Argentino Model 1891


PDA






Flyboy73
February 6, 2006, 01:43 AM
Was at a acution and they had listed a Mauser Argentina model 1891 with monte carlo stock and tasco scope.

I thought before this may have been a Bubbafied Argentina Mauser. But this apperars to be a sporting rifle from the start.

On the side it says "Mauser Modelo Argentino 1891 Deutsche Waffen-UND Munitionsfabriker Berlin"

It has no front site and a extendad mag(instead of the flush mauser floorplate), which the bottom pivots out after removing a screw.

I could find no info on this gun in the Gun blue book.

I paid $130 for it, and as I was loading it into my van, a guy came up, said he missed it, looked at and offered me $150 for it. I took his number and told him i would call him back.

My gut told me it was worth more.

Can anyone give me some info on the gun? Its value?

Also what is it chambered in? I could not find it on the gun.

Thanks
Brion

If you enjoyed reading about "Argentino Model 1891" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!
kentucky_smith
February 6, 2006, 02:01 AM
http://www.surplusrifle.com/argentine1891/index.asp

Probably sporterized.


Manufactured in Germany, the Modelo 1891 Argentine Mauser replaced the .43 caliber Remington Rolling Block rifle as the standard issue Argentine military rifle. Based upon the same Mauser protruding box magazine design as the Belgian 1889 and Turkish 1890 Mauser rifles. The Modelo 1891 had a short service life as it was replaced by the more modern Modelo 1909 Argentine Mauser in 1909. The 1891 is chambered in the 7.65x53mm Mauser cartridge and is a very long, slender, elegant, and beautifully made Mauser rifle.

dfariswheel
February 6, 2006, 02:11 AM
The 1891 Argentine was made by Ludwig Loewe and after Loewe combined with a German cartridge maker, DWM.

These were very fine rifles, but not nearly as strong as the later 1893-94-95-and 98 Mauser's.

During the between the war years, the 91 Mauser was a favorite of German custom hunting rifle makers for building light weight stalking rifles.

Argentine 1891 Mauser's were made in 29 inch rifles, and 17 inch cavalry carbines.

Many of these had the Argentine crest ground off the receiver ring after Argentine rifles started turning up in a war between two Central American countries.
When questioned about this, Argentina began grinding the crest off surplus rifles.
Later, this practice was ended and rifles with intact crests were again sold.

Huge quantities of both the rifles and carbines were imported into the US, and you see many of them that were converted to sporter rifles of various qualities.

Original caliber was the Mauser/Argentine 7.65mm.
These rifles are not suitable for use with more powerful cartridges.

Value depends entirely on the condition of the rifle and the quality of the sporterization.

Gordon
February 6, 2006, 02:47 AM
On the model 91 alpine/Calvary carbine (not the engineer carbine) the bayonet mount took a cut down version of the brass handled Remington rolling block bayonet. This makes a cool combo. I'll see if I can take a picture:D

Flyboy73
February 6, 2006, 09:09 PM
Think you guys are right Sporterized 1891 argentine. Looks like a really good job though. Now Need to decide on to sell it or not.


Brion

asknight
February 6, 2006, 10:30 PM
I don't know the true value of the things, but I paid $40 to a pawn shop for my 1891 Loewe sporterized cavalry carbine with all matching numbers and G to VG bore. My stock is the original stock, and it appears that they only removed the handguard. Due to the nature of pawn shops, makes me wonder what they paid the guy that pawned it in the first place. They are a hoot to shoot, and the 7.65ARG is real close to .308 ballistics.

I don't remember where I looked up my serial # on the net, but it reported that mine was made in 1894. A google search will likely give you more info on your rifle.

I've seen un-sporterized 1891 Argy's going for $200+ on many sites.

Roudy
February 6, 2006, 10:49 PM
Here is my 1891 Argentino. Don't know what they are selling for, but I wouldn't sell mine. It has had the crest ground off, but other than that is totally original. A beautiful example of turn of the century workmanship. The action is silky smooth and the bore is mirror shiny.

If the sporsterized rifle you are looking at has a good bore it is well worth the asking price....the rest can be corrected. The 7.65 cartridge is not hard to haldload, you can even make cases from a 30-06 case.

Deles136
February 7, 2006, 01:41 AM
Does anyone know where I can find a stock for the carbine type of these rifles ?

Many thanks,

dfariswheel
February 7, 2006, 02:10 AM
Stocks, especially for a carbine are going to be almost impossible to find.

Here's some '91 Argentine parts suppliers:

http://www.e-gunparts.com/productschem.asp?chrMasterModel=1780z91%20ARGENTINE

http://ssporters.com/

Cosmoline
February 7, 2006, 02:18 AM
I thought before this may have been a Bubbafied Argentina Mauser. But this apperars to be a sporting rifle from the start.

On the side it says "Mauser Modelo Argentino 1891 Deutsche Waffen-UND Munitionsfabriker Berlin"

It has no front site and a extendad mag(instead of the flush mauser floorplate), which the bottom pivots out after removing a screw.



Bubba for certain. The originals all had front sights and to my knowledge no '91's were ever mounted for scopes. The '09's filled that role later on, and continued in service all the way through the conflict with the UK.

Deles136
February 7, 2006, 03:25 AM
Thanks for the links - Someone butchered the existing stock and I may just have to live with it.

Many thanks,

Jim Watson
February 7, 2006, 12:44 PM
Bubba strikes again, call the guy who offered you a profit.
The price of 7.65 ammo will hurt your feelings, if you can find some in the first place.

asknight
February 7, 2006, 12:47 PM
Bubba strikes again, call the guy who offered you a profit.
The price of 7.65 ammo will hurt your feelings, if you can find some in the first place.

I agree about the profit part, but ammo can be found. Graf's makes it, and Yugoslavia is loading non-corrosive boxer primed rounds for it.

Jim Watson
February 7, 2006, 12:55 PM
Yup.
Graf's has 7.65 Argie in stock
Dollar a pop for Hornady, $.65 for Yugo.
Couple afternoons at the range, he's spent the price of the rifle in ammo.
It's been years since I saw any surplus advertised, but then I'm not looking for it.
Do you handload, Deles?

Deles136
February 8, 2006, 01:14 AM
Jim Watson - Yes I do handload but I have a good supply of surplus &.65 ammo. I found some at Century, I think, about a year ago so I can reload and have enough to supply me. I will check Grafs.

Many thanks,

Flyboy73
February 8, 2006, 04:07 AM
I was placing an order with Sportsmanguide and picked up a box for $18. Not sure if that is pricey though.

Brion

Roudy
February 8, 2006, 09:37 AM
7.65 brass is relatively easy to make from 30-06.

1. Run the 30-06 brass through a 7.65 Argentine sizing die.
2. Roughly trim to length with a hacksaw...cut a little long.
3. Trim to length with a Lee 7.65 trimmer, and deburr.
4. Load and fireform.

Viola....7.65 Argentine brass. Fortunately I bought a lot of once fired military 30-06 brass many years ago at about a penny each. If you use brass that has been fired you 'might' need to sized in a set of small base dies first. Make a few cases and try them in your chamber so see if they will fit.

Buck-eye
January 25, 2007, 09:19 PM
I think I have the bayonet that fits on this rifle. I was looking up info on it and that is how I found this site/thread.

Here is a link to info on the bayonet;

http://arms2armor.com/Bayonets/arg1891a.htm

I found a couple prices(bought for not just listed) for this bayonet on some antique auction sites...both were right about $123.oo. If that is what the bayonet is worth I would say you got a steal on the rifle.

Buck-eye
January 25, 2007, 09:43 PM
Here is a link I found with some prices on these rifles from a dealer.

http://www.nagelsguns.net/NagelsRifles.htm

Flyboy73
January 26, 2007, 01:30 AM
The gun is missing its bayonet lug. being thats sporterized value of it goes way down. Not a easy canadite to change back.

I did pick up a orginal one to go with it. Its a nice rifle, would make a great deer gun.

Brion

browningguy
January 26, 2007, 12:17 PM
I bought one a couple of years ago, kind of a shame for the guys collecting originals as it's all matching with a full crest.

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v11/jcm9371/Rifles/1891mauseraction.jpg

They are only worth what someone will pay, but if I found another one of this quality I'd go $400-500 easily, it's a nice example of post-WWII sporterizing. This one was done by Williams supposedly in the early '50's.

Tokugawa
January 26, 2007, 12:51 PM
Are you guys using factoy ammo? I have been gettin leery of using the Norms, apparently it spec's at 52,000 psi. When us commercial ammo for the 7 x 57 is held to 46,000 psi because of the "old" 1895 mausers, it sort of scares me to use the norma stuff in a 1891

Harry Paget Flashman
January 26, 2007, 04:12 PM
I got one for $173 a few months ago at a gun store. A guy was trying to sell two Savages and had the 1891 in his truck. The store owner bought only one of the Savages and the guy offered the 1891 for $250. The owner didn't want it so I offered the guy everything I had in my wallet...turned out to be $173 and the guy took it. The rifle was in superb shape. A real beauty.

Prvi Partizan ammo in 7.65 was going for $8.95/20 box at Aim Surplus.

browningguy
January 26, 2007, 04:27 PM
I handload a mild 180 grain load for mine at about 2350 FPS.

fatelk
January 26, 2007, 05:28 PM
I bought an 1891 in 7.65 years ago, for $75 I think. It's in excellent condition with a perfect bore, but minimally sporterized with a shortened barrel. The problem is accuracy is non existant. The front part of the chamber seems to be damaged or galled, perhaps the reamer chattered or something. I took the barrel off to recrown the muzzle (hadn't been properly done by the person who shortened it), didn't get the receiver wrench on right, and dinged the receiver. Didn't hurt anything functionally, but it bugs me every time I see it. I wanted to convert it to 7.62x39, either that or get rid of it. Has anyone heard of this kind of conversion before?

browningguy
January 26, 2007, 06:28 PM
This is three shots at 100 yards, rested of course with my sporterized Argie, it's extremely consistant around .7-.85" 3 shot groups with the handload. I'm not sure how it would hold groups as the barrel heats though, nothing is bedded in the stock.

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v11/jcm9371/7.jpg

The peep sights are the only way I can shoot non-scoped rifles any more.

Tokugawa
January 26, 2007, 08:45 PM
That is one nice group!
Fat elk, I have heard that the 1891 rifles are partial to heavy long bullets. As far as a 7.62x39 conversion, I have also contemplated it, I think they both use a similar dia. bullet, of course the 39 is going to be way lighter. Haevenot looked at the case head dia. to see if the bolt face will work.

fatelk
January 28, 2007, 01:37 AM
If I convert mine to 7.62x39, I will use a new barrel. I used to work for a gunsmith and can still get free barrel work on rare occasion, as well as inexpensive takeoff barrels. I haven't really looked at the magazine to see if I can make it work reliably with the shorter round.
The bolt face for the 7.65 is slightly larger than required for the 7.62, but looks like it should work fine.
I think this conversion would make a very handy carbine.

SlamFire1
January 28, 2007, 05:28 PM
OK I have an all matching high percentage (ground crest) 1891. Shot it and greased it up. Do not want to shoot it too much. Why?

The rifle was made in 1891 or there abouts. No matter how precise the metal work, beatiful the bluing, the metallurgy on that rifle is 1891. Without writing a history on metal development, let me say airplanes were 12 years in the future, the discovery of stainless steels about 20 years, in the mid 1890’s “nickel steel” was considered rocket science. I heard shock impact testing was not accepted until the 1910’s. The process controls and the quality of the steel in these rifles is too iffy to put my face behind it for an extended period of time.

A gun bud that I used to work with was at the range. He was given an 1895 Mauser to shoot. Do not remember if it was customized or stock, but he would not shoot a rusty dangerous thing. I do remember him showing me how he stuck his pinky in the chamber to see if there were any obstructions. He was real careful about risking his face, so I suspect the ammo was factory not reloads. On the first shot the receiver ring took off to parts unknown. The gist of it was the rifle looked fine, no corrosion, ammo was fine, the bore and chamber were not obstructed, and yet the receiver shattered. No injury to the shooter. If that metal had gone into his head we would not have been talking about it.

These things are old. So old that the metallurgy is suspect. Don’t shoot them, hang them on the wall. God save you if you get a bore obstruction or an overcharge.

NDCent
February 13, 2010, 12:50 PM
Wow, never heard this about poor quality metallurgy in these rifles before. I have owned one for over 40 years and shot it many hundreds of times. Ammunition was easily obtained back then, It was the first high power rifle I owned. Workmanship is outstanding, fit and finish the same. Mine is pristine condition, like the day it was manufactured, with the exception of the crest being ground. I'm sure you speak from an educated and much better knowledge base than I. However, I feel much safer with my cheek resting on the stock of this rifle over many in my collection of early made firearms. I may be carelessly naive but I still consider mine an occasional shooter, not a wall hanger.

SlamFire1
February 13, 2010, 02:21 PM
These things are old. So old that the metallurgy is suspect. Don’t shoot them, hang them on the wall. God save you if you get a bore obstruction or an overcharge

Perhaps I was being overcautious, but I will stand by what I said about the metal quality of the era.

I have a M1891. I zero'd it and put it away. I will not shoot it with ammo that could be considered "hot".

Until you read about the history of metallurgy, you just don't know how little they knew in the 1890's. By the time you get into the 30's metals were well defined and understood.

Anyone remember the progression of the semiconductor revolution? Metal science progressed almost that fast from the 1890's through +WWI. The early stuff, metals and chips, are primitive.

Double and single heat treat Springfields were made from steels that today are used as rebar. As mentioned in another thread, WWI era M1911's were not even heat treated!

There is just not a lot of margin if something goes wrong in early guns.

Anyone remember that the rivets on the Titantic were substandard? Lots of slag in the metal? "three times more slag than occurs in modern wrought iron" This was in 1912.
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/04/15/science/15titanic.html
http://dwb.unl.edu/teacher/nsf/c10/c10links/chemistry.about.com/library/weekly/aa022800a.htm
http://shipwrecks.wordpress.com/2008/01/04/metallurgy-of-the-rms-titanic/

This death trap was state of the art fourteen years after the M1891.

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v479/SlamFire/Farman.jpg

Gelgoog
February 13, 2010, 02:28 PM
^^^

Utter horse****. How often did you hear about these guns having critical failures? The 1891 Argentine Mauser has been a favorite amongst hunters around the world for almost 100 years now. The action is strong enough for handloading and can handle upwards of 60,000 PSI in common use and will start to have critical failures around 90,000 PSI.

jimmyraythomason
February 13, 2010, 02:41 PM
Prvi Partizan ammo in 7.65 was going for $8.95/20 box at Aim Surplus. That's what I paid too.

rcmodel
February 13, 2010, 02:45 PM
So old that the metallurgy is suspect. Don’t shoot them, hang them on the wall. Good grief!

Apparently you have never seen one?

They are made far better then any of todays commercial sporting rifles.

They are perfectly safe for the caliber & pressures they were designed for.

rc

Cosmoline
February 13, 2010, 02:49 PM
Got confused by a zombie thread, but the 91 Argie is plenty strong. The 98 pattern offers some additional strength but that's a design aspect not a question of steel quality.

rcmodel
February 13, 2010, 02:51 PM
I thought we were talking about Argentine 91 Mauser's?

rc

R.W.Dale
February 13, 2010, 03:13 PM
I have owned and shot these rifles extensively and IMO the metallurgy is fine for any sane loadings.

BUT

I do STRONGLY urge people to not fire these rifles even ONCE without ANSI approved eye protection. These rifles do not offer the safety in gas handling and deflection from the shooters face in the event of a ruptured primer or case that the later Mauser designs do.

But then again you SHOULD always be wearing eye protection when shooting anything!

Gelgoog
February 13, 2010, 03:29 PM
I would be more worried about a mosin nagant or M1 garand blowing up in my face, then I would a 91 Argentine. I have had 6 Argentine mausers, and none of them have ever had any problems. The fact they they are over 100 years old and look as though they just arrived from the factory should be testament.

If your worried about poor metalurgy in mausers look at spanish mausers...those are about the only ones that may be suspect. The early contract mausers made by DWM and Ludwig are some of the finest made military rifles out there.

SlamFire1
February 13, 2010, 05:07 PM
The action is strong enough for handloading and can handle upwards of 60,000 PSI in common use and will start to have critical failures around 90,000 PSI.

I have never seen these numbers in print. Where did you come up with these. ?

I would be more worried about a mosin nagant or M1 garand blowing up in my face, then I would a 91 Argentine

You consider a 91 Argentine safer than a Garand? What about a Garand makes you believe it will blow up in your face?

The fact they they are over 100 years old and look as though they just arrived from the factory should be testament

Let me finish this sentence: “should be testament that they have not been used in 110 years”

That is the only conclusion you can draw from a nice shiny antique. That it has not been used.

jimmyraythomason
February 13, 2010, 05:12 PM
Any 1891 Argy in good condition is perfectly safe for shooting regularly. Simply condemning ANYTHING on the basis of it's age is #####(not wise)#####.

SlamFire1
February 13, 2010, 08:04 PM
Good grief!

Apparently you have never seen one?

They are made far better then any of todays commercial sporting rifles.

They are perfectly safe for the caliber & pressures they were designed for.

To beat this dead horse further guys, let me say I know something about shooters. Most of you like old stuff. You like the history, you like the vintage design, and you hold historical objects in high esteem. So it aggravates you no end when someone criticizes your heritage.

But, older is not necessarily better.

The main source of the shooting communities information has been Gun Magazines and gunwriters. Every so often one of the magazines will run a vintage gun story, timed to help sales at Century Arms, or some other big importer.

So what do the shills say.You will read about the fine workmanship of these things. Check. They will describe the outstanding machine work. Check. You will read about the fine bluing. Check. And they will describe the very good accuracy you will get from a vintage gun. Check. They might also describe the vintage, often amusing design features of the things. Check.

But shill Gunwriters are at best French Majors. They can eat cake, but they don’t know how to bake a cake. They don’t know the difference between ultimate or yield, and the sure as heck don’t know nothing about the history of metallurgy.

That fine metal work, the beautiful finishes, the wonderful fit and finish are all paint hiding rotted wood. Or potentially rotted wood.

I am warning you guys because you are my guys, and I worry about you hard headed lunks hurting yourselves. :banghead:

So I am going to tell you that I have studied this topic, read and researched what I can, and the materials and process of that era are highly variable and greatly inferior to what we have today.

There are very few good detailed analyses of period metals. The third link leads you to a good one, unfortunately no pictures.

The only one I heard on action materials was on a M1909 Argentine. A metallurgist sent a detailed analysis to Ludwick Olsen. He summarized it something like “not metallurgically good material” Something short like that. What I would have given to read the full report.

Whenever I have read a metals analysis of the irons and carbon steels of that era, they are all “slag, impurities, low grade”. The Titanic analysis follows this trend, and the metals there are 21 years later. Just search for reviews on the Class C materials used in the 03 Springfields. Awful stuff. Springfield was unable to reheat the single heat treat receivers because of the carbon steels were just too varible in composition.

The design may be good, the workmanship great, but you should not trust the metals, and these old guns are iffy about margin.

This of course is my viewpoint. I have only one head and I don’t want to loose it or any fingers or eyes. And I don’t want you all to loose any non refundable body parts either.

That’s why I think they are best as wall hangers or shoot little and light.

Always wear your shooting glasses, new or old guns. Saved my eyes, twice.

Cosmoline
February 13, 2010, 08:47 PM
I am warning you guys because you are my guys, and I worry about you hard headed lunks hurting yourselves.

Well they've been in use for nearly 120 years now, and for several years since you first posted your concerns. Where are all these KBs?

Gelgoog
February 13, 2010, 10:04 PM
norma 7.65 arg. ammo is loaded to 52,000 psi.

Small ring mausers have been extensively tested for their strength.

http://img382.imageshack.us/i/3082pc6.jpg/

Maximum pressure 390.00 MPa (56,565 psi)

although critical failure usually happen at 70,000 +
I would not push a 1891 past commercial loadings, but they are perfectly fine for those. Do you honestly thing norma is going to release unsafe ammo for the only rifle it is intended for?

I have been shooting war surplus for years without even a gas leak or any indication of wear on my locking lugs to indicate a safety risk. The only real people at risk are reloaders who don't know what they are doing. When one of my 12 mausers blows up, I will let you know.

Maj Dad
February 13, 2010, 10:55 PM
Williams Gun Sight Co. had a "blueprint" for customizing mausers & other milsurp rifles, and a really nice one for 1891s. I know, because I bought a pre-1898 rifle through Shotgun News in 1977, and was going to convert it to the Williams Mannlicher configuration. I still have the literature somewhere - it is still a good outline for conversions - but something made me keep it stock. It is in excellent condition, shiny bore, nice finish & stock, and the ground crest is the only flaw. I bought one box of Norma 150 gr 7.65 at $22 (in 1977, no less), and decided reloading was indicated. I formed cases from 30-06, trimmed & chamfered, and off I went. Won a local NRA High Power Rifle match at the Flint River Gun Club in Manchester, GA, with modest loads of Hornady .313s & 4064 - ticked the good old boys off so badly they never got around to giving me the trophy :neener:

If you want to sell it, PM me - I like them.
Cheers,
George

SlamFire1
February 22, 2010, 09:23 PM
norma 7.65 arg. ammo is loaded to 52,000 psi.Do you honestly thing norma is going to release unsafe ammo for the only rifle it is intended for?

Per "Mauser Bolt Rifles" by Ludwig Olson, the 7.65 Mauser maximum pressure was 42,660 psia.

Maybe liability laws are different in Sweden. I don't know. This is from Norma:

Today, Norma is the sole supplier of cases. Despite such early development, performance of the 7.65 in modern guns is practically indistinguishable from 308 Winchester ballistics. Interestingly, to the untrained eye, these two cases look very similar; however, similar is not identical and these rounds are not interchangeable. Obviously, with top loads, the 7.65 Argentine is useful for the same range of hunting applications, as is the 308 Winchester; however, due to continued use of potentially weaker rifles in this chambering, data listed here is significantly reduced and ballistics are therefore also limited.

Small ring mausers have been extensively tested for their strength.

http://img382.imageshack.us/i/3082pc6.jpg/

Maximum pressure 390.00 MPa (56,565 psi)

although critical failure usually happen at 70,000 +


Garry James did an outstanding job of shilling for the importer. He had to dispell all those rumors of "soft" Spanish receivers. He was paid to convince readers that these actions, even though they were Spanish, were perfectly safe. Gunwriters who accept payment for infomercials are not objective.

A M1916 Spanish is a much later action. They were built by Oviedo from 1916 to 1951, and Catulun from 1936 to 1939.

What I don't know is whether the 308 conversions in the article were made from selected actions. If I were in charge of the rebuild program I would have said, convert late model, best condition receivers. That way the receivers would have been made from the latest metals. This is just me. I know others who could care less, to them any injuries suffered by end users would have just been “their bad luck”.

Even if the receivers were not selected by date, any receiver selected, by virtue of use, would have gone through a weeding out process. After all poor receivers would have been discarded before rebarreling, and any receivers damaged in the conversion process would have been discarded.

Demanding a record of blown up or damaged Mausers is unreasonable as there is no law mandating such a thing. Nor is there funding. All you will read are voluntary postings by someone interested enough to take the time. I would hazard that for every posting there are a hundred, maybe a thousand incidents. Still, sometimes these posts appear.


http://www.jouster.com/forums/showthread.php?p=41975#post41975
Soft rerceivers

I bought a 93 Spanish Mauser that had been rebarreled To .257 Roberts. The bolt had been ruined by Bubba trying to make it cock on opening. I bought it for a song and got a another bolt from Springfield Sporters and had a smith set the headspace and turn down the handle. Within only about 20 rounds of factory ammunition the brass started to show signs of excessive pressure... the bolt had already set back that much. I finally sold the gun less the receiver for about half what I had in it.

Not all of the 93's are like that and there is no way to know what Bubba had subjected that receiver to before he put on the .257 barrel.


Instead of pressing me, to prove these actions are unsafe, the advocates of their use should prove that they are "safe".

Why are they safe?
__________________

Maj Dad
February 22, 2010, 09:59 PM
I've heard for too many years, from too many reliable sources (far too many to quote) that the 91/93/95/96 actions are not as strong or as robust (ergo, safe) as the later 98 Mauser & Mauser-types to believe for a minute that they are. I have a 91 that I shot with Norma ammo when I first got it ~1977, but after learning the pressures it generated, never again. Modest handloads were, and are fine for it and are exceptionally accurate (and I do use a little Argentine GI ball from my stash from time to time). I've killed deer with it, just for fun, and still like to drag it out to the range & let it exercise itself. It's an old soldier, and like this one, strenuous exercise is out of the question - sitting around the house or VFW shooting the breeze is in... :rolleyes:

And having had a M1916 7mm I bought ~1969 that was a great shooter, I bought one of those 308s with all the propaganda included. After it wouldn't shoot worth a hoot or feed ammo worth a tinker's damn I sold it. I never did trust it with 308 factory/GI ammo anyway, and I'm kind of glad it's gone. If you want a full power rifle, don't put lipstick on pigs...

(I believe we're approaching equine asystole, sadly, as well)

jimmyraythomason
February 22, 2010, 10:04 PM
The only model that I would be leary of would be a Spanish M93. All of the rest,in good condition,using the round they were designed for are good to go.

Flyboy73
February 23, 2010, 12:52 AM
HOLY CRAP!!!!! My thread has come back to life. :what:

But seriously I still have that rifle. I really like that sportier. But I did add a unaltered M91 to go next it in the safe.

Brion

SlamFire1
February 27, 2010, 11:46 AM
This is a Swedish Mauser, don't know if it is a M38 or M96. Found the picture on my hard drive, don't know anything about the blow up.

But, here is a later action than a M1891 Argentine, a more modern design, the receiver ring is cracked and the extractor is blown off. It really looks like part or the right receiver ring is missing. These early low carbon, plain carbon steel actions tend to fragment, alloy steel receivers have more ductility.

I think the blood on the stock and on the ground shows how little shooter protection these early actions provide.

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

jimmyraythomason
February 27, 2010, 12:21 PM
don't know anything about the blow up.
which makes it irrelevent to the discussion. The wrong ammo could have been fired in it or an obstructed barrel. Without particulars,this photo doesn't contribute much and certainly doesn't prove that the action is weak.

Art Eatman
February 27, 2010, 01:33 PM
Generally, single-lug bolts are limited to 40,000 psi. Double-lug, around 50,000 psi.

IIRC, 50,000 psi is around 55,000 CUP, roughly. Loading data books show many very-effective loads in the 48,000 CUP pressure range, which should be safe in any double-lug bolt.

R.W.Dale
February 27, 2010, 05:52 PM
IIRC, 50,000 psi is around 55,000 CUP, roughly.

Making such rule of thumb cup psi conversios are unreliable in the extreme and can result in very nasty outcomes. CUP cannot be used to reliably make calculations of firearm strength because depending on the cartridge cup isn't the same pressure at the same value.

example 50,000 CUP for 280 rem = 62,000 psi
but for 308 50,000 CUP = only 60,000 psi
and for .223 52,000 CUP = a mere 55,000 psi

A psychical universe where the math of CUP could work out would be a wacky place indeed.

SlamFire1
August 29, 2010, 11:53 AM
Small ring mausers have been extensively tested for their strength.

http://img382.imageshack.us/i/3082pc6.jpg/

Maximum pressure 390.00 MPa (56,565 psi)



Inspite of Garry James doing an outstanding job of shilling for SAMCO, "extensively tested" here is a report on one of those M1916's that developed excessive headspace.


http://www.thehighroad.org/showthread.php?t=530130

Oceans - It is true, as I found out today, sadly.

I've had my 1916 Spanish Guardia Mauser from Samco for about 20 years now. Took it deer hunting every year until last year, when I heard about the same thing you did. I shot .308 rounds out of it.

Finally got the headspace checked by a gunsmith, and - well, the bolt locked EASILY on "no-go". And we're talking like butter. I snapped the firing pin and will have it hanging on the wall of my office soon.

If you enjoyed reading about "Argentino Model 1891" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!