Well I would hate to disagree with Paul Mauser on the greatest rifle every made..nor would I challenge Duane in his chosen field.

My only real concern on this subject is tossing a round into the chamber under stress is accident prone and Ive seen many a round end up on the ground..I can push one down in the magazine and close the bolt thus using the control of the existing Mausers..I hate to see the drop in method recommended to a newbie on his first DG hunt..Just my two bits.

BTW Ive never owned an original Mauser that you could close the bolt on without using two hands one to press the extracter and one to close the bolt..I have used this method more than a few times as a way to add an extra round in the barrel before going into a sticky situation, mostly if not entirely on African DG..

I never said "this is the way you gotta do it" I'm saying be aware of the design capabilities,make sure it works..."just in case."

I make sure my customs are delivered with the capability. That's just the way I do things

Like packing a pair of sunglasses on a long trip even though you start out on a rainy day.

My goal was to pass on information that may be helpful..take it or leave it
.

I'm about a month out now from receiving the rifle. I sent them a Lothar Walther barrel for them to fit and chamber in.30/06. In the meantime Im working on a stock in fiddleback maple. I have Recknagel irons and Granite Mountain will machine the bridges for Talley rings.

Duane got me started on single chambering. Never hunted DG but just felt like learning all about it.

Got started by removing a thou or two total from beveled face point of the claw tip of a Mauser 98 a tiny bit at a time to allow a snap over. The re-assemblies were a bit of a pain but got easier each time. Gun #1, done.

Gun #2, The failure to snap just felt different on this one almost like it was coming to a screeching halt not springy like the first rifle. I thought to check clearance on the outside of the extractor. Some inlet black proved it was tight there. Only had to remove a couple thou for it to snap over. Gave it a nice polish and it works every time.
I prefer #2 Yet the next time I intend to inlet black the case head for clearance as well.

quote:

Originally posted by Duane Wiebe (CG&R):
I never said "this is the way you gotta do it" I'm saying be aware of the design capabilities,make sure it works..."just in case."

I make sure my customs are delivered with the capability. That's just the way I do things


.

"I agree with Ray Atkinson... I don't know why people insist they have to be able to throw one into the chamber and have the extractor close over it, when its just as easy to push one straight into the magazine... People who want the bolt to ... close on a round in a 98... yadda, yadda, yadda... should buy a Model 700"

All this talk exclusively of single-loading ignores a reality of SOME controlled feed actions. To wit,

I've had 3 high-quality controlled feed actioned rifles that occasionally did NOT feed cartridges up under the extractor. This always happened with rounds coming from the left side of the magazine, and usually on the next to last rd in the mag.

When this happened, the rifle became an intermittent "push-feed;" the ctg was ahead of the extractor as it entered the chamber..... where it promptly jammed, with no way to extract the round.

The modest "snap over" modification fixed all these rifles (which had their factory barrels in the original caliber) so they fed ALL the time, regardless of their magazine quirks. Just because you have a belt, doesn't mean you can't have suspenders, too.

These were a first-year prewar Model 70, a later pre-64 70 and an original 1940 Berlin-Borsigwalde Kar 98k. Complain all you want about the Model 70's, but the 98K was a deadly serious combat Mauser built by dead-serious Germans, and it had Waffenamt inspector stamps out the wazoo.

As a famous firearms instructor is wont to say,
"If the Space Shuttle can turn into a bottle rocket, your (insert manmade item here) can fail, too."

To me, a custom maker who thoroughly knows and understands the 98/controlled feed actions and takes steps to ensure NO failures, even in unexpected/unusual circumstances, is a true professional.

Bravo, Mr. Wiebe!

John

OK so a non-DG rifle doesn't 'need' to single feed.
But, here's a story....some idiot (name withheld) went to the range with his 98 with a freshly externally re-shaped bottom metal and forgot to install the spring and follower which was 45 minutes away from the range.
I (I mean he) was happy for the snap over.
As the saying goes "It's better to have it and not need it" than the opposite.

I like the story...here's another related to me by Steve Billeb.

During a Wy antelope hunt, his hunting buddy stuffed one up the spout...and...couldn't close the bolt..They were a mile away from the vehicle, but there was no cleaning rod in the vehicle anyway.

One hunting day wasted!

quote:

Originally posted by Duane Wiebe (CG&R):
I never said "this is the way you gotta do it" I'm saying be aware of the design capabilities,make sure it works..."just in case."

I make sure my customs are delivered with the capability. That's just the way I do things

Like packing a pair of sunglasses on a long trip even though you start out on a rainy day.

My goal was to pass on information that may be helpful..take it or leave it
.

I'll say it, then. That is the way you gotta do it. Paul M. was not perfect.

Never understood why anyone wanted to try to improve the original design of the M98 action. When this said I respect gunmakers try to make their own `98`actions with some changes(not improvements).
The M98 action Paul Mauser wanted was to be a wartool.
Anyway. The Golamtic magnum action I used for my .416Rigby could be loaded directly into the chamber and ramming the bolt down.

Jens. Simple answer to your question: [Never understood why anyone wanted to try to improve the original design of the M98 action.] Because the original design was built to be loaded with a clip of ammo, not for hunting purposes.

Then sporting mods came into play (in no particular order) for single loading a cartridge, longer heavier game bullets, fine tuning for triggers, side swing safety for lower scope mounting, ramp, rail and follower changes/mods for caliber & case width & length changes. Many of these mods were made by low-production companies and 'smiths.
Necessary improvements. Sometimes.

For high production (as you seem to be saying), costs of manufacturing caused some unnecessary mods like a rocker lever bolt release to replace the ejector box, push feed to replace the more costly CRF and reshaping of the base of the action to a tubular style to save costs. Those are all about the money. They are built to allow a wider market, lower price. Winchester is a prime example of this beginning in 1964.

Take a close look at the 98 design. Close the bolt and one can plainly see that there is about 1MM clearance between the extractor and the ring wall.

I take that as proof the action was designed for "snap over" capabilities.

Or take another look. The wall thickness between extractor clearance and wall is thicker at the bridge than it is at the ring..by about 1mm! I'm looking at a G33-40...any small ring will be easily seen

This took some pretty darn deliberate machining

quote:

Originally posted by Duane Wiebe (CG&R):

Or take another look. The wall thickness between extractor clearance and wall is thicker at the bridge than it is at the ring..by about 1mm!

This took some pretty darn deliberate machining

You can see it widen in the ejection port. An extra setup, very deliberate and labor intensive.

I think Paul Mauser also walked on water!!

It has been over a year, but the completed barreled action will be here next week. Ultimately I sent a light profile Lothar Walther 30 caliber barrel blank, a set of Talley rings and some prewar commercial bottom metal to Granite mountain and they did all the work. I believe that they farmed out the action work to make it feed, and the heat treating. Here is the result in .30/06: https://imgur.com/gallery/jzPDEU8

I am contemplating a Rigby Highlander stalker inspired stock.

Nice!

I am not enough of a metalsmith to argue with Duane, and I mean that, and the way I see it is there is more than one way to skin a cat, Ive always been a G33-40 fan and of course love the old Brno 21 and 22..but my favorite 7x57 is a Ruger African custom by RJ Remmer (Hope I got that right) with side panals, schnable forend, old world rifle with a 2.5 Leupold Alaskan, and shoots bug holes, that I stole from a poor sole that liked plastic stocks and stainless steel...

I like todays Rugers and can live with that half assed control feed and that can be fixed...

Additionally and my last word on the subject is when one chooses the push a round down in the magazine and close the bolt, keep in mind It can be done with the barrel pointed at the beast and without taking your eyes off the animal, these are split second options and time is of essence in many, perhaps all of these situation...Ive been involved in several of these situation and it dawned on me this was the better of the two options for me anyway..but to each his own as to what works best is up for grabs, and we live with our results...Nobody told me this, I didn't read it anywhere, it just dawned on me a few days after a fairly close call..It beats the hell out of scrubbing around for another round in the high grass or a sticky gun loop that you just pulled up under your armpit!!

I am happy to report that my GMA rifle, a left hand G33/40 in 30/06, permits the bolt to be closed over a round in the chamber. With a 23” Lothar Walther light profile barrel, prewar commercial bottom metal and iron sights, the rifle weighs 5 lb, 4 oz without stock.