I'm working on a 38 Turk that is in very good shape and am planing on having it rebarreled in the near future. I haven't decided between a 280Rem or a 338-06 though.
I was reading through Kuhnhausen's book on Mausers and he suggests having the action re-hardened. I've done a bunch of reading and haven't seen folks mentioning this step when modifying Mauser actions in good condition. Do you think this is a needed step? If so, do you know who does this type of work well?

I already have the barrel dismounted and charger hump filed off and the new stock has arrived and I've fitted the action (roughly) into the stock with the bolt cutout. I'm getting pretty close to sending this off and I want to get it right.
Thank you

This link will give you a boatload of info on the subject of heat treating.

https://forums.accuratereloading.com/eve/forums?a=search...&forum_scope=9411043

That will take me a while to read, but after a 20minute scan I take it as adviseable and worth the extra $$
thanks

quote:

Originally posted by leoparddog:
That will take me a while to read, but after a 20minute scan I take it as adviseable and worth the extra $$
thanks

It is always best to start a project knowing what you have to work with.

quote:

Originally posted by leoparddog:
That will take me a while to read, but after a 20minute scan I take it as adviseable and worth the extra $$
thanks

A wise decision. And welcome to the forum.

If you think you need an strain gauge or pressure transducer to work up a load, The CZ52 is stronger than the Tokarev, only carry factory loads, and a hybrid to prevent global warming, then you probably want to send your rifle parts to a heat treat facility.


What does it all mean?
You may be suggestible.



This brass came out of a 1938 Turk that I converted to .243.

In all these years, it has never suffered from the harsh treatment, and I never sent it anywhere for heat treatment.

You might want to get with a gunsmith who works on Mausers frequently and investigate paying him to add your receiver to his next batch. It would probably cost you less in the long run to do it that way. Having your receiver re-gas carburized is never a bad idea. Its kinda like checking the air pressure in your tires before you take a long trip - cheap insurance against something that probably won't bother you, but is a pain the ass and expensive to fix if it does...

Welcome to the madness!

The only problem I have ever run across with rehardening actions is the method by which the action was determined to be too soft. Rockwell on the outside of the action tells you absolutely nothing about the locking-lug engagement surfaces which were most likely pack-hardened. The "scratch" method with hardness files is slightly better because you can get to the surfaces in question.

These are only my opinions as I am not a metallurgist, don't take my thoughts as final truth. I just hate seeing folks spending money for something that may not be necessary.

quote:

Originally posted by tnekkcc:
This brass came out of a 1938 Turk that I converted to .243.

In all these years, it has never suffered from the harsh treatment, and I never sent it anywhere for heat treatment.

FWIF, in talks with PacMet people I have been told that the heat treatment to WWII actions is roughly equivalent to the heat treating procedure they give them. This is 1924 and after actions.

That 1938 Mauser probably had at the day-1 the same heat treating that you would have received had you sent it to PacMet

From my understandings it's much more important to reharden pre-1924 actions.....WWI actions.

That said....I have a 1909 Argie in 25-06 that wasn't hardened and it's just fine today!.....but then it's not fired hundreds of rounds....it's a hunting gun and may have seen 100 rounds max in the last twenty years!

quote:

Originally posted by drewhenrytnt:
The only problem I have ever run across with rehardening actions is the method by which the action was determined to be too soft. Rockwell on the outside of the action tells you absolutely nothing about the locking-lug engagement surfaces which were most likely pack-hardened. The "scratch" method with hardness files is slightly better because you can get to the surfaces in question.

These are only my opinions as I am not a metallurgist, don't take my thoughts as final truth. I just hate seeing folks spending money for something that may not be necessary.

And since there is no non-destructive means of determining just how hard the "inside" surfaces are the best, most economical means is to have the bolt & action carburised. That way you know exactly what you have. Cost is really a non issue when you consider the overall cost of a custom rifle.

As to the late war action being the same hardness, is the depth of case also the same? If I recall, the method worked out produces a deeper layer. So, just because the action may be as hard doesn't mean it is as good as one that has been freshly carburised.

For what's it worth: I never believed the guys at Oberndorf or any of the other first class mfg's were stupid. And I haven't sent off every action tha came across my bench for re-heat treating...My mother used to say "If it makes you feel better to carry an apple in your pocket, do it"

[QUOTE]Originally posted by tnekkcc:
If you think you need an strain gauge or pressure transducer to work up a load, The CZ52 is stronger than the Tokarev, only carry factory loads, and a hybrid to prevent global warming, then you probably want to send your rifle parts to a heat treat facility.


This is one of the largest myths out there about the CZ52. Everyone thinks because that pistol is so robust it's brute stronger or stronger then the Tokarev. Well guess what? It's not. I know a physicist that blows up various firearms to study their strengths and weaknesses. He did the test on these two and the CZ52 failed. The Tokie did not. The weak link in the CZ 52 are the roller lock notches in the slide. If you have one of these look how thin the metal is at the notches. The slide cracked there. The Tokie didn't break anything.

quote:

Originally posted by starmetal:

quote:

Originally posted by tnekkcc:
If you think .. The CZ52 is stronger than the Tokarev,...

This is one of the largest myths out there about the CZ52. Everyone thinks because that pistol is so robust it's brute stronger or stronger then the Tokarev. Well guess what? It's not. I know a physicist that blows up various firearms to study their strengths and weaknesses. He did the test on these two and the CZ52 failed. The Tokie did not. The weak link in the CZ 52 are the roller lock notches in the slide. If you have one of these look how thin the metal is at the notches. The slide cracked there. The Tokie didn't break anything.

a link to some background on that well published gun myth

quote:

Originally posted by tnekkcc:

quote:

Originally posted by starmetal:

quote:

Originally posted by tnekkcc:
If you think .. The CZ52 is stronger than the Tokarev,...

This is one of the largest myths out there about the CZ52. Everyone thinks because that pistol is so robust it's brute stronger or stronger then the Tokarev. Well guess what? It's not. I know a physicist that blows up various firearms to study their strengths and weaknesses. He did the test on these two and the CZ52 failed. The Tokie did not. The weak link in the CZ 52 are the roller lock notches in the slide. If you have one of these look how thin the metal is at the notches. The slide cracked there. The Tokie didn't break anything.

a link to some background on that well published gun myth

I'll still go with what the physicist test found out. He broke the CZ he didn't damage the Tokarev.

Some really good gunsmiths argue this process, D'Arcy says harden them, Jack Belk says harding some of these actions is like painting and aluminum barn...

I have never had a Mauser crack or develope headspace on me and I have used a number of them but I use the better actions such as the 1908 Chilean, 1909, and a few other well known Mausers and stay away from the other stuff..I also use FNs but only on std. rounds like the 270, 280, and 30-06...

I have tried it both ways and since it doesn't cost much to bring one down and then back up to specs its probably a good idea...

I just can't see going through all the trouble when one can buy a truly modern action. Like a Ruger MKII most likely for less money then screwing around with a old miltary action.

quote:

Originally posted by p dog shooter:
I just can't see going through all the trouble when one can buy a truly modern action. Like a Ruger MKII most likely for less money then screwing around with a old miltary action.

Yeah, if you start screwing around with an old military action you might wind up with something like this old G33/40.

https://forums.accuratereloading.com/eve/forums/a/tpc/f/...043/m/347103474/p/17.

quote:

Originally posted by p dog shooter:
I just can't see going through all the trouble when one can buy a truly modern action. Like a Ruger MKII most likely for less money then screwing around with a old miltary action.

I suppose if you like turds, then the 77 is a great choice.

quote:

Originally posted by p dog shooter:
I just can't see going through all the trouble when one can buy a truly modern action. Like a Ruger MKII most likely for less money then screwing around with a old miltary action.

The best bolt rifles are built on military contract Mauser 98 actions. Cheap castings like the Ruger can't hold a candle to these.

quote:

Originally posted by rem721:

quote:

Originally posted by p dog shooter:
I just can't see going through all the trouble when one can buy a truly modern action. Like a Ruger MKII most likely for less money then screwing around with a old miltary action.

I suppose if you like turds, then the 77 is a great choice.

quote:

Originally posted by Atkinson:
Some really good gunsmiths argue this process, D'Arcy says harden them, Jack Belk says harding some of these actions is like painting and aluminum barn...

I have never had a Mauser crack or develope headspace on me and I have used a number of them but I use the better actions such as the 1908 Chilean, 1909, and a few other well known Mausers and stay away from the other stuff..I also use FNs but only on std. rounds like the 270, 280, and 30-06...

I have tried it both ways and since it doesn't cost much to bring one down and then back up to specs its probably a good idea...

This may be analogous to rifle accuracy rituals, where it is easier to do something forever than do good testing to see if it is needed.


And I miss Belk's posts.
Leeper still exists at benchrest forums.
I ask him.

Ok all of you can spend hunreds of dollors trying to bring a old miltary action up to modern standards.

If they are just a great action and so well made why are we even talking about reheat treating them.

That is your choice Iv'e done it a couple of times it is just not worth the time and money.

When gun smiths were only making a 2 dollars a hr it was worth the trouble now days not even close.

Keep it up gun smiths need to make money too.

gunmaker

Sure they are and I glad you have you customer base convince of that.

Others would say the pre 64 winchester are the best what ever you want to spend your money on.

I guess we could leave my poorly cast sty stocked stainless Ruger and your wounderfully machained wood stocked mauser sit out in the rain a few of days on a Ak hunt and see what one comes back full of rust.

I guess we could do run lots of proof rounds through them and see what one blows up first. Oh is that before or after reheat treating the mauser.

quote:

Originally posted by p dog shooter:
gunmaker

Sure they are and I glad you have you customer base convince of that.

Others would say the pre 64 winchester are the best what ever you want to spend your money on.

I guess we could leave my poorly cast sty stocked stainless Ruger and your wounderfully machained wood stocked mauser sit out in the rain a few of days on a Ak hunt and see what one comes back full of rust.

I guess we could do run lots of proof rounds through them and see what one blows up first. Oh is that before or after reheat treating the mauser.

You're comparing apples with oranges.

quote:

Originally posted by p dog shooter:


I guess we could do run lots of proof rounds through them and see what one blows up first. Oh is that before or after reheat treating the mauser.

One of my main hobbies is overloading guns to see what happens.
Sometimes I go to a gunshow and buy a whole trunk load of guns, just for overloading.
I have found that there are two outstanding designs for overloading:
1) Surplus 98 Mausers with original heat treat
2) Ruger #1s

And I have bags and bags of blown up 38 specials and CZ52s.

quote:

Originally posted by Atkinson:
Some really good gunsmiths argue this process, D'Arcy says harden them, Jack Belk says harding some of these actions is like painting and aluminum barn...

I have never had a Mauser crack or develope headspace on me and I have used a number of them but I use the better actions such as the 1908 Chilean, 1909, and a few other well known Mausers and stay away from the other stuff..I also use FNs but only on std. rounds like the 270, 280, and 30-06...

I have tried it both ways and since it doesn't cost much to bring one down and then back up to specs its probably a good idea...

I have an otherwise beautiful 1909 Argentine paper weight sitting here as an example of what CAN happen when exposing old technology to modern magnum pressures. With the cost being so cheap; when compared to little things like after market triggers and safeties; to bring the heat treatment of an action current, it would almost be foolish to not take advantage of today's technology if for nothing more than peace of mind. If nothing else, it could help the gunsmiths case, God forbid, if he is ever brought to court in the event of an accident involving the integrity of the action. I view it as cheap insurance.

quote:

Originally posted by Westpac:

quote:

Originally posted by Atkinson:
Some really good gunsmiths argue this process, D'Arcy says harden them, Jack Belk says harding some of these actions is like painting and aluminum barn...

I have never had a Mauser crack or develope headspace on me and I have used a number of them but I use the better actions such as the 1908 Chilean, 1909, and a few other well known Mausers and stay away from the other stuff..I also use FNs but only on std. rounds like the 270, 280, and 30-06...

I have tried it both ways and since it doesn't cost much to bring one down and then back up to specs its probably a good idea...

I have an otherwise beautiful 1909 Argentine paper weight sitting here as an example of what CAN happen when exposing old technology to modern magnum pressures. With the cost being so cheap; when compared to little things like after market triggers and safeties; to bring the heat treatment of an action current, it would almost be foolish to not take advantage of today's technology if for nothing more than peace of mind. If nothing else, it could help the gunsmiths case, God forbid, if he is ever brought to court in the event of an accident involving the integrity of the action. I view it as cheap insurance.

+1

quote:

Originally posted by Westpac:


I have an otherwise beautiful 1909 Argentine paper weight sitting here as an example of what CAN happen when exposing old technology to modern magnum pressures.

The new technology is often not as good. I overloaded a 100 year old surplus Mauser with original heat treat, a pre 64 M70 with original heat treat, and a Howa 1500 all on the same day, and the older the better.

When pounding the bolt open, the 98 Mauser is much easier to get open than the M70, which is easier than the Howa.
None had set backs.

The Mauser can go 6 or 7 grain beyond brass damage and still pound open easily. The Howa is a bear to get open with 1 grain over. With 6 or 7 grains the Howa would be problematic.

quote:

Originally posted by tnekkcc:
The new technology is often not as good. I overloaded a 100 year old surplus Mauser with original heat treat, a pre 64 M70 with original heat treat, and a Howa 1500 all on the same day, and the older the better.

When pounding the bolt open, the 98 Mauser is much easier to get open than the M70, which is easier than the Howa.
None had set backs.

The Mauser can go 6 or 7 grain beyond brass damage and still pound open easily. The Howa is a bear to get open with 1 grain over. With 6 or 7 grains the Howa would be problematic.

Were all the above actions of the same caliber, using the same components, same chamber finish etc.? I don't think you can do a comparison test like you mentioned above unless everything, other than the actions, are the same.

I would be more interested to see what the difference would be if you were to stick the exact barrel on an identical Mauser action that has been re-heat treated. While the results of such a test wouldn't change my opinion regarding re-heat treating old Mauser actions, it would be interesting, none-the-less, to see if there was a difference.

quote:

Originally posted by Westpac:
While the results of such a test wouldn't change my opinion regarding re-heat treating old Mauser actions, it would be interesting, none-the-less, to see if there was a difference.

I'll get right on that, as soon as I turn some stones into bread.

quote:

Originally posted by tnekkcc:

quote:

Originally posted by Westpac:
While the results of such a test wouldn't change my opinion regarding re-heat treating old Mauser actions, it would be interesting, none-the-less, to see if there was a difference.

I'll get right on that, as soon as I turn some stones into bread.

I'll be waiting.

best forum on the net.....period! If nontheless, I have learned to agree to disagree. Some of the best folks around.