Hello,

I'll introduce myself as a new comer to your friendly forums by promising to ask plenty of "dumb" questions.

But, what the heck... that's how I learn.

To set up the discussion, we're talking about a "pristine" 1909 Argentine Mauser action. It's unlikely it's ever been fired.

Now before you go on about that car you bought from that "little old lady" and my naievete, let me say this action came from a rifle with no wear marks on it's stock, all matching serial numbers and no wear whatsoever apparent on the bolt face or anywhere else for that matter.

(Why we'd have been insane enough to take it apart to begin with is still under debate!)

The intent of this inquiry is to decide if the action should be further heat treated, beyond it's original state, and if so how, and to what depth.

The caliber will be 30-06 and it will receive a Douglas Air-Gaged barrel, if suitable.

Douglas has a standing requirement that to mount a barrel, they need the receiver to be of a hardness between 20 and 40 Rockwell.

This action was tested today, at 23 Rockwell.

I await your opinions and other subsequent mayhem. - Thank You!

Well, a Rockwell of 23 is between 20 and 40.

Okay, here is a dumb reply, who tested it and do they know the correct way to check a 1909 for hardness?

Blanchards in Salt Lake City, Utah are a great source for heat treating actions and can answer your questions best. 801-972-5590

Welcome to the board. There is a lot of information here.

If you do a search of the topic in this forum, you will find many, many discussions. I would suggest first doing a search and reasearching the opinions alreayd posted on this board. If you have questions about that, this would be a very good place to get clarification.

I think being cautious is being prudent but I see nothing, from your ample description, to suggest re-heattreating a M1909 for a 30-06. Mauser heat treated different parts of the bolt & receiver to different levels in their peacetime production and I'd worry if reheating it would be an improvement. BTW, I'm doing a Modelo 1909 Peruvian in 22-250; very similar.

Bud W

In my opinion 23 Rc is very soft.

I've used Pacific Metallurgical in Washington for heat treating and have been satisfied so far.

Just tell them to heat treat it the same as Tom Burgess and you'll get the thing done easily.

I also agree with the reply of "how was it checked".....most heat treat checks are on the Rc scale and not adequate for this action. The reading should be on another scale such as the Ra scale or 15-n or 30-n scale and then converted to Rc.....it's a bit more complicated than it seems but the professional heat treaters know what they're doing.
Good luck with your argie!

I also have a pristine 1909 that I'm ready to barrel, but it Rockwelled (at the Douglas barrel factory by them) at only 2 on the "C" scale. Fred Depoy, who has been at Douglas for over 30 years told me he'd never had a 1909 there to be barreled that "C" scale Rockwelled any higher than 12 (in all his years). Needless to say, I'm having it re-hardened before having it barreled. However, if your action Rockwelled at 23, then I'd not bother to harden it.

quote:

Originally posted by Frank Beller:
I also have a pristine 1909 that I'm ready to barrel, but it Rockwelled (at the Douglas barrel factory by them) at only 2 on the "C" scale. Fred Depoy, who has been at Douglas for over 30 years told me he'd never had a 1909 there to be barreled that "C" scale Rockwelled any higher than 12 (in all his years). Needless to say, I'm having it re-hardened before having it barreled. However, if your action Rockwelled at 23, then I'd not bother to harden it.

I read a comment similar to this from Pac-Nor....Mauser action reading particularly soft.

Several folks have stated seeing quite a few Mausers with setback lugs while others have not seen it.

I feel sorry for folks that ask questions about heat treating as the replies are all over the map. Further I trult believe they are all genuine and sincere.

I have two 1909 argies and both in 25-06 that were not heat treated with no problems at all and one of them went prairie dogging with me for quite a few years.

I never check either for hardness and have no clue how hard they are.

I've checked thousands of pieces from heat treat ovens over the years and this includes case hardened items.

The only things I ever found this soft were measured on the Rc scale and this is as soft as steels normally get without a full anneal.

Even tellerium leaded 12L14 will come close to 0 on the Rc scale!

I often read this information as from someone that isn't using the testing equipment correctly. Not saying it isn't so....just that it';s not at all in my experience.
Take it for what it's worth!

THis might Help,

Darcy Echols and Tom Burgess view:

https://forums.accuratereloading.com/eve/forums/a/tpc/f/...=138103131#138103131

Darcy extract:

Twice in one day, Hand me the flack jacket! While attending the School of trades in Denver, We were told that any 98 rebarreled to a modern caliber should be re-carborized .030 to .040 deep so the surface hardness was around 36-40 RW C. The bolt a few point higher 40-44. They converted more than just two or three. Later when I opened my own shop I built 2 rifles chambered for 270 Win. and fell into the mind set that I now refer to as "how can you re-heat an action if you don't have a clue as to what it's made from" One was a 1909 and one a Radom. I had the rifles back in my shop years later and both had been set back enough that I had to set back the barrels the required amount clean up the lug seats and then sent both actions in to be recarborized and have not had a problem since(REMEMBER SAME REAMERS, SAME GAGES, SAME RIFLE). Do you know of anybody that has a 270 that won't try to get 3100 fps with a 130gr bullet? Ray sure won't leave the 404 at original speeds. The number of rifles I have had in my shop for some sort of repair or restoration that have set back is long indeed. This list would include the hallowed 98 square bridge actions, vz-24, 1909, 1908, and one FN in the white straight from the factory that I failed to check with the rockwell tester. I chambered the FN to 300 Win mag and it set back .015 in less than 200 rounds. It has since been hardened and to my knowledge has not move to the rear at all.Take it for what it's worth.

I have every 98 that I now use annealed dead soft, do 90% of the machine work that is required. Then it is sent in to be re-carborized as described and then finished up. Some 98 actions are probably OK to use as is the 1935 being one of them. But why take the chance and why waste all those end mills on an action that is glass hard on the surface or have to eat the repair when it shows up back in your hands.

I did have two 1909 action destroyed to get an idea of the steel composition. The results were as predicted and I now use the 1909 for any project that requires a 98 in a standard length Magnum, no I don't use them for the 375 H&H or similar lenght round as the action just gets to sloppy for my taste. Russell Wilkin the shop manager at H&H (ever hear of them?)requires all bolt rifles built on the 98 actions to be re-hardened. Go figure. Got to give my girl a bath!

TomBurgess extract:

Eldeguello, Considered as a whole there is not enough difference in the steel recipe for military '98 mausers. The reason for this is that machining with a predictable cutter wear, smoothness of finish from the machining and the final carburizing process leading to proofing all entered into the acceptance of any lot of steel. The steel does not exactly correspond to North American AISI SAE or ASME lists and chemistry's. The closest we have is the 1100 series. Prior to WW II there was a group called "Machinery steel" If you can find an old Ryerson book of that era you may find that this group had about 3 varieties from arouind "18 carbon ,25, 30 and 44 carbon". Starrett used the low carbon steel to make many of their tools "case hardened in colors". Others did similar things with it. The Various carbon grades of this steel is still available in various parts of Europe. For the Mausers the Spec was 27 to 33 Carbon. The significant alloying agent was Manganese. There seems to be very little difference from as early as 1901 to about 1942 in a carbon range of 27 to 33 and a Manganese spread from 115 to 140. The Manganese helped in the carburizing process because it allowed deeper penetration of the added carbon and softened the boundary definition in the carburised case. A smoother transition from case to core if you will. This also allowed a finer grain structure, and because the manganese tends to make up for the bad effects of too much sulphur ( up to a point) the Sulphur number could be higher allowing for smoother surfaces from machining, less wire edges to be trimmed at corners and so on. Carburizing these, particularly in the carbon monoxide gas process,is quite straight forward and does not require fancy or exotic methods. For those who have had readings made and point to all sorts of trace ammounts of various other elements I have to say that in carburizing these it makes damned little difference. Those actions made close to Czecoslovakia and or in that country will often have many elements in the mix and some of these can be said to add to the strength of the receiver and bolt.
This had more to do with the cokeing coal used to make the original pig -iron. These elements were sucked up by the iron in the melt, and could include Uranium, and Zirconium among a fairly long list of neither add nor subtract from strength elements the combination regarded as a whole entity. The Argentine made '09s do seem to be different. In a heat lot of 10 The as quenched Rockwell was noticably higher and required almost 100 degrees more heat (F) to achieve the desired Rc hardness. Conversely some crude Spanish made actions complete with Mauser Logo and "standard modell" plus a certain importers mark had to be cooked for additional time to achieve desired hardness. Subsequent test of another from the lot indicated 15 carbon steel. The machining was crude enough to indicate it had never been to the Fatherland. Experienced heat treaters check the hardness after quench to determine the correct temperature for the temper draw. In some schools the process is then known as heat-treating. The original method was Pack hardening. The carbonaceous material at the heat used liberated carbon monoxide gas which was absorbed by the iron. At quench this material flaked off in the quench medium, This was saved and applied in areas not needing great depth or hardness of case. New material was used in the locking lug area the bullet ramp and underside flat up to the recoil lug and also on the extracting cam of the bridge. Recycled material was used every where else on the exterior, but recycled plus new material was applied to the feed well and most of the rest of the receiver subject to wear from the bolt. The tang flat where the trigger humps rolled also got a good gob of new material. This was labor intensive. To go to Copper plating as a stop off would take double the time and was totally unnecssary. Same for the baked on copper bearing paint that the German's had available. The early powders used in Europe did not have the same burning characteristics as did Brit. Cordite or the American cylindrical powders. translating a Rockwell number to yield tables in "the book" are fine for static loads but not worth a damn for the Dynamic loads produced by modern powders particularly in so called reduced loads- the 25-06 being one come to mind that can produce great violence so loaded.

50-BMG

I have a excellent plus 1909 I will trade with you! Please don't cut it yet. Talk to me!!!!

Wow....Thanks All!

Lots of food for thought there. I'll try to respond to a few of your questions to keep the discussion going.

To: Westpac - "Blanchards" - Right, Thanks. I've gotten that tip before, but couldn't find them. Your contact information helps and I'll file it away.

Q- Where was it tested?
A- On the bottom of the receiver, just behind the front recoil lug. Three tests in all, all within a point or two.

Q- What was the hardness scale?
A- Here I'm out of my knowledge base, so I'll repeat what I heard... "N" scale(?) Maybe there was an associated number I didn't retain. We informed him the required range was 20-40 prior to testing, so he could apply an appropriate test method.

As for the instrument, it looked like a small arbour press, with a digital instrument display at the head instead of the usual blunt face. It read directly.

Q- Who tested it? Were they knowledgeable?
A- A fellow at the Cincinnati Steels Treating Co. locally here checked it for us. He was very knowledgable and explained some of the hardening processes and their various advantages. Ultimately, he came down on the side of doing nothing. Of course, he is not a gunsmith, hence my soliciting help here.

Also note, he was going to check the metal composition next, if hardening was required. He would also want to know what depth the hardening would need to be.

Finally, thanks for the application note Woodjack. I'll need to digest it for a while, but it looks like the kind of technical data I was hoping to bite my teeth into.

As for offers to swap actions... thanks, but no thanks. We're sticking with this one, feast or famine.

Dear 50-BMG:

I suggest a book written by R. A. Walsh, "Mauser M98 & M96 How to Build Your Favorite Custom Rifle", 1998, Wolfe Publishing Company. You can order it from Brownells.

Mr. Walsh is a design engineer and Mauser nut. He had a 1913 Gwer Berlin made military Mauser's steel assayed. Also, his thinking on re-heat treating actions will give you another perspective.

I have talked at length with Pete Grisel about the heat treatment of Mausers. If you can get a hold of him, he will give you some more information. Also, try Stuart Satterlee on this forum.

If you private message me, I can give you a more detailed answer.

Sincerely,

Chris Bemis

quote:

Originally posted by 50-BMG:
Q- Where was it tested?
A- On the bottom of the receiver, just behind the front recoil lug. Three tests in all, all within a point or two.

That is a common mistake folks make when trying to determine the hardness on an action such as yours. Because these receivers are not like current commercial types where the heat treating is uniform throughout, the true hardness cannot be measure as you described. These receivers are, for the lack of a better word, "spot" hardened, and only in those areas that need it, so your guy at the Cincinnati Steels Treating Co. was correct to do nothing.

quote:

Originally posted by Yale:
Dear 50-BMG:

I suggest a book written by R. A. Walsh, "Mauser M98 & M96 How to Build Your Favorite Custom Rifle", 1998, Wolfe Publishing Company. You can order it from Brownells.

Mr. Walsh is a design engineer and Mauser nut. He had a 1913 Gwer Berlin made military Mauser's steel assayed. Also, his thinking on re-heat treating actions will give you another perspective.

I have talked at length with Pete Grisel about the heat treatment of Mausers. If you can get a hold of him, he will give you some more information. Also, try Stuart Satterlee on this forum.

If you private message me, I can give you a more detailed answer.

Sincerely,

Chris Bemis

Why not share it with the group?

Terry

quote:

Originally posted by TC1:

quote:

Originally posted by Yale:
Dear 50-BMG:

I suggest a book written by R. A. Walsh, "Mauser M98 & M96 How to Build Your Favorite Custom Rifle", 1998, Wolfe Publishing Company. You can order it from Brownells.

Mr. Walsh is a design engineer and Mauser nut. He had a 1913 Gwer Berlin made military Mauser's steel assayed. Also, his thinking on re-heat treating actions will give you another perspective.

I have talked at length with Pete Grisel about the heat treatment of Mausers. If you can get a hold of him, he will give you some more information. Also, try Stuart Satterlee on this forum.

If you private message me, I can give you a more detailed answer.

Sincerely,

Chris Bemis

Why not share it with the group?

Terry

Darn right.....I agree

I agree with Yale...I think that heat treating may unravel the original Mauser design characteristics.

I have a DWM Berlin 1909 Argentine action used for a very H-O-T .280 Newton cartridge...no problems whatsoever.

I don't believe a good Mauser action like the 1909 Argentine would ever need to be re-heat treated...can't prove it by me. Mine has withstood very high pressures...and I repeat, no problems over the years...none whatseover.

Tom

white bison-

Statistically, your experience means nothing.

And your opinion runs counter to the two gunsmiths quoted.

Both of these names are high profile gunsmiths.

D'Arcy Echols, widely acknowledged as one of our best rifle builders, and Tom Burgess, the dean of Mauser metalsmiths.

While we all appreciate your right to express your opinion, it is only an opinion, and an opinion based on ignorance.

flaco

N.B. This is the reason so many of our more knowledgeable members were reluctant to answer this post.

Oh, and...

As long as I'm in my controversial mode...

The Walsh book sucks hind tit on a boar hog.

He wouldn't know a custom Mauser if it bit him in the ass.

flaco

Flaco,

Don't hold back, tell us how you really feel!

I have to agree that Walsh's book is probably my least favorite gun book and I have a lot. Ditto his ability to discern a custom mauser from one of those horribly engraved Santa Barbara actions.

quote:

Originally posted by Woodjack:

quote:

Originally posted by white bison:
...I have a DWM Berlin 1909 Argentine action used for a very H-O-T .280 Newton cartridge...no problems whatsoever....
Tom

Not all 1909 are the same.
The Argentinian made 1909 is known to be softer than the DWM 1909.

A few year back I bought 3 Argentinian 1909's before realizing there were DWM made actions and FMAP made ones. Can they be safely used if properly prepared?

Can the Argentinian actions be safely used, as is, if sticking to the original 7x57 or .257Roberts?

If properly heat treated can they be used for higher pressure cartridges?


Thanks, Rob

Rob,

I've built two rifles using the SA 1909 (FMAP) actions, one in 257 Roberts and the other in 7x57. I had both of them heat treated by Pacmet. I would say that you could build whatever you wanted on them (within reason) after they have been heat treated. As far as I can tell, the SA actions aren't any different than the DWM's, although the machining/finish on the DWM's might be a bit better.

D'Arcy Echols and Tom Burgess are on the same tract in that all Mausers should be taken "down" to soft, machined, then brought back up to specs.

Jack Belk, on the other hand tells me that messing with a 1909 Argentine is like painting a new tin barn, don't need it.

All three of these guys are in the top of their field.

My opine is, I don't know but it sure can't hurt, and its not expensive..

quote:

Originally posted by craigster:
Rob,

I've built two rifles using the SA 1909 (FMAP) actions, one in 257 Roberts and the other in 7x57. I had both of them heat treated by Pacmet. I would say that you could build whatever you wanted on them (within reason) after they have been heat treated. As far as I can tell, the SA actions aren't any different than the DWM's, although the machining/finish on the DWM's might be a bit better.

Thanks, I have some new projects to consider.

Mr. Burgess tells me he has all his customers' Mausers treated by Pacific Metallurgy in Kent, WA once he is done with his magic, regardless of manufacturer. Jim Sterling is the man there. Like someone else said, it is not that much incremental expense in the totality of a custom rifle project. Sure beats the hell out of lug set back after everything is done.

flaco...your comment my experience statistically
means nothing...probably so...but I did just input my experience...and I go by more what I find from my experience, than heresay. I find a lot of differences of opinion on this subject...pro & con.
Lots of Mauser actions were sporterized in the past with no addtional heat treatment...seemed to work just fine . The only place I discovered the problem of heat treating old Mauser actions is in the AR Forum. However, I agree that airing out the subject will bring a lot of light to bear on the subject...
My experience has only shown me that the military Mauser actions I have used in high pressure chamberings have worked just fine without any heat treating...so I'm going to stay with my ignorance.
Tom

WB,
The issue of Mauser heat treat has been around a lot longer than the internet.

What about if you have something welded onto the rear bridge, like a square bridge blank? Does that make it more likely to warp if you are having it heat treated?

Or for that matter, since it is being re-heat treated anyway, is there any danger to welding a chunk of steel to the front ring?

Todd

TMG-

If you know what you are doing, you can weld on the bridges with no ill effect as far as warpage goes. If you do not do it properly, trouble will follow.

I won't do a front square bridge without re-heat treating. But I am going to to re-heat treat all of them from here on out, regardless of how much I TIG on them. I have them annealed first and then do the metal work.

quote:

Originally posted by TMG:
What about if you have something welded onto the rear bridge, like a square bridge blank? Does that make it more likely to warp if you are having it heat treated?

Or for that matter, since it is being re-heat treated anyway, is there any danger to welding a chunk of steel to the front ring?

Todd

When welding to the rear bridge you merely can tell the heat treaters to mask that section (copper plating makes a great mask) and it will prevent carbon from entering the steel in that area. There is no advantage of carburizing the rear bridge anyway.

To this effect one can heat treat the action and weld afterwards with no problems from high carbon content.

Hmm,

A lot of good that will do when it comes time to quench the receiver. The additional steel is more prone to warpage. Think Remington made Model 1917's and the fix they employed to combat this tendency. The problem can be overcome but care must be excercised in the approach.

quote:

Originally posted by vapodog:

quote:

Originally posted by TMG:
What about if you have something welded onto the rear bridge, like a square bridge blank? Does that make it more likely to warp if you are having it heat treated?

Or for that matter, since it is being re-heat treated anyway, is there any danger to welding a chunk of steel to the front ring?

Todd

When welding to the rear bridge you merely can tell the heat treaters to mask that section (copper plating makes a great mask) and it will prevent carbon from entering the steel in that area. There is no advantage of carburizing the rear bridge anyway.

To this effect one can heat treat the action and weld afterwards with no problems from high carbon content.

I think it best to remember in cases like this the difference in information we are going to get from people that have been in business as gunsmiths for many years and have seen literally hundreds (and maybe for burgess in the thousands) of actions VERSUS the rest of us that have had a few, even a couple dozen, and go off the "no problems yet" versus actual testing etc.

I went with what I considered the solid advice from the above quoted Echols and Burgess, had both of my 09's sent off to Pacific. A very important point to remember is this, even if you don't personally feel the carbon addition is needed, annealing them makes working on the action easier and less costly for the smith. Another reason that people like D'Arcy, who are in it for business and have to think about every cost amortized out, would benefit from having it done.

As stated, for the cost of having it done, in comparison to the rest of your bill, why the hell not. Frankly I can't believe this even gets discussed (I understand the question getting asked). There should just be a sticky with the contact for Pacific and Blanchard's and instructions on sending it off at the top of the gunsmithing page.

hey Mike, you prefer to tig weld bridges on the action or would you go the silver solder/brazing them on route?

gotta send you an e-mail too bud.

Red

This thread is quite the read. I am wondering about when a 98 should be reheat treated during the gunsmithing process? Should the charger hump removal and all other metal work(drill and tap, square action and bolt faces, lap lugs ect...) be done prior to or after the heat treat?

I am currently building on a FN military 98 with no crest and .30 on the rear ring, it is one of the FN that wa oringinally a 30-06 and has the notch in the front ring to allow feeding from the stripper clip. This will be the first Mauser that I have reheat treated out of the several that I have had built(with no problems) but as has been mentioned, reheat treat sounds like cheap insurance.

this is a great thread. I am interested to know more. I never would have imagined that one would want to heat treat after machining. It seems like it wold cause warping of critical alignment pieces.

when you weld on bridges how do you get a seamless smooth surface without the gouge created at the edge of the weld bead?

Amazing..in over forty years, I've encountered only two set backs...an FN (20's rockwell) in 7x61 S&H and another FN in 7mm Super Mashburn.

The fact is: the set back was a safety factor in that extraction became more and more difficult..finally leading even the brain dead to come to the conclusion that SOMETHING was wrong....duh....

Nobody got hurt,,the 98 system lived up to it's legacy as the finest bolt action ever conceived. EVERY other "improvement" is a step backward.


My humble opinion...of course!

Well, I guess old Mausers are like cars; it depends on the talent level of the person doing the work and their ability level the day it was made. I'm sure like in Detroit and other car mfg areas, there are "Monday Mausers" and "Friday Mausers" and all sorts in between. If ole Hans had been into the Schnapps over the weekend, he may not have been as conscientious in packing new carbonaceous material into those lug seats on Monday morning. It is best to heed the advice of the experts and re-treat anything you are investing a bunch of cash into and may run hot ammo through.

My method in selecting actions is simple; I look for a well-used example that looks like it has had several thousand rounds thru it. If there is no detectable setback, I figure it is probably good to go. Then again, I don't load to extremely high pressures. Nor do I build high-end rifles.

quote:

Originally posted by Bobster:

My method in selecting actions is simple; I look for a well-used example that looks like it has had several thousand rounds thru it. If there is no detectable setback, I figure it is probably good to go. Then again, I don't load to extremely high pressures. Nor do I build high-end rifles.

Wise man, when it's about Mauser actions, especially 1909s. All my FNs except one are well used, with no setback. The three military actions I have left are well used, and in fine condition. One military action I had sporterized years ago and have shot maybe 400 rounds of 35 whelen handloads through it, and it's still in great condition.

I've had several 1909 DWM actions, and at least three showed set-back. I got rid of them all, and if someone gave me one, I would get rid of it too. If I had to re-heat treat any action of any make, I wouldn't go there, but get rid of it. There are too many good actions to be messing with junk.

KB

quote:

There are too many good actions to be messing with junk.

Where are they?

http://www.brownells.com/.aspx...roduct/CZ_550_ACTION

http://www.brownells.com/.aspx...ON_700_CUSTOM_ACTION

http://www.brownells.com/.aspx...TION_RECEIVER___BOLT

http://www.brownells.com/.aspx...AKOTA_AFRICAN_ACTION

http://www.brownells.com/.aspx...uct/DAKOTA_76_ACTION

http://www.mcmfamily.com/mcmil...actions-standard.php

http://www.bordenrifles.com/actions.shtml

http://www.midwayusa.com/viewP...productNumber=958451

http://www.midwayusa.com/viewP...productNumber=480700

http://www.midwayusa.com/viewP...productNumber=827553

http://www.midwayusa.com/viewP...productNumber=483257

http://www.brownells.com/.aspx...ONG_ACTION_RECEIVERS

https://www.budsgunshop.com/ca...roducts_id/411540382

http://www.viperactions.com/

http://www.gunbroker.com/Aucti....aspx?Item=216148848

http://www.gunbroker.com/Aucti....aspx?Item=215917603

http://www.gunbroker.com/Aucti....aspx?Item=216148851

http://www.gunbroker.com/Aucti....aspx?Item=216148798

http://www.gunbroker.com/Aucti....aspx?Item=216169109

http://www.gunbroker.com/Aucti....aspx?Item=216212073

Etc, Etc.

I realize the actions shown are expensive, but you get what you pay for. If price is a concern, buy a used Ruger 77 MKII as a donor action, and set it up as you like. Or something similar.

KB

Find a 1909 that's been used and shot, and without pitting, and check it for set back. If you find none, then it's a candidate for use again. If it has set back already, well it's your money.

This argument has gone on forever, and frankly no one changes their mind about it - until you waste your money, as I have. That what got my attention. Until then, I listen to the so-claimed experts, and guys saying they had one in a magnum, shot for years, etc, etc.

Advice is free, take it or leave it.

KB

To make a long story short, consider the FACT that the ONLY rifles that have a rep for setback are MAUSERS! No Springfields, no Enfields, no Mosin-Nagants, no Arisakas, no Mannlicher-Schoenauers, not even any Carcanos!

It's because Mausers are softer; period, end of discussion.

Sure, some are harder than others and all are safe, but the fact remains that Mausers are the ONLY rifles with generally-acknowledged setback issues.

So, what's the problem? Either re-heat-treat or don't, but don't sit there like Cleopatra and argue that Mausers don't need it 'cause we all know that some of them DO need it!
Regards, Joe

quote:

Originally posted by Kabluewy:
I've had several 1909 DWM actions, and at least three showed set-back. I got rid of them all, and if someone gave me one, I would get rid of it too. If I had to re-heat treat any action of any make, I wouldn't go there, but get rid of it. There are too many good actions to be messing with junk.

KB

What you have written is in complete disagreement with D'arcy Echols' statements on the matter. Please stop and ponder that for moment.