A mauser is a mauser. A winchester is a winchester. Couldn't be any simpler than that.

Karl,

I don't think the 3rd lug is really technically necessary, but I think it may well be commercially necessary, as 22WRF hinted.

Nobody will likely pass on the action because it has the third lug, but some may pass on it if it doesn't have the lug.

Steve

quote:

Originally posted by 22WRF:
A mauser is a mauser. A winchester is a winchester. Couldn't be any simpler than that.

True. Karl, make a mauser 98

Cheers
/JOHAN

But I bet you guys want low-swing, 3 position safeties and adjustable triggers, right?

Still, I think the breech, third lug, and claw extractor are sacred cows.

Steve

quote:

Originally posted by 22WRF:
A mauser is a mauser. A winchester is a winchester. Couldn't be any simpler than that.

22wrf,
I wish I could agree, and maybe I am just slow. But I guess what we are trying to understand from the market is 'What makes a Mauser a Mauser, and a Winchester a Winchester?"

Is it the third lug, the anti bind rib, the safety, or bolt stop, the c-ring, etc., etc., etc.

We understand there is a market for high end Mauser Actions, but in order to be viewed as a Mauser Action, which features need to be present and which do not, because in many cases, the third lug is a great example, there is a significant difference of cost to produce. The third lug on the bolt is not that big of an issue, however, in the receiver, the cut for the third lug to rotate is a blind cut and will require an EDM process to acheive, which will drive up the cost. As these are not cast actions, but machined from bar stock, every feature can add or lower cost depending on which way we go. We are just trying let the knowledge of the customer base, help us determine that, as opposed to designing what we think is right and hoping you like it.

quote:

Originally posted by skl1:
But I bet you guys want low-swing, 3 position safeties and adjustable triggers, right?

Still, I think the breech, third lug, and claw extractor are sacred cows.

Steve

I must have been typing my response at the same time you were. We have determine the route on the breech, and the extractor, not sure yet on the thrid lug. But what about the other features?

Karl what is the projected cost difference of having the third lug or not. Do you have any drawings of what the bolt/rear bridge area would look like using the bolt root as the third lug? I think that above all else the action HAS to LOOK like a Mauser for more appeal to more people. If you were able to get the cost down so more folks could afford them all the better.

Karl,

I think an adjustable trigger and 3 position, low-swing safety are "acceptable" variations from the military action. Square bridges are also allowed and desirable.

I'd leave the standard bolt-stop. I obviously wouldn't leave the charging flange. What else?

Steve

Don't forget to under cut the extractor claw like an original mauser.

quote:

Originally posted by D Humbarger:
WaffenfabrikHein what is the projected cost difference of having the third lug or not. Do you have any drawings of what the bolt/rear bridge area would look like using the bolt root as the third lug? I think that above all else the action HAS to LOOK like a Mauser for more appeal to more people. If you were able to get the cost down so more folks could afford them all the better.

Haven't got an actual cost difference but it could be a few hundred dollars, it just depends on how long the additional operation takes. We don't have any drawings that show this very well, but the rear bridge wouldn't change, there would just be additional material behind the bolt handle in the tang area. And I agree, it will look like a Mauser asthetically. There is a third option that I didn't mention regarding the third lug, and that we may offer it as a custom feature.

Another way to ask the question is "What is going to be your competition?". In this case I think only original Mauser actions. If you deviate too far then you can't compete.

There are three Holy Grails if you listen to this site; first it has to look like a Mauser, second it has to have the DG functionality of a sporting Mauser and last the primary parts need to interchange with comparable Mauser actions.

If you look at it that way, then safeties and triggers don't matter because a buyer can switch back to a Mauser flag safety or military trigger and be right where he wants to be (or any other aftermarket part for that matter). The bolt has to have the Mauser features to qualify under that scheme though.

Whether the fact makes the most technical sense is secondary to what the market demands. The C-ring debate is proof-positive in that regard. It's just an anachronism that a certain base supports for no practical gain. But it means enough to them to direct their purchasing tastes.

Unless it's virtually interchangeable, why even call it a Mauser via your Model M designation?

quote:

Originally posted by WaffenfabrikHein:

quote:

Originally posted by 22WRF:
A mauser is a mauser. A winchester is a winchester. Couldn't be any simpler than that.

22wrf,
I wish I could agree, and maybe I am just slow. But I guess what we are trying to understand from the market is 'What makes a Mauser a Mauser, and a Winchester a Winchester?"

Is it the third lug, the anti bind rib, the safety, or bolt stop, the c-ring, etc., etc., etc.

We understand there is a market for high end Mauser Actions, but in order to be viewed as a Mauser Action, which features need to be present and which do not, because in many cases, the third lug is a great example, there is a significant difference of cost to produce. The third lug on the bolt is not that big of an issue, however, in the receiver, the cut for the third lug to rotate is a blind cut and will require an EDM process to acheive, which will drive up the cost. As these are not cast actions, but machined from bar stock, every feature can add or lower cost depending on which way we go. We are just trying let the knowledge of the customer base, help us determine that, as opposed to designing what we think is right and hoping you like it.

Well, I can't speak for anyone else as to what features they want to see in a rifle and what their pocketbook (or their wife or girlfriend) will let them spend. But I can say this.

I own three Winchester Model 70s, a few Mark X mausers, a couple of 1909 argentines. I like them very much for what they are. And I own a g.33/40 mauser with the original 8mm barrel with a beat to hell stock on it. It still has the original 2 stage trigger and the original wing safety and the original turned down bolt handle.
And that is my "favorite" rifle.

Now, if I could buy a "brand new" one of those with modern steel that would handle a range of cartridges, up to and including the Winchester magnum chamberings, I would gladly sell all of my other guns, buy two new actions, and be done with it.

I have read countless, and I do mean countless discussions and arguments on these forums about calibers for everything from gophers to polar bears. I have gotten caught up in those discussions and actually spent money on more and more guns becasue of them.
Now, in my "older age, I figure I need three rifles. (I am not going to Africa) I need a 22 for plinking. I need a 22.250 for varmits, and I need a .300 Win Mag for everything else in North America that I might ever hunt (invcluding big bears although I don't think I will every hunt them). That is what I need. I may want more. But I need three rifles. And I would be very happy indeed if two of them were modern small ring mausers that were as safe and as smooth as could be, and I would be willing to spend a few more bucks to get them.

Karl,

I pulled out my copy of Stuart Otteson's The Bolt Action to see what he said about the safety lug. He noted it was there. He also noted that the M98's design is what gives it its strength, and the design will work with even poorer steels. He also notes that features on the bolt require cut-puts to support the 90 degree rotation.

I asked Mauser guru Dr. ALF from these forums what makes a Mauser. He responded that three features make the Mauser: the C-Ring collar, the non-rotating extractor, and the magazine box sized for each cartridge.

I would say if it is a Mauser, then it must take a Mauser bolt (of the correct length of course).

jim

Karl,

I just changed your name, sorry about that!...jim

.

quote:

Still, I think the breech, third lug, and claw extractor are sacred cows.

I agree completely.....

quote:

Originally posted by ALF:
So in short take the Mauser 98, copy it into new steel and technology but leave the basic design as it was intended to be, leave out nothing and you will have a captive audience. !

I could not agree more with Alf's suggestions.

Karl, the fact that you need polls and focus groups to "re-design" the System 98 gives me serious concern about your chances for success in this endeavor. This is how Winchester and Remington started down the slippery slope to ruin.

I wish you the best of luck and look forward to the opportunity to purchase a proper M-Series.

I am no Mauser expert by far, but I fail to see any practical need for the 98's third safety lug in newly made actions. That third lug is the major addition from the previous Mauser models, but it seems functionally insignificant in comparison to the other Mauser features mentioned. I like the idea of offering the third lug as an option for the more anal-retentive. I do, however, like the third lug for no other reason than it makes a 98 a 98, and I have no objections to its inclusion when cost in not a consideration. On the other hand, it also seems to me that those who would buy such an expensive action would probably go with a Dakota 76, Hein model 70, Granite Mountain 98, or Prechtl 98 action if the proposed action does not include all of the features of what makes a 98 a 98 (Such is the passion of real rifle looneis). I think that this would include all of the 98's gas handling features, which to me, are far more important than the redundant third lug.

.

Mr. Webber, Herr Prechtl has the right idea

http://www.golmatic.de/Waffen_EN/jagdwaffen_en/jagdwaffen_en.htm

Could you not procure an original Mauser M98 Type A and simply reproduce it?

quote:

Originally posted by ForrestB:

quote:

Originally posted by ALF:
So in short take the Mauser 98, copy it into new steel and technology but leave the basic design as it was intended to be, leave out nothing and you will have a captive audience. !

I could not agree more with Alf's suggestions.

Karl, the fact that you need polls and focus groups to "re-design" the System 98 gives me serious concern about your chances for success in this endeavor. This is how Winchester and Remington started down the slippery slope to ruin.

I wish you the best of luck and look forward to the opportunity to purchase a proper M-Series.

ForrestB,
Are you suggesting that we should not try an obtain input from the market we are trying to serve? There are a lot of threads that basically accuse the gun manufacturers of not listening to the customers and producing or not producing what they want. I think what gets manufacturers started on the 'slippery slope' is basing business decisions and design changes on the input from the accountants and lawyers. Beleive me, we are listening and hearing what everyone has to say, in order to get the input though, we have to ask the question. Our design decisions are not going to be made solely on the basis of the votes. What I think we may be taking away from this is there might be a need for several different designs, one pure breed M98, and one or more half breeds.

WFH,

The only major things i would like to see changed on a 98 is:

1. Eliminate 3rd lug.
2. Eliminate split in left lug, (use M70 type ejector blade angle.)
3. extend the barrel thread a little.
4. Make it in chrome molly.

Mr. Webber,

I would think that as long as you could offer an action that looked like a Mauser, had the non-rotating extractor and breech, proper magazine geometry to ensure good feeding, and above all else the safety features and gas handling capabilities of the original Mauser - if you could provide all that, I'd think the third lug on the bolt could be omitted. Or at least in leau of using the bolt root as a safety lug.

Omitting the split lug would be nice too. And please do keep the inertial type extrator over some spring loaded affair. The original Mausers were pretty darn simple and that's what made them great. I see no new need to make anything more complex than it really aught to be.

Karl,

Who comprises the market you are trying to serve? 90% of gun buyers couldn't tell you the difference between a C-ring and a cock ring. Of the 10% who could, only a handful could afford the kind of action you hope to build. Focus your attention on that handful and explore what they want. Like Alf said, its a religion.

I agree with you that it has been accountants and lawyers that often destroy the gun companies. But its the same mindset that lets guns get designed by a committee that lacks a passion for the product. In this case the product is not a generic "gun" its a 98 Mauser. Heed the advice of those passionate about Mausers - bacause no one else is likely to buy your action anyway.

Stop by the ACGG show and have a conversation with a few of the top builders. These guys are centers of influence within your target market. Hear what they have to say.

Prechtl and Hartmann & Weiss have achieved the Holy Grail of Actions. GMA comes close. If WFH can turn out that quality product at a significant reduction in price, the world will beat a path to your door.

Half breeds are commonplace. Some are nice, some are not. WFH already makes one of the nicest half-breeds out there (that's by no means an insult). The field though is crowded.

The question is not so much, "What should the design be?" but rather, "How can we produce the quality desired at an affordable price?" Many have tried and so many have failed.

I wish you all the luck in the world. I want to buy serial number 1.

Alf:

I am quite sure that I do "get it". Any 98 fan (myself included) would want all of the features of the 98, including the third lug. I was simply pointing out that, as a matter of practicality, the third lug could be left out. I thought that I made this clear in my post, but perhaps I communicated poorly. I understand that most 98 fans would find it sacreligious to leave out the third safety lug. However, I would not fault the maker, buyer, or the action, if the action did not have the lug. You just could not call it a 98. Perhaps it could be marketed as a 96, of which I am also a fan (Swedish 96).

quote:

Originally posted by ALF:
ColoradoMatt:

With respect and my sincere apologies:

If you dont get it, you dont get it ! and if it has'nt got it, it also does'nt get it !

Some see it early in their shooting career, some like myself saw it early but only grasped it much later; and some of course never get it! but once youv'e got it you will never let go of it. This is a religion.

The Self-Locking Extractor is what seperates the 98 from all the wanna-be CRF's like Winchesters and Rugers. Without it, it's not a 98.


The split lug is an important part of the 98 design:

It gives full length support to the ejector.

It allows for easy ejector cleaning or replacement in the field.

It provides easy diagnosis of lug-set back (not as important today with modern steel receivers).

quote:

The question is not so much, "What should the design be?" but rather, "How can we produce the quality desired at an affordable price?" Many have tried and so many have failed.

Karl

This should be tbe core issue although you must first define "affordable". What is affordable to a millionair is certainly not affordable to the masses. The masses spend more money on guns than the millionairs do. What do you think that you could build a plain FN/400 type action for?
you could probably even cast the triggerguard & have a seperate & sheet metal mag box & folks would gladly welcome it with open wallets. I know that if Winchester can produce the M70 at the price they do it for the Germans sure as hell can do better.

I think, unless you are dealing with:

high pressure rounds, read Weatherby type rounds or

are concerned about handloaders trying their own destructive testing of action integrity etc,

the third lug could be left out.

Modern steels and production procedures should keep you out of A&E and the Courts.

However, as many posters have remarked, the classic, purist Mauser design has the third lug for 8x57 type intensity rounds. It is expected, in a classic Mauser 98.

If I was betting the farm, I would go with the third lug. Just because my target market would expect it. I would be looking to produce a modern manufacture FN Mauser 98 or upmarket Interarms Mark X Whitworth.

I believe Empire rifles produce two versions of their own manufacture / 'design' Mauser 98 rifles, which come with double square bridges, 3 position swing safety.

The Standard rifle has the third lug and is circa $700 more expensive than the Legacy. The Legacy has the tick box Mauser features, shares many characteristics with their Standard Mauser model, but does not have the third lug. I suspect this would be adequate for .30-06 and 9.3x62 type cartridges.

quote:

Originally posted by ForrestB:
Karl,

90% of gun buyers couldn't tell you the difference between a C-ring and a cock ring.

LMFAO!!!! Now that is classic. Too funny.

What the hell, I'll throw my $.02 in as well.

From an engineering point of view, when considering the quality and properties of modern ammunition and steel alloys, none of the "classic" features that some here say make a Mauser a Mauser are necessary.

The self locking extractor is unecessary. We are not dealing with sooty, crappy powder and rifles dragged through trench mud.

The "supported" ejector is BS. The majority of the forces acting on the ejector are along its long axis, where there is already plenty of support.

The third lug is far and away the most redundant feature of the 98 design.

On the subject of the C-ring, I will admit I'm one of those who doesn't know it from a cock ring. . So I will reserve comment.

That said, if the target market thinks all that stuff is necessary, and is willing to pay the price, let them eat cake.

Just make sure that target market is big enough to support a solid business case.

As far as that "C" ring is concerned I do know what it is & I have never lost any sleep or killed any less big game because some of my Mausers didn't have it. I agree that the ejector system could be much simplified.

quote:

Stop by the ACGG show and have a conversation with a few of the top builders. These guys are centers of influence within your target market. Hear what they have to say.

Forrest,
What is interesting is we have talked to a few, the most prominent is Fred Wells, and his advice was to leave out the third lug, and he was not the only one to say that. We are having this conversation at many different levels and places, and if nothing else it is interesting to hear the different viewpoints.

Just a comment on any design changes in the Mauser design.

If built like like the original it will be a true and faithful reproduction of the classic design. If redesigned leaving off the third lug, it will be a new action with some Mauser features, or Mauser like.

The first will attract the purists and the custom market. The second will be very similar to what the Montana Rifleman action is today, almost a model 70.

Two seperate target audiences I think, although I would expect some cross over between the two audiences, but I think it will be more difficult to get the first group to seriously look at the second offering. Problem is if they want a mauser and your product isn't one, they will continue to purchase Mauser actions by other means ( milsurps's, commercial FN's etc ).

I don't think either is really wrong, but I am pretty certain when I it get it in my mind I am going to build another Mauser, it will be the real deal, not a close proximity thereof. I am launching a couple of new projects very soon, and the second option would not be on the table on either of these rifles, I am currently planning on using a Pre war FN, and a VZ-24, and you wouldn't convince me to change that for a new mauser like action. I have already explored that option once and got seriously fiddling with a Mark X, which I ending up being unhappy with and went back to the VZ-24 action for this rifle.

Just my $.02

This debate reminds me of the AR15 kool-aid drinkers, who think an AR HAS to have a 4150 (not 4140) barrel and a chrome lined bore, or else it ain't shit.

Those two features are there only because of military needs (4150 is for heat resistance to automatic fire and the chrome bore to resist corrosion under severe neglect) and are completely irrelevant for the use 99% of AR15 owners will give their rifles.

But don't try to tell that to the kool aid drinkers.

HI: My opinion is to leave out the Third lug. It
is not needed, necessary or important. Far
better to have the bolt itself serve as an
additional safety lug. Its still a Mauser
with the other typical features..I have a lot
of Mausers & Mauser types over the years.
I can see no realistic reason for the third
lug.
Best Regards, Tom

Karl - the 3rd lug seem to be the hot topic and the one that adds the most expense.

Offer these mauser features as options and the purists can pay for them if they want them. Those that want to save a few bucks can get theirs without them. JMO

And we do appreciate you asking!

quote:

Originally posted by WaffenfabrikHein:

quote:

Stop by the ACGG show and have a conversation with a few of the top builders. These guys are centers of influence within your target market. Hear what they have to say.

Forrest,
What is interesting is we have talked to a few, the most prominent is Fred Wells, and his advice was to leave out the third lug, and he was not the only one to say that. We are having this conversation at many different levels and places, and if nothing else it is interesting to hear the different viewpoints.

Have you talked to Pete Grizel and taken a look at one of his Mauser actions. I remember when they first came out. He wanted $800 for one and I almost bought one. Today I kick myself for not having bought a bunch of them. Talk to Pete.

For all those buyers hungering for a high quality M98 derivative without the third lug, without the split left lug, without the C-ring, etc, etc, etc, you are in luck. You can order yours today from Waffenfabrik Hein - it's their N-series action. Base price is $1950, options will take the price as high as $3000. It's a beauty and about as good as it gets for a "modernized" M98.

Karl, I'm sure your phone will now be ringing off the hook all day. While those orders pour in, let's get back to designing an action for the Mauser fanatics who look forward to drinking the kool-aid.

The WFH website says, "Waffenfabrik Hein is currently researching and prototyping an accurate reproduction of the Model 98 Mauser. As with other projects we've undertaken, you can rest assured that the end product will be worth the wait.

Please keep an eye on this page for information on our Model 98 Mauser."

If that is really the goal, then we're in luck. The design specs are widely distributed, the only question is how much will it cost? Folks wishing for a $500 M98 probably shouldn't be holding their breath.

I think it would be a major mistake to attempt to make the M-series a high volume/low price proposition. Make the M-series the WFH flagship then dumb-down the N-series if you really want to make a lower cost derivative. I think the gun-buying public would have confidence that a manufacturer that can get the M98 exactly right, could probably make a M70 knockoff as well. But visa versa is not neccessarily true.

Some ideas expressed are definite improvements and should be options: 3-position safety, M70 or Blackburn type trigger, longer front ring (like a Peruvian). However if you don't have the basics covered, I'd just leave Mr. Mauser's name out of it.

The market is saturated with practical rifles.

The niche market craves design and quality.

Mauser is the design.

Here is a picture that shows the best safety and trigger

http://www.golmatic.de/Waffen_EN/jagdwaffen_en/galerie_en/bild_22.htm