Ideal Bolt Action Rifle

[Rio Grande]

I sure like the Mosin M38, the length, handling.
But the action gives me no confidence. And the safety, lets not go there.
Enfields, #4, #5 are wonderful, the best sights ever, rugged aperture (peep) sights.
but again, the action. Fast yes, but rear-locking.

The Mauser 98, on the other hand,smooth and locks up like a Bank Vault. Wonderful safety, 3-position. But the sights! I think maybe a 19 year old w/ 20-20 might be able to shoot well with those sights, maybe.

I'd like a short Mauser that handles like an M38 Mosin with sights as good as a #4 Enfield.

(And Wouldn't that beat the new Ruger Gunsite bolt rifle?
You don't need that big mag sticking out if you can use stripper clips.)

It's OK to dream...isn't it?

[Shooter]

It's OK to dream...isn't it?

No, what you want is a Spanish FR-8.:bigsmyl2:

[Idaho Sharpshooter]

CZ carbine. Modern steels, nice wood, easy to see sights, now available with a factory peep on the cocking piece.

Rich

[EMC45]

Second the FR8. .308, small and handy. Can't beat it. Great cast shooter.

[Larry Gibson]

Appears an FR8 is indeed what you're referring to.

Larry Gibson

[Shooter]

http://castboolits.gunloads.com/imagehosting/30514e80cb5939a68.jpg

Got to keep the stock sights an flash hider, so you can launch grenades.

[adrians]

Appears an FR8 is indeed what you're referring to.

Larry Gibson

i want one,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,:twisted:[smilie=1::evil:

[leadman]

The 1903A3 is a great handling gun with very good sighting equipment. They do very well with cast also.
The installation of a reciever sight on a Mauser improves the sighting tremendously. A taller front blade normally has to be fitted also. These are available.

I haven't seen an FR8 for sale in quite awhile.

[Shooter]

They can be found, often for half the price of a 03A3.

[Chicken Thief]

I hope noone gives a hoot about my opinion but, i think that FR8 is as pretty as a turd in a punchbowl.
I do hope it is way better shooting than looking!

[gnoahhh]

I'll second that!

[wallenba]

A Mosin-Nagant with a Timney trigger will give you a better safety, built in to the trigger assembly. A little wood removal is necessary though.

[bob208]

17 enfield in 06. great sights, bull strong ,good safety

[1Shirt]

Can't really argue with the selection of military rifles, but there is a lack of civilian
rifles even being mentioned. Soooooo-My choice would be a 77Ruger in 7x57, light, easy to carry, and mine has taken over 15 head of big game at ranges up to 450 yds. Like my milsurps, but come deer season it is the Ruger that comes out of the rack.
1Shirt!:coffeecom

[Shooter]

I hope noone gives a hoot about my opinion but, i think that FR8 is as pretty as a turd in a punchbowl.
I do hope it is way better shooting than looking!

I agree, it is ugly.
They shoot like a dream, and you don't have to worry about scratching the finish.
Great truck gun!
I must admit, I regaurd guns as more tools, than objects of art

[Larry Gibson]

I agree, it is ugly.
They shoot like a dream, and you don't have to worry about scratching the finish.
Great truck gun!
I must admit, I regaurd guns as more tools, than objects of art

Exactly why I love mine and modified it to my own likings. It comes as close to a "scout" rifle as i think Coopers committee intended. My FR8 Scout is hell for stout, shoots moa with selected loads and the mag can be topped off or stripper clip loaded. The scope (1.5X Burris Scout) is easily detached if necessary and the Lyman 57SME with the M14 front sight is already programed to 600 yards with M80 ball and my "go to" reload. While it won't replace my M1A as my SHTF rifle I certainly don't feel undergunned with it at all. I probably use it more than the m1A these days also.

Larry Gibson

[Link23]

get a Savage Axis package, they are 299 with a bushnell 3x9x40 in almost any caliber you want for 299....

Link23

[Rio Grande]

No, Fr-8's ARE ugly. The faux thingy under the barrel... the flash suppressor, who needs those? Why the front sight so far back? The rotating rear sight, not nearly as elegant as the Enfield #5 sight.
Whose brother-in-law Comandante designed that thing?
And Corona Arsenal?

I was thinking more like a 'Tanker' Yugo with a rear sight as good as a #5 Enfield and a Mini-14 ramp up front, with ears maybe...all milled. That's more like it. 8mm or .308, who cares? Nice Yugo blue and matching.

If only I had Ted Turner's $ (but not his taste in women). I could make it happen.

No Mosins with Timney triggers please. Still a poor action, sorry. I like them, M38's have their charms...but I'm talking Ideal here.

A short Springfield, yes. With M14 front sight - awesome. But I've never seen a short one, and besides, who can afford one, and I'd never cut one down.

A Mexican Mauser maybe, http://www.google.com/imgres?imgurl=http://www.cowanauctions.com/itemImages/tee4297.jpg&imgrefurl=http://www.cowanauctions.com/auctions/item.aspx%3FItemId%3D59443&h=135&w=600&sz=13&tbnid=h4Ld7UD4l6WMMM:&tbnh=28&tbnw=124&prev=/search%3Fq%3Dmexican%2Bmauser%26tbm%3Disch%26tbo%3 Du&zoom=1&q=mexican+mauser&docid=tSYXSxEY9OlGnM&sa=X&ei=O4aBTovPI7OGsgLXroSVDw&ved=0CCUQ9QEwAg&dur=389 ...compare THAT to your FR-8...that Mexican Mauser is a work of art. And history, once again, I would not modify it.

[Rio Grande]

"i.m just sitting here watching the wheels go round and round..... #9 #9 #9 #9"

Adrians, I remember when that album came out, but your record is stuck.
oh lord, I have visions of toothless old geezers in 'retirement homes' getting in arguments whether the Doors were better than the Beatles.
But happiness IS a warm gun, I'll give you that..

[Rio Grande]

CZ carbine. Modern steels, nice wood, easy to see sights, now available with a factory peep on the cocking piece.

Rich

That might work. Rich, have you got a link or pic? I can't find one with the cocking piece sight on the 'net.
But, very important, does it have provision to use stripper clips?
Forget it if not.

[nicholst55]

Various importers brought in the Mark X (Zastava) Mausers in Mannlicher-style rifles; a good friend has an older version in .308, and it meets all of your requirements. Ruger built the M77 is the 'International' version - another Mannlicher wannabe.

Now just try to find one of either persuasion for sale... :(

[NickSS]

I know you do not like enfields but I have a Jungle carbine in 303 that meets everything you want I even installed a BSA windage adjustable rear sight on it and after 40 years of riding around in my vehicles it still shoots to its sights.

[adrians]

:twisted::twisted::twisted::twisted:
"i.m just sitting here watching the wheels go round and round..... #9 #9 #9 #9"

Adrians, I remember when that album came out, but your record is stuck.
oh lord, I have visions of toothless old geezers in 'retirement homes' getting in arguments whether the Doors were better than the Beatles.
But happiness IS a warm gun, I'll give you that..

rio i'm old enough to remember all the albums, when i was a lad growing up in England those four falla's music was drilled into my brain as mom was born in liverpool and the music was playing all the time at my house,
Lennon never did say why his fav # was 9 but that is why #9,#9 ect is there,
#9 dream and an obscure revolution #9 .
"But happiness IS a warm gun, I'll give you that..[/QUOTE]"
bang, bang , shoot,shoot,
as a side note i think Revolver, is a tad better than the White album .
J.W.L.,,,,RIP.:cry:
JIM MORRISON was very innovative for the "acid years " BUT he was never even close to LENNON,
hope i don;t start another war here[smilie=1:

[kbstenberg]

I'm not to interested in old military rifles. But if I wanted to see what the different rifles looked like where would I go?

[Shooter]

[QUOTE=kbstenberg;1410234]I'm not to interested in old military rifles. But if I wanted to see what the different rifles looked like where would I go?[/QUO



http://www.surplusrifle.com

[bcp477]

Finding what you want, "off the rack", is not likely. The various Mauser carbines are rare and usually expensive. Even FR8's are not that common. So, simply MAKE one. I did. Yugo M48 (that's what I have, but you could use any variation you want)......barrel cut and re-crowned (mine is 18").....stock modified accordingly (I made a sporter out of mine, but the military style can be shortened and re-built into carbine form)......and your chosen sights added. All that requires is a bit of woodworking skill. I used a forward mounted LER scope,but you can easily mount an aperture sight on the rear receiver ring.....and add a suitable front blade (or globe front sight).....as you prefer. The result will still have stripper-clip capability and fit the characteristics you seem to prefer.

I am not a fancier of the MN rifles, either. I've always much preferred the Mauser 98 design, but the shorter length makes for a handy little rifle. Still 8 x 57, which is my favorite rifle cartridge anyway.....with suitable hand loads, it will do whatever I need.

THIS is the ticket......and it only requires a suitable donor rifle, some skill and effort, a few parts....and a bit of time.

[gnoahhh]

Milsurps are fun to play with, and even the odd candidate for customizing dollars still presents itself occasionally (such as a good crisp 98 Mauser or 1903 Springfield that's already been hacked on), but the older I get the less inclined I am to put any money into a greasy worn out old milsurp of dubious lineage- just for the sake of getting it cheap and adding one more gun to my collection count. When I think back over 40 years of buying/shooting those things and realizing the money I spent doing it, I want to cry when i think of all the quality classic guns I could have acquired instead. Just the philosophical musings of a middle aged rifle loony.

[3006guns]

I have a couple of MN 91/30's, even though I'm not a slavering fan of them. What I've noticed is that the action itself isn't all that bad really.....it's that stupid stubby little bolt handle! I think the designer might have had horseback use in mind and didn't want to many protrusions, but that just makes it miserable to use. If that handle was only 1/2" longer a lot of the frustrations of using an MN would fall away.

I have an extra bolt kicking around here somewhere and I'm toying with the idea of grafting some length on it, just to see if it makes the gun more enjoyable.

I modified a Yugo to carbine length a few years ago, keeping the stock and handguard full military. It's one of my favorite rifles.....short, handy and accurate.

[Rio Grande]

Finding what you want, "off the rack", is not likely. The various Mauser carbines are rare and usually expensive. Even FR8's are not that common. So, simply MAKE one. I did. Yugo M48 (that's what I have, but you could use any variation you want)......barrel cut and re-crowned (mine is 18").....stock modified accordingly (I made a sporter out of mine, but the military style can be shortened and re-built into carbine form)......and your chosen sights added. All that requires is a bit of woodworking skill. I used a forward mounted LER scope,but you can easily mount an aperture sight on the rear receiver ring.....and add a suitable front blade (or globe front sight).....as you prefer. The result will still have stripper-clip capability and fit the characteristics you seem to prefer.

I am not a fancier of the MN rifles, either. I've always much preferred the Mauser 98 design, but the shorter length makes for a handy little rifle. Still 8 x 57, which is my favorite rifle cartridge anyway.....with suitable hand loads, it will do whatever I need.

THIS is the ticket......and it only requires a suitable donor rifle, some skill and effort, a few parts....and a bit of time.

Yes, that may be what I'll have to do.
Ditto on 8x57. I knew an old (OK, older than me at the time) German who was a boy over there during the war. He loved his 8mm.
He said "Ja, dot big deer behind dot tree, he look at me from one side of dot tree, den he look at me from the other side. But my 8 milli-meter, I shoot right in the middle of dot tree and dot deer, he is dead."
A wonderful man and a great craftsman. Learned his machinist trade the old way.

[Rio Grande]

I'm not to interested in old military rifles. But if I wanted to see what the different rifles looked like where would I go?

the book "Small Arms of the World".
http://www.amazon.com/Small-World-Edward-Clinton-Ezell/dp/0811716872

"I definitely recommend the 1969 9th edition as a good all around "get you by", if you just wanted one edition on older Curio and Reic Firearms, if you are a collector of Curios and Relics like me."

[Rio Grande]

I know you do not like enfields but I have a Jungle carbine in 303 that meets everything you want I even installed a BSA windage adjustable rear sight on it and after 40 years of riding around in my vehicles it still shoots to its sights.

Yes, definitely it is right up there. Given a choice between equally good condition short barrel peep-sighted M48 Mauser and a 'Jungle Carbine' I know I would hesitate a bit.
The action IS quicker than the Mauser. I love Enfields.
But I prefer the Mauser action and rimless cartridges.

The designers of the Enfield had a great sense of utility and aesthetics. You've got to love the English of those days.

[dbldblu]

There are quite a few 24/47 Mausers around. A lot of them have been FTR'ed to like new with excellent barrels. Sights are easy to change. They shoot pretty well too. This is with the Lee 175 grain cast bullet at about 40 yards.

[Bret4207]

Appears an FR8 is indeed what you're referring to.

Larry Gibson

Bingo. The other option would be a 96 Mauser 38. Sights are very good for a Mauser system.

[Bret4207]

No, Fr-8's ARE ugly. The faux thingy under the barrel... the flash suppressor, who needs those? Why the front sight so far back? The rotating rear sight, not nearly as elegant as the Enfield #5 sight.
Whose brother-in-law Comandante designed that thing?
And Corona Arsenal?



This coming from a guy who finds LE attractive? Come on pal. The faux thingy is supposed to hold the cleaning kit I think, the front sight is on the barrel, the flash suppressor is a given on most short barreled rifles, like the #5 LE. The rear sight is funky, but it works and it's rugged as anything anyone else ever devised. When it comes to useless appendages, why do most older MilSurps ahve half a tree length of wood hanging way out there? Rhetorical question, I know why they did it.

Ugly is in the eye of the beholder. An FR-8, LE, Springfield, MN, M1, M14, etc. will NEVER match a Swede for good looks and there's never been a Swede as good looking as a Lancaster school flintlock, Ballard, Stevens 44 1/2 or most any Schuetzen rifle. So beauty is and beauty does.

[303Guy]

... most older MilSurps ahve half a tree length of wood hanging way out there? Rhetorical question, I know why they did it. Why did they do it?

[lead-1]

I passed up a really good deal on an FR-8 about ten years ago and I have wished many times over I would have grabbed that rifle. Then again I wished I would've grabbed a Savage Scout rifle way back when, oh well, live and learn.

[303Guy]

No, Fr-8's ARE ugly.Ummm .... forgive me for being contrary but I don't think the FR-8 is ugly at all! It would look just fine sitting next to a No.4 in battle dress. (Going by the pictures shown).8-)

[adrians]

beauty is in the eye of the beholder:smile:
and i think the fr8 is ,,,well ,a good looking rifle.
and i still want one........:twisted::coffeecom:evil:
but for now my 2a1 with the rawson aperture sight is shooting straight:D

[Ed in North Texas]

[QUOTE=Rio Grande;1410165]No, Fr-8's ARE ugly. The faux thingy under the barrel... the flash suppressor, who needs those? Why the front sight so far back? The rotating rear sight, not nearly as elegant as the Enfield #5 sight.
Whose brother-in-law Comandante designed that thing?
And Corona Arsenal? SNIP [QUOTE]

The FR-8 was designed to use the Spanish arsenal's stock of M-44 rifles to make a 7.62 CETME trainer, and also serve as a reserve stockpile of 7.62 CETME similar bolt action rifles. When looked at as, and compared to, a Mauser bolt gun, it isn't the prettiest rifle around. But it needed to have a similar sight setup, flash hider (which was NATO standard for use with rifle grenades), etc. as the CETME in order to be a trainer for the transition.

BTW the Spanish arsenal is located at, and called, La Coruna. Corona is what the Mexican troops might have after a hard day at the range with their M-1910 Mausers. Personally I prefer Dos Equis (light or dark) to Corona.

[Bret4207]

Why did they do it?

Partly to reduce mirage and burning the hand on a hot barrel, partly to add protection to the barrel and stiffen the stock and to give the soldier something to grasp when bayoneting the enemy and partly out of tradition. I've always wondered if part of it wasn't an excuse to have the poor lad lug around another pound or 2 of weight!

[EMC45]

My FR8 cost 77 bucks OTD about 5 years ago. It was virtually new. No brass marks on follower or bolt face. Bore is mirror bright!

[Three44s]

I sure like the Mosin M38, the length, handling.
But the action gives me no confidence. And the safety, lets not go there.


.................................................. ...............................

It's OK to dream...isn't it?

I have an M38 amoung other Russians and it's my favorite of that series.

Take a look at this before you give up on your M38:


http://www.gswagner.com/mosin-nagant/safe/safe.html


Wagner's home page:


http://www.gswagner.com/

If you need help climbing back out of there ..... PM me and I'll throw you a line!!! LOL!



Enjoy

Three 44s

[roverboy]

Thats a good site. It helped me when I did my Turk 38 project. I bought a Turk that looked like it had been dragged down a road. It had some mechanical probs too, so I sporterized it and killed a good buck in '09 with it.

[Char-Gar]

I have yet to pick up an IDEAL rifle. However most rifles can be upgraded in sights and whatever to become ideal or almost so.

Find the action and caliber you like and go to work!

[Bret4207]

Just for giggles, if I had to pick an off the rack surplus rifle to go cross country with or hunt with, I'd strongly consider the Steyr 95 if I could load my own ammo and stick a recvr sight on it. Even the stock sight is okay, but that little powerhouse is a hunters rifle. Light, fast, short, great safety, very powerful. Oh, and it's just ugly enough to discourage envy among the lite fingered.

[Ed in North Texas]

Just for giggles, if I had to pick an off the rack surplus rifle to go cross country with or hunt with, I'd strongly consider the Steyr 95 if I could load my own ammo and stick a recvr sight on it. Even the stock sight is okay, but that little powerhouse is a hunters rifle. Light, fast, short, great safety, very powerful. Oh, and it's just ugly enough to discourage envy among the lite fingered.

I'd think the same thing of the MAS '36. It is 0.34 kg (3/4 lb) heavier than the 95/30, with a barrel which is 95mm (3 3/4 inch) longer but OAL is only 20mm (a hair over 3/4 inch) longer. It already has the receiver sight, and it doesn't require special clips to operate as more than a single shot. And most US sportsmen consider it to be butt ugly, the light fingered would probably look on it as simply too weird looking. However, there is no safety. The French military apparently believed you either were going to be shooting, or it was imminent, or you had time to crank a round into the chamber (probably the trench warfare thinking which brought them the Maginot line). Obviously the ammo for both of these are reload options.

[Bret4207]

Another fine choice Ed. I wish the 95 had a different mag system, but OTH, it works extremely well. Heck I'd take a Ross, some of the South American carbines based on the '91 Mauser or even a Krag if I had the chance. In fact, a Krag Carbine might be a darn nice rifle in a not so nice environment. For sheer ease and balance for carrying a '91 Mauser is hard to beat, feels like an old flintlock.

[Ed in North Texas]

Another fine choice Ed. I wish the 95 had a different mag system, but OTH, it works extremely well. Heck I'd take a Ross, some of the South American carbines based on the '91 Mauser or even a Krag if I had the chance. In fact, a Krag Carbine might be a darn nice rifle in a not so nice environment. For sheer ease and balance for carrying a '91 Mauser is hard to beat, feels like an old flintlock.

I have no experience with the Ross, but have a '91 Engineer Carbine. Picked up a "converted" Krag carbine this summer. It is one of the rifles which were professionally cut back to carbine configuration when the Army was disposing of the rifles for a mere pittance. From a collection point of view, it's a damned shame to do that, but the crown job is perfect and it is a sweet little rifle.

[Rio Grande]

[QUOTE=Rio Grande;1410165]No, Fr-8's ARE ugly. The faux thingy under the barrel... the flash suppressor, who needs those? Why the front sight so far back? The rotating rear sight, not nearly as elegant as the Enfield #5 sight.
Whose brother-in-law Comandante designed that thing?
And Corona Arsenal? SNIP [QUOTE]

The FR-8 was designed to use the Spanish arsenal's stock of M-44 rifles to make a 7.62 CETME trainer, and also serve as a reserve stockpile of 7.62 CETME similar bolt action rifles. When looked at as, and compared to, a Mauser bolt gun, it isn't the prettiest rifle around. But it needed to have a similar sight setup, flash hider (which was NATO standard for use with rifle grenades), etc. as the CETME in order to be a trainer for the transition.

BTW the Spanish arsenal is located at, and called, La Coruna. Corona is what the Mexican troops might have after a hard day at the range with their M-1910 Mausers. Personally I prefer Dos Equis (light or dark) to Corona.

Corona/Coruna....noted! My apologies to the Spanish.
I prefer Shiner Bock myself!
It's all preference really, rifles - or beer.
FR-8, Lee-Enfield, Mauser, etc... it's good to hear the reasons why. Good points can be made for all.
I'll stand by my opinion - Mauser 98, with qualifications. Short barrel 18", peep sights, .30 cal. or larger, stripper clip capable, NOT FR-8, which I find less than attractive.
Second choice, Enfield Jungle Carbine.

[leadman]

There was an FR8 for sale a couple days ago on Backpage here in AZ for $400. Looked to be as issued.
I paid about $125 for a ratty 1903a3 Smith Corona sporter a few years ago and brought it back to life with about another $100.

I have 2 1891 Arg Mausers, one original, one was a sporter when I got it. Killed quite a bit of game with the sporter. Had a new old stock original barrel installed about 10 years ago. Shoots less than 2" at 200 yards with hunting ammo.

I have an 1898 Krag carbine length sporter with a Lyman receiver sight on it. Slick and easy to carry. Even me being left handed it works great.

I have an old Savage 110DL in 30-06 with detachable clip that is also drilled for a receiver sight, but has a scope on it now. Easy to carry gun that has just enough weight to shoot well and operates flawlessly.

My old Remington 788 left hand in 308 was a great gun also but the price on these has risen considerable lately.

Saw a new Ruger Gunsite model at the range the other day and this may qualify as an ideal bolt gun.

[Ed in North Texas]

snip
Corona/Coruna....noted! My apologies to the Spanish.
I prefer Shiner Bock myself!
It's all preference really, rifles - or beer.
FR-8, Lee-Enfield, Mauser, etc... it's good to hear the reasons why. Good points can be made for all.
I'll stand by my opinion - Mauser 98, with qualifications. Short barrel 18", peep sights, .30 cal. or larger, stripper clip capable, NOT FR-8, which I find less than attractive.
Second choice, Enfield Jungle Carbine.

Nothing wrong with your preferences, and my preference would not be for the FR-8 either. As for the beer, when I'm buying (and I can find it) I prefer LaBatt's Blue (thanks to our neighbors to the north for that one). But in my area it is far easier to find Dos Equis than LaBatt's. :D

[Bret4207]

Blue is good, but some day if you get the chance try Samuel Adams Oktoberfest from the keg. If I could get that whenever I wanted I'd never crawl out of the gutter. Of course the last time I had a drink of any kind was over 3 years ago......

[bydand]

Cock on closing bad ? Ask yourself where your greatest leverage is. Opening the bolt or closing it?
O suppose moisens would be OK is it wasn't for the little bitty bolt handle.

Have three of them

[303Guy]

Cock on closing bad ? Ask yourself where your greatest leverage is. Opening the bolt or closing it? Aah! Cock on closing is not an accurate term. It cocks on pushing the bolt forward. Great for the battle field I would think but a pain on the range. Well, not really a pain. It does make a brilliant safe open bolt, cartridge in chamber, carry mode action. (Ummm .... that means carrying while actively hunting).

Just a thought, it doesn't take much to convert a No4 (Lee Enfield) to cocking on open - just a change in trigger sear. (The safety catch will become redundant but who relies on a safety catch anyway!)

[Multigunner]

Aah! Cock on closing is not an accurate term. It cocks on pushing the bolt forward. Great for the battle field I would think but a pain on the range. Well, not really a pain. It does make a brilliant safe open bolt, cartridge in chamber, carry mode action. (Ummm .... that means carrying while actively hunting).

Just a thought, it doesn't take much to convert a No4 (Lee Enfield) to cocking on open - just a change in trigger sear. (The safety catch will become redundant but who relies on a safety catch anyway!)

I vaguely remember a cock on opening conversion for the SMLE and LE rifles mentioned in an old article on British target and sporting rifles, definitely not the cock on opening conversion for the M1917 action that we are more familar with.
I don't remember anything useful about this conversion, but I think it was done by a gunmakers craftsman on ordering the rifle. Probably not a popular enough option for many if any specimens to survive.
It could be that this was the same as the cock on opening action used by some .22 training rifles, the length of striker fall of a rimfire rifle is much shorter so it would be more suited for that purpose.

Only problem a cock on closing action ever caused for me was when my hand slipped before turning the bolt home and the action sprang open ejecting the unfired round. I had not yet gotten used to the action, and this never happened again.
Theoretically a cock on opening action would allow more force to be applied in chambering a bent or dirty cartridge, while cock on closing would allow more force to be applied to ejecting the spent round.

The Lee 1899 action has a number of good qualities that could be carried over to an updated version suited to more modern cartridges.

As it is the older classic bolt actions are hard to beat, and few actions designed in recent years offer any thing new that is worth the difference. Manufacturing shortcuts have made many modern rifles less desirable than the old standbys.

[quasi]

P-14 or M-17

[Artful]

What's so wrong with M38?
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v355/rowdyfisk/FAL/P1020557.jpg
recoil pad,scout scope, and adjusted cheek rest - polish the internals a little - stripper clips work fine.
And if you want to go all out - I had the counter bore cut off and recrowned and threaded - true you loose the bayonet but you can add other things.
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v355/rowdyfisk/Misc/0612112302.jpg

[Ed in North Texas]

What's so wrong with M38?

snip

And if you want to go all out - I had the counter bore cut off and recrowned and threaded - true you loose the bayonet but you can add other things.
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v355/rowdyfisk/Misc/0612112302.jpg

But is the suppressor on a supersonic round worth the cost of the supressor + $200.00? Other than "cool factor", that is. That is only worth what the beholder believes. Or, through reloading, did you turn it into a low budget .300 Whisper rifle?

[Three44s]

I am acquainted with supersonic in .223 with a supressor (not mine) and from that I would say YES!!

How is a the crack of a 22 lr from the above and sounds like its out past 100 yds???

For me it would be worth it.

As for the Mosin ......... I have an M38 but not the suppressor as my State just repealed it's ban on firing them .......... so it may be in my future!


Three 44s

[Ed in North Texas]

I am acquainted with supersonic in .223 with a supressor (not mine) and from that I would say YES!!

How is a the crack of a 22 lr from the above and sounds like its out past 100 yds???

For me it would be worth it.

As for the Mosin ......... I have an M38 but not the suppressor as my State just repealed it's ban on firing them .......... so it may be in my future!


Three 44s

So you are saying that a .223 standard velocity round is effectively silenced by the suppressor? Or are you saying that the sound level at the firing point is reduced?

I'm not quite sure what you are asking about the .22 lr, but I am aware that sub-sonic .22 lr is available, as well as sub-sonic 9mm specifically designed for suppressed weapons (e.g. MP-5 with suppressor and 147 gr sub-sonic ammo).

I guess it may come down to what the individual expects from the suppressor, a "silenced" shot, reduced sound at the firing point, or something else.

[Artful]

But is the suppressor on a supersonic round worth the cost of the supressor + $200.00? Other than "cool factor", that is. That is only worth what the beholder believes. Or, through reloading, did you turn it into a low budget .300 Whisper rifle?

Ed already owned the suppressor so no additional cost - and yes I use that can on 308 and 300 whisper with subsonic loadings making for real quiet shooting. Can I make up 7.62x54 reduced or subsonic ammo - you bet! :p

Does it reduce the standard surplus ammo from flame throwing shock wave making explosions that drive people away from me on the shooting line :holysheep
to something that will make quiet enough so that Kurt quit grabbing his torso and saying "my aching liver" everytime I fired it - yep tamed it right down.


So you are saying that a .223 standard velocity round is effectively silenced by the suppressor? Or are you saying that the sound level at the firing point is reduced?

I'm not quite sure what you are asking about the .22 lr, but I am aware that sub-sonic .22 lr is available, as well as sub-sonic 9mm specifically designed for suppressed weapons (e.g. MP-5 with suppressor and 147 gr sub-sonic ammo).

I guess it may come down to what the individual expects from the suppressor, a "silenced" shot, reduced sound at the firing point, or something else.

Does a supersonic round sound different suppressed - yep - that same 30 caliber can on my .243 will make the gun hearing safe (under 140 db) so if I forget to put in plugs or on muff's and shoot I don't have partner's deafened. Does it make it sound like subsonic - no way - I have also used on my AR15 and with the 30 caliber can in place it does sound like an unsuppressed 22LR HV instead of .223. Again hearing safe but not silent about 126-135 db. If your looking for silent the best your going to get is a 22LR with subsonic with a good suppressor - about 112-118 db depending upon host system.

Oh, and yes sub-sonic ammo makes a huge difference but you have to be aware of trajectory difference the 22LR subsonic drops over 9 ft at 300 yards, so range estimation is key - and if you buy a MP5SD be aware that the barrel is bored out with 24 wee little holes to make 124 gr NATO std 9mm subsonic and if you use 147 subsonic in that weapon you've reduced the velocity to a point were it will bounce off a heavy coat (yes, this has happened).

Would my M38 be an ideal rifle - I'd say it could be for someone with the right expectations - 7.62x54 is a round capable of killing human predator or up to Bear size Predator's would it stop a charging elephant maybe if you knew where to place the bullet - cast boolit friendly and subsonic capable. I don't think you can go too wrong with it as a choice. If I want a smoother action look for a krag, if you want 98 action bubba it until you get it - parts are out there. As far as safety of M38 it seems to do well with parent cartridge I have not heard of a lot of problems with it.

[303Guy]

If your looking for silent the best your going to get is a 22LR with subsonic with a good suppressor - about 112-118 db depending upon host system.I would describe a suppressed 22lr subsonic as being as noisy as the firing pin - that's it. However, bullet strike is another matter. A suppressed 223 does indeed sound like a 22lr. A suppressed 22lr high velocity, that is.

I built a suppressor for a 22-250 and it made the gun sound like an unsuppressed 22lr. And this suppressor was tiny, adding a mere 2" to the overall length.

But not all suppressors are made equal. Some bigger and more expensive models are simply noisier and heavier.

Something to remember, a three decibel increase is double the sound pressure so reducing sound pressure from 140db to 120db is a massive reduction in muzzle blast.

[Ed in North Texas]

Artful - thanks for clearing up my misunderstanding. But (here's the big but), as an old gun bunny (artilleryman) from the days when the Army issued ear plugs (and thought that protected hearing on an M-110 pushing a 200 pound projectile 12 miles), any noise level approaching 140 db is definitely not safe for your hearing. It doesn't harm your hearing in a big way, right away. But the damage is cumulative.

Oh yes, and I wouldn't even try to hit anything with even a regular .22 LR at 300 yards. Not even 200 yards. I know my limitations (which get greater the older I get).

Everyone can do themselves a favor and always remember to wear "ears and eyes". You don't need to be like me and have to buy hearing aids (which don't do all that much good in situations where there is much background noise). Not that I would want the hearing aids covered, but health insurance and Medicare do not cover them. "Ears" now are much cheaper. I had to buy electronic "ears" so I could hear range commands when I was participating in club matches because I couldn't hear the commands (or whistles, horns, etc.) without the amplifier.

And besides, you won't have to suffer your wife telling you that there isn't anything wrong with your hearing, you just don't pay attention to her. :-)

[Multigunner]

From what I've heard if a sniper uses a suppressor with a supersonic cartridge those near the victim being fired on and not themselves hit would hear the crack further down range and believe, for a few precious seconds at least, that the shooting came from the opposite direction.
Sounds feasible.
In any case any reduction in muzzle blast is a plus.

[Artful]

Ed I concur that any noise level approaching 140 db is definitely not safe for your hearing.
But that is the standard for impulse noise exposure of short duration.
Sources of noise that can cause hearing loss include motorized equipment, firecrackers, and small firearms, all emitting sounds from 120 to 150 decibels as in impluse.
Long or repeated exposure to sounds at or above 85 decibels can and will cause hearing loss.
The louder the sound, the shorter the time period before noise induced hearing loss (NIHL) can occur.
Sounds of less than 75 decibels, even after long exposure, are unlikely to cause hearing loss.

But long term noise above 75 will damage your hearing, it doesn't harm your hearing in a big way, right away.
But the damage is cumulative and irreversable and you should be wearing hearing protection.
But the Standard for "hearing Safe" short duration impulse noises are set as 140 db for impulse noise by the agencies involved.
Any Suppressor that changes the pressure level to below 140 db "can" be considered as "safe".
Of course the more reduction the better. And I know a lot of people who shoot thinking 22 rimfire etc. are save and they are not.

For people who have not been exposed to the Logarithmic scale of sound measurement let me post some classic's
0 db - Threshold of hearing - Don’t hear anything sound proof room
10 db - Broadcast studio interior or rustling leaves - 1/32nd as loud as conversation
20 db - Quiet house interior or rural nighttime - 1/16th as loud
30 db - Quiet office interior or watch ticking - 1/8th as loud
40 db - Quiet rural area or small theater - 1/4th as loud (and what our ears enviromentally were developed for)
50 db - Quiet suburban area or dishwasher in next room - 1/2 as loud
60 db - Office interior or ordinary conversation between two people in quiet environment - Ordinary Conversation
70 db - Vacuum cleaner at 10 feet away from you - Twice as loud
NOTE - hearing damage by continuous levels can start above 75 db
80 db - Passing car at 10 ft. or garbage disposal at 3 ft - 4 times as loud
90 db - Passing bus or truck at 10 ft. or food blender at 3 feet. - 8 times as loud
100 db - Passing subway train at 10 feet or gas lawn mower at 3 ft. - 16 times as loud
110 db - Night club with band playing or Chainsaw, 1 meter distance- 32 times as loud
120 db - Threshold of pain instant pain ringing of ears- 64 times as loud as conversation (twice as loud as night club)
140 db - Jet aircraft, 50 meter away
ref'd links
http://www.nidcd.nih.gov/health/hearing/pages/noise.aspx
http://trace.wisc.edu/docs/2004-About-dB/
http://www.sengpielaudio.com/TableOfSoundPressureLevels.htm

Some measurements of real world sounds measured @ http://www.silencerresearch.com/decibel_reference_library.htm

Daisy Red Ryder BB Gun 94dB to 98dB
Ruger 10/22 Hammer Falling on an Empty Chamber 102-103.5dB
Ruger 10/22 Bolt Drop on an Empty Chamber 112-113dB
Browning Buckmark Hammer Falling on an Empty Chamber 107-110dB
Browning Buckmark Bolt Drop on an Empty Chamber 112-112.5dB
Colt AR15 635 Style Upper Bolt Drop on empty chamber 114-119dB
Black Maxx Paintball Gun shot with paintball 116.5dB to 119dB
Black Maxx Paintball Gun shot without paintballs 126dB
Mossberg 44US Target Rifle 26" Barrel CCI Subsonics 128dB to 129.5dB
Mossberg 44US Target Rifle 26" Barrel CCI CB Longs 121.7dB
Mossberg 44US Target Rifle 26" Barrel Remington Subsonics 129dB to 131dB
All these measurements were done with Mil-spec sound meter 1 meter from object being measured.

[Bret4207]

SO STANDING NEXT TO AN A-4, A-6, F-4 or AV8A WHILE THEY WERE RUNNING UP THE ENGINES PROBABLY WASN'T A GOOD IDEA? WHAT'S THAT YA SAY??? SORRY, I DIDN'T CATCH THAT. WHAT???

[Ed in North Texas]

SO STANDING NEXT TO AN A-4, A-6, F-4 or AV8A WHILE THEY WERE RUNNING UP THE ENGINES PROBABLY WASN'T A GOOD IDEA? WHAT'S THAT YA SAY??? SORRY, I DIDN'T CATCH THAT. WHAT???

In fact I remember that the Army belatedly decided that the noise level of the Gas Turbine Generator Set (GTGS) of the Sergeant Missile System equipment was damaging crew members hearing, and that noise level was nowhere near what the aircraft engines turn out.

[Trey45]

Sorry about going off track here, but you guys that have an FR8, do you use 7.62 NATO or commercial 308 Winchester ammo in it. I bought one of those FR8's about a month ago, will they hold up to the easier to find 308 win. ammo? I'm not worried about handloading for it right now.

[EMC45]

Sorry about going off track here, but you guys that have an FR8, do you use 7.62 NATO or commercial 308 Winchester ammo in it. I bought one of those FR8's about a month ago, will they hold up to the easier to find 308 win. ammo? I'm not worried about handloading for it right now.

I have only shot ammo that is .308 spec and of course a bunch of cast loads too.

[Larry Gibson]

Sorry about going off track here, but you guys that have an FR8, do you use 7.62 NATO or commercial 308 Winchester ammo in it. I bought one of those FR8's about a month ago, will they hold up to the easier to find 308 win. ammo? I'm not worried about handloading for it right now.

Either is fine as the FR8 is the M98 action. Having pressure tested mumerous 7.62 NATO (foreign and domestic) cartridges and commercial .308W cartridges there's not really much real difference between them. Some 7.62 produce more psi than some commercial .308W and visa versa. I've no qualms about shooting any commercial .308W in my FR8.

Larry Gibson

[Trey45]

Thanks Larry, that's good enough for me. My only real concerns were the pressure differences, your testing alleviates my concerns. Looks like commercial 308 Winchester will be the FR8's diet until I start reloading for it.

[Bret4207]

FWIW Trey, I had my first and only double charge in ny FR8- 26.0 Red Dot behind an RCBS 30-180FN. Someone estimated the pressure at over 70K. I dunno, but a 98 Mauser made with good quality materials is a 98 Mauser made with good quality materials, ie- no worries.

[Trey45]

Bret, thankfully your FR8 was built tough and you've got the fingers to prove it. That is indeed a testament to the durability of these rifles, however, I don't think I'll be trying that one myself!

I imagine that was quite the eye opener, shooting a nice string of mild recoiling loads when suddenly you get a double charge. Glad you're ok.

[EMC45]

All this talk of the FR8 caused me to get mine out and try some 185gr. Lee 312-185 sized to .309 with a GC. Loaded over 20gr. 2400 at 2.710. Shot pretty tight, but low. Kick wasn't bad, I think the steel recoil pad helped mitigate some of the recoil.....

[Rio Grande]

I have an M38 amoung other Russians and it's my favorite of that series.

Take a look at this before you give up on your M38:


http://www.gswagner.com/mosin-nagant/safe/safe.html


Wagner's home page:


http://www.gswagner.com/

If you need help climbing back out of there ..... PM me and I'll throw you a line!!! LOL!



Enjoy

Three 44s


I made a similar but better one, a smaller 'ring' ( the 'u' shaped pc. from a lock) with cocking pc. drilled like your example and the 'u' welded on from the back....to which I attached a large split ring to pull on. I could remove the split ring and you hardly noticed the modification. Very neat and clean looking.

I've read the Mosin action lacks a gas diversion port in case of ruptured case or primer.
Just a personal feeling, but it just doesn't give me the confidence of a Mauser '98 action.

But the Mosin carbines handle great, and the sights far better than a Mauser.
I wouldn't turn one down if a good deal, I'd snap it up in a heartbeat. I'm looking at a possible buy of a 91/59 right now - if it's still there :)

[NHlever]

Hmm,
I've read this whole thread thinking that the FR-8 was the converted Spanish M93 actioned .308 Winchester like one I had years ago. What did I have? It fit the physical description you are talking about here, but was not a model 98 mauser!

[Artful]

Hmm,
I've read this whole thread thinking that the FR-8 was the converted Spanish M93 actioned .308 Winchester like one I had years ago. What did I have? It fit the physical description you are talking about here, but was not a model 98 mauser!

Sounds like you had FR-7

FR7 rifles- Converted from M1933 short rifles/carbines and M1916 short rifles in the 1950s.

FR8 rifles- Converted from M43 short rifles in the 1950s.

Larry Gibson had a good write up on this for us. :bigsmyl2:

http://castboolits.gunloads.com/showthread.php?p=428029


manleyjt

NO comment as to how suitable a certain firearm is to a certain chambering but I would like to keep at the fore front of our minds that the three rounds are not one in the same.

Externally the dimensions are the same. Many think there is a difference between the 7.62 NATO and .308W based on chamber dimensions (headspace varience gets the biggest attention). Actual cartridge exterior dimensions are the same. Ever wonder why there are only .308W loading dies and no 7.62 NATO dies? The answer is because they are the same dimensionally.

@e also need to keep in mind the different working pressures for the 7.65x51 nato and the 308 win, 50K and 62K respectively. The 50K psi figure is not necessarily correct for the 7.62 NATO. The MAP (Maximum Average Pressure) for M59 and M62 is 50,000 psi. However the MAP for M80 can be from 45,000 to 65,000 psi depending on temperature. (TM 9-1305-200 dtd June 1961, Small Arms Ammuntion). Also the method of measuring 7.62 NATO pressures is with a gas peizo-electric transducer located at the case mouth. This method does not capture the peak preassure as high as other methods do. As I stated previously, my measurements of various types of 7.62 NATO pressures gives figures from 48-58,000 psi. The average for M80 type ball is in the 52-56,000 psi range which is above the 50,000 psi often quoted. I have yet to find any 7.62 NATO or .308W that comes close to the 62,000 MAP of the .308W. My testing has been out of 3 different rifles with 3 different twists. The 10" twist gives consistantly the highest pressure of the 3 rifles. There can be alot of difference in how the metalurgy reacts once you cross into the different regions of the stress/strain diagram or when calculation for thickwalled pressure vessels ( those calculations can be used for barrels of firearms according to my mechanics of materials professor, I am no expert so have to relay that on to someone who is).

Once again a reminder that 7.62x51, 308 win, and cetme round are not equal. even though they are very close in dimensional aspects.

I believe the CETME was loaded with lighter bulletts at a lower pressure/velocity to make automatic fire controllable in the model 58 CETME automatic rifle? Is that correct in the historical context? No it isn't. The CETME rifles were a redesign of the Stg44 rifle of German use in WWII. It had a delayed roller lock up and functioned fine with the intermediate 8.9 Kurz cartridge. When redesigned for use with the higher pressured and less tapered 7.62 NATO case the CETME rifle was quickly found, after fielding to their army, that the rifle would not reliably extract the cases during firing. The solution was the lower pressured cartridge with a lighter bullet that gave a lower recoil impulse. Hence the CETME cartridge was a stop gap cartridge simply to make the fielded CETME rifle reliable. The German engineers then discovered that fluting the chambers solved the extraction problem and all CETME rifles were recalled and the chambers fluted. The production of CETME ammuntion ceased at that time as it was no longer needed. That's why it's very hard to find actual CETME cartridges (anyone seen one?). The 7.62 NATO cartridge then once again became the standard cartridge for use in CETME rifles. CETME bullet was speced at 7.25 gram (approx 112 grain) at 760 m/s (approx 2493 fps) versus 7.62 nato at 9.5gram (approx 147 grain) at 840 m/s (approx 2756fps). The 7.62 nato has so many variants for bullet weight that it is mind boggling I chose to referenc ethe M80 service cartridge in my estimations above, but the range rather amazing. NATO requirements for 7.62 ball ammuntion are a bullet of 145-155 gr at nominal 2700-2750 fps from a 22" service rifle. That does give leeway to a lot of variations.

I hope that some of the above is correct as I had to dig into some of my reference books for it and as previously said there is some variation in the written specs.

Any corrections you have would be appreciated, I will try to make sure the above texts reflect what was the actual specs.

Larry Gibson

Your FR-7 was converted small ring 93/95's mausers for 7.62 Cetme cartridge a lower pressure version of 7.62x51 NATO but NOT the same spec's.

If you look on the rifle the caliber does say 7.62. It does NOT say 7.62 NATO. These rifle were made to shoot the 7.62 CETME round which was a slightly downloaded 7.62 Nato round. It was downloaded for two reasons. Firstly to make it safe to shoot in the small ring Mauser & CETME. The second reason was to make controllable full auto fire possible in the CETME. The CETME had real control problems with the NATO round on full auto during testing. Our own US ARMY also fielded ammo to try and make M14 on full auto more controlable in the end we just took out the selector switch.

Can you shoot 7.62 NATO and commercial 308 Win in this rifle, yes and no. You can't do it 100% safely and it is going to be hard on the rifle, very hard.

I know of stories of people that have run hundreds if not thousands of 308 win through their Spanish Mausers without a problem,
SAMCO the importer had HP White labs test to destruction
http://www.masterton.us/GAM1916_Article.gif

Keep in mind that Garry James was paid to write that infomercial and he was paid by the importer. People with a financial incentive are not going to be objective. Or have you never had a bad experience after bought something you saw in an advert?

Why would SAMCO spend so much time “proving” that these rifles are safe? Maybe it is because they have a deserved reputation for being defective.

SAMCO sent a number of M1916's to HP White. We don't know if the receivers tested were late model or early model. We don't know if the rifles were rebuilt from 1893's or were new M1916's.

but I also know of some that have had very bad experiences with escaping gasses when a case let go. :holysheep

This Swedish Mauser is the exact same action as a Spanish Mauser. Don’t know what happened here but there is a cracked receiver ring and blood on the ground. Obviously an over pressure event of some sort, and the shooter was not protected by this old action.

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v479/SlamFire/Blowups/M96Mauserblownup.jpg

Wear your shooting glasses for sure. Here's another take on it.

http://www.falfiles.com/forums/printthread.php?threadid=317683


Posted by Kenshi on September 26, 2011 15:15:

quote:Kenshi I'm not doubting you word and I appreciate the info, but can you show me any data where it states a Spanish mauser or FR7 can't handle the pressure of a 762X51 or a 308W? If it was designed to handle 45k psi, it shouldn't go kaboom at 50k psi. That would be a mighty small window of safety. If I shoot mine it will be with 762X51 so I don't really see a problem.



First let me say that in my past life I was an Aerospace Structural and Weapons design engineer, and a Reliability and Maintainability engineer for the Lockheed Skunk Works in Palmdale Ca. Additionally I am an A&P Mechanic, a Master Machinist, a Certified Welder, and a Gunsmith with over 30 years of experience. I designed and tested "things", including weapons, for the F117, F22, F35, and "others". I am a Bladesmith and a Blacksmith.

In my job as a Reliability and Maintainability engineer I was tasked to test many items under increasing stress and pressure until they failed. I learned to recognize the failure modes, point of failure, and what the failure trends would be, at times by just examining something. Examining a somethings design criteria, material selection, the design itself, and the metallurgy to decide what the point of failure and point of catastrophic failure would be is what l did for a living, and I did that very well and it made me a better design engineer because of it.

When speaking or writing of failures, material failure and catastrophic material failure are two distinct and separate failure categories and modes.

I agree that something with a designed operating pressure of 45kpsi should safely handle a 50kpsi operating pressure and this was no doubt a factor in the re-barrel and chambering of the M93/FR7 to 7.62 NATO by the Spanish Military Engineers as that is within the common minimum IRL designed engineering safety factor of a 20% over build.

Without access to the Mauser design notes I would have to err on the side of caution and "assume" a 20% engineering design tolerance is what was actually used. I do not think that one would see a "Kaboom" (catastrophic) failure with a 5kpsi over pressure as that is approximately 11% of the design pressure. There would be an increase in overall stress however and recognizing the simple fact that all stress in accumulative, it would definitely increase to some degree the failures seen. Whether or not that is acceptable depends on the criteria they used to evaluate the design and design changes and I (without the design notes they used in the modification) can not obviously "speak" to that.

The issue of soft receiver locking lugs and the bolt to receiver issue is a different one and is dependent of the metallurgy and elasticity and recovery limits of the metal and the forces (bolt thrust) being applied.

Bolt thrust is dependent on a number of variables which include; cartridge taper, surface area of the cartridge base, case lubrication, case adherence, and instantaneous chamber pressures. Between two cartridges of equal taper, no lubrication or adherence changes, and equal case base area it is a simple mater of multiplying cartridge base surface area by chamber pressure to get a bolt thrust value between the two.

SOOOO based totally on the foregoing is it OK to re barrel, chamber and shoot 7.62 NATO Spec (7.62x51mm Mil Spec) in a M93 Mauser action in good material shape? I would say yes it is OK based on the foregoing discussion.

Any and all .308 Winchester loadings? HELL NO!! What is the pressure of the specific .308 Win loading one wants to use? In absence of data one MUST assume a 62kpsi value. To do otherwise is moronic and begs the answer of just what Darwin award is one trying to win for their family to display?

Because 7.62 NATO "looks" like .308 Winchester they ARE the same and are interchangeable? If anyone want to talk specific MIL SPEC vs SAAMI spec we can do that, there is A LOT more here than just a pressure difference.

It should be very easy to see why there is a bolt set back issue with the M93 Mauser action and the .308 Winchester cartridge.

An action designed for 45kpsi handling 50kpsi and the relatively minor increases in bolt thrust is one thing. Being designed for 45kpsi and handling 62kpsi and a major tonnage increase in bolt thrust is entirely something else. Is a catastrophic failure of the action also possible under these conditions? Depending on the health of the action YES. Maybe not today, maybe not tomorrow, but next week? Being a firm believer in Murphys Laws of engineering, it is just a roll of the dice away at these levels of stress.

So you see the FR-7 is not a "safe" conversion, reason being, it's built on a small-ring mauser action not originally designed for the maximum pressures invloved, these actions can be identified in that they are typically "cock on closing" type, that is, the bolt fully cocks on the return stroke, you can feel the spring tension when it's doing this.

These actions also are not rated for that kind of pressure, and can develop what's known as "receiver lug setback" where the lugs on the bolt are literally slammed into the receiver with such force that they'll indent the receiver due to softer steels and increase the head space and you chance of brass failure and release of Very High Pressure gases aimed at the shooter!. :shock:

You want a .308 Mauser? Start with a m98 action (large ring action) these actions are much stronger, bolt is fully cocked upon lifting, bolt has 3 lugs on it(2 in front 1 in the rear, (a "saftey lug") not just 2, the receiver ring is a 1/8 larger than a small-ring action, pg 85 in Jerry Kuhnhausen's Book "The Mauser Bolt Actions, A shop manual Says this,


"MauserM91-M96 actions,even in fully serviceable or in as-new condition must not be rebarreled and chambered for,or fired with, higher pressure cartridges than the action was orginally made for. An example of stretching this rule is found in the arsenal rebarreling and chambering of M93/M95 small-ring Spanish Mauser actions to fire 7.62 CETME cartridge The M93/M95 actions used were orginally made for lower pressure 7x57 Mauser cartridges, After Conversion these rifles and carbines were redesignated as 1916 Models, at normal temperatures the 7.62mm CETME cartridge generates pressures in roughly the 41,500 -42,000 CUP range, in a correctly dimensioned chamber and bore,
To compound the problem above,a 7.62x51mmNATO (or .308 winchester) cartridge will chamber in a 1916 Model 7.62 CETME chamber However, a 7.62 NATO or a .308 Winchester cartridge can generate pressures of, or about 55.200 CUP. THIS PRESSURE RANGE IS DANGEROUS EVEN IN A WELL HEAT-TREATED GERMAN OR SWEDISH MADE SMALL RING M91-M96 MAUSER ACTION BUT, IN MY OPINION, CAN BE PARTICULARY DANGEROUS IN THE MUCH SOFTER SPANISH MADE ACTIONS, A lot of Spanish made M93-M95 Mausers are still around that are chambered for the 7x57 cartridge. Due to the known softness of the Spanish made Mauser actions and limited receiver/barrel thread bering area etc, most mfg's of 7x57 Mauser ammunition restrict operating pressure to as close to 37,000CUP as possible as a saftey factor...

So, there you have it, from the man himself...

And sorry if I got off track a little but I don't want any one hurt by unsafe conversions, weapons are best if used in their original caliber.

[vintagesportsman]

Yugo Mauser m-48, short, hefty enough to know your carrying something solid, Sub MOA @ 100 yards with Prvi 196, Lee 175 RN or Hornady 195 grainers, it will shoot anything...top it off with a set of mojo sights and you have a real nice rifle for short money - IMO...

[Artful]

Yugo Mauser m-48, short, hefty enough to know your carrying something solid, Sub MOA @ 100 yards with Prvi 196, Lee 175 RN or Hornady 195 grainers, it will shoot anything...top it off with a set of mojo sights and you have a real nice rifle for short money - IMO...

And they are importing them again - J & G Sales has them for like 200.00

[Rich/WIS]

I vote 03A3 0r M1917. Have two A3s, one from CMP and one built from a drill receiver, both are accurate, good sights, and the two groove barrels can't be beat for CBs. Other possible candidate is the Swiss K31, usually are in excellent condition, sights are better than the Mausers, and they are still not too pricey, although ammo is an issue (if you are alreay into reloading not a big deal). K31s have a rep for accuracy both with J and CB.

[Larry Gibson]

I recently came into some actual CETME cartridges!!!

They were made at Fabrica De Palencia in '62.
Headstamp; P 76 62
Berdan primed
26.9 gr of the square cut "Balistate" type powder
111.5 gr FMJBT
2.808 OAL

Phot shows top of cartridge box. The 2 inner cartridges are the CETME cartridges and the outside are standard M80 7.62 Ball cartridges. I will be velocity/pressure testing the CETME cartridges as soon as the weather breaks.

Larry Gibson

[Larry Gibson]

If you hable' and palavar Espanole;

Larry Gibson

[Multigunner]

The P-14/M1917 rifles are pretty good but un necessarily long and heavy.
During WW2 some Chinese troops turned out to be way too short to handle an M1917 rifle so several thousand of these rifles were converted to short rifles, with fore end and bayonet lug set back along with the front sight. OAL was about the same as a No.5 Enfield carbine.

A very similar P-14 short rifle had been experimented with by the British. The Infantry training school where the conversions of the M1917 were done was mainly run by the British, so they likely suggested the conversions.

I like for a woods rifle to be short enough that I can hold it down at my side by the grip and the muzzle be clear of the ground by at least a couple of inches.