Sheared Bolt Lugs - Swedish Mauser

[Ricochet]

Isn't it amazing how often we see pictures of totally destroyed firearms and read that the shooter suffered relatively minor injuries or none? Bet it's a terrifying experience to hold one that kabooms, though! I hope to never find out.

[jonk]

Just to consider the small ring/large ring debate:

When I hear small ring/large ring, to ME it means a 98, period. Either it is large ring (98, 98k, etc.) or small ring (33/40, Kar98A, etc) or perhaps a hybrid like the turk guns- large ring, small shank for instance.

Pre-98s may coincidentally have a small ring diameter; however I usually hear them referred to as such, a "pre 98".

I have no reason for this opinion, it was just my understanding.

[Dutchman]

Isn't it amazing how often we see pictures of totally destroyed firearms and read that the shooter suffered relatively minor injuries or none? Bet it's a terrifying experience to hold one that kabooms, though! I hope to never find out.

Scroll down the page to this:

The photos are courtesy of the Swedish state criminal forensic laboratory. The shooter was killed when the breechblock split in two and half lodged in his skull behind his right eye.

http://dutchman.rebooty.com/RBfailure.html

I don't particularly like preaching but I like less hearing about fellow shooters being killed.

Dutch

[Ricochet]

That is awful!

You sure can get killed when a gun kabooms, but still, it's amazing how many times it's a much better outcome than you might expect.

[Larry Gibson]

I find it rather hard to believe that the bolt pictured is forged. Problem is I've never heard of a cast bolt for Mausers. Given the still excellent appearing condition of the action and the minor damage to the case I'd have to say that the load was not really over pressure. Not the primer pocket is not "blown", only to top of the primer is missing along with the anvil. I have also seen several cracked Mauser bolts from over loads and none had the granular structure exhibited in this case. Interesting to say the least.

Larry Gibson

[Dutchman]

I heard of another bolt lug failure in Sweden with a m/38 rifle. Was with standard ordinary m/41 military ammo but the lugs sheared and killed the young soldier. This causes the Swedish military to withdraw all Mausers from service. This wasn't more than 7 yrs ago as I recall but my memory sucks canal water. The person who told me was a former sergent in the Swedish army and vice-president of the largest gun collector's org in Sweden.

The only current use of Mausers in Sweden is with the Liv Guard (KI), the 1st kavalry who guard the Swedish palace in Stockholm. They have a daily ritual of the changing of the guard on horseback. They all carry loaded & locked m/94-14 carbines. They are not purely ceremonial.

Dutch

[skeet1]

Large ring, small ring, who cares what you think Pietro. I thought this thread was a discussion of the sheared bot lugs on the model 96 Swed. I would be much more interested in a continuance of the original discussion than what you think is large or small.

[stocker]

Interesting comments on small ring definition. I suggest Pietro may have something. All Mausers prior to the 98 (ie: the 93's, 95's, 96's) had similar sized receiver rings, front and rear so there was no necessity to have two terms (large and small ring). It wasn't until the 98's came along with different sizes that there was any need to discern between the two sizes. So on a practical sense the early models may have small rings but there is no need to identify them as such thus the term does properly apply but does when discussing 98's only. And if you are wondering, prior to this discussion, I would have thought the same as the rest of you as the early ones are small ringed but the description is moot in their case. I think score goes to Pietro in this case and we are all enlightened a bit. More a case of proper form of use of the term as compared to the obvious dimensional characteristics.

[405]

Yikes! While that does not look like the huge pressure of whatever caused the 93 failure it still looks like too much. And yes, agree with those who see the granular break seams on the lugs/bolt. Something is wacky. Crystal structure that coarse is not normal for properly heat treated/alloyed steels. Comparing that failure to that of the 93 provides some clues or at least something suggestive of differences in steel types or treatments.

[skeet1]

Dutchman,
It looks as though there is little or no damage to the receiver and extreme damage to the bolt. To me if this damage was caused by pressure or some other cartridge problem I would think there would be at least a little more damage to the receiver. My guess would be a bad bolt. I know the 96's are some of the best pre 98's but even moderns arms are not immune to bad materials and manufactrue recalls.

Skeet1

[Ricochet]

Something I've long wondered about is why the heat treating problems of the low numbered Springfields were only reported with those rifles. Surely the makers of Mausers, Lee-Enfields and such employed similar methods and materials.

[Bret4207]

Bret - I guess I have several replies, some stemming from over 45 years experience with these rifles, and others from my own library - and yet still more provided by a few of the above critics who either excerpted what suited them from a source, or didn't bother to read the source they hyperlinked.

Mike in co - I have stated a fact, and not my opinion - as attested to over many years by real (not internet) experts, like Frank deHaas for one (see: BOLT ACTION RIFLES, Military Rifles & Actions, Mauser Model 98, pp 103/104).

Dutchman: Why not paste the entire Brownell's section, like where the Small Ring Model 98 in described as one of the four Mauser variations, instead of just what fit your agenda ?

Also, Dutchman, in your posted hyperlink to the MidwayUSA tech section, the Model 98 is listed under Small Ring Mauser's, just waiting to be read by any who cared to:

"Small Ring Mauser - Mauser 34, 38, 91, 93, 94, 95, 96, 98 (Small Ring), 99 & All Other Military Model Numbers (except Large Ring Mauser 98)"


Buckshot - [What are we to call them ?] - Good question.
IMO (and this IS an opinion of mine), pre-98 Mausers are "Mausers with small rings", but M-98 Mausers with small rings are "Small Ring Mausers", decidedly different.
What's not opinion, but fact - is that the defining feature that separates them is that the "pre-98's" are all "cock-on-closing" (unless aftermarket converted), while M-98's are all "cock on opening".

.

Darn it! My copy of De Hasses book is buried in the barn. Well, all I can say is that the term isn't in common use. In your opening post you stated the following-"The problem is, most wouldn't know a real Small Ring Mauser (which the M-96 most decidedly is not) if it bit them in the butt." And-
The term "Small Ring Mauser" refers specifically to cock-on-opening Mauser 98's of that description - which has all the safety features of the Large Ring Mauser 98 - and specifically NOT to any of the cock-on-closing Mauser Model 93's, 94's, 95's, & 96's - which lack those features." But you also reference the Midway site which says the 93's, 95's, 96's ,etc ARE small rings. So you can see where I might be confused.

For now I'll stick with referring to MOST COO designs as small rings, with exceptions. No need to get hot under the collar about it. We've had horrible wars over terms like leade and throat and seat in the past. No sense going to battle over it.

[MtGun44]

Looks like a straight overload failure, now that the pix are back.
Tracking the 45 deg line as 'tensile' failures essentially always shift to
shear failures, leaving a 45 or nearly that angle failure surface.

No signs of a fatigue crack having existed prior to failure, just one
continuous and consistently textured failure surface.

Since the case is essentially intact, yet the primer is missing, I wonder if
it was a primer failure leading to very high gas pressure across the face
of the bolt. It would appear in this case that either gas venting was better
or the receiver ring was stronger - leaving the bolt to fail in the lugs due to
pure thrust load exceeding the strength of the steel, yet leaving the receiver
fully intact.

It would appear that there is inadequate ductility in the bolt, either poor
choice of alloy, heat treating too much for hardness at the expense of
ductility - or - the old question of the quality (and perhaps consistency!)
of steels in the early part of the last century or even late in the previous
century. Alloy mixing and heat treat were much less well understood in
those days.

If I were the engineer on this design, I would want considerable ductile
setback of the lugs prior to shearing, not this sort of failure.

Very impressive if no injury resulted.

Thanks for post the pix back to the thread.

I have a set of pix of a modern Sako action that failed in a totally
brittle way - split in half lengthwise due to (it appears) a barrel failure.
The extremely small amount of metal holding the receiver ring and rear
action ring together is seen in the broken halves, along with the totally brittle
behaviour. That one shows signs of an improperly hammer forged barrel
with deep internal fatigue cracks letting the barrel split into three nearly
equal pieces lengthwise. The case was petaled out in almost exactly
120 deg strips with an intact head. The pix seemed to show very brittle
action metal.

Again, (as Ricochet pointed out) it is amazing there was reported to be
no serious injury.

Bill

[math]

Yes that happends now and then and often you can see that there are rust under the lugs and a small new brake. It was more common when people used to use the powder from blanks just pulling the wooden bullet and replacing it whit a match bullet Not a recomended praktice!

Math

[M98]

small ring is small ring...it dont matter what model it is...there are small ring m98s....a large ring is a large ring....action is an action...no mater what it is...here is one example...the turks that are out there...some of them are a large action with a small ring long shank barrel...