1891 Argentine Mauser bolt “stuff”

[Cree]

Just wanted to drop this little bit of knowledge I pieced together for all you folks with the old 1891 Mausers. I’ve got an early gun (made 1891-92) that - like most- was sporterized in the 1960s by one of the importers - cut down barrel, bent overt bolt, but was all numbers matching. It shot well, but I noticed under certain circumstances (shooting light loads of Universal and pistol boolits sized 313) that I got some blowback through the action.
First solution was to check firing pin protrusion and reset it. Now, these early guns, the firing pin screws into the cocking piece, so you’re left with either “too much” or “not enough”. Admittedly, the load in question was weak, but the gas handling ability of the action was still worrisome. Even Mauser realized this, and in the mid-late 1890s. Had redesigned the bolt sleeve to reflect the then-new 93/94/95 bolt sleeve - with a slight “wing” to the right and left of the lug raceways.
My early gun didn’t have that, and under close examination, it also appeared the firing pin collar had a crack in it.
I’d seen some posts here that suggested the 1896 Swedish Mauser bolt sleeve/safety/cocking piece/firing pin could be swapped into the Argentine Mauser with minor fitting, but the majority of what I could find was (and I’m sorry I can’t remember the poster here) referring to using a low scope safety along with the Swede bits.
So, long story short, if you have an 1891 Mauser, you CAN swap in the ‘96 Swede firing pin, safety, cocking piece, and bolt shroud with minor fitting to the bottoms of the “wings” on the shroud and the base of the cocking piece to your bolt body. I reused the original firing pin spring from the ‘91. Test fired today and no failures, nor blowby (not that I expected any), and the old gun shoots incredibly well. (Already did before).
I love these actions, but their ability to handle gas is very poor, so even with the addition of the Swede bolt shroud, glasses are a must. If you have one of the real oldsters with the “smooth” bolt sleeve, then this might give you a little extra protection.
The best part is, you can swap in the Swede parts for shooting and none of the original pieces - the action or the bolt body - need to be modified.
Just wanted to share to try to help others, but of course, your mileage may vary.

[smithnframe]

Could you post a pic of the original parts?

[Texas by God]

This is good knowledge. Yes, please post pics.

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G930A using Tapatalk

[Uncle Grinch]

This process of swapping cocking pieces between the Argentine and the Swede is documented in the Mauser Shop Manual.

Attachment 247265


BTW... welcome to CastBoolits from one Georgian to another!

[EDG]

I have a number of Swede bolt sleeves and 1891 Mauser bolts and they will NOT work. If anyone knows how to make them work I would like to see photos of what was required because I have 2 sets of Swede parts I would like to add to 2 of the 1950/1960s cut down 1891 Mausers.

The buttress thread of the Swede bolt sleeve does not allow the bolt sleeve to turn on to the 1891 bolts completely.

There are some 1891 rifles and bolts missing the guts out of the bolts. The missing 1891 parts are scarce and expensive. You can install parts from other years but not from the Swedes.
Here is what I have found

1. An 1893 or 1895 Mauser bolt sleeve will screw in correctly (but not a M94, M96 or M38 Swede)
2. You can fit an 1893 or 1895 firing pin if you can rework the tip of the firing pin to make it shorter.
3. You use an 1893 or 1895 cocking piece.

There is still another combination that I have not played with much.
The 1889 Belgian Mauser action was reworked and partially updated by adding an 1898 Mauser bolt sleeve. This requires some machining of the 1889 tang and it appears you could make the same modification to the 1891 too. I think a special firing pin and cocking piece might be necessary. I have not pursued this parts conversion to know what really works but you can see photos of a few converted Belgian 1889s on the web. I have one of the converted M1889 Belgian stripped receivers and it has the small relief cuts made on the tang. My receiver has the sear and the cocking face is located in a different position compared to the 1891 sear. Unfortunately the M1889 uses a unique bolt that I do not have so I cannot work on the rest of the conversion. However the M1898 bolt sleeve will sit on the receiver in the correct location. It will not sit on an 1891 receiver without some work on the tang.
Photo of a Belgian m1889/36 rifle
http://surplused.com/wp-content/uplo...gian-89-36.png

As far as gas handling it is true the early 1891 Mausers did not have wings on the bolt sleeve. The later models did. I have blown primers and primer pockets in an as issued early 1891 Mauser. I got zero gas in my face. Nothing came back through the bolt. On the other hand I did see a guy at the range that blew a case head in an 1898 Mauser and he got hit in the face by a lot of particles causing bleeding spots over most of his face. I think it is hard to generalize about gas protection when talking about modern brass in the old Mauser actions. The brass does not fail often or very easily and when it does you do not always get the horrible gas leaks you might expect. When you do get a bad leak it may blow past even an 1898.

[Cree]

Okay, I just spent half an hour typing a response and hit the wrong button. If it magically shows up, hopefully the mods can remove the double post so I don’ look too dumb.

Thanks for the welcome, guys, I’ve been around for a while but never realized I hadn’t posted.

EDG, with all due respect, these Swede parts did all come together beautifully in this Argie. Let me try to explain a little more for all the other posters - I’;m not sure if I can figure out pictures, but if I can’t, maybe I can email them to someone smarter than me...

For starters, this 1891 is an early (Series A) gun. That may account for some of the differences we’re having. The Swede (I believe these were all ‘96 parts) bolt sleeve at first did not screw all the way into the 91 bolt body and index properly. Looking closely, the problem was dirt/grease/120 years of funky in the threads of the body and the sleeve. Judicious cleaning and the bolt sleeve and body fit properly - outside the gun.
The bottoms of the wings of the bolt sleeve did interfere slightly with the tang of the 1891, so I rigged up a jig to allow me to lap a very small amount of metal off the two parallel flats on the bottom of the bolt sleeve. I did not have to remove any material from the “round” on the bottom.

The cocking piece also had some minor interference in the tang channel, so I removed - maybe?- 1/32 of metal from the bottom of the cocking piece. Laterally, the cocking piece fit fine in the tang, but since it was rough, I did stone the sides of the cocking piece - actual metal removed? In the thousandths. Very little.

I did reuse the original firing pin spring, but the Swede firing pin - once all the other pieces were properly fitted - fit fine and protrusion was in spec - I remember looking it up, but I’ve now forgotten the number.

All in all, the actual fitting time was very short and the results from the actual firing yesterday were very nice. I have more confidence in the safety of the gun, even though it will likely live on a diet of 16gr. Of 2400 from now on.

Why might this not work in some instances? I’m not sure. EDG, perhaps as 91 Mauser production was moved from Ludwig to DWM, minor specs and difference in the tooling changed? Certainly, by 1893/94/95/96, they were producing newer models, so that may account for why your pieces aren’t fitting together? A case of stacking tolerances? Maybe my rifle and the Swede parts were rode harder and have more wear? Tough to say.

EDG, I think the gas I got in the face was the result of the cracked firing pin collar internally as well as poor or no obturation on that load and the original (1891)firing pin being a little “pointy” - I massaged it a bit and had no further problems with it except in the back of my mind, which kind of started this whole thing going.

I will absolutely try to get pictures of these for you guys and like I said, if I can’t figure it out, perhaps I can email some trusting soul and they can help me out.

I also appreciate Uncle Grinch posting where this swap was documented- I still need to get that book, but there’s precious little these days that anyone seems to want to do with these old sporters besides complain that somebody “bubba’d” it 50 years ago. I’ve always felt I was born too late.

Mike, I don’t know where you are in “Middle” Georgia, but I’m in Statesboro, so we can’t be too far.

Again, thanks for the welcome and I hope this helps. I’ll try to document this in pics for posterity... and learn how to post.

[Moleman-]

I put 96 bolt parts in a 91 (manufactured 1893 by ser#). The right shroud "wing" on the bolt sleeve hit the bolt handle so I stuck it in the mill and took a few thousands off of the bolt handle where the wing wanted to be. Other than that the cocking piece sear surface needed fitting so that when the safety was on the cocking piece wasn't still resting on the sear which could allow the gun to fire when releasing the safety if the trigger had been pulled while on safe. I don't consider having to fit a cocking piece to be out of the ordinary especially when they're two different models. I had located a correct late model winged 91 bolt sleeve to replace the smooth one my gun came with and sent it back in 04/16 along with a NOS bolt body to have the bolt handle cut off and a new one welded on for scope use to a gunsmith. Apparently he liked it also and no longer returns my calls.

[Cree]

Moleman - You know - I didn’t think about the root of the bolt hitting. On my ‘91, the bolt handle had been bent and it might have been “cleaned up” at some point. That could account for why EDG couldn’t get his to fit and mine dang near dropped in.

Thanks for bringing this up!

[Moleman-]

At first I thought the safety was sticking out and hitting the bolt handle, but it was the sleeve body bump up for the safety. Dropped the bolt in a dividing head pointed straight up, found an endmill about the right size and just made that clearance cut a little deeper on the bolt handle. Could of also just trimmed the front of the sleeve where it was hitting, but where's the fun in that?

[Cree]

Okay, trying to post some photos of the Argie. Here goes nothing!















Maybe?

[Cree]

Dang! It worked! If anyone has specifics, now that I know how to post, I’ll try to answer them and if you need some different photos, I’ll be happy to take them. Going out of town this week, though, one of my twins is graduating USMC Boot Camp at Parris Island.

Pretty da**ed proud of him.

[LAGS]

P I is the toughest Book Camp in the MC.
Glad he made it.
I had the chance to go there in '71, but backed out.

[EDG]

I can see one difference right away.

1. The back of the Argie bolt handle has the clearance cut for the safety housing hump.
2. On my Argies original bolt sleeves rotate into that cut and almost contact the back of the both handle.
3. The Swede bolt sleeves have the buttress threads located to the rear about .040" (1mm) further than the Argie 91 bolt sleeve or an M93 bolt sleeve.
4. When I turn the Swede bolt sleeve into the Argie bolt the nose of the safety hump hits the back of the bolt handle at the clearance cut. I filed part of the remaining fin away so the Swede sleeve could rotate past but it collides with the face of the clearance cut on the back of the bolt handle.
5. In your photo it appears you installed your bolt sleeve one entire turn out from the bolt body.
6. I am guessing that your safety did not line up with the front face of the cocking piece when cocked or with the notches in the cocking piece when uncocked and the bolt handle down in the fired position.

Parts for an 1893 or 1895 Mauser are pretty much exact replacements other than the firing pin and do not require any fitting or backing off of the bolt sleeve one turn. The problem is the 1893 parts are usually pretty shabby quality and the 1895 parts are non existent.

I have 2 sets of new Swede bolt sleeves, cocking pieces and safeties that do not work in the m91 bolt bodies. I have 2 of the bubbaed M91 complete bolts on rifles (DWMs), 1 M91 rifle in unaltered condition (Ludwig Lowe early model without wings) and 2 new never installed M91 bolt bodies. None of my bolt bodies will work with the Swede bolt sleeves.

I also have 2 M96 Swede CG rifles and 1 M38 Husky made rifle plus a like new complete bolt assy for an M38 or and M94 carbine. All the Swede bolts work with the Swede bolt sleeves.

I have 2 new M95 firing pins that work in the Swede cocking pieces except the tail of the firing pin does not fill the hole in the cocking piece to the back end of the cocking piece.

I have 1 complete M95 bolt assy from a complete like new 1895 Chilean Mauser so I have had all these parts to fit check.

The only thing the M95 parts need to fit is the shortening of the firing pin tip. The bolt sleeve screws right in and fits like an original M91.

Just for grins
I have several M98 bolt sleeves that thread into the M92 bolt bodies. They will not clear the tang of the M91 rifle when the bolt is moved forward. I suppose if I had a mill where I could do a good looking set of clearance cuts I would just install nice clean M98 parts like the upgraded 1889 photos show.

[Cree]

EDG - thanks for the clarification, I will take a look when I get back to the safe and have time to look further. Since I didn’t have any real blueprint other than a few references to go on, I am trying to make sure to measure six times and cut once. You are right, though, if the bolt sleeve isn’t all the way “in” then it would make sense that firing pin length is affected, to, which is why this “dropped” in and I didn’t have to shorten the FP.
The other challenge is I don’t have another small ring action to compare it with to reassure me on some of the measurements. I’ll keep everyone posted, as making sure the conversion - as I’ve described it - is safe is vitally important.