I just wonderd if anybody knows how well the later FN/HVA action, with the H-ring handles a ruptured case, gas handling etc?

The Mausers were built with a C-ring originaly just because of this.. while the H-ring came later because of easier manufacturing.

Was it compromised because of this? If so, how much?

Hello Nortman

Since no one else has piped up I'll have a go at this, but my opinion is worth exactly what you pay for it . . . like much other advice you'll get from the 'net - and you've had some already I think. As far as I know the "ring in a 98 action is to reinforce the receiver, like an internal collar, nothing so much to do with gas handling. If you have an action without a barrel have a look and you'll see that the "ring doesn't really do anything with gas from a rupture. I have also read that it is part of the "system" of manufacture to set headspace - that mauser military barrels tended to be set primarily against the inner ring.

Cheers

The ring with the "C" cut keeps gas from coming
back down the left side of th action. The "thumb" cut was also for gas relief.
All this was important 125 years ago when
they were learning to make cartridge cases, now?

quote:

Originally posted by hawkins:
The ring with the "C" cut keeps gas from coming
back down the left side of th action. The "thumb" cut was also for gas relief.
All this was important 125 years ago when
they were learning to make cartridge cases, now?

I think there is some BS being spread about the thumb cut being gas relief feature. I am sure that a Mauser marketing geek may have hatched that goofy notion. The thumb cut is for loading convenience especially with heavy gloves. If you shoulder a 98 and open your left eye you can see the thumb cut and understand that any gas exhausted out of the thumb cut will be dumped right into your face and your left eye.

quote:

Originally posted by SR4759:

quote:

Originally posted by hawkins:
The ring with the "C" cut keeps gas from coming
back down the left side of th action. The "thumb" cut was also for gas relief.
All this was important 125 years ago when
they were learning to make cartridge cases, now?

I think there is some BS being spread about the thumb cut being gas relief feature. I am sure that a Mauser marketing geek may have hatched that goofy notion. The thumb cut is for loading convenience especially with heavy gloves. If you shoulder a 98 and open your left eye you can see the thumb cut and understand that any gas exhausted out of the thumb cut will be dumped right into your face and your left eye.

The fact is, wheteher or not the thumbcut was DESIGNED to relieve gas it does.

And that bit about it going into your eye, wrong. It vents up and out and any residual gas that may continue down the raceway is conveniently blocked by the marvelous Mauser bolt stop.

The attached patent documents may serve to support the claim that the 'thumb' notch was originally designed as a gas relief port.





Also, here's patent documents that deal with the 'C' ring.

quote:

Originally posted by z1r:

quote:

Originally posted by SR4759:

quote:

Originally posted by hawkins:
The ring with the "C" cut keeps gas from coming
back down the left side of th action. The "thumb" cut was also for gas relief.
All this was important 125 years ago when
they were learning to make cartridge cases, now?

I think there is some BS being spread about the thumb cut being gas relief feature. I am sure that a Mauser marketing geek may have hatched that goofy notion. The thumb cut is for loading convenience especially with heavy gloves. If you shoulder a 98 and open your left eye you can see the thumb cut and understand that any gas exhausted out of the thumb cut will be dumped right into your face and your left eye.

The fact is, wheteher or not the thumbcut was DESIGNED to relieve gas it does.

And that bit about it going into your eye, wrong. It vents up and out and any residual gas that may continue down the raceway is conveniently blocked by the marvelous Mauser bolt stop.

I don't believe you have any understanding of gas under pressure.
Not only is it not stopped by the bolt stop, it is not stopped by the flange and when it blows out the thumbcut it spreads in all directions except down of course.

I believe that the patent document only made the gas vent claim as a preposterous bit of fakery.

You can also test your beliefs very easily. Put your face behind a 98 that leaks a lot of gas.
I have seen the result and the guy's face was a mess.

You can believe all you want from the patent documents but they do not defeat the laws of physics. Just because they are patent documents does not mean they did not opportunistically stretch the truth. Yeah you can say it vents the gas - but is it an improvement or did it make the rifle more dangerous? I think it is more dangerous.

Many bolt actions designers have had the opportunity to copy that feature, if it was of significant value it would have been copied.

Taken on the whole, the 98 does a great job of venting/re-routing gases. The 700 on the other hand contains gases. Two different approaches that both work well.

I've seen the results of major gas leaks in a 98. Never saw a shooter injured as a result. The thumbcut is but one of the many devices used in the 98 to route or deflect gas.

SR, since you are the expert, please critique the pre-64 winchester model 70.

So.. I have a singleshot mauser, solid bottom and H-ring, pretty much everything would hit my face in a catastrophic event?

Better get rid of it then?

quote:

Originally posted by Nortman:
So.. I have a singleshot mauser, solid bottom and H-ring, pretty much everything would hit my face in a catastrophic event?

Better get rid of it then?

Yes you should ship them to me for proper disposal.

4759, It's a shame you were not around when
Mauser did the design. You could have shown
him the light. Mauser was well aware of gas
escaping an action, particularly after he
lost his eye to it.

Shoot a spitball out of a straw...now cut a big notch out of the side of the straw and try shooting a spitball again.

The side rail vent has been copied. Not a full thumb cut but an upper rail cut. Just look at a Ruger M77, Mossberg, Savage 110-114 series, Smith and Wesson, Arisaka, 1917 Enfield, or a Remington 700.

quote:

Originally posted by SR4759:

quote:

Originally posted by z1r:

quote:

Originally posted by SR4759:

quote:

Originally posted by hawkins:
The ring with the "C" cut keeps gas from coming
back down the left side of th action. The "thumb" cut was also for gas relief.
All this was important 125 years ago when
they were learning to make cartridge cases, now?

I think there is some BS being spread about the thumb cut being gas relief feature. I am sure that a Mauser marketing geek may have hatched that goofy notion. The thumb cut is for loading convenience especially with heavy gloves. If you shoulder a 98 and open your left eye you can see the thumb cut and understand that any gas exhausted out of the thumb cut will be dumped right into your face and your left eye.

The fact is, wheteher or not the thumbcut was DESIGNED to relieve gas it does.

And that bit about it going into your eye, wrong. It vents up and out and any residual gas that may continue down the raceway is conveniently blocked by the marvelous Mauser bolt stop.

I don't believe you have any understanding of gas under pressure.
Not only is it not stopped by the bolt stop, it is not stopped by the flange and when it blows out the thumbcut it spreads in all directions except down of course.

I believe that the patent document only made the gas vent claim as a preposterous bit of fakery.

You can also test your beliefs very easily. Put your face behind a 98 that leaks a lot of gas.
I have seen the result and the guy's face was a mess.

You can believe all you want from the patent documents but they do not defeat the laws of physics. Just because they are patent documents does not mean they did not opportunistically stretch the truth. Yeah you can say it vents the gas - but is it an improvement or did it make the rifle more dangerous? I think it is more dangerous.

Many bolt actions designers have had the opportunity to copy that feature, if it was of significant value it would have been copied.

quote:

Originally posted by Nortman:
I just wonderd if anybody knows how well the later FN/HVA action, with the H-ring handles a ruptured case, gas handling etc?

The Mausers were built with a C-ring originaly just because of this.. while the H-ring came later because of easier manufacturing.

Was it compromised because of this? If so, how much?

The C-ring is a design feature that adds strength to the receiver.
The H-ring weakens the receiver, in some circumstances the receiver can split/peel back all the way back to the ejector slot.
and there is no doubt that a H-ring would better facilitate the flow of high pressure gases down the left raceway.

Paul Mauser seemed like a most practical sensible person, Its hard for me to imagine that he would to go to the trouble of designing the more difficult to produce C-ring and the left wall cut out, for no practical gain.

If there are seriously doubts as to the value of his patent regarding such, Id like to see modern day fluid dynamic studies to verify any doubts as to the effectiveness of the left wall cut out.

I wonder how much testing Paul Mauser performed on his design compared to anyone on this forum?

quote:

Originally posted by SR4759:
I don't believe you have any understanding of gas under pressure.
Not only is it not stopped by the bolt stop, it is not stopped by the flange and when it blows out the thumbcut it spreads in all directions except down of course.

The design features of (i)left wall cut, (ii)bolt stop gas block and (iii)shroud flange,
are of no benefit to the shooter in the event of escaping gas travelling down the left raceway?

There are both pro's and con's on both C/H rings and thunb-cut

C/H
H ring lets-go of a little more gas dovn the left raceway, but is not capable of creating as high thrust at the entire boltface in case of a caseheadleak.
C ring might block a bit more gas down left raceway, but helps to create mutch higher thrust on the entire boltface. Often the boltthrust , in case of caseheadleak, gets so high that you would see major lugsetback or total faliure.

Thumbcut might reduce the amount of gass and powder and brassparticles going out tru the left raceway, but during my manny happy hours of blowing up rifleactions, i have not seen a major differens on military m98 Cring and thumbcut, and civilian H ring FN actions without thumbcut.

What generally happens, in case of casehead leaks, is that on the m98 military actions. The extractor is blown werry far away, in a 5 o'clock direction. The boltstop is blown up, loosing the boltstopspring in a 7 o'clock direction (sometimes the entire boltstop flies in the same directions.
Often you will se major lugsetback, split boltface, and or lugs breaking of. In the most ekstreme situations, this will cause the third lug to engage, often resulting in that the reciever is torn apart, in the thumb cut area.
It is a weet dream to belive that the shooter is not been hit by mutch gass, powder or brass splinters in his head. But on the other hand there is mutch worse actions around.
The H ring civilian actions follovs almost identical the same senario, but generally they withstand higher preasure or larger leaks before reaching the same level of damages. On all tests using civilian FN mausers the third lug did as intended, without tearing the reciever apart.

quote:

The design features of (i)left wall cut, (ii)bolt stop gas block and (iii)shroud flange,
are of no benefit to the shooter in the event of escaping gas travelling down the left raceway?

Have you actually seen a shooter hit in the face by gas with a blown case head in a 98?
The benefit that I saw was minimal. Only his glasses prevented serious eye damage. The stock on this rifle was split open by the gas dumped into the magazine and the bolt was locked.
Using good cartridge cases is much more important than the ticky tacky gas handling features on the 98 Mauser.

quote:

The side rail vent has been copied. Not a full thumb cut but an upper rail cut. Just look at a Ruger M77, Mossberg, Savage 110-114 series, Smith and Wesson, Arisaka, 1917 Enfield, or a Remington 700.

Those are very small reliefs or just edge radii that permit some ease of loading. However they are not very effective when using heavy gloves. The 98 thumb cut is excellent when you have heavy gloves in cold weather. However most people never discover this today because they shoot exclusively with scopes.
To say they are a copy for gas venting takes a lot of imagination.

quote:

The C-ring is a design feature that adds strength to the receiver.
The H-ring weakens the receiver, in some circumstances the receiver can split/peel back all the way back to the ejector slot.
and there is no doubt that a H-ring would better facilitate the flow of high pressure gases down the left raceway.

Paul Mauser seemed like a most practical sensible person, Its hard for me to imagine that he would to go to the trouble of designing the more difficult to produce C-ring and the left wall cut out, for no practical gain.

If there are seriously doubts as to the value of his patent regarding such, Id like to see modern day fluid dynamic studies to verify any doubts as to the effectiveness of the left wall cut out.

I wonder how much testing Paul Mauser performed on his design compared to anyone on this forum?

Mauser lost an eye to a gas leak. I think he was overly concerned with that problem.

Whether or not the receiver splits or peels back is almost moot. The parts and the gas should not hit the shooter. Once the receiver is damaged beyond repair the shooter is the only concern. To depend on the open thumb notch to protect the shooter is misplaced. I like the thumb notch for cold weather use. It would be handy for rapid reloading of a DGR without a scope. But I would never kid myself that it will keep gas out of my face. Just shoulder a 98 and look at the thumb cut with your left eye.

quote:

Originally posted by hawkins:
4759, It's a shame you were not around when
Mauser did the design. You could have shown
him the light. Mauser was well aware of gas
escaping an action, particularly after he
lost his eye to it.

There are better gas handling actions but that does not seem to matter in the pro Mauser clic. Gas handling is a rarely used but often bragged about feature.

quote:

Originally posted by ForrestB:
Shoot a spitball out of a straw...now cut a big notch out of the side of the straw and try shooting a spitball again.

Put your face next to a straw with notch and see what happens.
Then put your face next to the notch in the straw and see what happens.
What happens is you will find out you are wrong.
You will be wiping spit off of your face.

You guys need to hit with high pressure gas a few times. It will sure change your minds.

quote:

Originally posted by SR4759:

quote:

The design features of (i)left wall cut, (ii)bolt stop gas block and (iii)shroud flange,
are of no benefit to the shooter in the event of escaping gas travelling down the left raceway?

Have you actually seen a shooter hit in the face by gas with a blown case head in a 98?
The benefit that I saw was minimal. Only his glasses prevented serious eye damage. The stock on this rifle was split open by the gas dumped into the magazine and the bolt was locked.
Using good cartridge cases is much more important than the ticky tacky gas handling features on the 98 Mauser.

I most emphatically disagree. In 1966 in Trinidad I personally witnessed an Ackley-built 98 Mauser catastrophic case head disintegration at a range of about 10 feet. The 270 WCF was basically destroyed for any salvage use as shown by later examination back at TSJC. The 35 Rem cartridge had blown out its sidewall and brazed itself to both the bolt and the barrel, while the 35-cal bullet had swaged the 270 chamber's throat out measurably on its way down the barrel. The stock was split into many, many pieces, the magazine box was blown egg-shaped, and the shooter was so startled that he threw the remains of the rifle onto the ground, scope first (!).

Damage to the shooter? Ears ringing and one, count it, one small piece of the splintered stock stuck in one cheek. No red marks from gas, no skin damage, no eye damage at all DESPITE no shooting glasses, and not even any damage to his left arm. So in the one case that I witnessed up close and personal, I'd say that the 98 came through with flying colors!
Regards, Joe

quote:

Originally posted by z1r:
Taken on the whole, the 98 does a great job of venting/re-routing gases. The 700 on the other hand contains gases. Two different approaches that both work well.

I've seen the results of major gas leaks in a 98. Never saw a shooter injured as a result. The thumbcut is but one of the many devices used in the 98 to route or deflect gas.

SR, since you are the expert, please critique the pre-64 winchester model 70.

Why pre 64? It is a cone breech with no unusual gas handling features. It is going to leak a lot of gas too. It just does not have a thumb cut.
1. What does it have on the right side of the bolt head? Just an exractor backed up by the bolt handle. Many designs have this.
2. What does it have on the left side? A skinny bolt stop.
3. Top of the bolt - nothing but it does not have the top lug split like the Mauser.
4. Bottom - feed ramp/lug abutment.
5. Bolt internal - much less venting than a 98.

Why not talk about the 110 Savage or the 700 Rem?

quote:

Originally posted by J.D.Steele:

quote:

Originally posted by SR4759:

quote:

The design features of (i)left wall cut, (ii)bolt stop gas block and (iii)shroud flange,
are of no benefit to the shooter in the event of escaping gas travelling down the left raceway?

Have you actually seen a shooter hit in the face by gas with a blown case head in a 98?
The benefit that I saw was minimal. Only his glasses prevented serious eye damage. The stock on this rifle was split open by the gas dumped into the magazine and the bolt was locked.
Using good cartridge cases is much more important than the ticky tacky gas handling features on the 98 Mauser.

I most emphatically disagree. In 1966 in Trinidad I personally witnessed an Ackley-built 98 Mauser catastrophic case head disintegration at a range of about 10 feet. The 270 WCF was basically destroyed for any salvage use as shown by later examination back at TSJC. The 35 Rem cartridge had blown out its sidewall and brazed itself to both the bolt and the barrel, while the 35-cal bullet had swaged the 270 chamber's throat out measurably on its way down the barrel. The stock was split into many, many pieces, the magazine box was blown egg-shaped, and the shooter was so startled that he threw the remains of the rifle onto the ground, scope first (!).

Damage to the shooter? Ears ringing and one, count it, one small piece of the splintered stock stuck in one cheek. No red marks from gas, no skin damage, no eye damage at all DESPITE no shooting glasses, and not even any damage to his left arm. So in the one case that I witnessed up close and personal, I'd say that the 98 came through with flying colors!
Regards, Joe

You cannot disagree with what I observed.
You were not there. The rifle that I saw damaged was a .243.
How many times do you think the 35 Rem in a 270 will come out with no casualty? Your one accident does proves almost nothing except luck.

I have seen the same accident where a 270 round blew open the bottom of a 7MM Rem Mag chambered BAR. It expanded the bottom of the receiver.

quote:

Originally posted by Nortman:
So.. I have a singleshot mauser, solid bottom and H-ring, pretty much everything would hit my face in a catastrophic event?

Better get rid of it then?

I don't think so. Use good brass and sane loads and forget about gas leaks. The lack of a magazine eliminates a path to blow out the stock.

quote:

Originally posted by hawkins:
4759, It's a shame you were not around when
Mauser did the design. You could have shown
him the light. Mauser was well aware of gas
escaping an action, particularly after he
lost his eye to it.

I think he lost his eye to an autoloader that he could never make work really well.
Gas leaks are nasty.
I have been gassed by a SXS double shotgun and a 22 with a sealed up receiver at the rear.
The gas still got through the narrow joints.
The shotgun caused a welding burn scar on my right eye to hemmorage. No permanent harm but it was a good lesson.

quote:

Originally posted by SR4759:
You cannot disagree with what I observed..

But I CAN disagree with your conclusions, and I do.

Sorry, on this question you're currently a minority of one. Wait until you've blown up a half-dozen different actions and then come back and tell us your results. Until then, we'll continue to believe the historical record and the acknowledged experts.
Regards, Joe

According to Wayne von Zoll, in his in his book Boltaction Rifles Expended , the notches were introduced and then deeper to facilitate use of stripper clips in loading.

quote:

Originally posted by J.D.Steele:

quote:

Originally posted by SR4759:
You cannot disagree with what I observed..

But I CAN disagree with your conclusions, and I do.

Sorry, on this question you're currently a minority of one. Wait until you've blown up a half-dozen different actions and then come back and tell us your results. Until then, we'll continue to believe the historical record and the acknowledged experts.
Regards, Joe

Don't i count. Or maybe it is because i only has blown up 30+ actions, during tests.