This question is about mauser based rifles.

I was just reading another post and saw something on single stack magazines being more reliable than staggered. Why is this?

Can a staggered mag rifle be made to be as reliable?

Thanks!

I think it is because the engineering is made simpler. In a staggered stack, the feeding system must be able to feed cases from both sides of the stack equally well, which can sometimes be difficult to get right. The single stack eliminates this problem. Just my thougths...

Idiots can build rifles that will feed cartridges from a single stack magazine, and a staggered magazine can be made to feed reliably.

Chuck

'bout the only thin' a single-stack is good fer is when the case diameter is the size of the Yorktown! Mausers all came originally with stagger-stacks and they've worked the bees' knees for over a hundred years. What the blazes was that author goin' on about, anyway? Poppycock!

"Better?"

It's NOT........

But I'll back up a bit. The single-stack magazine is only "better" if some ignorant, buffoon gunsmith is trying to build, let's say, a 7mm Rem. Mag. on -- again let's say -- a 1909 Argentine Mauser action, but doesn't do one single thing to change the magazine box from 7.65 Argentine dimensions to proper 7mm Rem. Mag. dimensions.

Basic Rifle Engineering 101: A magazine box and follower MUST be of the correct dimensions to achieve the correct stack angle for a specific cartridge. This is Paul Mauser's original concept, which is absolutely and beyond a shadow of any doubt mathematically correct.

If these physical realities are violated, the action will NOT feed properly, regardless of feed-rail work, etc.........

AD

If all else is equal a single stack will always be more reliable and will always feed with less effort. Of course the trade off is a drop in magazine capacity. Although with a slight drop magazine Wby now gets 3 of the 378 based calibres in the magazine. Actually a Wby on the 378 case is more like a staggered stack that is funneled through a single stack outlet.

Anyone who has used a 458 with either soft blunt cast bullets or 400 grain flat nose speers will soon see the advantage of the single stack when such a rifle/cartride combination is compared to a cheap 22 rimfire with it single stack.

Mike

Mike,



The advantage of the single stack only increases with bore diameter, when one is using normal magnum mauser actions or equivalents!



Allen there is much "old wives tale" in what you say. There is some truth though, as well. It would truly take a buffoon not to be able to get a 7mm Remington magnum to feed through a M1909 Mauser.



ASS_CLOWN

As stated above, the dimensions of the magazine box, side rails and feed ramp are critical for the smooth feeding of each particular cartridge. Not every gunsmith (or factory) is aware of this, as they seem to subsribe to the "one size fits all" theory. As always, you get what you pay for.

Also note that the type of magazine does not necessarily dictate the type of feed. Staggered vs Single stack magazine, Alternating vs In-line feeding. Some detachable magazines may be staggered for capacity, yet taper to an in-line feed for reliability.

The advantage of the single stack only increases with bore diameter, when one is using normal magnum mauser actions or equivalents!

Agree but more correctly would be as bore diameter gets bigger in relation to the case diameter.

While an extreme test....loading a 416 Rigby with 400 Hornadys loaded backwards in a Ruger and the same in a 416 Wby in a Mark V..and then bashing the bolt closed with a rubber mallet...the Wby wins and of course it could be no other way.

Actually, the smoothest and most reliable feeding rifles I have held and used wer the old Kricos. Although I am sure some of those rotary magazine rifles would be as good or better.

But for expensive custom rifles I think CRF and staggered always wins the day because the combination of staggered feed and CRF just looks better when its working. Got a sort of steam engine look about it in that you can see it all working.

Mike

"Old wive's tale"?

No, it's a mathematical fact.

AD

Both the original Belgian and Argentine Mausers of 7.65X53 mm caliber had single-stack magazines. If this design were indeed superior, I doubt that Mauser would have gone to a staggered-box type in his improved designs!

If you make the staggered feed work then you gain magazine capacity. Even if you have a wide magazine box and then funnel the cartridge through a single outlet you will lose magazine capacity although gain reliability. But the gain in reliablity is reduced if you are working with "standard ammunition" and in particular ammunition that has a bore diameter considerably smaller than the chamber diameter and doubly so if the ammunition is loaded with FMJ spitzers.

But at the end of the day the in line feed will easily feed ammuntion that the staggered feed could not deal with. Imagine getting a staggered feed to do as well with pistol type calibres as the various lever action rifles do.

Mike

Ive got an old model 81 auto-loader that utilizes an inline mag. The only time it hasnt fed was twice, once because the cast bullet/pistol powder load wasnt enough for the mechanism to operate, and once when I tried some resized millsurp brass. I suppose that its possible that it could operate as well with a staggered box, but I seriously doubt it. For most actions though, the staggered box works quite well.

Allen,



Perhaps I mispoke before. Please explain the "mathematical facts" to me in mathematical terms.



Mike,



You are correct, but as the bore gets bigger case diameter really doesn't matter. The problem is one cannot get the feed ramp wide enough to "walk" the cartridge over without it binding up on the extractor or stove piping into the feed ramp. The wider case does help somewhat, but it is often not enough. Hence the NEED to produce a wider Mauser so on and so forth.

You are correct about blunt nose bullets in the Rigby. The 458 Winnie feeds much easier than a 500 A Square does too. Then you entire the fun realm of the 500 Jeffery, 505 Gibbs and the other true behemoths. All these cartridges feed spitzers far better than blunt round noses. The issue we are discussing is also the reason the 500 Jeffery uses the unique Schuler point design a semi-spitzer if you will. This was done to aid with initial engagment of the feed ramp, and with a single stack magazine to boot!



How is your 550 Mag coming? Are you going to single stack or stagger the box?



Thanks Allen,



ASS_CLOWN

How is your 550 Mag coming? Are you going to single stack or stagger the box?

Well..I sent the money over for the long chambered, contoured barrel and sights and dies etc and now await.

It will be in line because it is going on a Weatherby

Mike

The most reliable single stack magazines (including those which stagger rounds below the top) retain the round at the rear like an automatic pistol magazine. But these systems require removable magazines since rounds cannot be pushed in from the top. If you want to do that you need a spring system (like the 378/460 Weatherbys) to retain the cartridges. Mauser's staggered magazine uses no springs or clips, allows top loading, allows more rounds to fit since they are all partially side by side, and is almost impossible to get out of whack since the feed rails are part of the receiver. Brilliant. But Mauser very carefully calculated every dimension so that his rifles fed rounds perfectly. Any cartridge change on staggered magazine rifles can definitely get you into trouble, especially with todays shorter, fatter rounds and sharper shoulders.

Gentlemen: You cannot get any better answer than this one by 9x23W.


Not even if he turned it into a Louis Lamour novel

Thanks for the replies!!1 I'm learning a lot from this. Keep it up!