Absolutely do not put a cock ring like this on your Mauser.

Mr. Webber, I would pay $5,000-$7,500 for a really good rifle, price subject to design, material, and quality.

I may buy a rifle built by this gentleman http://www.cprifles.com/ It would cost me about $5,000 and utilize a M70 reciever and McMillan stock and be an excellent rifle.

I would pay up to $7,500 for an excellent reproduction of a M98 Type A. $5,000-$6,000 would be a very attractive price range. Less than $5,000 and I would be suspect of quality.

A rifle is not worth more than $7,500 to me, otherwise I would own a Prechtl because it seems those rifles most closely replicate the originals.

Boy I'm slow this afternoon. Can someone help. I own just short of 30 centerfire rifles. All but two are a 98 of some type. Either military, FN, Mkx or Daly. Yep I know a "C" from and "H" and have never had a need for a cock ring. So does that mean I vote Ja?

I sure don't know much about actions. I do know the difference between push feed and control feed and Mr Jack Belk showed me the difference between c-ring and h-ring.
I've got 86 radio-active seeds in my prostate and still don't need a cock-ring

I sure do like the original long infantry Mausers! Especially the 98s. Can't get excited by the sporterized ones, though. Not even the fancy "customs" with purty wood 'n' all. Commercial Mausers are another matter.

Quite frankly I don't know what you are talking about. I actually prefer a Model 70 action to a Mauser any day whether military,commercial or whatever. They are both just actions and don't have any magical properties. Both work (along with a lot of others) and both could be improved. That's of course just MY opinion, but then all the other opinions are just that also ,Others opinions. I really don't understand now and never have understood the reverence given the Mauser Action.

quote:

Originally posted by zimbabwe:
Quite frankly I don't know what you are talking about. I actually prefer a Model 70 action to a Mauser any day whether military,commercial or whatever. They are both just actions and don't have any magical properties. Both work (along with a lot of others) and both could be improved. That's of course just MY opinion, but then all the other opinions are just that also ,Others opinions. I really don't understand now and never have understood the reverence given the Mauser Action.

Aye.

We're not just talking about a mauser, where talking about a Model 98. It was the culmination of 30 years of trial and error, that began in the 1860's with push-feeds. Every improvent in the design was the direct result of battlefield feedback, with countless soldiers paying the ultimate price to achieve such perfection.

It then took almost 30 years more to achieve the commercial quality of the Oberndorf and Brno sporters that we are now trying to duplicate.

As for the model 70, it is a knock-off of the 54, which is a knock-off of the 1903, which is a knock-off of the 98. The model 70 apple has fallen too far from the tree. There are plenty of similar actions already available should one choose to go that route.

Over 100 years and there have been a lot of imitators and very few minor innovators.

Then every mass produced modern automobile is a knockoff of the Model T with no improvement able to be made???????

quote:

Then every mass produced modern automobile is a knockoff of the Model T with no improvement able to be made

I'm sure no expert. Just curious besides the safety and yep longer action what does the M70 add to the 98? Most changes I see in the various actions today is to lower the production cost not add to the design.

Just curious as to what you view as improvements the newer designs bring to the table.

quote:

Originally posted by ramrod340:

quote:

Then every mass produced modern automobile is a knockoff of the Model T with no improvement able to be made

I'm sure no expert. Just curious besides the safety and yep longer action what does the M70 add to the 98? Most changes I see in the various actions today is to lower the production cost not add to the design.

Just curious as to what you view as improvements the newer designs bring to the table.

If functionality is not reduced, and cost is lowered, there is an improvement.

Of course I am probably wrong but I would assume the steel composition and heat treatment have improved in the ensuing years and I personally like the trigger of the 70 better than the 98 military. The floorplate trigger guard and catch are equally as good as the 98 if not improved especially the one piece one although I have never had a problem with the 2 piece. I think the boltstop and ejector is an improvement. But then again that is MY opinion only. I don't hold reverence for ANY particular action. I have just never really understood the overwhelming adoration of the 98 by so many people with so few real reason other than personal preference.

But then I might ask, if your planning on improving the mauser, why would I want one of those and not just get a new production Model 70 and build up a custom on it? Going price on a new Winchester is about $600 for a complete rifle.

Back on topic thread, and correct me if I am wrong, but there really haven't been any "C" ring mausers in mainstream production since WWII.

Maybe you can modify your cock ring into a barrel band of some sort.

I did vote "Ja" and I do know why andhow a well-built Mauser 98 action is so good for use in a hunting rifle. But I have a cold water budget that does not begin to match my champagne taste. So one of you folks with the necessary funds needs to commission an extra rifle, classic all the way (.30-06, 4X Leupold, 3.5 lb. trigger, black Decelerator recoil pad, matte finish on rifle and scope, non-glossy finish on straight grained black walnut classic stock without cheekpiece). Then shoot it regularly, take it hunting, and appreciate it twice as much as you normally would. Only in that way will the world find stable equilibrium between total Mauser aspirations and total Mauser fulfillment!

If I am going to sink $5K to $15K on a bolt gun, it will ONLY be a Mauser.

Actually, the only guns I buy are Mausers and doubles. Except for ARs and one Cooper for PD hunting.

quote:

Originally posted by HP Shooter:

If functionality is not reduced, and cost is lowered, there is an improvement.

An improvement to the bottom line maybe, a cost savings that benefits the producer but not necessarily the end user. Cost savings are often employed as a means of extracting greater profit not passing on greater savings.

Dear Mr Webber,

I do know the difference between a "C" and a "H" ring.

I do know what a split lug is, and believe I understand what function it serves. I can even find the third lug on a Mauser bolt.

I can read and have the the De Haas and De Haas / Van Zwolle books on the rifle (actions).

However, I do not know what "Kool aide" is and reckon my education is safely incomplete, not knowing what a cock ring and what you do with it. (Smiley face symbol).

Mausers underwent an evolution. So, for pedants, even if a rifle lacks some of the later features, it would still be a Mauser.

However, I would ask people this if having read the threads on FN Mausers and the Interarm Mark X action, which the majority of economically (dis)advantaged reminisce about, what would you, as a company, market?

Sure, people extol original Oberndorf double square bridge maganum length Mauser actions, or the Brevex action, but just how many can afford one? Granite Mountain and Prechtl / Ritterbusch actions are strictly for the carriage trade. And yes, I am envious!

Robert Thomas

aka robthom

I grew up shooting Remington 870s, Remington 700s and Colt M-16s. Thirty plus years later I am starting to realize that there has been no significant improvement on the design of the Model 98 in the last 107 years. Metallurgy, stock finish and metal finishes, sure, but no significant design improvement.

Jesus loves me, and he shoots a re-worked G33/40 chambered in 7x57 and stocked in French walnut. It is lighter than one of heaven's clouds and mightier than Michael's sword.

Ja.

A Model T was the first mass produced auto, the Model 98 was not the first mass produced turn bolt rifle.

It would be better to compare a 98 to the high quality autos of the 40's and 50's, with a model 71 mauser more akin to a model T ford.

Many of us believe that the model 98 was the high point of bolt action design, with 30 years of development before it, and 30 years of production improvements after it.

I think there is a strong market for a classic 98 action, if it can be kept around $1500. I would suggest following the Oberndorf double square bridge pattern, with the stripper clip slot. As stated previously, safeties, triggers, bolt handles and thumb cuts are all options that can be available to suit individual tastes.

(This stripper clip slot is an important part of the 98 design. Even without clips, it permits cartridges to be loaded straight down into the magazine, without having to "hook" them under the rear bridge. It is also the area that gets relieved to allow the use of larger cartridges).

quote:

If functionality is not reduced, and cost is lowered, there is an improvement

When I look at most of the changes that were made to reduce cost they also reduce the functionality. One could question if all the gas handling design is still need with the new brass. And yes new steel alloys etc are nice.

But, for my $$ if a FN or sporterized good quality 98 will handle the case I want to use I would never even look at something else. Give me a square bridge 98 in new metal the right length etc I would be a happy man.

I don't know the exact difference betwen C- and H- ring so I did a search and came up with this from a review of CZ Rifles.

" Original Mauser 98 actions have an internal collar in the front receiver ring. When a Mauser barrel is properly fitted the end of the barrel tightens up against this collar at the same time the barrel shoulder tightens against the front of the receiver.

When the bolt is closed the nose of the bolt fits inside the collar, flat against the end of the chamber, with the cartridge enclosed in barrel steel right up to its extraction groove. The right side of the collar is slotted for the extractor. Looking into the receiver the collar looks like the letter "C".

Some Mauser derivatives have been made with the collar slotted on both sides, in order to make it easier to broach the locking lug raceways in the receiver. While this system has proven satisfactory, most Mauser enthusiasts feel the collar should be left as Mauser designed it."


My question is what is meant by "broaching" the raceways?


Thanks, Rob

Thanks, Rob

Ramrod340 and z1r, could you both explain to me what functionalities are lost if one deviates from the Mauser pattern by doing away with stipper clip slots, C rings, split LH lug, and third lug in an otherwise properly manufactured action?

Does it no longer load, feed, fire, extract, and eject without undue effort?

I'm not looking to get into a pissing match, just to understand what PRACTICAL purpose these features provide.

It has already been stated that such is what makes a Mauser a Mauser, but that is not what I am asking.

quote:

Originally posted by Recoil Rob:My question is what is meant by "broaching" the raceways?

Broaching is the process of removing material by pulling or pushing a cutting tool, called a broach, (sometimes called a broach cutting tool) through or past a piece part. The teeth on the broach are equally spaced, with each tooth successively larger, and more to the shape desired, as the previous tooth. Each tooth usually removes only a few thousandths of material, until finally the last tooth is to the exact shape and size desired.

Examples of broaches:

Actually, Mauser makes a 98 mauser. I don't know what it costs, but they claim to make it from original drawings.

http://www.mauserwaffen.de/index.php?id=37&lang=en

Is THIS a Mauser?

quote:

Originally posted by Poleax:
Absolutely do not put a cock ring like this on your Mauser.

That's funny as hell!

quote:

Originally posted by HP Shooter:
Is THIS a Mauser?

Its a mauser. But its not a Model 98 mauser.

quote:

Ramrod340 and z1r, could you both explain to me what functionalities are lost if one deviates from the Mauser pattern by doing away with stipper clip slots, C rings, split LH lug, and third lug in an otherwise properly manufactured action?

I could care less about the stipper clips. I prefer the C-ring vs the H. Is it probably belt and suspenders as is the need for a thrid lug with new metals. I prefer the way the front of the extractor engages the bolt. I view it as stronger. Maybe it is me but I like the way the split LH lug ejects vs the M70. I do prefer the M70 safety. But I can live with the old two positon on a FN. What I HATE on the M70 is the extractor grove in the barrel. Turns an easy barrel installation into a pain in the A$$ as least for me. There has been more than once I turned a 98 barrel a 1/4 turn and rechambered and hid the old markings.

HPshooter - If I couldn't find a good Mauser a M70 would be far and away my second choice. Followed by one of the custom M70 knockoffs.

quote:

Originally posted by HP Shooter:

quote:

Originally posted by Recoil Rob:My question is what is meant by "broaching" the raceways?

Broaching is the process of removing material by pulling or pushing a cutting tool, called a broach, (sometimes called a broach cutting tool) through or past a piece part. The teeth on the broach are equally spaced, with each tooth successively larger, and more to the shape desired, as the previous tooth. Each tooth usually removes only a few thousandths of material, until finally the last tooth is to the exact shape and size desired.

Examples of broaches:

Thanks for the explanation HP.

So, am I correct in assuming that the H-ring is strictly a result of simplifying the manufactirong process, a cost saving measure that adds nothing to the functionality of the action, possibly weakens it?


Thanks, Rob

From what little I know, the ring is basically a washer between the barrel and receiver. So it seems its only function is to provide a place for the barrel stub to bear against. Perhaps the rings come in different thicknesess, or it is ground to its final thickness as part of the barrel fitting operation, to assure orpoer contact of the barrel shoulder on the outside of the receiver AND on the end of the threaded stub inside the receiver.

Also, I do not think that the cuts that make the C or the H shape on the ring go all the way through, so as long as the corners were radiused to prevent stress risers, I don't see how strengh can be reduced to the point of making the H ring unsafe. Obviously, the C ring will be stronger, since less metal is removed, but just how much of that extra strength is necessary? The lack of kabooms with H ring Mausers would lead one to believe that the H ring is not a disadvantage.

I wonder why it costs so much to machine an action.

From what I have read in many separate places by very knowledgable people, the front locking lugs and the frong recoil lug do all of the work. Therefore, I do not see why someone could not machine three separate pieces (much easier and cheaper than machining one piece) and then join them together into one single action.

Steel is joined together all of the time to manufacture items that take considerable stress. Certainly, it should be able to work on a mauser action.

And why would this not also work with the bolt. One could then have one bolt body with different heads for regular and magnum cartridges. This would then allow for interchageable barrels on the same action for normal and magnum cartridges.

(by the way, isn't it a fact that broaching is only required because there is no other way to machine a square hole?)

quote:

(by the way, isn't it a fact that broaching is only required because there is no other way to machine a square hole?)

That is one of the applications certainly. Not the only application though. Take a thick piece of metal such as a mag box (not new sheet metal ones) the hole down the center could be cut on a mill. Problem is cutting on the side of the cutter on a deep surface results in clatter, even the best jigging and fixures can't really correct it. If you mill the box it can be draw files to clean up the waves down the straight side (bad=hand work=craftsman vrs machine operator) if milled slightly undersized. A broach can bite cleanly and not ripple the interior finish. A new method of doing the same thing is a 5 wire EDM but that is expensive, broaching is cheaper, although much less precise as you can build some very small complicated parts on EDM's. When I say less precise I mean you can build things with a EDM you could never attempt by broaching (small complicated stuff).

Mauser magazines were braoched, so was the "C" ring actions, and I am not certain of it but it wouldn't suprise me the triggerquard was done that way also (cut the hole for in the guard)

Another advantage to a broach is it finishes very smooth, and doesn't leave a hatch pattern like a mill tends to leave, this means more hand work cleaning that up. Broaches tend to be set up so its one cutter for application so to speak, and they are not as flexible generally as a set of ball or end mills which are more universal in nature.

HP I prefer "C" ring Mauser but I would full of you know what dissing "H" ring versions. From De Hass bolt action rifles:

" FN actions were made at first with the full inside collar, just as in the M98 military action, with the collar slotted on the right side for the extractor. At some point FN began to fudge and" (post war production circa early 1950's) " thereafter slotted the collar on the left side as well, leaving only partial collars top and bottom. This was done for one reason only-to make milling the left locking lug raceway much easier. I feel it was an unwise move, and that Paul Mauser would think the same. Although I have no solid evidence to indicate that dividing the collar has affected the strength or the safety of the action, I would certainly rather have the collar remain as Mauser designed it."

I believe the test of time has proved the safety and strength guess above on FN rifles, and there are a lot more "H" ring model FN's running around in the USA than old "C" ring versions ( a very unscientific most commercial FN's in the USA )

If somebody has scanning abilities and the De Hass book please scan the picture on pg 173 and post it.

H ring action raceways were broached. This is much cheaper. In one pass you can go from a .700" hole to an action with the breech ring to an H shaped hole with the breech ring viloated. C ring action raceways were shaved with a cutter on a mandrel. Kinda like the cutter box used for cut rifling. About .0003" per pass. If you look inside a real 98 the left raceway stops short of the thread and if it continued forward it would remove some of the threads. Kind of like the new M70 & Dak76. Not my definition of top quality. Just easy to produce.
gunmaker

Paul Otteson's The Bolt Action starts off with the M98 Mauser as the fountainhead for modern bolt action rifles. His comment on the C-Ring is it is a ring of steel around the cartridge case, and other designs substitute a ring of steel in the barrel or the nose of the bolt.

jim

quote:

Originally posted by 22WRF:
Actually, Mauser makes a 98 mauser. I don't know what it costs, but they claim to make it from original drawings.

http://www.mauserwaffen.de/index.php?id=37&lang=en

The action used on the new production magnum mauser "Mauser" youve shown us above, is made by Reimer Yohannsen, Germany.

Well, having read everything, I think its going to boil down to something not related to the action itself.

Having studied management science in the past, it would appear that the whole thing is going to come down to "Cost Benefit" and "Breakeven" analysis.

Nobody, including Waffenfabreikhein, is going to spend time making actions unless they can make a profit doing so, and they certainly are entitled to make a decent profit for their time, energy, and investment in machines, etc.
Most people want the original mauser, so they will need to spend extra time machining it. That will mean that they will have to charge extra dollars for it. And that will mean that in order to break even (and then make a profit) there will have to be one of two things happen. Either they will have to take the Fred Wells and Hartmann and Weiss route and make very few actions and charge a very high price, or make a lot of actions and charge a lesser price, with the much greater risk being in tooling up for a much greater number of actions that may or may not sell. The least risky thing to do is make an action, put it on the website, advertize it to potential customers, wait until one gets an order and a down payment, and then make another action. But that way will never get a large number of actions distributed to those who might otherwise purchase one at a lower price.

Its a business dilema, first and foremost.

One way of lessening the risk is to spread the investment. (i.e. sell stock in the company to pull investment out) but that in turn distributes power and lowers the prospect for long term wealth.

Oh well, back to looking for good surplus actions.

quote:

Originally posted by Woodjack:

quote:

Originally posted by 22WRF:
Actually, Mauser makes a 98 mauser. I don't know what it costs, but they claim to make it from original drawings.

http://www.mauserwaffen.de/index.php?id=37&lang=en

The action used on the new production magnum mauser "Mauser" youve shown us above, is made by Reimer Yohannsen, Germany.

And I thought the Johannsen was made by Prechtl

My vote is for "if it ain't a Mauser it's just a gun." And a Winchester is not a Mauser, by the way.