Seemed a good deal to pass up, 308 spanish mauser.

[Tackleberry41]

Was in paying off a gun, they had taken a Spanish mauser in 308 on trade. Owner test fried it, so a functional rifle, bore is clean. $215 didnt seem to bad a price. I was looking for a bolt gun in 308.

[macomber]

nice find

[tdoor4570]

which Spanish mauser is it

[Tackleberry41]

Its the 1916. I would guess a generic timney mauser trigger will work in it?

[Adam Helmer]

Takleberry,

IF that is a Model 1893, you are "testing the ropes" as the M93 action was meant for mild loads. I have many M1893, M1895 and M1916 Mausers and all like my cast 7mm 168 grain cast boolits. The .308 rebores were an expedient and not safe in my opinion.

Adam

[Tackleberry41]

Its the 1916.

[bouncer50]

Takleberry,

IF that is a Model 1893, you are "testing the ropes" as the M93 action was meant for mild loads. I have many M1893, M1895 and M1916 Mausers and all like my cast 7mm 168 grain cast boolits. The .308 rebores were an expedient and not safe in my opinion.

Adam I have to agree with you on the M1893 M1895 and M1916 What i have seen the 93 and the 1916 is a 93 action. I never seen a 1895 Spainish action made into 308. Always been the 93 and 98 actions. I seen a couple 93 for sale at my local gun shop with bad headspaceing in 308. now a 98 mauser 308 is fine for full power loads. Now a 1893 action is good for reduce 308 loads. The 1893 action was made in 7mm a fine caliber but it was not design for 308 pressure. The fr-7 1893 action fr-8 a 98 mauser action

[tdoor4570]

With the 93 action you will want to keep the chamber pressure down to around 45,000. the org 7x57 operated at about 47,000 . I have 2 93 actions 1 in a FR-7 and the other in a 1916 both chambered in 7.62x51, I load both using 300 savage info to keep the pressure down both rifles are minute of a gallon milk jug at 200 yards

[Tackleberry41]

It is the later 1916 converted rifle. The consensus on safety seems to be none. Internet forums are full of 'oh my god its gonna blow up' balanced with plenty of 'been shooting mine for years', with lots of middle ground 'use NATO spec vs 308 and they are fine'.

I dont own any 308 ammo, dont see me buying any, everything I have is 7.62 nato surplus. That seems to be the issue with these guns is running the hotter civilian stuff thru it. May or may not even have any NATO stuff put thru it. I just wanted a bolt gun in 308, its hard to do much accuracy comparison on cast loads thru my CETME.

[tdoor4570]

I wouldn't worry about your cast loads you are not going to be getting close to nato specs with them I have been shooting my FR-7 with both cast and j-word for over 10 years. never had any signs of pressure , just watch what you are doing (pay attention)

[RustyReel]

I have to agree with the doom and gloom guys. It is not something I would spend $215 on (and I've bought a BUNCH of junk). Also, I wouldn't waste any $$ on an after market trigger. Just my opinion.....

[bouncer50]

The 93 action is not going to blow up. What happen the bolt lugs and the reciever take a beating in 308 in a 93 action. Buy a head space gauge to check to make sure it safe to fire.

[koger]

I used to buy these by the crate in mid 1980's when I ran a gunshop, about half were junk, other half were good shooters, but the all had several problems, this is what I ran into. I quickly got rid of the clunkers, as parts when I broke them down.
1. Often bores or chambers were oval, off center, too big.
2. Often would not feed 308, at all, as mag an follower were designed for 7mm mauser.
3. Heat treat was good on some, not on others, not uncommon firing mil surp ammo to have the lugs set back into the receiver.
4. Have seen several that had the barrel cross threaded into the receiver, botched bubba job at the armory!
The FR8 was a 98 action, barrels were much better, all of them I have shot did well. Also, the military ammo is much hotter than any civilian ammo. Just my experience, I have passed a lot of them up for a lot less in recent years, but hopefully yours will be a good one. Just get some decent ammo, shoot it at 50yds, see how it groups and feeds, then go from there!

[MostlyLeverGuns]

The 7.62X51 as loaded by Spain IS NOT the 7.62x51 NATO (.308 Win). Spain developed a cartridge with a lighter bullet at lower velocity AND LOWER PRESSURE. The 7.62x51 CETME shares dimensions with the 7.62x51 NATO but the Spanish rifles were not expected/required to endure the NATO cartridge pressures.

[Scharfschuetze]

The Spanish Military issued the 7.62 CETME round for their converted rifles. Same external measurements as the 7.62 NATO round, but significantly less pressure. This cartridge (if memory serves me) was only loaded to the pressures of the previous 7mm round that the rifles were chambered for and not the 57,000 PSI of the NATO round.

I once shot against the Spanish Army rifle team at an international shooting match. Pretty good bunch of fellows, although they were no longer using Mauser or CETME rifles.

[Jniedbalski]

I shot a 1916 Mauser plenty of times very good shooting riffle. I shot a lot of military Surpless through it . I thank most of it was hotter machingun ammo.we bought this riffle in the late 80s so no internet at the time warning not to shoot the hotter ammo. My brother had it re barreled back to 7mm Mauser with a custom grade schlean barrel new walnut stock and muzzle break.beautiful riffle but still a old Mauser

[CLAYPOOL]

I just got one of those in the 7 x 57. Seems O.k. But i didn't buy it to break my shoulder or worse. I will start with a couple boxes of Sellier & Bellot to get cases. It is supposedly load light as original was.

[runfiverun]

with something approximating the old mauser round you'll have a good rifle for many things.
the 175gr Hornady bullet is reputed to be a good shooter in many of those rifles at about 24-2500 fps.
you just don't need to push the bullet that hard to out run most animals in America.
that is also the load the Spanish used in cuba to laugh at our 30-40 krag rifles and many thought those old Krags were fine Elk rifles in their day.

[Artful]

http://castboolits.gunloads.com/showthread.php?190274-1916-Spanish-Mauser

These M1916s vary a lot in quality so I'll not get into the 7.62 vs .308W in them. Suffice to say the Spanish manual for them states they are for 7.62 NATO ammuntion also besides the 7.62 CETME cartridge. These rifles do however usually make excellent cast bullet shooters. The usual .308W cast bullet data does well. I like a 311291, 311041 or 311299 (prefered) cast of COWWs + 2% tin and aged for 7 - 10 days before use (sized at .311, GC'd and lubed with a good NRA 50/50 lube) over 28 - 30 gr of 4895 (any flavor) with a 1/2 - 3/4 gr dacron filler. That load always works for me with little fuss or working up loads.

Larry Gibson


FYI; I've pressure tested several different milsurp 7x57 rounds with 150 to 172 FMJBTs and RNs from 1918 up through the '50s. The psi's run very consistent with M80 milsurp 7.62 NATO and factory .308W cartridges. You would be aghast at the psi some of those 7x57 milsurp rounds were running at. Both R-P and Win factory 175 RNs and Hornady's Light Magnum were running about 10,000 less psi than the milsurp stuff.

However, the M93 action with a good cast bullet load of 4895 under the excellent 311299 runs a lot less psi and will make for an excellent shooter for the daughter.

Larry Gibson

http://castboolits.gunloads.com/showthread.php?38235-Spanish1916-308

I own a 1916 Spanish Short Rifle that was arsenal rechambered for 7.62x51 NATO. They were originally chambered for 7x57 Mauser. These old rifles are based on '93 pattern actions and were tested for safety with 7.62 by the Spaniards. Interestingly, the later FR-7 conversions were based on the same action. I think it's *pretty* safe rifle, but there are a few things to bear in mind...both good and bad.

* The '93 is a small ring two lug action. Doug Bowser is correct that it's basically a 44,000 PSI action and its gas safety leaves a bit to be desired when compared to an M98 action.
* The Spanish government did these conversion, not some backyard bubba and they were tested and designed to handle 7.62 Nato pressures of around 52,000 psi acceptably. .308 Win is NOT the same round and some .308 pressures can go much higher. Be warned!
* The Spaniards did not convert the 1916s to fire the lower-powered CETME round. It was designed for 7.62 NATO.
* I have a copy of the Original Gun Tests article and their reference to the HP White Laboratories tests of the 1916. They were tested to pressures of over 90,000 psi before failure.
* The 1916s and FR-7s were designed for rear eschelon troops while Spain was in the process of converting to the CETME as their MBR and one might suppose that they weren't expected to see very heavy use.
* I have fired (with certain safety protocols in place) very hot 7.62 in mine - as a test - without the slightest indication of trouble.

Having said these things, I consider the '93 action to be an iffy choice for 7.62. I really like my 1916 and think it's a well made and handy old carbine, but I reserve it for CB loads and mild(ish) jacketed hand loads. I just don't see any point in pushing ones luck. Besides, I have other, better and stronger .308s.

The Spanish FR-8 is a whole 'nother kettle of fish! That rifle, while very similar-looking to an FR-7, was converted to 7.62 NATO from Spanish Mauser M43 actions. The M43 was Spains' version of the K98 Mauser in the WWII era and was originally chambered in 7.92x57 (8mm Mauser).

I own an FR-8 and it is one of my favorite rifles. I have every confidence in its ability to handle 7.62 NATO OR any commercial .308 loads. The large ring M98 action is easily up to .308 pressures and in both my 1916 and FR-8 the chambers are surprisingly tight for .mil rifles and have no headspace issues. I have no idea if that's representative of the breed or if I just happened to luckily get a couple of tight examples!

I acquired both of these rifles from private sellers at different gun shows, the 1916 for $100 and the FR-8 for $200 and have no regrets about either.

As far as cracked receivers go, I think any old rifles should be checked out carefully before use, but I doubt if Spanish receivers are more liable to cracking than others. Some say that Spanish Mauser steel tends to be softer than other examples. I don't know if that's true, but would observe that softer steel should be less likely to crack than brittle steel. Soft steel might be more liable to stretch and cause headspace trouble, but I'd think catastrophic failures would be more likely with brittle receivers, like the problematic early production 1903 Springfields.

Best regards
Doc

http://castboolits.gunloads.com/showthread.php?38235-Spanish1916-308/page2


The Mauser Bolt Actions
M91 through M98
A Shop Manual
by Jerry Kuhnhausen

page 8:

Most M93 Spanish rifles were converted to 7.9mm before, or during, WWII.
Many Spanish M93 short rifles and M95 carbines were later rebarreled and
chambered to fire the 7.62 CETME cartridge and were redesigned as 1916
Models. Large quantities of these M93/M95 to M1916 7.62 CETME conversions
have been imported into the U.S. and several other countries. The 7.62 CETME
cartridge generates a much lower gas pressure than the 7.62x51 NATO or
.308 Winchester cartridges. See caution on page 85.

page 85:

A slightly different subject having to do with chambers and cartridges is the
strength limitation of the small ring M91-96 Mauser actions and Spanish-made
small ring M93 and M95 Mauser actions in particular. Mauser M91~M96 actions,
even in fully serviceable or in as-new condition, must not be barreled and
chambered for, or fired with, higher pressure cartridges than the action
was originally made for. An example of stretching this rule is found in the
arsenal rebarreling and chambering of the M93/M95 small ring Spanish
Mauser actions to fire the 7.62mm CETME cartridge. The M93/M95 actions
used were originally made for lower pressure 7x57mm cartridge. 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 to 42,000 CUP range in a correctly
dimensioned chamber and bore.

To compound the above, a 7.62x51mm NATO (or .308 Winchester)
cartridge will chamber in a 1916 Model 7.62mm CETME chamber.
However, a 7.62mm NATO or .308 Winchester cartridge can generate
pressures of 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 particularly dangerous in
the much softer Spanish made actions. A lot of Spanish made M93
and M95 Mausers are still around that are chambered for the 7x57mm
cartridge. Due to the known softness of the Spanish made Mauser actions
and limited receiver/barrel thread bearing area, etc., most manufacturers
of 7x57 Mauser ammunition restrict operating pressures as close to
37,000 CUP as possible as a safety factor.
[end of quote]

http://i7.photobucket.com/albums/y285/Jungesblut/Stuff/M1916GC6in.jpg

[fast ronnie]

They are a good rifle at 45,000 pressure, but not so good at .308 levels.
The bad news is that someone who doesn't know better looks at the book and loads them to max for the .308 without ever working up a load for them.
There is a reason the 98's were re-designed.

[Tackleberry41]

If the barrels no good, I have a lathe a barrel is not that big a deal, convert it back to the original 7mm.

Its rare I load anything to max in the book. Generally half to 2/3 of the load data. I doubt it will be ingesting much 308 jacketed anyways. The owner of the shop test fired it before he put it in the rack, as good as he has treated me, be pretty stupid to screw me over something cheap.

So back to one of my questions, the standard timney mauser trigger will work in these? And somebody drilled and tapped for a scope at some point, what peep should I look for to put on it?

[tdoor4570]

I don't know about a timney trigger but I scout mounted a pistol scope on the rear sight base, like I said with my loads it is minute of milk jug at 200 yards. after having shot it for a while and learned how it shoots I feel that I would not be afraid to go on out to 500 or 600 yards with confidence. It is all up to you with what you want to do , just pay attention to what you do and you will be all right.

[Multigunner]

The 93 and 95 actioned rifles were phased out by any military that could afford model 98 actioned rifles for a very good reason. During the Gran Chaco War 7X57 ammunition intended for use in machineguns chambered for that cartridge wrecked many of those older rifles. They might not have been damaged or destroyed if the fighting had been in the cooler climes but the jungles of South America could spend chamber pressures through the roof.
One DWN load available in 1915 sent a 150+ gr bullet out at 2900 FPS.

[Scharfschuetze]

back to one of my questions, the standard timney mauser trigger will work in these? And somebody drilled and tapped for a scope at some point, what peep should I look for to put on it?

I really prefer the double stage trigger of Mausers if it is properly set up although that's my preference. I have put Timney triggers in to Mausers for friends and they have been satisfied. Get the Timney model F M95-6 #203 for your Model 95 Mauser.

For an aperture sight you can use any of the aperture sights designed for the Model 98 Mauser or Springfield rifles. I like the Model 48 or 57 Lyman sights.

[jsn]

Anecdotal evidence--Midwayusa sold short chambered rifle barrels for both the small and large ring Mauser. The small rings were called Series 2, and the barrels available were 6.5x55, 7x57, and 35 Rem. The 22-250, 243 Win, 308 Win, 30-06, etc. were all for the large ring Series 3 Mausers.

I would have no problem shooting low velocity jacketed or cast in it, but I wouldn't shoot mil-spec 7.62x51. I wouldn't loan it to anyone that couldn't follow instructions, either.

[Earlwb]

There were two types of the .308 conversion rifles made. With the Spanish version they set the barrel back about 1/4 of a inch or so and rechambered it for the 7.62 Nato rounds. The other version was the Chilean model and in that one, they soldered in a chamber insert to convert it to 7.62 Nato. Now both methods work OK. But the soldered in chamber insert will erode over time at the solder joint if the rifle is fired a lot.

I don't see a problem with using one of the rifles. I happen to have one and it works fine. But if I remember correctly the main detractor is that if the bolt lugs fail there is no third safety lug, like they have on the Mauser 98 actions, to prevent the bolt from going back into the shooter's face. Also there is no provision to vent the gasses away from the shooter in case the cartridge case ruptures. But if one isn't using hot reloads or hot loaded surplus ammo such as for the machine guns, then the rifle and its action should be fine and not pose a problem.

[bouncer50]

There were two types of the .308 conversion rifles made. With the Spanish version they set the barrel back about 1/4 of a inch or so and rechambered it for the 7.62 Nato rounds. The other version was the Chilean model and in that one, they soldered in a chamber insert to convert it to 7.62 Nato. Now both methods work OK. But the soldered in chamber insert will erode over time at the solder joint if the rifle is fired a lot.

I don't see a problem with using one of the rifles. I happen to have one and it works fine. But if I remember correctly the main detractor is that if the bolt lugs fail there is no third safety lug, like they have on the Mauser 98 actions, to prevent the bolt from going back into the shooter's face. Also there is no provision to vent the gasses away from the shooter in case the cartridge case ruptures. But if one isn't using hot reloads or hot loaded surplus ammo such as for the machine guns, then the rifle and its action should be fine and not pose a problem. The Spanish use the 93 action and the 98 action. Also know as the FR-7 and FR-8 they rebarrel the rifle to 308. You are correct about the Chilean using a sleeve to chamber to 308. Both the FR-7 and the Chilean i would only use lower pressure rounds. The 93 action are 120 years old the steel they used was good at the time they made them. But steel for gun making reach in peak in the 1920"s I would not push my luck with a 120 yo action with high pressure loads. The 98 mauser was the best design action made. The 1903 springfield is a copy of the 98 Mauser.

[toolness1]

You can argue whether these are safe or not, but there's no argument as to whether or not they were made for the NATO or CETME cartridge.

180120 180122

I have one I bought from SAMCO. I got a cruddy one. I only feed it cast loads and light jacketed loads. But, they were converted with the 7.62 NATO in mind.

[roverboy]

I've got a Spanish that I've had since '94 and shot and hunted with a bunch. Killed about 25 deer over the years with 2 Federal factory loads and the rest handloads. Never had any pressure problems. I've heard and read all the **** for years about these. If you use reasonable loads a good condition rifle should be fine. By the way, I put a Bold trigger in mine.

[Tackleberry41]

The 'CETME' round was never really a production thing. Its was a downloaded round used in the at the time experimental CETME rifle. The Spanish would not have chambered a rifle in 7.62 NATO if they intended on it only being used with the downloaded CETME round, and then never produce it in quantities. Maybe no actual thought was put into it about the pressure issue. Maybe after it was done it was brought up, and they used the CETME ammo as the solution to the problem in the short term. And then just got rid of the rifles. Not like military decisions always make sense.

The Spanish rifles, like all the guns they produce tend to be hit or miss. LLama made copies of the S&W 357, but often would not hold up under heavy 357 use.

[koger]

I would replace the trigger, I used Timney for years, but a Bold with the side safety, will be just as good as the timney, for nearly half the price, I have 3 of them on rifles now!

[Multigunner]

When the .308 chambered Spanish mausers were first imported a terrible lot of Santa Barbra marked 7.62 ammo was imported which had a percentage of cartridges that generated 68,000 PSI in testing. These were suspected to have been proof test rounds that got mixed in with the ball rounds somehow. These wrecked several Spanish rifles and some other rifles resulting in lawsuits.

The Cetme cartridge was intended to allow positive extraction with the earlier CETME rifle which did not have the fluted chamber of later rifles built on this design. The Japanese also used a lighter loaded version of the 7.62 at one time.

[GONRA]

GONRA remenbers (and purchased some for SHTF stocks)
sealed tins of Spanish Military 7.62x51mm NATO ammo
that I assumed (might) be loaded to a little lower pressure for their CETME rifles.

(This is not the wierd CETME develomental ammo of course!)

[Tackleberry41]

One would imagine ammo labelled as '7.62x51mm NATO' is going to be loaded to NATO or full power specs. Doubt NATO would allow a lower pressure ammo to be labelled as NATO if it wasn't. Imagine the headaches if each country simply loaded 7.62 NATO to whatever they wanted. Somebody drops off a couple cases of that low pressure ammo to the front lines and wont cycle semi autos or machine guns but works great in bolt actions nobody has used in 50 yrs.

I really doubt the whole small ring conversion to 7.62x51 was exactly planned out. That the rifles would be converted then a whole pile of special ammo made thats pretty much indistingishable from all the other 7.62 ammo that can easily be stuffed in the rifle. Sounds like something a pogue would come up with, 'hey lets save a bunch of money converting these bolt guns so we can use them longer' somebody in the back raised his hand 'umm that wont work the pressure is to high' he was overruled and they went forward, then after all the effort and expense figured out oooops the guy was right. So as a stop gap may have used that downloaded CETME ammo till it an out, and dumped the rifles on the surplus market.

[Multigunner]

Despite the general NATO specs for Ball ammunition the exact loadings and chamber pressures from one country to another did vary wildly at times. Add to that the use of surplus WW2 manufacture propellants as a cost cutting measure along with uncertain storage conditions in hot climates and actual chamber pressures of some low grade milsurp 7.62 can blow the lid off the strongest rifle.
I had some I broke down for components and found the powder smelled like cat urine and disintegrated a steel IMR powder can I put it in. The cases had pinholes under the brown scabs I cleaned away. Even the gilding metal cladding peeled away from the steel jackets.

Lousy quality ammunition has ruined many a rifle. I no longer use milsurp ammo other than as a source of bullets and/or boxer primed cases. I would use freshly manufactured milspec M80 Ball ammo with no reservations. so long as I knew how it had been stored, but M118 Long Range Special Ball (intended for LMGs and Sniper rifles) is too hot for the 93 action. The max chamber pressure of M118 is just short of that of a proof test load (58,000 CUP) for the early mausers.
Some lots generate less chamber pressure than others, but continuous use will cause excessive wear or damage.

PS
Metalurgy improved greatly around WW1 but even early Swedish Mausers can exhibit cracks and such.
A very early Carl Gustave M96 I examined had a crack at the firing pin retractor cam . Only one I've seen on a mauser so far.
Properly smelted vanadium steels such as those used for later M96 mausers were only available on a mass production basis after the First World War, mainly due to the efforts of the automobile industry.

[gnoahhh]

While such a beast as a .308 M1916 probably won't come unglued on you, I would've used the money to stock up on ammo/reloading components instead. $200 worth of powder and primers may well come in handier than a dubious old army rifle.

[Earlwb]

I think that if you didn't try to use surplus military ammo in them, that the rifles would hold up well and work OK. I never tried firing surplus military ammo in mine. There are some hot loaded machine gun specific military surplus ammo out there that should not be used in anything except a machine gun. But as mentioned already some of the surplus ammo could be a mixed lot with proof loads, machine gun loads etc mixed in. The problem is that we really do not know the provenance of the military surplus ammo, how it was stored, how old is it, and so on. Some of that stuff could be really bad or really dangerous. I would not be surprised that some smart aleck discovered a large lot of military surplus ammo that was stored away because it had a manufacturing problem but there wasn't anyone around to tell them why it wasn't used. So they get it and sell it off to unsuspecting buyers.

[Tackleberry41]

Only reason I loaded 308 to this date was experimenting with cast loads in my CETME. Again I do not own a box of off the shelf 308, never bought any. CETME are not known to like the commercial ammo, so do not see me buying any. Seems the ever so simple solution is to get out some of the 308 brass I have and simply use 300 Savage data for any jacketed I feel like loading. And use it to test my 308 cast.

If I get bored with it, the other options are: a drop in barrel in 7mm or 6.5mm mauser. Or one of the kits to use 45ACP in it, could easily run some of the 460 rowland I have been using in my blackhawk.

[Soundguy]

I'd load it to CETME levels...or 7mm mauser.. etc..

[Soundguy]

I'm glad this discussion started, because it made me think of another slightly similar, but ?less? talked about issue.

Turkish mausers.

What about the 1893 actions 'modernized' to m38 and chambered in 8mm mauser?

You never hear anyone worry about their strengths. Looking at the m38 you see lots of different guns...

[JRPVT]

I just checked some of the Spanish Ammo I have that's marked 7.62mm para F.A. Cetme, there is no NATO x in circle stamp on the case head. There is, however, 7.62-C stamped on the case head.
Grabbed it at a gun show thinking it would be cheap plinking for my M1A...Wrong! Single shot only, there is not enough pressure to move the bolt more than half an inch. That started me on the headstamp search, and finding out why this ammo was made.
Apparently when NATO 7.62 is used in the Cetme, it really beat the guns up, so they came up with this load which cycles them, but doesn't break them. Hope this helps. Dave

[brstevns]

Load it using 300 Savage Load data you will be fine, I have one and that is what I do. Don't think a target or a deer will know the difference between it and a 308 win. The 300 savage has been taking game for years.

[Scharfschuetze]

Load it using 300 Savage Load data you will be fine, I have one and that is what I do. Don't think a target or a deer will know the difference between it and a 308 win. The 300 savage has been taking game for years.

Very good advice Brstevns.

[Multigunner]

Sound Guy wrote
"Turkish mausers.

What about the 1893 actions 'modernized' to m38 and chambered in 8mm mauser?

You never hear anyone worry about their strengths. Looking at the m38 you see lots of different guns... "

Rifles such as these along with the GEW88 rifles are why Remington loaded their generic 8MM hunting ammo with bullets intended for the 32-40 and with a modest charge and velocity. They sold millions of rounds of these mild loads for good reasons.

Personally I have yet to see anyone post on any board I've visited about owning and shooting the 91 actioned M38 rifle. If thousands were imported and sold without any safety warnings I don't doubt someone somewhere would try feeding it the Luftwaffe 7.92 aircraft gun ammo with 60,000 CUP chamber pressure and we'd hear about the results.
A re-barreling shop manual I once looked through had plenty of blown up mausers of all models in it, these guns are not indestructible.

[Soundguy]

Back when those 1893 ,etc, rifles were converted to the longer and more powerful 8mm mauser, I'm sure they were shooting the same 8mm ammo as the 98+ actions... Makes you wonder.

I have dozens of Turks, all with differing amounts of headspace, from 'as new' to very nearly closing on a field gauge.

While I may have handled a couple Turks that swallowed fields in my lifetime, it sure wasn't any more than that.

I'd say those actions were/are likely stronger than those spanish 1916, that's a guess/opinion anyway.

[Multigunner]

Soundguy how many of the Turk 8mms you owned were built on 1893 type actions?

The Turks used many GEW88 rifles, originally intended for the milder 8mm J bore cartridge. The 1893 Muser could likely handle the J bore cartridge with no problems, and certainly the U S standard commercial 8mm hunting cartridge.
The 7.92 S bore cartridge was a powerful round but not quite as intense as the WW2 era heavy ball cartridge the Germans used in the 98 K rifles and LMGs.
I could be mistaken but I was under the impression that the Turks continued to use a WW1 era type Ball cartridge not as hot as the WW2 heavy Ball cartridge. In neither case were the standard infantry ball cartridges as hot as the NATO M118 LR Special Ball I mentioned as being to hot for the 93 actioned rifle converted to 7.62.

I would not knowingly use hot LMG loads in a 98K for that matter. German troops were issued a single five round stripper clip of the standard LMG AP cartridge for use in emergency situations if pinned down by a AFV or an MG that had a gunshield that protected the gunners.
As I said the Luftwaffe used some very hot loads and this ammo made its way to the battlefields when aircraft MGs were adapted to ground use after they could no longer put most of their aircraft into the air due to fuel shortages. Even this hot ammo was within the safety margin of a good condition 98 rifle, though it would accelerate wear. It was though loaded to chamber pressures that exceeded the proof test pressures of the earlier Mausers. The operating pressure of M118 LR Special Ball is about the same as the proof test pressures of the GEW88 and early Mausers which was 58,000 CUP.

The original NATO infantry ball specifications are for a chamber pressure of no more than 48,000 CUP, within the safety limits of a 1893 action in very good condition. The M118 greatly exceeds that limitation. Many long Range target rounds in .308 generate even higher pressures than the M118 cartridge.

The rifle actions design is no weaker than it was when it was first converted, but the available ammunition in 7.62 NATO and .308 Winchester may now be too hot for it, especially if the conversion was not well done or the bore has degraded.
Also Spain has always had a problem with low grade iron ore. They developed many methods of purifying the ores because they had too. Medieval Japan also had poor grade Iron Ore, which is a major reason why they kept invading Korea to obtain better ores.
Depending on where and when made a Spanish 93 action can be as good as any mauser, or it can be dead soft , full of inclusions and wear quickly. Hopefully the bad examples were weeded out long ago.

[Soundguy]

I have at least a few 93 Turks, and a couple, three 88's.

I dont know what all ammo turkey used, but many won't use Turk in sa actions.

[Tackleberry41]

The turk ammo most of us are used to, is that overly hot surplus that was dirt cheap for a long time. I have to go thru what I have here or there to weed out the ones with split necks. Just shoddy brass was used. Hard to find one that doesn't split on firing.

My understanding of the downloaded US 8mm is those old questionable rifles it will fit in with the tighter bores vs trying to make it work in converted small ring rifles. They always have to err on the side of caution.

Maybe someday people on both sides of the pond will sit down and come up with some sort of universal system so we dont have to deal with US and Euro specs. Tho would imagine such talks are doomed before they begin as the US would insist on using our archaic measurement system, vs what the other 95% of the planet uses.

[Multigunner]

Found a break down and chrono test of the Turk ammo dated 1843. The Turk bullets were circa 150 gr (probably 154) and velocity was 2875 FPS out of a 98 K barrel. About the same ballistically as NATO standard M80 Ball ammunition.

I've run across re printed articles on post WW1 imported German sporting rifles, and apparently many were built on surplus GEW98 or 98a small ring actions bought in unfinished condition from factories and heat treated and finished out by the gunsmith, with widely varying quality of heat treatment.

[Soundguy]

The turk ammo most of us are used to, is that overly hot surplus that was dirt cheap for a long time. I have to go thru what I have here or there to weed out the ones with split necks. Just shoddy brass was used. Hard to find one that doesn't split on firing.

My understanding of the downloaded US 8mm is those old questionable rifles it will fit in with the tighter bores vs trying to make it work in converted small ring rifles. They always have to err on the side of caution.

Maybe someday people on both sides of the pond will sit down and come up with some sort of universal system so we dont have to deal with US and Euro specs. Tho would imagine such talks are doomed before they begin as the US would insist on using our archaic measurement system, vs what the other 95% of the planet uses.


I think it's the .318 vs .323 issue...

[Multigunner]

The U S military uses the EPVAT transducer method for all small arms other than the M118 LR special Ball which is tested using the older Copper Units of Pressure method. This has lead to errors in comparing the M118 maximum pressure specs to those of the M80 Ball cartridge. The Standard operating Max for the M118 is 52,000 CUP not 52,000 PSI. The Standard operating Max for the M80 Ball is 48,000 CUP or 50,000 PSI EPVAT. The real difference comes in when they test for maximum allowable pressure under conditions of high ambient temperatures or when chambered in an already very hot barrel after long firing sessions. I lost my Army Propellant procurement file when my last PC crashed and burned in a storm but IIRC the maximum allowable pressure for the M118 at 130 degrees is 57,000 CUP. Hogdon has listed Long Range Match loads for the .308 with operating pressures of over 59,000 CUP.

BTW
The Radial Crusher Copper Unit of Pressure method was adopted from the French. The U S Army had previously used a method where a chisel like blade was forced into a block of copper.
Other than the expression of pressures in PSI ,CUP, BAR or Metric Atmospheres the only differences in U S testing Methods and European testing methods has been exactly where the crusher pistons or Transducers are placed in the chamber wall. EPVAT uses transducers mounted at the case mouth while C.I.P uses transducers mounted at the case wall.
The British BAR and Mainland European Metric Atmosphere pressure readings are easily translated into PSI.


A rifle doesn't have to blow up in my face like a pipebomb for me to recognize that a particular load is too hot for it. Lug setback is a sure sign the action is not up to the pressure levels its been subjected to. After enough lug setback blow primers in an action with little or no gas escape provisions can cost an eye or worse.
A Hatcher hole might be a good addition to a 7.62 chambered 93 actioned rifle.

[Tackleberry41]

300 savage data really doesnt work, yea its within 4% of 308 case capacity, and the pressure is right. The OAL length is a problem. 300 savage is considerably shorter, pushing it out to 308 length throws everything off. 2500fps in the book went to 2050fps.

Most books do not list actual pressure, the Lee book does, but only max. But the hodgden site shows the pressure for min and max loads. Min 308 loads are well under the 46kpsi. I compensated for military brass, all I have. Book data really is little more than a guide. Hodgden showed Varget as the highest velocity, but in actual use came in lowest. I had bought some 748 as in some data it came in higher for lower pressure. I keep Varget, Benchmark, H/IMR4895 on the shelf for various uses. I do not have the mauser in my hands, but can run them thru my CETME. Just not going to get the brass back.

46gr of 748 with a Hornady 150gr BTSP interlock, OAL 2.80" gave 2562-2625fps, Av 2591, ES 62.82.
44.5gr H4895 same bullet and length gave 2597-2659fps, Av 2639, ES 62.22.
45gr Varget same bullet and length gave 2514-2550fps, Av 2536, ES 36.55.

All charges were weighed on a jewelers scale that goes to .01gr. Think I will go with the 748 as it gives less pressure, even the max load at Hodgden was only 2kpsi over max. Maybe someday ammo companies will use realistic barrels to come up with data. Hodgden used a 24in barrel for the 308, which is probably pretty rare to see in use.

[racepres]

300 savage data really doesnt work, yea its within 4% of 308 case capacity, and the pressure is right. The OAL length is a problem. 300 savage is considerably shorter, pushing it out to 308 length throws everything off. 2500fps in the book went to 2050fps.

Most books do not list actual pressure, the Lee book does, but only max. But the hodgden site shows the pressure for min and max loads. Min 308 loads are well under the 46kpsi. I compensated for military brass, all I have. Book data really is little more than a guide. Hodgden showed Varget as the highest velocity, but in actual use came in lowest. I had bought some 748 as in some data it came in higher for lower pressure. I keep Varget, Benchmark, H/IMR4895 on the shelf for various uses. I do not have the mauser in my hands, but can run them thru my CETME. Just not going to get the brass back.

46gr of 748 with a Hornady 150gr BTSP interlock, OAL 2.80" gave 2562-2625fps, Av 2591, ES 62.82.
44.5gr H4895 same bullet and length gave 2597-2659fps, Av 2639, ES 62.22.
45gr Varget same bullet and length gave 2514-2550fps, Av 2536, ES 36.55.

All charges were weighed on a jewelers scale that goes to .01gr. Think I will go with the 748 as it gives less pressure, even the max load at Hodgden was only 2kpsi over max. Maybe someday ammo companies will use realistic barrels to come up with data. Hodgden used a 24in barrel for the 308, which is probably pretty rare to see in use.

Considerably shorter???? in the NECK ...not gonna hurt a thing..
I have shot thousands of cast loads...308 by the Lyman book...thru my 1916 Spanish...with a Scout scope it is a really neat piece. If someone has one they don't want...Send it to me...I'll pay shipping!!!!

[Tackleberry41]

No there is a considerable difference in OAL. Data in Lee book for 150gr in 300 Sav is 2.520", the 308 data is for 2.800. So Savage data loaded in 308 to 308 length gives alot lower pressure and velocity.

[racepres]

No there is a considerable difference in OAL. Data in Lee book for 150gr in 300 Sav is 2.520", the 308 data is for 2.800. So Savage data loaded in 308 to 308 length gives alot lower pressure and velocity.

Yes by the Book OAL is much different..
I just use Published 308 cast bullet data...Never a Problem..tho I put my OAL where I want it...
Just checked [never gave it a Thought] my 300sav. is 2.575 with same Boollit as my 308 which comes out at 2.700.
These are tailored to My Guns...YMMV
Fact remains. The Spanish 1916 makes an excellent Cast Boolit shooter..Giving up Nothing to any other 308!!!
My Savage, OTOH, suffers from a Short neck, and needs specific Boolits..

[Tackleberry41]

Picked it up yesterday. Cant complain, groups good. Only issue I had was, and one would have thought somebody in the last 70 yrs would have fixed, was the magazine. The follower would hang up on the lip at the rear of the mag box, making it hard to load. NO way it would load from a stripper clip. Couple minutes with a file and its fine. Can you modify the mag follower so the bolt will simply push it down when empty vs, having to stop and push it down to close the bolt?

[tdoor4570]

Yes that can be done just file the back of the follower to an angle where it stops the bolt so the bolt will push the follower down when you close the bolt . just look at it and you will see where it needs filed down

[racepres]

If it is a 1916 Spanish...It should close on the follower...as All I have seen are already Tapered at the follower...Not hard to modify tho...first check that follower...it could be from a K98!! In which case it has enough worth to Move it to a Collector an buy a Couple of Spanish Followers...
If ya need a Pic of the follower Mod, LMK I'll get ya one...

[43PU]

Check this out


http://www.jgsales.com/mobile/advanced_search_result.php?keywords=Spanish&search_in_description=1&search=submit

[Soundguy]

They 7x57 example of good,used , probably should say very, very used, then not cleaned, and then stored poorly...

[racepres]

Yea...I heard they were poor at best.
But, if someone gets one, and wants to change the stock and Furniture...I would really love a Stock set!!!

[JHeath]

Picked it up yesterday. Cant complain, groups good. Only issue I had was, and one would have thought somebody in the last 70 yrs would have fixed, was the magazine. The follower would hang up on the lip at the rear of the mag box, making it hard to load. NO way it would load from a stripper clip. Couple minutes with a file and its fine. Can you modify the mag follower so the bolt will simply push it down when empty vs, having to stop and push it down to close the bolt?

I had a 1916 that was passed down to me by a VERY knowledgeable, accomplished rifleman with a background in firearms engineering. He'd installed a Williams aperture sight, removed the issue sight, and slickly covered the gap with a fitted 03A3 handguard. He used it as a budget practice/trainer rifle to give his Obermeyer barreled M1A competition rifles a rest. IIRC it shot pretty well. A relative absconded with it and I miss it, especially since my rifleman friend passed away.

It had a similar issue with the follower. I loosened the bottom steel, jiggled it, heard something click into place, reassembled it just so and it was fine.

As noted above White reportedly tested these rifles on behalf of Samco and they failed at 98,000psi. That's a lowish design factor, not "unsafe" but not as safe as some other rifles. By comparison IIRC a high number 1903 fails around 125,000psi and the worst of the low-numbered 1903s failed around 80,000. So a good 1903 has a design factor around 2:1. I think a Redhawk tests around 2.5:1. If you load cast for a low number 1903 at 25,000lbs that's better than 3:1 so arguably safer than a Redhawk if you don't screw up.

So 7.62x51 through a 1916 Mauser is okay, but it has none of the safeguards of a 98 or clone. Probably it's about as safe as a Swede but those let go sometimes. I shot my 1916 Spanish and would still do so. Riding a horse is taking a partially-controlled risk and shooting a 1916 seems if anything more reasonable than that. We let 12 year old girls ride horses so I figure a 54 year old man can shoot a Spanish Mauser without whimpering too much about it.

[Tackleberry41]

I cant complain about the rifle. I modded a williams to fit in the factory sight base, so you can actually aim it now. The follower, seems they came both ways, the original style that prevented the bolt from closing when empty, and some that would close. Found a place selling both kinds. Not going to spend money on it, and its not valuable, so no issue to modify the existing one. Used a file to fix it so the follower would get hung up on the magwell trying to load it. Again would think sometime in the last 100yrs somebody would have fixed that. Have resolved its going to be a zero dollar rifle, no stocks, triggers, scopes, etc.

Some ammo wasnt an issue, not afraid to fire it with the surplus 7.62x51 I have. But easy enough to load some ammo. Have couple hundred free lake city brass. Plenty of 30 cal bullets under the bench. Just use close to min data to keep the pressure down. 43gr of Win748 behind a 150gr BTSP got me 2593fps, with ES of only 6.67fps. Have some cast I made other day, need to powder coat em so can test them. Some 200gr lyman, and a 165gr NOE I bought for my 30-30, which doesnt like anything cast. And gives me a platform to mess with some subsonic, has enough barrel past the front sight to thread it. Its a bit more troublesome to mess with subsonic in a CETME, my only other 308.