I am thinking of the difference that modern steel and lack of a thumb cut would make.

500 grains---

About 99% of all Commercial Mausers had a thumbslot. All of them had a "C" ring, and all had the gas sheild in the top lug........just like the military actions. The big difference was in tolorences and finish.

My opinion would be that most of the commercials are only partial C-ring actions and are actually LESS safe than the militaries. In addition , the thumb cut provides another escape route for any hot gasses before they can reach the shooter............I am speaking of commercials such as the post war FN , Santa Barbara , Mark X , etc.

Actual commercial pre-war actions produced by Mauser would be about like finding hen's teeth.......I have never seen one .

[ 04-01-2003, 18:52: Message edited by: sdgunslinger ]

Jack,

Up until the later 60s out here both M17s and Mausers were used a lot for making up rifles.

One of the gunsmiths out here whose name was Don Black was the son of another gunsmith called Jack Black. Old Jack use to do lots of experimenting and was one of the blokes that did 303/22s and so on.

Don Black always reckoned that an M17 would take a load that an M98 would not take. Don always took the extractor of M17 barreled actions when firing them overloaded.

Mike

"Modern steels" are really not that modern. The Japanese made steel swords 1,000 years ago that were BETTER than anything made since 1800..... Even the tempering of these swords cannot be duplicated today!!

[ 04-01-2003, 18:51: Message edited by: eldeguello ]

When talking about commercial mausers, there are two seperate categories:

1. Oberndorf and Brno

2. FN, Interarms, Whitworth, Santa Barbara, etc.

There is a substantial difference.

Good point Kurt---

When I talk about "Commercial Mausers" I'm talking about the sporting actions made by Mauser. (Duh) Not FN, Santa Barbara, Mk-X or any of the other Mauser copies.

Case hardened actions are BETTER than alloy actions IF they were barrelled properly.

Before trying to re-heattreat anything, you HAVE to know what the alloys in the steel being treated is.

If an action doesn't *need* more hardness it's rediculous to take the chance of ruining it "just because".

Mike 375--- The M-98 and the P-17 is nearly identical when a case lets go. Parts go flying and the bolt and receiver are left undamaged. The difference is in the shooter. THe shooter of the P-17 is going to have a problem. The M98 shooter will have to change pants, maybe.

It's REALLY easy to prove.

z1R---

Actions made by all but Erfurt and Radom were case hardened BEFORE 1924. The steel was somewhere between 1010 and 1020. The only way to know for sure is to do a destructive test.

Actions mada after 1926 by everybody was alloy steel that's through hardened to about Rc32.

The ONLY actions that get heat-treated in my shop are ones PROVEN to need it.

There are VAST differences in heat-treat of all Mausers. Treat each one differently and if someone says "I tested the hardness", ask WHERE. Some of the very best actions were only heat-treated where it was needed. Some seemed to have missed heat treatment all together.

Jbelk,

Why is the P17 more trouble than a mauser if blownup? I have two, a 35whelenAI and a 458 being finished. Love the actions and planned on getting as many as I could at good price for future projects. (aesthetically I like them for some reason).

I have a small ring 98, German, I haven't looked in a while, but believe marked 1918 or 1919. Would this be one of the ones with good case hardened steel then?

Thanks very much.

Red

Well put InfoSponge---

What he said is right. The harder the steel the less the coeffecient of friction, but the more brittle it is. The softer core gives the strength and the case gives the glide and wear resistance.

Dago Red---

Your 1918 small ring is a kar98 and not worth messing with. They're a war production short cut with a history of failures. The receiver ring is very thin and sometimes extremely brittle. Stay to 45K or less with them.

The M-96 is weak by design, not material.

Jbelk,

What about the problem with P17's that you mentioned?

thanks much. so much information to absorb....must keep reading..... :-)

Red

Dago Red---

The P-17 has an oddball bolt stop and ejector box housing and not much gas shielding. I've personally heard of more injuries with the P-17 than most other actions.

Not long ago there was a case failure in a P-17 the details of which were posted on HuntAmerica. The front section of the extractor had enough energy to penetrate a pick-up door at least 15 feet away!!

Suffice to say, if you map the "debris field" of particles blowing out of commonly used and available actions, using a box and recording paper, the M-98 does the best job of keeping the shooter in the "shadow" of high speed things that go "OUCH!!".

Jbelk. I read, more than post, on these boards but you've got me a little nervous. Is my kimber 96 (sporterized 96 mauser) ok with with normal handloads. I like the 6.5x55, and it is a pleasant round to shoot. Is the action weak and untrustworthy? My handloads are pretty conservative.
Thanks, Weagle

Weagel---

Use factory pressures as your guide. The factory makes ammo that's safe in the '96 and as long as you use their ballistics as your guide there shouldn't be a problem.

The Swede is a fine round and a really fine action, but they aren't something that makes a good hot-rod.

[ 04-02-2003, 06:02: Message edited by: JBelk ]

Jbelk. Thanks, I really like the 96 action and I think my handloads are pretty mild. I don't try to push things in the swede, but it is a great shooting action. I've been getting pretty good groups with the 120 gr nosler BT's. Pretty good coyote medicine for south GA.
Good shooting, Weagle

Jack. I am curious as to the design flaws you see in the 96 Mauser.Mark

Jbelk,

glad we are talkinga bout this before I started my next project. It is indeed a kar98, says it right on the side, it says erfert on top and has a couple of dates. I was going to have a .257 roberts AI built off of it. Do you think its not worth spending the money?

I am seriously thinking that a M1999 short action in .257AI is a better way to go. :-) With a custom serial number. :-)

Red

Dago Red had a great idea--

quote:

---

I am seriously thinking that a M1999 short action in .257AI is a better way to go. :-) With a custom serial number. :-)

---

That's much better!!

358 Mark--

The 96 was one of the stepping stones by the Mauser brothers on the way to perfecting the turn-bolt rifle.

The 96 has fewer safety features and less means of handling high intensity cartridges. They're fine for what they were made for......Like a '55 Nash Ambassador was. The '55 Chevy had the 283 V-8 that was suitable for hot-rodding.

Consider the M-96 as a flat-head straight six and the M-98 as a push-rod V-8.

That's actually a pretty good analogy.

Jack, Thanks. The Nash analogy is very funny. I'll make sure not to try and make a 55 chevy out of my old swede. It's a great rifle though. I like most any old mauser or springfield better than the current crop of remchesters.
Good shooting, Weagle

Jack, Thanks for the reply.

I asked because I have one of the Big5 VZ24's that I just lapped the lugs on. Since it had a mismatched bolt it took quite a bit to get the lugs bearing evenly. I did this after truing the recesses. Being the novice I am I didn't think to record the original lug thicknesses and as a result don't know exactly how much I removed. Lesson learned. To be safe, I was going to have this receiver re-treated. I'd hate to have to toss it because I've invested so much time in truing & polishing it.

Your post has brought up two questions in my mind. The first, is what happens if you have an alloy receiver case hardened? Will it acccept the case? Or will it end up too hard to be useful? I ask because, as I mentioned, my instructor required that his students have every mauser re-heattreated. There was no mention of some being case hardened mild steel and some being alloy that was hardened through. the implication was that they were all case hardened. I wonder what happened to those VZ's in class that were subjected to the case hardening process?

Question 2 is what about the bolts? Were they also alloy vs mild steel like the receivers? With practically all the current VZ's being mismatched you can't be sure where the bolt came from.

The more I learn the more confused I get!!!