy, the H&H would be best. and cheapest to make.
How much? Let me think about it.

Newton did one better when he designed his takedown to be accomplished by releasing the hinged floorplate and using it to unscrew the front action bolt. No tools or coins needed!

I imagine a Mauser could be built the same way.

quote:

Originally posted by Huvius:

quote:

Originally posted by dpcd:
H&H advertised their takedowns, as "detachable stock" models, whilst keeping the "body" and barrel together. They used a hooked tang that held the back end in place, and a very large slotted captive screw in front. Meant for a coin. Remember, the English Penny was about 30mm in size, making for a serious tool. Ok, that is a tool, but every sporting gentleman had them available at all times.
I do prefer the rotating barrel and fore end type for coolness, but for accuracy, the H&H would be best. and cheapest to make.
How much? Let me think about it.

Newton did one better when he designed his takedown to be accomplished by releasing the hinged floorplate and using it to unscrew the front action bolt. No tools or coins needed!

I imagine a Mauser could be built the same way.

Harald Wolf did exactly this, details in one of the editions of his Hatari magazine. Really very east to accomplish.

Sauer 202 take down system ! Best in the world !
no tools necessary, push the button on the fore end, pull it off, pull back the bolt, twist the barrel and pull off literally takes less than a minute to do. And it is accurate because the bolt "auto" headspaces.

The concept hails from the Gehmann design of a action that bolts directly to the breech end of the barrel ! this is the key.

The old systems of H&H, Jeffery and Rigby are yesterdays systems !

I'm a little late to the party but here's a Thomas Bland & Son in a 7x57 on a Mauser action that I own .
It's a little rough and in need of a refurbish & re-stock as it was broken through the wrist years ago ..
I'll get to it sometime ..

But it has a really neat and very simple take-down system .. might not be the best but it sure is neat ..
Easy as falling off a log backwards !!

Here's a few pics ..

Enjoy ..

Pretty well proven...still used today

Allen Marin,

This is the system I'll go to next time.

My takedown .300 has a plunger into opposing hole in a plate and the plunger will stick in the hole and make it difficult to takedown.

I doubt the system on your Thomas Bland will do this.

I might just convert the current Take down ............. if I run out of projects.

I still say the take down systems suck, you will always have the wrong barrel on the gun when timbo comes out of nowhere to pounce upon you or you will have your 577 Whatchamacallit on when a world class Kudu presents himself at 400 plus yards...

Take down is a quirky system of "Who'd a thought it" Use one barrel that will do both DG close and PG out yonder is a better option, the other is only an art form and of no practicle use..

It's not the take down system that sucks it's the switch barrel idea that needs serious thought.

A switch barrel package in one case is a really heavy SOB, On the other hand, a sensible TD rifle is a very handy traveling package

Similar to Thomas Bland & Son's method, as mentioned by Allen Martin, I like the Take-Down system that's on my 275 Rigby. The function is simple and slick. While holding the rifle "belly-up" under your left arm, you lift the Deeley Locking Lever that is on the bottom of the forend. (this retracts the lock-pin that extends into the front of the stock) Then you twist the forend / barrel counter-clock-wise, and unscrew the barrel. To reinstall the barrel, you simply screw it back into the action. The Deeley Locking Lever automatically lifts open, and then snaps shut when the barrel is fully seated, thereby locking it back in place with the forend lock-pin.





As per Atkinson's comment that "...the take down systems suck...", I agree with Duane Wiebe, "...Its not the take down system that sucks, its the switch barrel idea that needs serious thought..."

The major purpose of the take down system is the ease of transport, usually in a case, not switch-barrels. Most of the early English Makers catalogs didn't even mention a "switch-barrel" option.

buckstix,

Beautiful little rifle.

From the threads it looks like it may be on an early small thread, large ring intermediate action, with the longer receiver ring, probably ideal for a takedown of this type.

Similar in configuration to the 1909 Peruvian action.

My travel kit, .300 Win Mag and 9,3x62. Ready for mice (the largest species...) to pachyderm. Assemble and shoot without need to check zero.

Proves that practical and innovative doesn't HAVE to be pretty.

But...Can't see why go through all the trouble with what seems like the primary goal of making it ugly.

I have two types/systems - HS Precision and Dakota Traveler. I like both.

I use a takedown for ease of traveling with guns. They are accurate and return to zero for me.

The HS Precision system is the simplest for me.

PS - "Pretty" is in the eye of the beholder...

I've never owned one, but I've always been interested in take down rifles. It seems to me a take down rifle can be fit into a nice tidy little case that's handy as hell for loading into the back of a small Jeep !

Actually anywhere a full length rifle case would be cumbersome and awkward to deal with, like a hotel lobby or out in public, a takedown would be perfect.

Now the multi barrel setup isn't quite my thing because it's a whole different animal. Like Duane says, the case would be larger and end up being one heavy SOB. They do look impressive though !

Here is a short article by Sporting Classics that features two systems that haven't been discussed yet.
http://sportingclassicsdaily.com/take-down/



Wyatt

Those take down cases or a dead giveaway in a RSA airport even the ones that had a hidden compartment under your cloth bag. The bag boys in some countries had that figured out before production began... taking one gun on safari is questionalble, best take two..then you have both in the backi at all times..

I tried it all, and at best is was never suitable to me..Again I say its mostly an art form and very appealing from that stand point..

I base my opinion on experience, and from conversation with hunters I sent all over the world...not on the skill of a gunsmith or the imagination of those who like the idea because it seems handy or cute..and I couldn't make it work from a hunters standpoint. I never even used the take down for my double rifle, I stuck in the the tuff case with my bolt gun wrapped in 20 pounds of socks, shorts pants whatever was soft and protective..

Just my opinion passed on for whatever, some will take it and others won't. I like the skill and workmanship much like engraving or fine additions of bells and whistle, but you have to admit that even that can be over engineered.

You're saying the baggage handlers spot a TD case every time but can"t figure a full length case???

quote:

Originally posted by Duane Wiebe (CG&R):
You're saying the baggage handlers spot a TD case every time but can"t figure a full length case???

A "Rayism"

quote:

Originally posted by K W Johnston:
I've never owned one, but I've always been interested in take down rifles. It seems to me a take down rifle can be fit into a nice tidy little case that's handy as hell for loading into the back of a small Jeep !

Actually anywhere a full length rifle case would be cumbersome and awkward to deal with, like a hotel lobby or out in public, a takedown would be perfect.

Now the multi barrel setup isn't quite my thing because it's a whole different animal. Like Duane says, the case would be larger and end up being one heavy SOB. They do look impressive though !

Here is a short article by Sporting Classics that features two systems that haven't been discussed yet.
http://sportingclassicsdaily.com/take-down/



Wyatt

Thanks for that link. My 1913 H&H 375H&H Belted Magnum Magazine Rifle on a magnum action is the same takedown as the Jeffery.

H&H later dropped that feature 8n favour of removing the barreled action from the stock.

Ray, I certainly wouldn't argue with your experience. The point I was making about a takedown rifle case has nothing to do with trying to hide the gun , smuggle it through an airport, or disguise it from the public.

I was simply saying that a take down rifle in a compact case would be easier to carry around than a full length case.

The very best benefit I can see is how a takedown would fit in the back of a Jeep, or in a small truck ect. where space is at a premium.

Wyatt

Rockdoc... the takedown system that incorporates a set screw isn't fancy compared to other methods, but I really like how darn simple it is. It must have been a popular method in the past because it was used by multiple British Gunmakers. Post us some pictures of your Holland sometime. I'd like to see it.

Here is a nice Fraser rifle that uses the set screw. This rifle has several neat features....built on a 95 Mauser action, with Alexander Henry forearm tip, Fraser style bolt handle, reshaped bottom metal and nice engraving.... I'd love to own it !
http://www.hallowellco.com/danl%20fraser%20360.htm

Wyatt

I can’t figure out how to get a full size rifle into a Pelican or Storm case that isn’t oversized on all the usual airlines. Now it’s close enough that sometimes they don’t charge an oversized fee but if I have to pay, it becomes $200 in fees very fast.

My "go to"case is the Kalispel. The new owners will still make a case to your dimensions. In theory, they aren't as bullet proof as a Pelican.

If not a TD, I disassemble so the package is compact..even fits just fine in those telephone booth size customs offices