Would one of large ring/small thread Turkish 98s be strong enough to turn or surface grind into a small ring size?

No.

surface hardened steel.. you would scalp it
j

I've seen it done many times without issue.

Too Many Tools,

Was it Turks or other actions you've "SEEN" this done on? If Turks, which ones specifically?

There are some very good reasons NOT to do this especially on indigenously made actions.

They are '38 actions. Mounted on a mandrel and surface ground to small-ring dimensions. A very good friend who's made a living building custom rifles for 22 years and his father before him does this on request. I don't know for sure how many he's done but if you really are interested I can ask him.

I met a guy from Eastern NC and he had a bunch of them on a table in very nice rifles. They started out as Turk 38's is what he told me. SOme were cut to small ring then shortened, soke were just cut to small ring, and one had the top of the front ring in an oval shape. He said got them re-carburized and that he shot all of them and had doen this for years. I had no reason to doubt him.

BTW-his metal and wood work were of the highest caliber. About as good as any I've seen, and I have seen wood and metal done by people MILES better than I am.

Recarburised or not, these gents are playing with fire. Unlike Oberndorf made variants the K.Kale made actions have the thread relief directly in front of the "C" ring cut to the same depth as on a standard 98. The result if you thin the ring is a very thin wall especially in the extractor relief slot.

Not unlike the problem the WWI era Kar had. They simply took the LR blanks and thinned the ring. The reuslt, at least initially, was the rather annoying habit of the rifles to become takedown models. Later models reduced the depth of the relief cut and also increased the carbon content of the steel to counter this. Not so the Turks.

I have 3 diferent large threads thinned Mauser, They are all build bu germam gunsmiths, in cal 8x57 , and my opinion is that phey are potential to blow of the barrel.

When buing them they all shoved sever sighns of stretching above the thread frecut, at the end of the barrel.

Testing one lige this shoved that the theradarea only withstod 7 ton, compared to a small ring smallthread withstod fron 15-18 ton, and a large ring large thread withstod from 15 to 21 ton depending on make

Jorgen-

What did you see when you blued them that showed you they stretched? Also, was it hot bluing or rust bluing?

I am not doubting you, just wanting to learn something new too look for.

Thanks!

Mark,

Despite our differing opinions of the pre 98's, this is one area where I am in agreement with Jorgen. He has pointed out the obvious in that the front ring becomes prone to stretching. Again, this is the same as what plagued the early KAR's. It is a fairly well known issue that was addressed in later models.

A headspace gage and frequent use thereof is about the most practical method of monitoring.

Think of incipient case seperation only on the front ring of the receiver.

quote:

Originally posted by Marc_Stokeld:
Jorgen-

What did you see when you blued them that showed you they stretched? Also, was it hot bluing or rust bluing?

I am not doubting you, just wanting to learn something new too look for.

Thanks!

It was prety simple to se, because you could se a thinning of the ring, yust like a rubberband around your arm.
I newer intended to rebuild them or do any kind of job on then, I have just bought them over the years, to take them of the marked, and have them as educational items

Over the years i have colected a wide range of bad excamples, i also refused to do any work on a lot of dubius rifles, because i think i as a "socalled" profesionel, feel moral isues when not warning customers of hazardus things.

Unfortunatly some takes it as a critisism of ther weapon, and gets pissed of. But mostly customers are relieved.

I'm sold on it being a bad idea. Definitely sounds like flirting with disaster. And this from a guy who will shoot low numbered Springfields, M96's, and Damscus! I still have some beater Mexicans that I shorten, but i was planning on doing it to a M39 when my supply ran out. Won't being doing that now.

But that guy I met really was quite a riflesmith. ANd he collected original Oberndorf Sporters too. I was one of the few guys at the show to stop and talk to him he said, as most folks had no idea what they were looking at. Too bad he did all of that cusom work on those actions and not something more suitable.

quote:

Over the years i have colected a wide range of bad excamples

Good thing I kept moving the one time I visited Norway.

LD

quote:

Originally posted by lawndart:

quote:

Over the years i have colected a wide range of bad excamples

Good thing I kept moving the one time I visited Norway.

LD

You can feel quite safe, as i dont dare to colect anything that scary

I've done this on a few Turks with no ill effects. This could be because I just didn't know any better. They were built in 6.5x55, 7x57, 6mm Remington and 308.
That deep relief cut in front of the C-ring makes for a good story but does not exist on any of the half dozen receivers I have in the shop. Maybe mine are atypical.
In any cartridge that fits the action, I don't think it's a problem. Regards, Bill.

If you want a real nice small ring rifle, sell that turk and buy this rifle

http://www.gunbroker.com/Auction/ViewItem.asp?Item=56665810

Nice rifle. Looks like a lot of cash went into that one.

Shame about the brake on a 6.5-06. Each his own, I guess.

Sorry about bending the thread a little.

Interesting stuff on the small rings.

quote:

Originally posted by jeffeosso:
surface hardened steel.. you would scalp itj

True enough. However, it is NOT the surafce you'd be grinding away that keeps the bolt from setting back-it is the interior surfaces, and these would NOT be touched by this procedure. So the question is, are the receiver walls still thick enough over the barrel thread section after the reduction in ring diameter.

Bill,

I do believe yours were atypical. Which Turks were these? The 1903's or the so-called M38 or K.Kale indigenously made actions?

By the way, have these rifles been back through your shop and did you verify that there was no receiver stretch or was it simply good enough that they haven't seperated yet?

Z1r
These actions are stamped Ankara 1935 on top of the receiver ring. I bought a bunch for about thirteen dollars apiece back in the early '80's.
I can't say anything about the others but one of them wore out one barrel and got a second one installed. Seemed fine.
As I said before, the relief cut is to the major diameter of the threads and no more.
Browning made rifles based on a small ring action with large ring threads. The receiver ring was short too. I never really liked them but they apparently were OK with Browning. In comparison, a modified Turk is robust. Regards, Bill.

Bill,

Thanks. There are at least two variants of the Turkish Large Ring / Small thread receivers. Unfortunately all are stamped Ankara. The key is in either the date or K.Kale markings. The K.Kale of which I speak is the standard length action and was indigenously made. All, I've seen have been dated in the 40's. The 1930's marked receivers are the 1903's which are related to the 1909 peruvian and which as you state have the relief cut to just over major diameter. Not so the indigenous receievers which are cut to just over major diameter of the large ring thread. Thus the difference in depth of cut and suitability of the action to being reground to small ring diameter.

Thanks for taking to time to reply, it helps to put the seemingly different experiences into context.

I don't have a Turk. I was just thinking about this and wanted to hear some good discussion. Thanks for all the replies.

X-51,

why not just buy a small ring to start with?

Rich

I like to try to make somethings out of nothings if the cost and labor don't out-weigh the end product. And like I said, just kinda wanderin out loud.