I have an M94 that bubba ruined so it will be the donor action for another build in the future. If I would chose to change from 6.5x55 what other calibers are safe in this action? 6.5x55 AI, 7x57, 22-250, 300 Savage?

Not sure about the 6.5AI or 22-250 but the .250 Sav. is good as well as the .35 Rem.

Other than the 6.5x55 the 9.3x57 gets my vote as best.

So if the 9.3x57 is safe I take it 8x57 would be also?

Depends on the aqmmo. SAMMI spec would be fine but some of the hotter European loads might not be so safe. To confuse the issue, however, many Husqvarna '94 sporting rifle actions were factory chambered for 8 x 57 .

Do not worry about preassures if the action is in good condition. They are made by very good steel, and unless it has been abused, just as safe as a M98. The norm is to think of it as a week action, but actual preassure testing shows it is not so.

All the rounds you mentioned are safe, if one uses common sense reloading practices! The "improved" cartridges that have minimum body taper are actually better, because they grip the chamber walls better, placing LESS stress on the bolt when fired.

But I would favor the .250 Savage or 257 Roberts, and the improved versions of these two would be even better.

quote:

Originally posted by Bent Fossdal:
Do not worry about preassures if the action is in good condition. They are made by very good steel, and unless it has been abused, just as safe as a M98. The norm is to think of it as a week action, but actual preassure testing shows it is not so.

Every one always says they are strong, well, true enough. They are strong enough, however, everyone always glosses over the fact that they don't handle gas very well. It is for this reason that I limit them to cartridges that generate about 45 KPSI.

I have several of the wonderful little swedes in 8x57 but I limit them to the anemic US loaded ammo and have a great time with them. All mine are open sight rifles and at the ranges I can use open sights effectively the US loads have more than enough power for my purposes. These actions really shine IMO with the 9.3x57. I look at it as sort of an overgrown .30-30. Granted, the chances of a mishap are slim but in this day where we have so many good alternatives why bother.

If you want a mauser and NEED a cartridge with more power/pressure then do yourself a favor and use a 98, They are still very plenitful and cheap.

I can't disagree in principal but if I compare closely, it looks to me like the 94 handles gas at least as well as the Model 70 and no one seems to complain about it. Did I miss something?

As well as the pre-64 Model 70 maybe.

Ever wonder why Darcy Echols prefers the post 64 Model 70? This is one of the reasons.

I currently have a 1900 Obendorf, M96 that I am building into a 9x57 to use as a cast bullet gun.

They are sweet when done correctly.

Jim Wisner
Custom Metalsmith

Like I said this project is down the road as I just finished having a commercial 98 mauser action barreled in .257AI. I most likely will just keep it as a 6.5x55. I am just curious as to other options.

quote:

Originally posted by z1r:

Every one always says they are strong, well, true enough. They are strong enough, however, everyone always glosses over the fact that they don't handle gas very well. It is for this reason that I limit them to cartridges that generate about 45 KPSI.

Mike-

I understand you know a lot about Mausers, and I value your opinions, but I want to ask if this is something you have tested, or seen tests about - or is it theory?
Have You ever seen a cracked M94, and the face of the shooter?

Thanks,

300 Savage is a really nice cartridge for that application. You wouldn't notice much difference in the field from a 308 Win.

Jim

Sounds interesting.. Are you casting yourself? Who's molds? etc?

Rich

quote:

Originally posted by J Wisner:
I currently have a 1900 Obendorf, M96 that I am building into a 9x57 to use as a cast bullet gun.

They are sweet when done correctly.

Jim Wisner
Custom Metalsmith

To have a look at a blown M96 one can open this link,

http://forum.robsoft.nu/viewtopic.php?t=32131&highlight=%2Aspr%E4ngning%2A

The link goes to a Swedish forum where a guy I know and respect has "polished his turd a bit" and came ut with a good looking M96.

The cause of the "blow up" has not yet and will probaly never be determind for sure.

The load fired was 120 grains Barnes X, Norma MRP, CCI 200, Norma cases, fireformed and neck calibrated.

The shooter belives that a low load, light bullet and perhaps a faulty case could be the combined culprit.

Any ways the shooter was wearing shooting glases and sustained only the slightest of injuries, a hour afterwards, he had to shoot again, with another gun to make sure he could do it, he was at home enjoying his vifes rubarbpie.

http://forum.robsoft.nu/viewtopic.php?t=31628&highlight=

Here is a tread about what can be done with a M96.

Best regards Chris.

I hold in my hands an issue of RFFLE SHOOTER Magazine from Feb 2001 containing an article by Terry Wieland titled "A Grain Too Many". For the aricle the writer intentionally blew up two rifles: a 1917 Enfield and an M96 Swede. The Swede blew at 47 grains of 3031 with a 140 grain bullet. The rifle was wrecked, largely due to escaping gases. Interestingly the bolt held solidly in place despite not having the safety lug on the M-98. In terms of the actions themselves, the enfield did not fare so much better but it did not suffer asmuch damage overall due to better venting.
This experiment, to me, kinda helps both sides of this discussiion. If one is so inclined a search of the web will turn up a rather easily accomplished method of adding a gas baffle ala the M98 to the Swede bolt. I don't recall the forum where it is found but it is under the heading, "98izing a Pre-98 Bolt". The addition of such an improvement could help one's peace of mind however I consider it somewhat of a moot point.
In the real world what can the "improved" cartridges or the "normal" cartridges which fit the Swede action offer over those of the appropriate pressure level? Just go to your ballistic tables and compare trajectories of the various standard cartridges and see just how much better any of them are than the 6.5x55, 7x57 , 257 Roberts, etc loaded to normal pressure levels. The difference can be easily overcome by changing one's hunting methods and the game will be just as dead. If one really desires a long range rifle there are better actions with wwhich to start.

Hi Bent,

Sorry I did not see your reply earlier.

I haven't done any specific testing on this subject. My opinions have been formed based off of results and failures I've seen. As well as a few documented accounts of failures and or other's testing.

The Rifle Shooter article is a fairly decent cursory look at the strength, and weakness, of the action. The article clearly shows the action to be strong. It also clearly shows the weakness which I alluded to earlier, poor gas handling.

The link that was provided to the sporterized 96 also shows the action to be strong. The damage all resulted from escaping gas.

When I went to gunsmithing school we saw quite a few of the Kimber sporterized 96's come through the shop. The most common defect we saw was setback. We did see a couple that looked like those in the article where a case head let go and the result was magazine floorplate blown off, magazine sides bowed out, extractor wrecked, and stocks split. On one of these the shooter lost the sight in his left eye.

I also used to shoot silhouette with an older gent in LA who lost the sight in his left eye due to a case failure in a 96.

I like to wear shooting glasses whenever possible, especially at the range. But, on occassion in the field it is impractical. Like when it is raining. That's why I prefer to use a 98. It deflects gas better. It is not foolproof by any means but does add a much greater margin of safety.

The failures I've seen in the 98's are similar to those in the 96 however, very little debris makes it back to the shooter's face.

I still have several 96's and no plans to dispose of them. They are nice little guns that when used in calibers like 6.5x55 and 9.3x57 are fine esy carring field guns that are more than pleasant to shoot. I also have a couple in 8x57 that as I said before I only use Remington Factory ammo in. If I need more power then I switch to my 98's.

I have a 91 argentine that I had chambered in .300 savage. I love it. I am currently working on a 93 mauser and after reading all these posts I am wondering if the comments about the 94's and 96's apply to the 93's as well? I have been thinking about a wildcat in .270/257 Roberts AI. but I am still deciding.

quote:

That's why I prefer to use a 98. It deflects gas better. It is not foolproof by any means but does add a much greater margin of safety.

The failures I've seen in the 98's are similar to those in the 96 however, very little debris makes it back to the shooter's face.

I think the 98's advantage of gas hanlding is way over rated. The 98 that I saw had a case head fail in it and it looked just like the Swede. The floor plate was blown off, the magazine box was spread open and the stock was broken back through the pistol grip. The shooter got about 25 or 30 small punctures in his face from flying debris. Only his glasses saved his sight.

I have been gased by a 22 rimfire and by a double barreled shotgun. I don't want to depend on any center fire design for protection. Keep you loads safe and wear glasses.

I never said the 98 was perfect. But, one must consider the loads that were fired when these failures occurred too. Also, there is no telling what mods were done to that 98. Did it retain the original shroud or was that replaced with a smaller aftermarket shroud? Still, one thing is for certain, the 98 handles gas better than the 96, imagine what the results would have been had that been a 96.

riverman1, the 93's and 95's are not as good as the 96 in gas handling. I would not use a high pressure round in one for many reasons.

quote:

Originally posted by z1r:

When I went to gunsmithing school we saw quite a few of the Kimber sporterized 96's come through the shop. The most common defect we saw was setback. We did see a couple that looked like those in the article where a case head let go and the result was magazine floorplate blown off, magazine sides bowed out, extractor wrecked, and stocks split. On one of these the shooter lost the sight in his left eye.

zlr,

I'm interested to know if the Kimber 96's you saw with setback were the ones chambered for the higher pressure cartridges, They offered them rebarreled to 22-250, .243, 7mm-08 & .308.

I have one of those Kimbers but mine is a 6.5x55 with the original barrel turned down. Were any of the failures on the 6.5's?

Recoil rob,

Some were before my time but to the best of my knowledge the actions with setback were the ones that bad been rebarrelled to the high pressure cartridges.

I've seen setback in original Swedes but I wouldn't worry too much if you are shooting yours at "Normal" pressures.

Thanks, yep mine just gets fed Win/Rem/Norma ammo.


Thanks, Rob

I have as adventurous a mind as most anyone but have concluded that shooting a pre-98 at what Z1r terms "normal" pressure is NOT a handicap! A cursory study of trajectory charts, one's own shooting ability at distance and a bit of hunting history from around the world will show that most "advantage" of the more mosern rounds is to be found largely between the shooter's ears.
Using my own 7x57 as an example, jusst a bit above "normal" loading level lets me shoot to the hash marks to 300 yards (my range doesn't go to 400) with a Ballisti-Plex reticle. Sure a 7mm Mag will have more retained energy but I believe in starting a good bullet a decent velocity and letting it do it's job. I also believe that if I can't reduce the distance through hunting maybe I should just forego that opportunity. In the real world,the difference between the trajectory of "standard" cartridges and the "high" velocity ones is mere inches at 300 - 400 yards and is easily accomodated in sighting in. I realize my opinion will not be hared by many and ceertainly would not sell many new rifles or cartridges.

What most forget is the inheirant [sp] accuracy AND killing qualities of the little 6.5 Swede! I have seen these do things to the big Axis bucks in Hawaii a 30-06 lover would appreciate AND not at max pressures either. Accuracy,bullet placement and construction should be the things we look for not how fast it goes. Both my daughters began their hunting on the cliffs of Molokai with 6.5 Swede carbines [sporterized---OH the pain] and always did well. Of course if I had known the little carbines would be such historical pieces I would have gotten them 243s or something. LOL
Just my .02!!
Aloha, Mark

z1r-

Thanks for your reply, sorry I have not checked in for a while.
I get your point, but the way I see it is that the action is strong enough at normal preassures, no matter what cartridge. If it brakes, something is wrong with the load. And that can as easily happen with a "low preassure" round as with any hot-rod cartridge.
To little slow-burning powder in a 6,5x55 will make it blow like Moby Dick.

And by so, what one should do, was to not use the M96 at all?

By the way, I see you live in Lakewood, did you study at CST too? And if so, when? Is Guido's Nickelbar still making the best Long Island Ice Teas in the West? Maybe a PM?

Bent,

We are in agreement that the action is strong enough even for the .270. But, where I differ from your thinking is again when it comes to how the action handles a case rupture. At the pressures the 6.5x55 operates at the action does ok, not stellar but ok. But, add another 10 to 15 thousand psi and that all changes.

I can understand having built the 96 into sporters using various high pressure cartridges. After all, the actions were abundant and unfortunately, as I understand it, gun laws a bit more restrictive than here. Perhaps more importaltly, liability laws a bit more relaxed than here.

Again, since the 98 is still easy to come by and in the scheme of things, cheap, I can see no reason to use the 96 for anything other than the cartidge it was designed for or cartridges that operate at similar pressures.

I trained at Lassen in Susanville, CA. I'll PM you.