I have seen the comment that a nice Commercial
FN is good for regular pressure rounds but not high intensity rounds.

Is that because most of them (after about 49' I think) are H rings instead C rings like the mil-surp?

Or is it something else?

I don't want to chamber a high intensity cartrage. Actualy it's 9.3x62. I was wondering if they were weaker than a mil-surp for some reason.

I will shortly be looking for a C ring, Commercial 98 Mauser for my wifes custom rifle.

I want to get her the best Commercial C ring Mauser that is reasonably avalible. 1949 and befor FN Commercials look like a good candidate.

It will get surface-ground and new get a safty, bolt, trigger & bottom meatal.

Any better commercial action to start with?

Allen

quote:

I have seen the comment that a nice Commercial FN is good for regular pressure rounds but not high intensity rounds.

Commercial FN actions were used by Browning to chamber in 264 win mag as well as other hi intensity rounds and Weatherby used it to house their cartridges prior to the Mark V they introduced.

The 9.3 X 62 is nearly the same as a 30-06 for boltthrust and a heck of a lot of FN actions were used for 270 and 30-06 and I wouldn't hesitate to chamber an FN commercial this way.

+1

You might want to recheck whoever told you FN Mausers aren't capable of handling high-intensity cartridges. A lot of todays very best gunmakers would be astonished to learn that.


Okie John

It was on the AR Boards here some where. I think if memory serves it was in refrence to 7mm STW type rounds.

Still it didn't make sence to me why the FN action in patrticular was mentioned.

I wondered at the time, what would make it less strong.

Is there any other C ring Mauser action that would make a better custom gun? and still be reasonably avalible?

Allen

If you are looking foe FN Commercial mauser try D&D in Troy, Mi. They had one in the white not to long ago. Don't know wheather it was a C or H, but the price was $450

quote:

it was in refrence to 7mm STW type rounds.

These longer rounds often resulted in cutting the receiver up front and weakening the area behind the locking lug.

Modern day Zastava actions are made the same way.....they get away with it but they might be using 4140 steels!.....I'm not sure the FNs were using this steel.

quote:

Is there any other C ring Mauser action that would make a better custom gun? and still be reasonably avalible?

I really like the VZ-24 actions and wouldn't hesitate to chamber one to such rounds as the new 375 Ruger but wouldn't attempt myself to open it to long rounds like the 375 H&H.

Others might do it but they have experience I don't! So look to advice from folks that have modified a lot of them this way.

Of the post war Mausers, the Zastava actions (currently spelled Remington) and barreled actions (at least from the ones I've owned) make good donors. These are avail able in 375 length and 30-06 length and shorter lengths as well.

Others poo poo them.....and with some justification but go find one and fondle it yourself. I've never read any reports of lack of strength in these actions. Cost might even be a wash with modernizing a Milsurp.....but then you didn't have all the fun!!!

To me the issue of a C or H doesn't cause me that much concern. I've had numerous FNs over the years. Often loaded with normal magnum loaded to the 64-65,000psi range. I've never had an issue, setback or any indication of a problem.

In the case of the STW and even the H&H to fit them in an FN the easiest way is to simply remove metal from the feed ramp. That removes a lot of the support metal behind the lower bolt lug. It has been done for years in the FN, various 98s, MKX, Daly and yes now Rem 798. Again I have never heard of a failure.

That said. I have a Whitworth (MKX) 375 H&H. I shoot it all the time. I also load it to the 58-59,000 range. The STW loads to 64,700. While I have no issue loading a normal magnum to 65,000 in an FN becasue of the removed metal I would not do a STW, 300wmag etc. Others have. Again I have not heard of a failure simply not something I care to do.

You might do some research on Husquavarna. They built one heck of alot of 9.3s and many of them were built on commercial actions (many were also built on Swedish 96 military actions as well). Whether any of those commerical actions were c ring I don't know. But seeing as how they seemed to have no trouble with the H ring actions I wouldn't hestitate to use one of the actions they used for a 9.3 X 62

I can't see what real difference there is in either a "C" ring or "H" ring other than snobbery. It's like those who believe that only a Pre-64 Winchester M70 is any good, and anything else is, well garbage. From what I understand, the only reason for the "H" ring was to simplify production, according to Frank de Haas in his book on bolt actions. Even he wasn't all that sure that it weakened the action all that much if any.
The Husqvarna 640 I have (FN style)has an "H" ring action and it's planned to be a donor for a custom rifle.
I wonder how many people are going to look into a custom rifle's action to see if it has a "C" ring or an "H" ring. Kind of reminds me of a little kid trying to look up a girls skirt to see what color her panties are. Much ado about nothing.
Paul B.

I have a 9.3 x 62 on a FN stamped 1949 and have absolutly no problems with it. The place to find these actions is to look for the JC higgins rifles in 30-06 or 270 for cheap. I have 3 of them and have yet to pay over 250 for a complete rifle.

There is a photo of a failed FN Mauser bolt on this forum under failed Mauser bolt.FN bolt failure photos

You hit it on the head. Failed "BOLT", which more than likely had nothing whatsoever to do with C ring or H ring. Probably had more to do with a flaw in the metal that made that bolt, or it could have been that the bolt wasn't lapped in correctly and that side of the bolt had more stress placed on it than the other side, and it could have been a whole host of different things, including the fact that the rifle was a .264 maggie, which generates a lot of pressure if you juice up the loads on it.


Idaho Elk

If you are finding FNs for $250 or less, let me know if you aren't going to buy them. I will take every one you find for that price!!!! Either that or you havn'et purchased a good one lately.

I recall Ray Atkinson posting something about FN actions being soft.

I do have an old, circa 1949, FN that has excessive headspace and that might be due to a set back.

All it takes is for one action to be too soft or too hard for a problem. You know how people make mistakes? There are accidents happening right now as I type this.

Springfield went and made 800,000 or so "low numbered Springfields". That was a sloppy practice. Who's to say that some guy at FN did not do one or one thousand of the actions wrong?

22 easy there, I have found them in pawn shops, news papers, etc. The last one I bought was last spring, '06. Listing in the paper read "JC Higgins 30-06 $200, ...". No mention FN. Now it had been spray painted (a little paint striper fixed that)and the stock striped of the finish, but I bought it for the action and paid $175. Some people just look at them as an old gun not for what the parts are.

Many of the Husky M98's were true C ring if it matters....

I bought a 308 Norma Magnum in a commercial FN Mauser action that was from the 1960s and it didn't shoot like I wanted because of a poor/rough bore. I had it rebarreled to 264 Winnie and I am not the least bit afraid of it.

ducker
did you see the failed bolt thread?

I know nothing about Husky M98 gun or actions.

Any information? Did they private lable like FN making J C Higgins ect.? Or will it be listed as a Husky rifle?

Where were they made?

Allen

Ok, Say I did find a nice JC Higgins for a doner action.

A few questions,

Did JC Higgins come out before 1949?

What year did JC Higgns first come out?

And mst importantly, who would I send the Recever and Bolt to to have tested for hardness/softness?

Just in case after reading the thread about the cracked FN bolt.

I'm not overly worried, but just to be sure.

Allen

quote:

Originally posted by AllenBosely:
Ok, Say I did find a nice JC Higgins for a doner action.

A few questions,

Did JC Higgins come out before 1949?

What year did JC Higgns first come out?

And mst importantly, who would I send the Recever and Bolt to to have tested for hardness/softness?

Just in case after reading the thread about the cracked FN bolt.

I'm not overly worried, but just to be sure.

Allen

If you insist, you can send it to Pacific Metallurgical...(do a search)

If I was in want of a 9.3 X 62 on a commercial FN action I'd just do it.....buy one (j c Higgens) thru gunbroker/gunlist/gun shows and just do it......quit talking about it...quit posting about it.....quit worrying about it.....quit worrying about "H" or "C" ring...just do it and enjoy it.

Those actions have been throwing 30-06 and 270 rounds across canyons for 50 years now. If there was a problem it would have shown up by now. One failed bolt means nothing to me...we have no clue what kind of use it saw.

quote:

If I was in want of a 9.3 X 62 on a commercial FN action I'd just do it.....buy one (j c Higgens) thru gunbroker/gunlist/gun shows and just do it......quit talking about it...quit posting about it.....quit worrying about it.....quit worrying about "H" or "C" ring...just do it and enjoy it.

Those actions have been throwing 30-06 and 270 rounds across canyons for 50 years now. If there was a problem it would have shown up by now. One failed bolt means nothing to me...we have no clue what kind of use it saw.

I agree with vapodog 100%. The FN was used by Higgins, sears, Herters, Browning. There have been 100s of thousands in use for 50-60 years. It would take far more than one unknown picture to raise a concern with me.

Buy a used rifle. Have the setback and bolt inspected when you have it barreled and go enjoy. No way would I send it out for pressure testing. The 270 pressure is 65,000 so is the 25-06. The 30-06 is 60,000 and the standard for the 9.3X62 is only 56550.

Just my 2 cents. Time for coffee.

Ramrod, you left out Colt. They made a few rifles on the FN action as did High Standard. However, I don't think the Herters were FNs. My friend had one and it was marked, "Made in Spain." Sure was an FN clone though, Santa Barbara maybe?

Paul B.

Firearms International imported the Musketeer which was a FN also.

quote:

Ramrod, you left out Colt.

Hey I said I hadn't had coffee. I had forgot the HS don't know that I knew about the Colt.

As to the Herter. I believe you are correct. I knew thay made a U9 BSA and J9 FN "style". I show references to it being made by Zastava. Which would make it basically a MKX clone. If his says Spain then I sure would bet on the Santa Barbara.

I have a JC Higgens FN Mauser action sitting here at my desk and there is a Rockwell instrument in our model shop. I'll gather a data point before I screw a new barrel on the action. The only number I can find on the action is 1272 on the flat behind the recoil lug.

You might check to see if there is a Brinell ball indent on the right side of the recoil lug

quote:

Originally posted by Johnly:
I have a JC Higgens FN Mauser action sitting here at my desk and there is a Rockwell instrument in our model shop. I'll gather a data point before I screw a new barrel on the action. The only number I can find on the action is 1272 on the flat behind the recoil lug.

Does the rockkwell tester check on the 15 N scale?

If not you can get some seriously bad data.

These FN's were used by lots of people for high pressure cartridges forever, I would not be afraid to use them at any normal pressure. I have one in .338 WM, the serial no. is under 1700 and it is not a c-ring. These would be very few in number judging by this. These were also used by Weatherby, I believe in the beginning and his early ammo was plenty hot for sure and these were for .300's and had some metal removed for a .375 H&H length cartridge.

Well the reason I want to go with a C-ring instead of H-ring has nothing to do with strenth. It's just because I like C-ring better,
no logical reason.

Heck if I was being logical about this I would just buy a CZ and save a bunch of $!

The reason for the strength question was because some comments in, as it turns out Ray Akinson's posts. I went back and looked it up to see where the heck I got that.

I'm also in research mode right now since I not ready to buy any thing for a few weeks as we are moving an the next couple of week. Moving to Bosie ID.

I guess seeing the cracked bolt got me to thinking which is usually not good .
Vapo's right its silly to be concerned about the bolt. Theres been a lot of FNs made thats the first I've heard of a bolt cracking.

I get a bit OS sometimes (surpise surpise) . Of course thats probably why I'm even doing custom guns instesd
of factry!

quote:

AllenBosely: The reason for the strength question was because some comments in, as it turns out Ray Akinson's posts.

Don't let that stop you. Weatherby built their first 9500 rifles, mostly high pressure 257, 270, 7mm & 300 Weatherby mags, on FN Deluxe actions. Never heard of one giving way. I currently own and shoot 17 commercial FN Mausers and have owned another 20. No better rifle.

fla3006

Do you have any that are c-ring actions? Just wondering how many they made, as I have three with numbers under 4000, none are c-rings, one is 16xx. This makes me think a c-ring FN would be very tough to find.

I have 5 commercial/non military FN 98, 4 H ring made in the early '50s.

1 C ring made in '41. Also charger hump/thumb slot.

I think about '49 and earlyer are C rings

Some had no thumb cut and with charger hump

GSP7 is right, C rings 1948 and earlier, not real common. The only C ring I currently have is a 1947 9.3x62 factory sporter with charger and thumb cut, all others are later H versions. If C ring is the main criterion, go with a good quality military action like a VZ24 or Oberndorf. The C ring theoretically is a little stronger but so what?

Unfortunately a C-ring Mauser is inportant to me. Not because of strength, just because a mauser should be a C-ring I guess. Not really I know.

It's silly and I know it's silly.

I didn't realize an C-ring FN would be all that rare.

I know theres nothing wrong with an H-ring FN.
I guess maybe I should say an C-ring is one of the little things that make the Mauser so attractive to me.

I have a month or so before I'm ready to really get started, so have been figuring out all the little details.

Samco has "very good" Perisian 98/29 barreled actions. I may just get 2 of them one for her 9.3x62 and one for my .404.

And thier C-rings!

The Persian 98/29s are supposed to be as good as a VZ-24 Yes? I seen some pictures of them and the machine work looked great.

Allen

Allen

You might talk to WEAGLE over on 24 hour about the markings on his C ring FN.

http://www.24hourcampfire.com/ubbthreads/showflat.php?C...age=0&gonew=1#UNREAD

The reason for the C action has nothung to do with strength. Around the turn of the century some case heads were soft. The C blocked off the left raceway
and protected your eyes.
Good Luck!

quote:

hawkins: The reason for the C action has nothing to do with strength. Around the turn of the century some case heads were soft. The C blocked off the left raceway and protected your eyes.