quote:

Originally posted by Doug W:
Measuring the lugway wall is not an accurate method to determine the wall thickness at the relief cut.

You can clearly see in most of your pics the relief cut at the extractor is deeper than the lugway.

Doug you are wrong and you need to see an optometrist. The middle photo is the GEW, the only one that has an extra relief cut at the slot, albeit a very shallow one.
Go back and read my post properly.

Here's a Mauserwerke, relief cut EXACTLY the same as the extractor slot.
And not from a secondary relief cut either.
Also note nicely radiused groove.
Actually you can see on the LHS the lug way is deeper than the relief!!! Something I found on more than a few, see top photo of VZ24 on page 3.
And the step on the LHS is virtually f#%k all as well.

quote:

Originally posted by metal:

Actually you can see on the LHS the lug way is deeper than the relief!!! Something I found on more than a few, see top photo of VZ24 on page 3.

I don't think you are seeing it because my VZ used an inverted dovetail relief cut. Where the deepest part of the cut is hidden by the threads when looking into the receiver.

The transition from relief to lugway isn't a sharp corner so it is hard to see.

You can't see it 'cause it ain't there, sorry to disappoint you.

2nd time, I don't think you would be able to see the deepest part of the relief cut because it is hidden behind the threads.

Put a bent probe and see if you can feel it, better yet a indicator with a probe.

Or you could always saw it in half.

Already probed it, trust me.

I put Doug on ignore so I can’t see his counter argument, but no amount of argument or empirical evidence is worthwhile to him. Stop wasting your time. I posted the dimensions from the original dimensional drawings from Loewe, DWM, and Mauser Oberndorf, but those were not “real” to him. Don’t waste your time arguing with him. It’s like the other thread where I posted original specs and figures from Mauser Oberndorf documentation, which wasn’t good enough for him.

Unfortunately the whole community loses out.

quote:

Originally posted by Doug W:

quote:

Originally posted by WoodHunter:
Well Shazamm. A gent could make anything he wants to out of the words in this thread! Interesting reading to say the least.

Anyway, some photos below of a 98 action I use as a proof gun with a strain gauge system. I think it came from the Gun Show near Tacoma WA maybe 30 years ago, was in a big box of M98 parts I bought.

So here goes: Receiver ring is 1.372".

Keep grinding and up the juice to 3 of Stuart's 86ksi proof loads.

I wanna see what happens.

I like your test sled, 12" Miscellaneous Channel?

Big chunk of channel I had out in the weeds behind the shop. About 110 pounds. Those little nasty 50 calibers in front of the test gun push the sled back about 8 inches. First few trials did not have the steel recoil block with keys under the aluminum bar. Sheared off both the 3/8" grade 8 socket heads holding it together. Then I got smart and milled the steel recoil block with keys. Held to the channel from underneath with two grade 8 1/2" cap screws. No more problems.

quote:

Originally posted by Fal Grunt:
WoodHunter are you using a home made strain gauge system or did you purchase one?

PM sent.

The relief cuts vary in profile depending on the manufacturer. Factory published dimensions are valid only if tolerances are given because all manufacturers work to tolerances.
The Turk is looking good but the bolt is pitted enough that jeweling won't cover it. I'm trying to decide what to do. Regards, Bill.

quote:

Originally posted by Bill Leeper:
because all manufacturers work to tolerances

This is incorrect, I'd recommend you go back and study the history of manufacturing a little further.

I'll add to this as I have time. Running a batch of Mexican Mauser firing pins this morning and finishing up some Remington 30 Cocking pieces.

The problem with discussions like this, and the potentially great part about discussions like this is that they bring in a wide range of people with a lot of different backgrounds.

Problem is you also get people like Doug who think the whole world is against them and have a chip on their shoulder the size of Texas and even when you try to help them they can't see past themselves to understand.

Additionally you get people with no background or concept of mass manufacture. Even worse, you get people with knowledge of mass manufacture, who are convinced it can only be done one way.

Doug couldn't get past himself and whatever his issues are to answer the question that I asked him. "Do you want me to machine it to print, or do you want me to machine it to work?"

I was expecting him to be intelligent enough to understand that question, but again, whatever the chip on his shoulder is, he couldn't put 2 and 2 together and make 5.

Mauser's were mass manufactured, we all know that. They were manufactured by a multitude of countries in a variety of arsenals and factories ranging from extremely skilled and competent to very unskilled and incompetent.

I've been blessed, and cursed, by having a varied background in manufacturing. I once rebuilt a powdered metal mold originally built in the 60's that made a couple hundred ring gears a year as replacement parts for John Deere. I built tooling that ran 600 strokes a minute in .004" Kevlar. I built tooling that hit 10mm steel 80 strokes a minute in a 2800 ton transfer press. I built tooling that ran hardened spring steel at 200 strokes per minute.

Limit gauges are still common place today. Take the part, set it on the gauge. If it fits, it is a good part. If it does not fit, throw it in the scrap bin. I have watched a 250 lb man fit a part on a gauge with the full weight of his body and use a die bar to remove it. This is inherently the problem with limit gauges. This is inherently the problem with any system of measurement. At a shop I worked at we had competitions using the big mic's to see who got the most accurate measurement. Then we would have a good laugh when we got the "real" measurement back from the CMM inspection. Another tool rendered useless by a bad operator.

Lets go back to the gorilla press operator. A reasonable person would ask why wasn't he fired. In truth he was one of the best press operators. He knew that if he could lean on that part and force it onto the gauge, it was a good part, and it would WORK when assembled like it was supposed to. If the part dropped on the gauge as it should, the parts it was assembled with would fail inspection and be scrapped.

In Germany prior to WWI, there were something like 4 to 6 complete sets of gauges for the Mauser rifle, this is in reference to the Gewehr 98 being made for the German government (Storz). If a company needed to make a part, a gauge was sent to them to verify and inspect the parts.

There are a great deal of machining done on Mauser parts that simply were not dimensioned in a manner that we would today. There are some aspects that are not dimensioned AT ALL. That was up to the Meister and there are a few RARE examples of prints drawn by hand, with notes, referring to how a minor aspect is setup and machined. Akin to me sitting down with a die maker and machining die components to what they needed to be, what would WORK, and ignoring the engineered drawings.

So in Doug's argument he has selected one part and clung to it. One of hundreds of thousands. Even after some of the top gun makers in the country agreed with him (myself not included though I do agree with him) he continues to argue, even claiming not to be arguing anyone.

When I was in college I took one philosophy class. While I have continued to enjoy reading many of the great thinkers I quickly grow tired of idiots that want to argue what is "real". I will implicitly accept a production drawing as "real" over a single sample of unknown origin.

Now in regards to making a small ring, I have done numerous of these without issue, on Large Ring, Small Thread actions. The result is in many ways identical to the original Mauser small ring transitional actions, Mexican 1902's, Chilean 1895's, Swedish 94's, and Spanish 1893's, all quality actions produced by quality German companies. They still have a thin cross section, which is what I was trying to show, and help prove Doug's point, but alas, it was not to be.

Interestingly my only experience with an issue with one of the actions, they do not fail at the thread relief, they fail at the intersection of the bottom of the bolt/extractor cut, where typically there is a sharp corner.

quote:

Originally posted by Fal Grunt:

Doug couldn't get past himself and whatever his issues are to answer the question that I asked him. "Do you want me to machine it to print, or do you want me to machine it to work?"

I didn't answer because it is a silly question that is irrelevant.

Because I am not asking you to machine anything and you are not back in 1898+ working at one of the many Mauser plants.

What matters is what the ACTUAL relief cuts were.

You claim to have sectioned receivers, simply measure them up and provide the data.
Better yet post some pics so we can all see what the relief cuts look like from various manufacturers.

Instead you have long winded post after long winded post with NOTHING. Zero, Nada, the bubble.

You posted some numbers of relief cuts where ALL the diameters were smaller than my sectioned VZ24.
The largest 28mm (as I recall), where my sectioned VZ is 29.1mm.

How is it possible that the 1 guy that has actually provided a real and verifiable number with pics in this thread has such an outlier?

How is it possible that with everyone adhering to those sacred prints produced such a large clearance cut on my VZ and none on all 3 of Metal's VZs?

Rather than follow me around bitching, whining, asking irrelevant questions, telling us all about you modern manufacturing experience, prattling on with your kewl stories, and engaging in interwebs psychological analysis,,, how about you post some actual data on those cuts (YOU HAVE GATHERED YOURSELF) in question and stick to the topic?

quote:

Originally posted by Bill Leeper:
The relief cuts vary in profile depending on the manufacturer. Factory published dimensions are valid only if tolerances are given because all manufacturers work to tolerances.

Yep, and it isn't like they don't change methods, specs and tolerances throughout the life of production.

quote:

Originally posted by Doug W:

How is it possible that with everyone adhering to those sacred prints produced such a large clearance cut on my VZ and none on all 3 of Metal's VZs?

Could be a chinese copy. We had hundreds of 98 copies at TSJC gunsmithing school. Some of the FN labeled "clones" had backwards F on the rec ring.

Sorry to throw a curveball into your hate filled box of Mauser opinions.

quote:

Originally posted by gunmaker:

quote:

Originally posted by Doug W:

How is it possible that with everyone adhering to those sacred prints produced such a large clearance cut on my VZ and none on all 3 of Metal's VZs?

Could be a chinese copy. We had hundreds of 98 copies at TSJC gunsmithing school. Some of the FN labeled "clones" had backwards F on the rec ring.

Sorry to throw a curveball into your hate filled box of Mauser opinions.

Sorry you have posted yet more speculation and no substance in this thread.
But hey, that is how we are going to get to page 5!!

So did you ever figure out how to cut thread relief with a cutter with a smaller radius than the ACTUAL thread relief w/o offsetting the cutter?

quote:

Originally posted by Doug W:
So did you ever figure out how to cut thread relief with a cutter with a smaller radius than the ACTUAL thread relief w/o offsetting the cutter?

A small edit from one of my eariler posts.

quote:

Originally posted by gunmaker:
FYI
Pete's prints for his action thread relief right side raceway clearance cut calls a Radius of .535" +.000 -.005. .....

I'm sure Pete didn't waste any time cutting any more material than he needed to.

quote:

Originally posted by gunmaker:


A small edit from one of my eariler posts.

quote:

Originally posted by gunmaker:
FYI
Pete's prints for his action thread relief right side raceway clearance cut calls a Radius of .535" +.000 -.005. .....

Again,
The right lugway is about a 0.560" radius, how do you cut relief for the shaving cutter with a 0.535" radius cutter w/o offsetting it?

Or are finally admitting my offsetting the cutter in the drawing that you objected to was correct?

Just made a simple 1.100” gauge from a piece of wire.
Mauserwerke and VZ24 exactly 1.100” all the way around relief cut.

quote:

Originally posted by Doug W:

Or are finally admitting my offsetting the cutter in the drawing that you objected to was correct?

Reading comprehension isn't your forte???

quote:

Originally posted by gunmaker:
FYI
Pete's prints .....

I'm sure Pete didn't waste any time cutting any more material than he needed to.

In other words, your junk action that you cut in half IS NOT some gold standard for Mauser 98 dimensions. You can't seem to wrap your head around that.

In case you really don't know. Which I rather doubt.
Pete = Pete Grisel

quote:

Originally posted by Doug W:

Again,
The right lugway is about a 0.560" radius, how do you cut relief for the shaving cutter with a 0.535" radius cutter w/o offsetting it?

I could be wrong, but I ASSUMED you understood how to use a rotary table, or have a working understanding of how CNC machining centers worked.

I certainly wouldn't use a .535" Radius cutter to make that clearance cut. Even on my manual mill.

So I bought a Chilean from the Hensley's that was turned to a small ring. I chambered it in 250 Savage. Is it going to be a bomb? I've hunted it a couple times and it shoots great.

quote:

Originally posted by gunmaker:
Why on earth would you put the center of the .535" OFF center??

&

quote:

Originally posted by gunmaker:
I could be wrong, but I ASSUMED you understood how to use a rotary table, or have a working understanding of how CNC machining centers worked.

No matter what you use, the cutter must be offset from the axis of the receiver.

Keep dodging James, it is a hoot to watch.

quote:

Originally posted by butchlambert:
So I bought a Chilean from the Hensley's that was turned to a small ring. I chambered it in 250 Savage. Is it going to be a bomb? I've hunted it a couple times and it shoots great.

Run three 86ksi proof loads through it as Mr. Satterlee suggested and get back with us.
Because otherwise it is just guessing and conjecture.

quote:

Originally posted by Fal Grunt:

quote:

Originally posted by Duane Wiebe (CG&R):
Let's put some real numbers out there.

Lets... not clog up the thread

Looks to me like that job's already taken

quote:

Originally posted by butchlambert:
So I bought a Chilean from the Hensley's that was turned to a small ring. I chambered it in 250 Savage. Is it going to be a bomb? I've hunted it a couple times and it shoots great.

I hope it stays together. Is it shortened too? That is something I've thought of doing with one of the Turks. I like the way this one is turning out and may do it again. If I shortened the other action, I could cut out most of the bad pitting. Regards, Bill.

quote:

Originally posted by Doug W:
No matter what you use, the cutter must be offset from the axis of the receiver.

ignorance has a cure
stupid is forever

The arc center can be the center of rotation. In the manual world and the CNC world. It's basic machining 101.

I do all of my repair work on the cars/trucks my family owns. Recently I've rebuilt the transmission in my 04 Tahoe, replaced injectors in my 02 Duramax and adjusted the valves more than once, machined the heads and put new head gaskets in both my kids Subarus. This is just a small list of how much time I spend in the car shop and not making $$ in the gun shop. I glean most of my info from the fantastic forums where trained experts in the field I want to learn willingly offer their years of experience on the subject I wish to learn more about. Not once have I argued with someone that has worked for GM, BMW, Subaru, etc about how to do their job. I'm just happy to have someone with years of experience offer their EXPERTISE for free.

I truly understand why speerchucker got fed up with BS.

Doug
How many bills have YOU paid that you EARNED building a custom Mauser???
Got an FFL & Sales Tax license to do this above board???
Are you willing to bet your business and reputation on the custom work you preform on Mausers?

I am.

There are several on this thread that are. I'm guessing you're not one of them.

quote:

Originally posted by Doug W:
Keep dodging James, it is a hoot to watch.

Speaking of dodging, what do you do for a living??????????????????????????????????????????????????????
??????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????
??????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????
??????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????
??????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????
?????????????????????????????????????????????????????????

quote:

Originally posted by gunmaker:

The arc center can be the center of rotation. In the manual world and the CNC world. It's basic machining 101.

Of course it can, but once again, with the dimensions given the axis of the cutter HAS to be offset from the axis of the receiver.



You objected to the cutter axis being offset.
Originally posted by gunmaker: Why on earth would you put the center of the .535" OFF center??

Haven't you made a fool of yourself enough on this?

If not keep going.

quote:

Originally posted by Doug W:

Of course it can, but once again, with the dimensions given the axis of the cutter HAS to be offset from the axis of the receiver.

Based on what personal experience?

Have you paid your bills building custom Mausers?

quote:

Originally posted by metal:
Just made a simple 1.100” gauge from a piece of wire.
Mauserwerke and VZ24 exactly 1.100” all the way around relief cut.

I just dissected a junker Erma S/27, 1937.
Clearance cut 1.119", about 0.004" deeper than the right lugway.
No second clearance cut.

Dovetail clearance cut was the opposite of the VZ24 with the deeper cut at the rear.

Pretty much like your GEW and a better candidate for regrinding than the VZ24 I have.

quote:

Originally posted by Doug W:
Haven't you made a fool of yourself enough on this?

If not keep going.

7,800,000,000 people on this planet. Give just one of them a reason to swallow your BS.

quote:

Originally posted by gunmaker:

Based on what personal experience?

Have you paid your bills building custom Mausers?

Based on simple 5th grade geometry, no Mauser building required.

The circle generated by a small radius won't intersect with the circle generated by a larger radius about the same axis.
^Isn't that obvious?

quote:

Originally posted by Doug W:
Based on simple 5th grade geometry, no Mauser building required.

As I assumed, you haven't built ANY custom Mausers for ANYONE.

Was thinking, yes that can get many persons in trouble.

There is a really SIMPLE way of measuring the inside diameter of the under cut.

Make up a half round gauge.

I used then all the time when machining the radius cuts on extractors and other parts. Once you make the half round gauge you then have a static dim you can go from.

The hard part would be cleaning the cut in each receiver so you can get a correct measurement.

Plus would have to make the gauge in such a manner/shape so it could be used to measure many different makes of receivers as the cut varies so much in shape between makes

Just my 3 cents.
Jim Wisner

quote:

Originally posted by J Wisner:
Was thinking, yes that can get many persons in trouble.

There is a really SIMPLE way of measuring the inside diameter of the under cut.

Make up a half round gauge.

I used then all the time when machining the radius cuts on extractors and other parts. Once you make the half round gauge you then have a static dim you can go from.

The hard part would be cleaning the cut in each receiver so you can get a correct measurement.

Plus would have to make the gauge in such a manner/shape so it could be used to measure many different makes of receivers as the cut varies so much in shape between makes

Just my 3 cents.
Jim Wisner

I like that. Another option is to clean the receiver real well, spray some silicone mold release in there, then do a 5 minute epoxy cast of about 1/4 of the circumference. Pop it out and measure the step. Other options include wax or hot glue. Regards, Bill

A very interesting discussion.

Wouldn't be much easier just of buy Ruger MKII's and get some of the most desired features one wants.

Double bridge scope mounting, 3 position safety, modern steel, properly heated ect.

But than one wouldn't be able to charge for all the time put in making a old military action into something similar.

quote:

Originally posted by Doug W:

quote:

Originally posted by butchlambert:
So I bought a Chilean from the Hensley's that was turned to a small ring. I chambered it in 250 Savage. Is it going to be a bomb? I've hunted it a couple times and it shoots great.

Run three 86ksi proof loads through it as Mr. Satterlee suggested and get back with us.
Because otherwise it is just guessing and conjecture.

Pray tell me why in the hell that I would do that! I'm with Mr Anderson, you are out of your element.

quote:

Originally posted by p dog shooter:
A very interesting discussion.

Wouldn't be much easier just of buy Ruger MKII's and get some of the most desired features one wants.

Double bridge scope mounting, 3 position safety, modern steel, properly heated ect.

But than one wouldn't be able to charge for all the time put in making a old military action into something similar.

Hmm. I am building a 338 Win Mag on a 77 now.

quote:

Originally posted by butchlambert:

quote:

Originally posted by Doug W:

quote:

Originally posted by butchlambert:
So I bought a Chilean from the Hensley's that was turned to a small ring. I chambered it in 250 Savage. Is it going to be a bomb? I've hunted it a couple times and it shoots great.

Run three 86ksi proof loads through it as Mr. Satterlee suggested and get back with us.
Because otherwise it is just guessing and conjecture.

Pray tell me why in the hell that I would do that! I'm with Mr Anderson, you are out of your element.

Yea I want to use the action for another 400 H&H, do not want to destroy it by playing with the silly pressure testing gear.