I am contemplating buying a left hand GMA G33/40 action for a custom 30/06. I have heard that they are unfinished and require additional gunsmithing for proper feeding. I've also heard that they are ready to go as is. . Does anyone have first hand experience? Also, I can't find any photos of the G33/40 action on their website. Can someone provide a photo of one?

GMA is top notch. I have handled a G33/40 built buy Joe Smithson. It was fine. I own GMA Magnum actioned 338RUM built by Kathy Forster - I have hunted with it for 9years and put over 500 rounds through the Krieger barrel. Some basic light gunsmithing is needed to finish but I think the actions are a work of art in 8620 steel.
I wish you great luck and pleasure.
Drt I would recommend Smithson scope rings for this project - worth the money.

I visited GMA inPhoenix last year... the G33/40 treatment is an option to their excellent M98 actions. I ordered a “stretched” G 33/40 to build a .404 J.

They build these actions for gunsmiths to use as the foundation for the finest custom rifles, they are left for the gunsmith to polish and finish, but they are works of art. You cannot do better.

Top notch actions. Depending on the cartridge they require varying amounts of work to get to feed properly. They are hand stoned prior to heat treat so they don't take a lot of work to clean up. John's an awesome guy to work with.

I own one of the GMA G33/40 clones in right hand. It's very close to being a fully functional action. In terms of function it's the best I've seen from GMA to this point and since '02 I've had approximately 120 GMA's thru here. He is getting better each passing year, and of course intended cartridge has a huge bearing how much feeding work will need to be done. This 33/40 clone runs the 06 family including the 280 Ackley and all I've done so far is deburr the sharp edges underneath the rails.

The GMA 33/40 action weighs 3lbs 1oz, it's a bit of a tank compared to a an original 33/40 which comes in at 2lbs 9oz. Using a Berkley digital fish scale. Keep in mind the GMA is a square bridge so add a couple ounces to the original for custom bases of equal size of the GMA square bridges. The original might crowd 3lbs with custom bases, and modern aftermarket bottom metal.

One may ask the question, where is the weight on this GMA? The answer to that is in the bottom metal which is more substantial in every way, thicker walls on the box, more front tange ahead of the front screw.
Much heavier guard with a lever release in the guard, ounces can be shed off the bottom metal. A guy could stand to make the receiver lighter as well, like the left wall of an original 33/40 is relieved well below the wood line or centerline of bore, GMA for some reason only machined down to the centerline or wood line on the relief, why? Get rid of that extra material while it's still in the machine, it can move metal a hell of a lot faster than having to reset up just to cut that. Any how my obsession with the 33/40 has led me to 3 decent originals in the last 10 years and this GMA which I believe I will be putting on a bit of a diet then most likely a 280 Ackley. Anyhow hate to sound too wordy and such, but that's what I know about the GMA 33/40 action. I give him high marks, as some gunsmith inputs will be needed, but no where to the degree of earlier actions. Kudos to JR for sticking with it as making actions, especially M98's no easy gig.

Thanks for your input on the GMA. I'm not going to use GMA bottom metal. I have a petite prewar commercial unit that will save weight. That's the reason for selecting the G 33/40 action.

I have considered Joe Smithsons scope mounts as well as Talley mounts. What other mount choices do I have for the GMA? Also, does anyone machine the square bridges to Talley base profile so that only rings are needed?

Timan: In the past, there was not enough clearance in the ring to single load, I bitched forever, but gave up on the actions because of this...Have they addressed that issue?

They had also used their own guard screw hole spacing, which means after market bottom metal would not be compatible. Has that been changed?

quote:

In terms of function it's the best I've seen from GMA to this point and since '02 I've had approximately 120 GMA's thru here.

I had always heard that the precursor to the GMA company was Mr. Wells of Wells Sports store, and that he - Mr. Wells, was well regarded for making an excellent product.

Couldn't dispute that, but to my knowledge it has always been a Mike Roden enterprise

I know Mike stopped in Fred Well's shop to learn as much as he could but there are a lot of pretty fine, minute details on the originals that take time to understand and to do correctly.

As Stuart says, the GMA 33/40 action weighs more than a standard FN action, but a good portion of it is the bottom metal.

As for the Smithson mounts, I carried on of Joe's rifles built on a GMA 33/40 for a season
That also had his QD scope mounts and think they are the best in the industry, bar none.

quote:

I carried on of Joe's rifles built on a GMA 33/40 for a season That also had his QD scope mounts and think they are the best in the industry, bar none.

Why?

This is spoken of ignorance, as I come late to Mausers, being left handed. What is the purpose of the square bridges if not to mount scope bases or sights? The photo above shows a finished rifle with nothing on the bridges. All double square bridges do is add weight if they aren't used for sights.

Duane,
The two GMA actions I have do show a more open tolerance between the extractor and lugway thru the front ring, I can take the blade of screw driver and press the extractor to the right probably .030, which tells me single round tuning will be possible when the barrel is on and chambered with out a lot of draw filing of the extractor to come up with clearance to jump a case rim.

The bigger GMA action I have here is an SRV 3.600 inch drop box 8.0 inchs over the screws center to center.
It's a magnum. 300 and 375 H&H, 416Rem. 458 lott. and again very little work to get it feeding rounds thru the front ring without a barrel on I might have 30 minutes in it tops, to get it going, basically touched up the rail with a dremmel touched up the bottom corners of the ramp, polished the ramp...done. it works.
It's longer than a milsurp standard over the screws by about .180 so still bigger/longer in that respect.

.030... wouldn't be enough for a 416 Rigby. may not make it without thinning the extractor..RIGHT at the hook!

The guard screw holes spacing is their proprietary idea too.

I suppose if I made a staple gun, I want it to work only with my staples!

[QUOTE]Originally posted by Vol717:
This is spoken of ignorance, as I come late to Mausers, being left handed. What is the purpose of the square bridges if not to mount scope bases or sights? The photo above shows a finished rifle with nothing on the bridges. All double square bridges do is add weight if they aren't used for sights.[/QUOTE

You're absolutely right. Those squares make a dandy scope mounting platform WHEN used. I frequently use the rear for a claw mount, then remove the front one if not needed ( As with a front mount on the barrel)

My bottom metal weighs 10.5 ounces with spring and follower. Is that a lot lighter than GMA?

Also, please note that Talley bases made for the Dumoulin Mauser, which also has level front and rear rings, should fit the GMA.

I agree that unless used for scope mounting square bridges do little (nothing) for the handling of a rifle other than adding weight and making them uncomfortable in the hand.
But they are an integral portion of the Smithson mounting system and well worth it for that.

Mostly that's right. I would say there's an aesthetic aspect to them as well. I've done several open sighted .505's with square bridges essentially for looks. The rifle pictured above was a special case. I built six matching rifles for John Roden for his kids and his nephews. He had me finish out the rifles before he made custom rings for them and machined the bridges accordingly.

quote:

Originally posted by Vol717:
This is spoken of ignorance, as I come late to Mausers, being left handed. What is the purpose of the square bridges if not to mount scope bases or sights? The photo above shows a finished rifle with nothing on the bridges. All double square bridges do is add weight if they aren't used for sights.

quote:

I built six matching rifles for John Roden

So there is a Mike Roden who owns and runs Granite Mountain Arms Company. And then, there is a John Roden who buys 6 custom rifles at a time for his kids and nephews.

Very interesting, especially if Mike and John are related and John bought the custom rifles from Mike's competitor who also makes custom actions!

Not the case at all. John runs GMA. I'm hardly his competitor

quote:

Originally posted by lindy2:

quote:

I built six matching rifles for John Roden

So there is a Mike Roden who owns and runs Granite Mountain Arms Company. And then, there is a John Roden who buys 6 custom rifles at a time for his kids and nephews.

Very interesting, especially if Mike and John are related and John bought the custom rifles from Mike's competitor who also makes custom actions!

Many years ago, John Buehmiller (famous barrel maker) was on an elephant cull...His rifle had a Brevex action that also does not have extractor clearance.

He stuffed one up the spout, tried closing the bolt and now had a hopeless jam.

So, MNR, did those 505's have the issue and if sop, how did you fix it?

I have a Vector action here to make a 450 Rigby with the same defect. It is not an easy job to provide that clearance since it must be done to the action itself, not the extractor.

Not starring a war, just asking questions so I can find out things

quote:

Originally posted by Duane Wiebe (CG&R):
Many years ago, John Buehmiller (famous barrel maker) was on an elephant cull...His rifle had a Brevex action that also does not have extractor clearance.

He stuffed one up the spout, tried closing the bolt and now had a hopeless jam.

So, MNR, did those 505's have the issue and if sop, how did you fix it?

I have a Vector action here to make a 450 Rigby with the same defect. It is not an easy job to provide that clearance since it must be done to the action itself, not the extractor.

Not starring a war, just asking questions so I can find out things

Mr B with a very good gunwriter.

Actually, it was Jim Carmichel who passed along the story about the Brevex

Pretty sure that's Jim on the right

That was the old Jim

Yes, with these actions the extractor had clearance to cam over the rim of the case if one had to. Of course it's not the recommended SOP on a true CRF action but it's a must to at least be able to do so in a pinch on a DG rifle. I don't know about the earlier production GMA actions but the ones I've dealt with have taken very little work to get the extractor to function this way.

quote:

Originally posted by Duane Wiebe (CG&R):
Many years ago, John Buehmiller (famous barrel maker) was on an elephant cull...His rifle had a Brevex action that also does not have extractor clearance.

He stuffed one up the spout, tried closing the bolt and now had a hopeless jam.

So, MNR, did those 505's have the issue and if sop, how did you fix it?

I have a Vector action here to make a 450 Rigby with the same defect. It is not an easy job to provide that clearance since it must be done to the action itself, not the extractor.

Not starring a war, just asking questions so I can find out things

Jim sent me that photo some time ago after a barrel conversation.

quote:

Originally posted by MNR:
Yes, with these actions the extractor had clearance to cam over the rim of the case if one had to. Of course it's not the recommended SOP on a true CRF action but it's a must to at least be able to do so in a pinch on a DG rifle. I don't know about the earlier production GMA actions but the ones I've dealt with have taken very little work to get the extractor to function this way.

quote:

Originally posted by Duane Wiebe (CG&R):
Many years ago, John Buehmiller (famous barrel maker) was on an elephant cull...His rifle had a Brevex action that also does not have extractor clearance.

He stuffed one up the spout, tried closing the bolt and now had a hopeless jam.

So, MNR, did those 505's have the issue and if sop, how did you fix it?

I have a Vector action here to make a 450 Rigby with the same defect. It is not an easy job to provide that clearance since it must be done to the action itself, not the extractor.

Not starring a war, just asking questions so I can find out things

Thanks, that's refreshing to hear..I assume you only had to work on the hook itself?

I wrote a column about GMA published last year in Sports Afield including excerpts from interviews with Mike and John Roden. Compamy origins, manufacturing processes and action development were discussed as well as Fred Well's influence.

I guess I'm well ahead of the AR curve?? and you guys don't subscribe to quality magazines?? I'm quite often surprised when topics or specific rifles I've covered come up as question and discussion here??

What's your point?

Steve,

I read your article and kept that issue of Sports Afield because of it and the Rigby Mauser article in the same issue. The reason for this inquiry is that I was afraid that the action was just a "box of parts" that required extensive gunsmithing to render a final product. I am convinced now, based upon this discussion that that is not the case. There will be some gunsmithing work left to do, but most of the work is done. I ordered the action today. They are making left hand G33/40 actions now. https://imgur.com/gallery/UPC2tl7

Good on ya Vol, that should make a dandy rifle. I think you will find John to be a good guy to work with.

With all due respect, it just doesn't seem like a g.33/40 without the thumb notch.

quote:

Originally posted by lindy2:
With all due respect, it just doesn't seem like a g.33/40 without the thumb notch.

Do you use stripper clips?

no, but I have three of those actions and I like them just the way they are.

Thumb cuts on a gun with a scope are like buggy whip holders on a Subaru.

I disagree...every custom horse drawn Subaru I ever rode in had and truly needed whip holders.

Ah Subaru, the vehicle of choice for slow drivers.

Dave

Occasionally, I'm asked to do those thumb cuts..mostly from DG hunters.

Mr. Wiebe

Getting back to that extractor issue, I am wondering what the fix is. Do you have to go into the front ring and polish the raceway (or whatever its called) that the extractor is housed in when it enters the bolt in order to provide some clearance for movement? And realistically, how much can be shaved off the outside of the extractor?