Looking to thin down my action count. One to keep one Std length Magnum face Mauser action.Which of these two "H" ring commercial actions should I hold on too. And Why if you have a strong feeling.Mark X with the release in the bowCommercial FN with pin floorplate release

I think they are, functionally, pretty much equal. I have no rational preference, other than the fact that, IMHO, FN commercial rifles tend to be a bit nicer. I'd like to see pics of both of your actions in order to make a more informed opinion, but without seeing pics, I voted FN.

I'd call the quality about equal. The Mark X had a nice polish job. Sharp corners no oval screw holes. The FN might be a touch smoother. The Mark X was a 7mag that I ran about 200 rds through and pulled the barrel for a project that never happened.

Sell them both and get a good contract 98

quote:

contract 98

Sorry Duane you lost me.

Mauser military action he means.

quote:

Mauser military action he means.

Thanks,
Duane, while I agree that a Modified Mil M98 would probably hold more value on a high $$ custom. This "if it gets done" rifle will be a simple low budget hunting rifle.

Heck the way I'm getting around to projects the one I keep will probably be for sale in a couple years.

I always thought an FN commercial was a desirable action for a custom. What makes a contract Mauser action the better choice? Serious question, please educate me!

quote:

Originally posted by lee440:
I always thought an FN commercial was a desirable action for a custom. What makes a contract Mauser action the better choice? Serious question, please educate me!

Lots of these contract mausers were EXTREMELY WELL MADE. The 1909 Argentine and 1908 Brazillian DWM being good examples. You start with no holes, no over polishing. Often times there are fewer tool marks inside the action than with a commercial action. Two big factors, for a lot of folks, are the C-ring, which most commercial actions don't have, and the Pre-War Mauser, DWM, FN, BRNO, etc provenance on the left wall or bridges. For open sight use, some folks like to retain the stripper clip slot, both aesthetically and functionally. I know of at least a couple of Alaskan guide AR members that like clip slots for quick reloading out in the Alders. Thumb notches may allow more flex in the action, but like the clip slot/hump and C-Ring, I find them to be functional, and just plain cool as hell. Just my two cents.

BTW, we are talking contract mausers. WWII production from the Germans and Czech's to supply the war effort can be very rough.

I AGREE ON THE MILSURP MAUSERS, I prefer the 1908 Chilean, Puruvian 98 Large rings, etc.

My favorite for calibers up to the 30-06 to even a 9.3x62 is the G33-40 or a Brno mod. 21, 22, or the German Customs Service action, all small rings, the three are, for all practical purposes, the exact same G33-40 action.

However for your purposes and to answer your question, any good FN would be my choice, especially a C ring 1935 milsurp FN.

that issue with the C ring is a bunch of poop.

quote:

Originally posted by lindy2:
that issue with the C ring is a bunch of poop.

While I don't necessarily think it's a bunch of poop, I certainly don't think it's a big deal, and I doubt that "H" rings truly bother most Mauser cranks.

Personally, don't think that's true. The C ring action will be snapped up while the H ring will gather dust...all being equal. The H ring is a cheaper manufacture technique and is universally recognized as such

Re Mark X..good enough action. I seen two firing pin nuts fail and have heard of others (cast material, hard and brittle)

quote:

Originally posted by Duane Wiebe (CG&R):
Personally, don't think that's true. The C ring action will be snapped up while the H ring will gather dust...all being equal. The H ring is a cheaper manufacture technique and is universally recognized as such

Re Mark X..good enough action. I seen two firing pin nuts fail and have heard of others (cast material, hard and brittle)

In the world of high end custom mausers, this certainly is the case, but plebions like me don't get as uptight about it when building more utilitarian arms. However, if given a choice between a nice quality pre-war action that has been worked over and an 1950's era FN Supreme at the same affordable price, I'd certainly go with the former. I do think one would almost be silly not go all out with a C-Ring on a full on high end gun. I would go with a boutique barrel as well, like a Krieger, not necessarily because it's better than, say a Douglas or whatever, but because it might help the rifle bring more when I die and my family had to sell it.

I am not a gun expert. Does the Winchester Model 70 and the Remington 700 have a C ring?

quote:

Originally posted by lindy2:
I am not a gun expert. Does the Winchester Model 70 and the Remington 700 have a C ring?

No and no H ring either.

quote:

Originally posted by lindy2:
I am not a gun expert. Does the Winchester Model 70 and the Remington 700 have a C ring?

Keep in mind, in the Mauser design the "c" ring serves two purposes; it provides a seat for the barrel and it encloses the open portion of thr bolt face when the bolt is closed. The "H" ring no longer provides the second function. In some actions, an extension of the barrel provides enclosure (Arisaka, Rem. 700, Howa, etc.) while in others (Ruger 77, Winchester Model 70, P14) enclosure is ignored. It's pretty hard to say this is a big deal given the track record of these actions (although the Model 70 is usually not considered to handle gas all that well).
The main thing about the best '98's is that the workmanship is so good. My own 35 Whelen is built on a 1935 Brazilian (Oberndorf) and I will hang on to it after the Model 70's are gone. I have some commercial FN's as well ("H" ring) and like then for their workmanship but like the 1935 much better. Regards, Bill.

It has been said that the H ring action is less costly to manufacture than the C ring action.

Can anyone explain exactly what makes the c ring less costly in terms of both machining and material costs.

I;ll take a c ring everytime.it ain't poop, and they fetch high dollar and any thinking man would not pay for poop...One can build a 300 Wby on a C ring, but its iffy on the H ring is the general consenses as the H ring seems to develope headspace in many cases Im told by those in the know...

who are those guys, and what exactly was their evidence.

quote:

Originally posted by lindy2:
It has been said that the H ring action is less costly to manufacture than the C ring action.

Can anyone explain exactly what makes the c ring less costly in terms of both machining and material costs.

Look up how the broach and the reason will be self explanatory.
Don

So what, maybe a couple of dollars in broaching time?

I bought a 1909 Argentine cavalry carbine about 9 months ago. It's all matching and stock, but for replacing the trigger with a Timney. I haven't shot it much, but very smooth.