Printable View
Yup, a Chilean in 250-3000 is sweet, some feeding issues tho.. on mine anyway...Quote:
Originally Posted by jimkim
the 35 Rem, is superlative on a Large ring... But this action was kinda Swiss Cheezed by??? a Practicing Smith??
Feeds Great... depending on the Boolit..
that i did not know. you learn something new every day.Quote:
Originally Posted by 405grain
What about this one http://www.antiquearmsinc.com/1895-c...er-rifle-2.htm shows a anchor and chain
FLINTFIRE: Now that one is definitely an anchor! The Chileans did in fact have a Navy, and the rifle you pointed out is obviously from that service. The "anchor" that I was talking about is a small stamp on the right hand side of the receiver. There's sometimes another stamp which can cause confusion on Ludwig Loewe rifles. Mr. Loewe was a Hebrew, and on several models of Mauser's made by his company there's a small star of David stamped on the receiver. These aren't Israeli Mauser's because Israel didn't exist then. Mr. Loewe was just taking pride in his religion.
405grain I was wondering about the star of david and had came to the conclusion he was showing his belief , wish more today took pride in their heritage , I know nothing about the Chilean mausers just came across that link .
Now I need to look at my commission rifle see what it is marked .
What would be interesting to know is if that setback was residual i.e., from the get of the rebuild. I mean, I wonder if they would have resurfaced the races and thus removed some casing (not a sensible idea) or just headspace to what was extant in which case the setback might (?) have been there all along. I Have '95 and '93's with setback in the original caliber, 7x57.Quote:
Originally Posted by Dutchman
Greetings all the way to Homer...Quote:
Originally Posted by copperlake
Your basic misunderstanding here is 1-how gov't bureaucracies work... 2- how military dictatorships work.... 3- the low cost of army conscripts in a South American country.
And while I applaud your technical curiosity I'm afraid your most valid questions will forevermore remain unanswered until the sun burns out and the 3rd ice age encompasses earth. Anything else is just a WAG.
Dutch (who supports the Alaska fishing industry)
Many times what is perceived as "bolt lug set back" in Mauser actions of all models, including M98s, is actually the "seating/mating of the bolt lugs to the locking surfaces. This initial seating or the bolt lugs to the action was expected. Usually after the initial seating no further "set back" with normal milsurp ammunition was expected or experienced. If the set back did continue then eventually the bolt would form a recess in the lug area and could not be opened after firing because the case would hold the lugs back in the recesses. Acceptable headspace specifications were/are much longer than acceptable commercial standards. With the CRF Mauser actions the extractor holds the case back against the bolt to fire so the case bolt to shoulder headspace dimension isn't really a factor. If the chamber headspace is to long the case simply fire forms. The military "field" go gauge was very generous in length for all the Mauser military cartridges.
Not saying that the picture posted wasn't "set back". Just saying we shouldn't confuse normal seating of the lugs in Mauser actions with "set back". My M95 is till in original 7x57 and is in excellent condition as it was sporterized probably when in was basically new. The headspace does exceed the SAAMI no-go headspace dimension.......
Additionally, the actual average psi of milsurp 7x57 is much higher than most think. I have measured the psi of various milsurp 7x57 [Spanish, Chilean, Venezuelan and German). The measured psi's run from 54,000 upwards of 60,000 psi. The 1918 DWM ran 55,000 psi. The Chilean F.M.F ran 55,300 psi. The the 2 different lots of Spanish PS 1950 ran 60,000+ psi.
I would not shoot one of the 7.62 converted rifle with service 7.62 or .308W ammunition as that conversion has indeed proved to be unsafe. Some of the M95s were also converted using 2 groove barrels believed to have been originally made for the M1903A3. I have see a couple of those but the rifling didn't exactly look like that in 'A3 2 groove barrels so I'm not really sure about those barrel origins. Those would be safe to shoot with standard 7.62 M80 type ball as the psi is similar to the 7x57 milsurp ammunition the Chileans loaded.
However, Dutch's cautions regarding the sleeved chambered barrels are certainly noteworthy.
Dutchman, thanks for the reply. You probably don't remember me as I haven't been active for some time but I sent you a re-typed copy of what Ackley wrote re his blow-up tests when I went down this rabbit hole:Quote:
Originally Posted by Dutchman
https://castboolits.gunloads.com/sho...low-up-project
I did all that during a time in my life that I had a lot of free time for an unusual reason that changed to having to work, again. Now that I am building my last boat and will never (I hope, at 73 years) have to slave again, I've been thinking about adding some more to that thread in a more deliberate way.
A hat tip that you support an industry that has fed my family.
Larry, I disagree a bit about setback. It is, obviously, a REAL thing though I understand what you are saying which has to do with manufacturing tolerances: no way under high-speed production can BOTH locking lugs mate perfectly with their mating surfaces - not possible. Longitudinal bolt slop can take up some of that not both lugs mating perfectly and I have seen that differential in some actions- one lug impressed deeper than another, measurably from (what else to go by?) the receiver ring face.
A little anecdote: I have four Brazilian FN 1894 receivers that have been around the block judging by their exterior condition and NONE of them even show polish on the lug races. I have turned two into shooters and boy, howdy, they are hard as bricks to work.
copperlake
I don't think we're in disagreement at all. Yes, there can indeed be lug setback. My point is; we should not infer that normal "seating/mating" of the bolt lugs be confused with actual setback. Often that is the case which leads to the unnecessary condemnation of many actions.
Larry, then we agree, thank you.Quote:
Originally Posted by Larry Gibson
I feel compelled to attach a pic of extreme setback. I could go on about what I think this pic reveals about a 1916 mauser coming apart as it relates to how (I think) most bolt actions come undone but that would be pages. Nonetheless, here we have 'setback' in the extreme.
As you said: "If the set back did continue then eventually the bolt would form a recess in the lug area and could not be opened after firing because the case would hold the lugs back in the recesses." I offer the pic to pointedly confirm your statement.
Attachment 286854