Change Cock On Closing To Cock On Opening For m96 Swedish Mauser

[Linstrum]

I have two m96 Swedish Mausers that I would like to change from cock on closing to cock on opening. I have seen a few Swedish rifles that had the bolts converted to cock on opening but I have no idea how it was done. Can new parts be installed or do the bolts have to be replaced?

[waksupi]

They can be converted, but people have varying success, in getting everything to work right.
Just personal preference, but I kind of like the positive extraction feature of the cock on closing bolt. I believe they are just as fast, or faster to cycle.

[Bullshop]

A vote for cock on closing here. I like the feel you get on extraction for developing loads. With the cock on closing your not fighting the spring when you turn the bolt. If you need to work the bolt kinda quick to keep somethin from biting or stomping you I dont think you notice the added resistance to getting the bolt closed.
BIC/BS

[Ricochet]

I'd never really given it much thought till I got a '93 Turk recently, but I like the cock on closing, too. I don't find the cocking force on closing a distraction, and the analysis I'd read many years ago about how cocking on closing is disruptive to rapid aimed fire because it pushes the rifle away from the shoulder is poppycock. It's a lot easier and more natural to resist the cocking force with the other arm pulling straight back than it is to resist that force in a cock on opening rotating the rifle. And it removes the cocking force from the opening force so it does help with a sticky cartridge case. (Cocking before opening is a useful trick in the cock-on-open models when one doesn't want to come out.) A cock on closing bolt is a lot simpler (and cheaper) to build. If the Swede were mine, I'd leave it as it came. It's interesting to note that everything Mauser built before the G98 was cock-on-closing. I think he converted to cock-on-opening not because it was a better system, but because someone important on the German general staff wanted it that way, just as the 1888 Commission rifle was set up.

[NVcurmudgeon]

I have used many bolt rifles cocking both ways, and have no trouble getting used to either. In my younger days, when I could get into prone and sitting positions, I shot a few High Power matches with a 1917 Enfield. Cock on closing was no trouble in rapid fire, and I am left handed. But if you really want to convert your Mausers, make sure that you are getting reliable parts, the aftermarket will have to go some to equal Swedish quality!

[Buckshot]

..............Part of the problem in the cock on opening conversion is that the bolt wall thickness at the rear is probably too thin. Mauser thickened the rear of the M98 bolts where the cam is cut so as to spread the pressure on the 2 sliding surfaces. I personally have no problem with cock on closing, other then I have forgotten on occasion when first cycleing the bolt. Not being used to the extra 'oomph' required against the mainspring. Just muscle memory is all. After that no issues.

.............Buckshot

[1Shirt]

Being an old yankee, have come to know that the old yankee saying "if it aint broke, don't fix it!", has great merit. Have a pair of M-96's that are all matching numbers with super clean bbls that I would not change anything on them for the world. I find a lot of pleasure in the resistance of the cock on closing factor on these and on 17 Enfields. Just sort of feels right to me.
1Shirt!:coffee:

[Larry Gibson]

I'm going against the concensus here and be the odd man out. While I shoot several rifles that cock on closing, mostly my M91 Mausers, given my druthers I prefer cock on opening. For me it is faster when working the bolt with the rifle still at the shoulder. Yes I can get used to cock on closing but then I have to get used to cock on opening when switching back. I have converted 20+ cock on closing Mausers to cock on opening over the last 25+ years. I've yet to recieve a complaint or hear of a problem with any of them. To the contrary, I have recieved additional requests for the conversion because of their ease of cocking and quick lock time. I've also found that either kit could be used with military or commercial triggers.

It is not a difficult conversion but you must have the right tools (nothing extensive, does not require a "machine" shop) and a very good understanding of how the cock on opening works. The camming surfaces must be correctly ground, polished and mated. Both kits I have used were good quality but do require fitting. The alteration of the bolt is fashioned after a M70 Winchester so it helps to have a M70 bolt handy to use as a model.

As to all the supposed "weakness" this causes to the bolt I have not seen it. My first conversion was on a M93 (M1916 action made at Oviedo in 1928). That rifle has had the barrel shot out (.308 Win - another no-no conversion), another barrel installed and shot out and it is on it's 3d replacement barrel so your guess is as good as mine as to how many times the bolt has been cocked since the conversion. In the photo you will see that M93 bolt on the right. The middle bolt is a M95 Chilean and the bolt on the left is from a M96 Swede. These are all good conversions that have given years of service with untold number of cockings. Some may say I have been lucky with these but I'd counter that with 20+ conversions done over 25+ years without a problem "luck" had nothing to do with it. I recommend the conversion.

Larry Gibson

[shoehorn]

Although it may sound stupendous, I have a need to convert a Remington 700 bolt to cocking on closing. In reality, I will have to purchase a new custom bolt. However, I am unclear on how the cocking cam would have to be cut in order to make this possible at all. If any of you have some suggestions, I would appreciate them! Thank you.

[Larry Gibson]

Photo of the modified M93, M95 and M96 bolts to COCing.

M70 on left, M96 on right.

M96 "Scout".


Larry Gibson

[higgins]

I would consider whether they are in original military configuration; matching numbers, condition, etc. If they are, you could be coverting fairly valuable military rifles into cheap deer rifles. They're your rifles and you can do as you please. It's one thing to do conversions when rifles are cheap and plentiful, but I'd think twice about tampering with one in correct condition, possibly with mixed results. If they're already modified, it's a different judgement call.

[waksupi]

I think a cock on closing also re-enforces the way a Mauser is supposed to function. The bolt is to be manipulated "smartly", and not gently pushed into battery with a Mauser. Slow functioning of the bolt can cause miss feeds with some ammunition.

[MtGun44]

I agree with bullshop exactly.

Bill

[BD]

Another vote for leaving them be. My swedes have some of the slickest, most natural feeling bolt throws I've found anywhere. And they need to move forward a bit anyway or the bolt hits my nose. I've shot a swede in a couple of high power matches, and a couple of "tactical rifle" matches. I never won with a swede, but I beat enough AR's to make myself feel good about it. I certainly never felt that the cock on closing was an issue.

BD

[spqrzilla]

I've never felt a need for the conversion on my Swede either.

That said, you can buy a conversion kit. I see them advertised in various gun rags and Midway and Brownells sell them too.

[CaptainCrossman]

I have two m96 Swedish Mausers that I would like to change from cock on closing to cock on opening. I have seen a few Swedish rifles that had the bolts converted to cock on opening but I have no idea how it was done. Can new parts be installed or do the bolts have to be replaced?

this is an old topic but worth reviving. I have owned many Swede 96 rifles, and still own quite a few Mauser 91-95 models, Enfield 1917 and P14, Jap 99 and 38, and SMLE No. 1, 4, 5 rifles. All are cock on closing.

Recently I acquired a sporter Enfield 1917 30-06 and it was converted to cock on opening What a pleasure it is to shoot now. The first Enfield 1917 I owned, was another sporter with a very nice old Fajen walnut stock, and scoped, but I sold it because the cock on closing feature was not conducive to hunting with a rifle that heavy.

What would happen is, shooting from the shoulder, if I tried to cycle the bolt quickly, the gun would see-saw on my left hand at the forearm point, when I shoved the bolt handle forward to chamber a round and cock the gun against the mainspring tension. The gun would be pointing down at a 45 degree angle, and one time I almost dropped it.

With a lighter gun, it may not have been as much of an issue, but with a sporterized Enfield weighing over 9 lbs. it is an issue. It would also be an issue with a Swede with full length military stock.

I'd say if the gun is matching numbers definitely do NOT convert it. It will destroy its resale value. If the gun is already mixed numbers, hacked, and in a sporter stock, then by all means convert it, they are much more enjoyable to shoot with cock on opening, then cock on closing.

If the gun is mixed numbers, but still in the original stocks and complete, I also would NOT convert it. The only ones I would recommend converting, are if they have already been sporterized, i.e. cut stock, or aftermarket stock. At that point it no longer matters from the value standpoint, so may as well go the whole hog and make it cock on opening too.

After getting this modified Enfield, I'm selling off my other 2 Enfields that are cock on closing. No comparison, the cock on opening is much better, quicker lock time, easier to operate. Comparing the 2 systems back to back, it's like day and night. The cock on opening is much smoother and quicker, and easier to cycle. Anyone thinking about this conversion, do a comparison first if you can find rifles that were already converted, it's a no brainer, it's easier. The lock time and striker travel is cut in half as well, which improves accuracy, the gun has less time to wander off zero after the trigger is pulled.

One added issue - the conversion is only as good, as the guy doing the conversion work, it must be done precisely and polished, etc. If they hack it up, they can make a mess out of it.

For as much as everyone worships the Swede Mausers, the lock time is way too long and clunky, and the travel of the striker is 2x what a Mauser 98 is. The guns are a good basis to build a custom sporter from, but definitely inferior to a Mauser 98. The Swede lacks a 3rd safety lug on the bolt as well.

[Spector]

Years ago I had my first Swede converted to ''cock on open'' using a Dayton-
Traistor kit. It works OK, but I'll never convert another one of mine like that. Once I polished everything after the gunsmith made the coversion it worked much more smoothly.

I have since discovered I prefer cock on close. I talked with Dayton-Traistor about modifying their kit to utilize their firing pin spring and shorter travel in a ''cock on close'' system. He said it was possible to do that, though I never followed through on it. I liked the idea of having a faster a lock time and still keeping clock on close.

I have a Swede 96 ''scout'' sporter that I modified the rear sight base into a Weaver style ''scout mount'' allowing for a very low scope mounting. I have had safety problems with the Dayton-Traistor trigger I'd installed. I am going to switch to a trigger with side mounted safety. I may try the modification of the Dayton-Traistor kit then. I'd rather modify their kit than another Swede bolt.........Mike

[Bob S]

I don't have any inherent problem with cock-on-closing with a Lee-Enfield, M1917, or my M1885 Lee Navy, but I have a problem with the Swedish service rifles because of the long LOP. My arms are just not long enough to close the bolt completely while in sitting or prone in the sling. I dumped most of my Swedes a few years ago because of that. I kept an 1899 Oberndorff and a CG-63/80. It is interesting to note that the CG-63 has a LOP that is at least an inch shorter than the service rifles, so I guess not all Swedes are ten feet tall with very long arms. ;)

I like the cartridge so much that I built a Model 70 match rifle in 6.5x55 :)

Resp'y,
Bob S.

[Bret4207]

I have several Mausers and L/E with the COC, I've never had an instants problem. I find I use both type equally well. I would imagine it's an individual thing, just as some people can't properly use a lever rifle or have issues pumping a shotgun.

To each their own.

[Larry Gibson]

Yes, to each there own.

As I posted earlier, I've converted numerous M93, M95 and M96s to cock on opening. If I sporterize one I convert it because I prefer it. However, my milsurps are left as is with the COC but I do not operate the bolt as well during rapid fire with the but of the rifle shouldered.

Larry Gibson

[W.R.Buchanan]

The kits are available from Brownells and are made by Dayton-Traister. I got one for my M96 to CG63 conversion and then sent it back as I didn't like the way it worked and it required irreversable modifications to the striker.

The up side is that they shorten the lock time considerably. The stock striker must fall nearly an inch, which does take some time., The Down side is the parts were made soft and unless they were hardened after the fact would wear quickly.

The kit was about $30, and mind you it could be made to work very well. I just didn't want to put that much time in it.

The striker assembly on a M96 is not easy to modify to shorten the striker travel because if you cut the sear back the slots for the safety need to be recut and this is not easy to do at all. You pretty much have to make a completly new cocking piece, or abandon the stock safety and use a trigger assy with a safety.

Just installing a nice trigger in the gun made all the difference in the world.

I personally think the M94 Carbines were some of the best Mil Mausers ever made, and were before the RGS 77 the ultimate "Sheep Gun."

Randy

[Freischütz]

I was accumstomed to cock on opening. Then I bought a Swedish Mauser and, after shooting it some, used it on caribou. In the field I never noticed the cock on closing.